From Hearst Connecticut Newspapers that include the Connecticut Post, Danbury News-Times, Greenwich Time and Stamford Advocate.
When you ask Malloy a question, he will give you an answer. You may not like his answer and you may not agree with it, On the other hand, second-time Republican candidate Tom Foley’s response to specific questions are often vague, defensive and, essentially, variations on “Trust me. I’m a problem solver.” Business experience is good, but government is not a business. Whether it’s a Greenwich, Bridgeport, Hartford or Washington, the purpose of government is to do for us what we can’t do individually.
And it’s meant to provide a safety net for those among us who, for whatever reason, need help to survive.
Government’s function is to protect and care for its citizens; a business’s function is to make a profit.
Full editorial here.
Next up, the Mew Haven Register. Paging the editorial Board of the Mew Haven Register. Your endorsement of Governor Malloy, please.
OIB is the big time. Just because you enjoy Lennie’s good graces doesn’t mean you can demand an endorsement. I hope the New Haven Register ignores you. You’re still a newbie to me and now you’ve identified yourself as an unqualified snob, too.
CT Post endorsement? This is news?
Bob Walsh, I checked the ‘Find out more’ button of Marilyn Moore’s ad. It’s just a link to her Facebook page filled mostly with Democrats hugging or posing.
Someone posted a question on Moore’s Facebook page, asking if she supported Jack Hennessy’s bill clarifying city employees serving on the city council.
There is no response from Moore.
I asked Rick Costantini the question. He supports the bill in its original form and will not support a grandfather clause. I wonder where Marilyn Moore stands on that.
We have received campaign material from unions (CEA, AFSCME, AFL-CIO) endorsing Moore (what a surprise). It was the unions and Democrats who pushed through legislation 20+ years ago to allow municipal employees to serve on municipal legislative bodies.
Marilyn Moore is silent. Has she traded endorsements for obedience? That’s the Democrat way.
Did you see this back in June, Tom?
State Senate Candidate Moore Pledges Support of Government Reform
Musto Votes to Ban Chocolate Milk From Schools, But Won’t Ban Financial Conflicts
June 17, 2014 – Bridgeport resident, community leader, and candidate for Senate in Connecticut’s 22nd State Senate District, Marilyn Moore, released the following statement declaring that taxpayer money must always transcend politicians’ financial interests. Democratic State Senate candidate Marilyn Moore announced today that one of her first actions in the Connecticut General Assembly will be supporting a version of the government reform bill to guarantee the separation of powers between the Mayor’s office and Common Council delineated in the Bridgeport City Charter, which prohibits city employees from serving on the City Council.
“This is an important issue to protect taxpayers in Bridgeport, Trumbull and Monroe. Time and again Anthony Musto has served political interests over the interests of the people. He’s allowed the Bridgeport political machine to dictate public policy in the district,” said Moore, founder and CEO of The Witness Project of Connecticut, which serves to reduce death rates of breast cancer among low income and African American women.
The Bridgeport City Charter approved by city voters prohibits city employees from serving on the City Council. State law precludes municipal employees from sitting on boards of finance to eliminate conflicts of interests such as voting on their own wages and benefits and to provide guarantee accountability between legislative and executive branches. Bridgeport’s legislative body, however, functions as a board of finance. Musto has opposed a reform bill in the state legislature that would extend the existing provision prohibiting municipal employees from serving on a board of finance to all municipal bodies that have budget authority.
“Instead of the City’s legislative branch serving as a check on the executive branch, some City Councilors are paid by the Mayor’s office,” says Moore. “A likewise scenario is illegal on both the state and federal level, but in Bridgeport we have a situation where politicians play by a separate set of rules to serve political self interest.”
“We need more reform-minded watchdogs and fewer lapdogs in the state legislature,” says State Rep. Jack Hennessy, who co-authored the government reform bill with State Rep. Auden Grogins to enforce the Bridgeport City Charter. “I’m supporting Marilyn Moore because I will have a partner in protecting taxpayer money from the conflicts of interests protecting political sacred cows. The state of Connecticut will only benefit from having municipalities that have sound governance policies in place. And that includes supporting municipal home rule approved by voters.”
The bill has received widespread support in the State House, but Musto has blocked the bill’s passage in the State Senate siding with his political supporter special interests.
Connecticut’s 22nd State Senate District encompasses Trumbull and portions of Bridgeport and Monroe. Moore is challenging Musto in an Aug. 12 Democratic primary.
Not at all. Marilyn is 100% behind banning city employees from the legislative bodies when the legislative body serves as the finance board.
As to the question of the grandfather clause, I believe that will play out in the next legislative session. Tell me where do you stand? Are you opposed to the bill if the grandfather clause is the only way it will pass? Letting your emotions get in the way of compromise? Is that Rick’s stance as well?
I will vote for the candidate who commits to supporting the bill without a grandfather clause. So far, there is only one candidate who has committed.
Does ‘play out’ mean she is willing to compromise on defining right and wrong? The only reason it did not move forward last session was lack of willingness of Bridgeport reps to annoy their fellow Bridgeport Democrats. To hell with doing the right thing and to hell with an effort to address conflict of interest in Bridgeport city government. My fellow Democrat comes first.
Bob, compromising is part of life, but if, as in this case, it endorses the ongoing conflict of interest, it serves no purpose.
Refusing to compromise on principles may appear stubborn. Maybe that’s why I could never be a Democrat.
Perhaps Marilyn Moore should announce whether she would vote for the bill with a grandfather clause. By announcing her position, it will make it clear what the expected outcome is.
Getting elected and going into the session without stating opposition to a grandfather clause could be a clear message of what her position is.
Willing to accept a bill which endorses continued conflict of interest?
Rick Constantini – No
Marilyn Moore – ?
Actually Tom, what you’re saying is if you don’t support the grandfather clause you support 20 city employees serving on the City Council, in violation of the City Charter, instead of limiting the four who currently exist. That’s what you, Rick Torres and Costantini are saying. We’re against the grandfather clause because we support 20 city employees serving on the City Council.
Lennie, Lennie, Lennie. Starting with no grandfather clause out of the gate is not the same as no grandfather clause. Then, what good is a statute with “exceptions?” This administration twists every statute they can to get 100% of what they want, so why give them a built-in out if it is not necessary?
Because 80 percent is better than no percent if a grandfather clause is the way to get it passed. Hennessy started with no grandfather clause, then adjusted the bill because he believed correctly it could get traction. The bill had strong support in the State House but ultimately died because Anthony Musto (who’s gone) and Andres Ayala (still there) worked against it. One of the reasons Marilyn Moore defeated Musto in the Democratic primary was because of her strong support of enforcing the city charter in support of Hennessy’s bill. You also supported the grandfather provision but because you’re now supporting Costantini for State Senate you’re reinventing your position on the bill. How convenient. Costantini is taking this position because he clerked for the honorable Judge Radcliffe who’s married to the honorable former Judge Lopez who opposes any sort of compromise? Does Costantini have a mind of his own? Or is he guided by the political advice of honorable judges Radcliffe and Lopez? Hopefully, sanity will prevail and the city charter will be enforced with or without a grandfather bill in the next legislative session because either one is better than what you have now.
i will give you 80% is better than what we have now. I would not like seeing the grandfather clause in the bill at first draft. Auden suggested it and Jack took her advice to see if the other reps and two senators would be more receptive. And yes, at that time I was in support of whatever it took to get the bill passed. It did not work. Many of the state reps now say during campaign season, they have not mentioned with or without the grandfather clause. The one thing I have lived and learned in CT, one-party rule at the local and state level is not good. Yes, even if they were all Republicans I believe we would be in a similar mess.
“One of the reasons Marilyn Moore defeated Musto in the Democratic primary was because of her strong support of enforcing the city charter in support of Hennessy’s bill.”
The only reason she won was due to a low turnout and Musto asleep at the wheel. There were Moore serious issues she could have attacked him on. For example, Solar Change and the missing company and funds. Where are the 32 jobs? Lennie, why are you taking a position? Sounds like an endorsement of Moore to me. Could it be because your employer Auden Grogins is one of the people who used this issue on her platform while ignoring Solar Change and 32 missing jobs?
You Bloody Heart Liberal.
Jennifer, that’s why I’d throw in a Nuclear Option. Why should there be only two options?
I still compromise only when there is a Nuclear Option. The compromised version with a grandfather clause makes matters worse. Let’s take the Council President for example. The Council President will be under threat by other people who can use the fact if they don’t get what they want, they won’t support the Council President if or when he is challenged. He’d be gone forever, unless he quits his job in order to make a comeback. Then there is the issue of BOE jobs. Why stop at city jobs and ignore BOE employment? Now by leaving the City Council President on, there could never be a Charter Referendum question formulated to address the issue by forming a Charter Revision Commission, which the council president can kill. Notice what they did the last time we had a Charter Revision Commission established, they only considered what the administration wanted them to. Stop making a show out of this with your soft and weak bill.
Your comments are definitely a reach.
Tom,
Isn’t that the Republican mantra down in DC these days? Compromise is bad. No progress is good.
Tom, I am with you 100%. There is absolutely nothing wrong with being principled. In fact, our local, state and federal politicians and aspiring politicians should try it sometime.
The role of the Bridgeport delegation is to enact legislation that supports the will and wants of Bridgeport residents, not what their personal view is on any particular topic. Clearly the majority of Bridgeport voters have already weighed in on this topic or it would not be in our City Charter.
The Bridgeport delegation should not offer a single piece of legislation that circumvents the will of those they represent.
You should now expect Jennifer Buchanan to announce you sent an email to many Hartford legislators withdrawing your support of Jack Hennessy’s bill because of his addition of a grandfather clause. However don’t become alarmed because when you ask her to produce said email she never will.
Doesn’t that pretty much sum up your tenure on the BOE? Compromise is a sign of weakness? Principle over progress?
Bob, Bridgeport’s voters have already made a decision on this matter. It is not the role of any legislator to support or introduce legislation that is contrary to what the voters have already decided they want from their municipal government.
Bob, I have only missed three Regular BBOE meetings since March 2009, and in that five-year period I have only seen you at one BBOE Regular, Special or Committee meeting, therefore you have no idea on what issues I did or did not compromise.
I don’t view compromise as a sign of weakness, however there are high-priority items I place a premium on and are at the core of my values and beliefs. And no, those items are not negotiable. Then we have a variety of matters, issues and policies I am not deeply passionate about and those items are subject to compromise.
For example I am absolutely opposed to charter schools, privatization, teacher bashing, etc., however I would be open to discussions and a give and take on standardized testing, how to reduce the high school dropout rate, gang prevention, etc.
The problem with Bridgeport, CT and the United States is not that those who have political power are too principled, it is that they are not principled enough.
I’m committed to supporting it without the grandfather clause. It should even go farther and require all city council members to use their stipends to send a letter to every constituents reporting all and any family members who work for the city, date of hire, and how much they make.
Tom White, how is that working out for you, being a Republican?
Lennie, you of all people should appreciate the importance of making your position known. If Marilyn Moore goes to the state senate ready to support a bill that is compromised by a grandfather clause, that’s what will be adopted.
The unions, that endorse and then control Democrats, will be applying pressure. Marilyn Moore has welcomed ownership by the unions. Look at her campaign material.
Jack Hennessy added the grandfather clause last session in an attempt to keep the bill alive. He did not consult with supporters.
A grandfather clause would negate the benefit of the bill by allowing conflict of interest to continue with the blessing of Democrats in the legislature.
Lennie, I agree that the city charter prohibition on city employees serving on the city council should be honored regardless of how the state statute is interpreted by the obedient city attorney, although not in writing. Unfortunately, Democrats are in control. It’s not about doing the right thing, it’s about doing what’s best for the Democrats.
Ron Mackey, the views I have expressed lately may seem ‘Republican’ to you and others, but outside of Bridgeport and other urban centers, my views are probably more mainstream.
And Lennie, your remark about Costantini and Judge Radcliffe was inappropriate.
Ownership by the unions??? That is not a pretty picture to paint when speaking about an African American, is it?
Or maybe that is the exact picture you are intending to paint.
Bob Walsh, that is the picture Tom White is painting with his “dog whistle” Republican comment.
I agree, the comments regarding Carmen Lopez and Dale Radcliffe were completely out of line and highly inappropriate. Even I was completely unaware Costantini clerked for Judge Radcliffe.
Are your comments an opinion or based in fact? It sounds as if you are stating them as fact and I am looking for some clarity.
Maria, on this one I’m in total agreement about Judge Radcliffe.
Ron, why inappropriate? I’ve written here many times about my admiration for the wordsmith legal minds of Judges Radcliffe and Lopez.
Thank you, Lennie. I could not have said it better. I obviously could have said it with fewer words, though.
And remember, the grandfather clause works both ways. If someone steps down from the council or fails to get reelected OR if they leave city employment they are done. It is not a lifetime exemption.
Yeah, Bob. Once they leave the council, their job and that of their family member(s) isn’t as protected. This is one reason why we need to get TOM FOLEY elected. He will sign a strong bill immediately while Malloy (Mal hoy, mañana y siempre) will work for a weaker bill and can be expected to sit on the bill or veto it.
The change should be effective as quickly as allowed by law. That would prevent more gameplaying with resignations and appointments if Tom White and Jennifer are really concerned about what is good in the long run.
Tom White’s savvy outlook on the 22nd district underscores who’s worthy of the position. In sharp contrast, Bob Walsh’s outlook highlights the political acumen of those who’ve been able to circumvent the City Charter for so long!
Lennie, that’s true. I wish we had more people like them.
It all comes down to spondulix.