Walker Channels Reagan, Years As Nation’s Top Auditor In First Campaign Commercial

Bridgeport resident David Walker, the former U.S. Comptroller General, has launched his first television commercial as a Republican candidate for lieutenant governor in partnership with gubernatorial candidate John McKinney, highlighting his years in the Reagan White House, as the nation’s top auditor and efforts to reduce spending. Walker’s in an August 12 primary against GOP endorsed Penny Bacchiochi and Heather Bond Somers.

Transcript of commercial text:

I’m Dave Walker. I’m a CPA and a Reagan presidential appointee. As our nation’s top auditor I led the fight to reduce spending and reform government. My efforts to promote fiscal discipline were featured on 60 Minutes. And I led turnaround efforts in both the public and private sector. Making government more efficient and growing our economy is what I do best. I approved this message because John McKinney and I want to bring major change to Hartford.

Walker’s fundraising for lieutenant governor is expected to help McKinney qualify for a $1.3 million primary grant under Connecticut’s public financing program. As a result, they will share advertising dollars. The pair expect Connecticut’s State Elections Enforcement Commission will officially sign off on the grant on Wednesday. McKinney is facing party endorsed Tom Foley in the primary. The winner will receive a $6.5 million general election grant to face incumbent Democrat Dan Malloy.



  1. Big problem here. I like Foley over McKinney but I like Walker over Foley. Will Walker have enough input into the system to make it worthwhile to choose McKinney?

          1. Jennifer Buchanan, I don’t think much about this ad but the 60 Minutes feature is much better. One of the problems I have with Mr. Walker and John Marshall Lee is how they talk and the way they talk. They assume everybody understands what they are talking about. You should not be talking over the heads of people, break it down to where they see and understand what they are saying fits in with voters’ lives and don’t preach to them, a little free advice, take it or leave it.

  2. Ron,
    Thanks for your concern about “how I talk” and “the way I talk.” You have been reading my material for awhile and know I have been criticized for the length of my posts, right? But you like a lengthy commentary from Walker “so people will understand what is being talked about.”

    If you care about communication to the people of Bridgeport, as I do, how about talking on the phone (203-259-9642) or meeting in person?

    I went to an ECDE committee meeting last night and one Council person is upset about comments I have made. He was pretty upset and he’s probably a very nice guy. However in all the times I have made comments that disturb him and he has understood, he never has called me to comment, complain, straighten the record or whatever. I gave him my card again and asked him to call me. That’s when I learned he had my number already.

    When I write about money (as a non-accountant), I try to explain to an audience of taxpayer non-accountants the problems I have spotted and why I see things as a problem, issue or concern. I am not the only taxpayer in town. When I observe and write, it is for all the taxpayers who are without reasonable public watchdogs. I do not get a STIPEND and I do object when City money is used illegally or without accountability.

    So Ron, please look at my latest posting yesterday, and let me know whether I was able to make points as to:
    ** The City has no special talent in real estate when they buy private property, hold it and pay expenses, and then sell it in a market that shows they paid too much.
    ** When the City provides the opportunity for a “tax abatement plan” for a property owner of 10 years duration, what are the justifications and what is the precedent you are making? Especially when the project is for “market rate” housing for fairly affluent future residents ($2200 per month for a two-bedroom unit)?
    ** When you, Ron, or I must face decreased residence home values (and the Mayor closes down the revaluation data) and higher taxes, is anyone there to relieve our angst and help us to decide whether to stay in town another year or bite the bullet and sell?
    For real, Ron. Am I communicating or not? Time will tell.

    1. John Marshall Lee, you wrote, “But you like a lengthy commentary from Walker so people will understand what is being talked about.” No, that’s not true. David Walker comes off as a “bureaucrat,” which he is for over 30 years, people are looking for new and who understand their day to day problems, not a bureaucrat. Now he changes that by listening to others instead of hearing the old voices he has around all the time.

        1. BOE SPY, please go back to what you know, kissing Finch’s ass and attacking the current BOE, you are like a fish out of water when you talk about something else. Think about it, somebody who we don’t know with no name, we don’t if they are a man or woman, black or white and they want to tell us who to vote for? What a joke, lol.

          1. I didn’t tell you whom to vote for. You have such a great voting history (Obama, Finch x 2, Malloy). Why would anyone have to tell you whom to vote for? With voters like you why do the rest of us need to worry?

            Ron–Why does my race, sex, creed or color make any difference on how someone would vote? Are you trying to say you would not hold the political opinion of a white woman as valid as the political opinion of an Inuit transvestite? You don’t see it as a little racist you can’t consider an opinion unless you know gender, race, creed and color?

      1. Ron, I hope you do not mean this definition, as this is most certainly not the legacy and record of Dave Walker.
        bu·reau·crat [byoor-uh-krat] Show IPA
        1. an official of a bureaucracy.
        2. an official who works by fixed routine without exercising intelligent judgment.

        1. Jennifer Buchanan, bu·reau·crat noun \ˈbyu̇r-ə-ˌkrat, ˈbyər-\
          : a person who is one of the people who run a government or big company and who does everything according to the rules of that government or company : a person who is part of a bureaucracy

          1. I will respectfully disagree with your assessment of Dave, based on his book Comeback America written from the experience and knowledge of 10 years working to change and reform out-of-control government fiscal policy. I can understand why some people would want to paint Dave with that broad definition, however the policies he wrote and was able to pass actually reduced the size of and cost of government programs.

    2. JML–the thing about the rental market. Renters are usually people who do not want the hassles of owning or those who can’t afford to buy. The housing market is so loose in BPT making houses in BPT very affordable. This is driving down rents in town. Why would you rent @ $2200/mo when you can buy for less, say $1800 (all included)? Even if you walk away from the house you saved $400/mo over renting.
      Maybe having this guy paying something is better than nobody paying anything. Maybe they want to keep him around to finish his project if things pick up. These guys don’t seem to know much about business and often make poor or arbitrary decisions based on how they feel at the moment.

      1. If “these guys don’t seem to know much about business” and make poor decisions, how do you feel about this tax abatement that is up for approval?

        1) What is a good justification for you to allow a developer who has had all the approvals he has needed for this project on land use for ten years, to decide now is the time to pull the trigger, but he just needs THE TAXPAYING PUBLIC OF BRIDGEPORT (or the majority of 20 Council members) to help him reach a 12% investment return?
        2) Yes, there would be an immediate gain of $100,000 in City revenues (but a continuing sucking sound for the other $200,000 not received). But the Council could vote to reduce their Stipend budget by $40,000 and their Other Services budget by $60,000 and the Operating budget would be in the same place. Expense cutting? Novel idea.
        3) When another developer who has run into the same real estate market wants to move from condo to apartment rental asks for his tax abatement, what will be said?

        Is this fair to all concerned? What do you think? Time will tell.

        1. No, it is not fair, but life is not always fair. You only pointed out two of the three possibilities. 1- The guy pays what he should ($300K). 2- The guy gets a tax break and pays less ($100K). 3- He just stops paying altogether ($0). Maybe I am too conservative. I do not think it is a good idea to make decisions in the heat of the moment. I usually like to keep things as they are until you can consider all the possibilities. If he sells the land, the new owner will argue the pipe ends make it less valuable and the owner may let it go for what he owns, making the assessed value less and related taxes less. If he can’t sell it, he may let the city take it and write off the loss. If that happens we will be stuck with the expenses associated with that, lost taxes and now the city has to sell it.
          Serious cost cutting is something the city has been delinquent about for a long time. Between money that goes to support votes from poor areas, partisan jobs, corruption and what it actually costs to run the city, they only seem to want to cut the ‘what it actually costs to run the city’ part.
          The one thing you can count on is people will do what is best for them. That is why you have to pick a politician such that what is good for him is good for you. That is one of the things I like about Walker. If his taxes go down, mine go down. I think (hope) Finch or Malloy will not win again. The next question is who will win?


Leave a Reply