Where’s The Parade?

President Barack Obama is due to end the war in Iraq – with a speech. It should be brought to a close with a parade – several parades, in fact.

Obama no doubt will mention in his speech his own valiant efforts to bring to a close the war in Iraq, without over emphasizing the role played by lesser lights such as ex-President George Bush, whose successful efforts, after frequent failures, to implement a successful war strategy implemented by General David Petraeus were vigorously opposed by congressional Democrats and a left wing media that dubbed Petraeus “General Betray-Us.” Obama's view of the surge at the time it was proposed was not ambivalent.

The left’s misgivings about the war are replicated in statements recently made by Connecticut’s Democratic congressional delegation on the occasion of Obama’s formal declaration announcing an end to direct military engagement by American soldiers in Iraq and the withdrawal of all but 50,000 support troops remaining in the country to serve in an advisory capacity.

Rep. Jim Himes, a 4th District Democrat, is happy that a “sorry” chapter in American foreign policy finally will be closed. “What did we really achieve,” Himes asked, “apart from removing one awful dictator who had nothing to do with Sept. 11th? We paid far, far, far too high a cost to achieve those things.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro said the Iraq war was “misconceived” and "a colossal waste of resources and people." The situation in Iraq, DeLauro noted, “remains precarious” even though some troops will remain in the country in an advisory capacity.

DeLauro has not ventured an opinion as to whether the precarious situation might have been made more precarious had Democrats been successful in bringing combat troops home before Petraeus’ strategy had been allowed to succeed. Nor has she rated the present precarious situation in Iraq with the present precarious situation in Afghanistan, a war about which she may have misgivings.


Rep. Joe Courtney rated the withdrawal of combat troops “a significant milestone,” warned the U.S. against “taking a victory lap,” and said the “jury is still out” on the question: Did the Iraq war make us safer or not? Courtney lamented the effect that the presumably successful war in Iraq had on the status of the United States: “…we paid a very heavy price in terms of our… standing in the world.”

A reasonable man, Courtney might agree that U.S. standing in the world would have received a more fatal blow had some anti-war Democrats been successful in prematurely withdrawing troops and aid before the Petraeus surge. And, of course, the now successful venture in Iraq, which ridded the country of a mass murdering tyrant and planted the still tender shoots of democracy in his wake, is a grievous disappointment to Iran, a country that thinks of itself as a more vigorous center of Wahhabi doctrine and Hanbali law than Saudi Arabia and – now that it has acquired, with the help of China, a facility to shoot rockets into Israel – a nuclear tipped force to be reckoned with in the Middle East.

A victory lap, and more especially a victory parade, would be crassly premature. But a welcome home parade – several welcome home parades – might be therapeutic and unifying.

Post-war parades are therapeutic because they signal a terminus, permanent or temporary, to a national agony. Welcoming home parades are unifying because they allow those with different viewpoints to stand together in honor of returning troops.

Early in March 2007, Rep. John Larson of the impregnable 1st District unleashed his Iraq Bill, which repealed congressional authority to use force in Iraq. Larson and Sen. Chris Dodd were very much interested at the time of “reversing the Bush doctrine of unilateralism:

“The bill, which is binding,” Larson noted, “would repeal the authorization for use of military force against the Iraq resolution from 2002. It also outlines ways in which the Bush doctrine of unilateralism and preemption have ignored the precedence of past foreign policy and diplomacy; a policy that has exacerbated the situation in Iraq and has forced us to neglect the situation in Afghanistan. It provides for a sense of Congress asking for a new vote on the war in Iraq based on the current situation, calls for abandonment of the Bush doctrine of preemption and unilateralism, while realigning U.S. foreign policy by enhancing diplomatic relations in the region and redirecting critical support to Afghanistan enabling more aggressive pursuit of Osama Bin Laden and other terrorist organizations.”

Larson’s bill, regarded by some as little more than a campaign document, would have made it impossible for Obama, the titular head of Larson’s party, to bring home the remaining American troops to “Welcome Home” parades – one to be held in New York, another in Washington D.C., others in whatever states wish to honor and reward valiant American troops.

In New York, one may imagine the parade winding past a reviewing stand placed at ground zero. And why not invite some prominent imams in the city to share the stand with city leaders, national leaders and people in New York who would welcome a show of solidarity with the same eagerness with which they would welcome home returning American troops?

In Connecticut – if Brad Davis, Mr. Parade, could be persuaded to organize such an event – the reviewing stand might include the new Democratic war hawks who support, with reservations, Obama’s “war of choice” in Afghanistan.

Blumenthal And The Prostitutes

It is sometimes said – humorously, of course – that prostitution is the world’s second oldest profession, the first being politics. True or not, we do know that politicians make political hay of prostitution. It appears that former Attorney General of New York Elliot Spitzer was en exception to this rule, and it was not until late in his sterling career we understood why: Spitzer was indulging on the side. His pastime cost him his job; it almost cost him his wife. One does not condemn one’s own indulgences and escape being tagged a hypocrite, particularly if one is a demagogic attorney general. If you live in a glass bordello, it’s best not to throw stones.

Attorney General of Connecticut Richard Blumenthal has other hobbies; a best guess might be canasta. We know Blumenthal does not shy from condemning prostitution because several months ago he took off after craigslist, a California based company, with a pitchfork. This suggests that, unlike Spitzer, Connecticut’s attorney general does not indulge and therefore is able to attack facilitators of prostitution with great energy.

Blumenthal’s beef with craigslist has evolved over the few months since he sent his first threatening letter to the company.

Now, no attorney general who is not Spitzer likes prostitution. In fact, no Comstockians like prostitution, with the possible exeption of the prostitutes and their “Johns,” who just may, this glaring exception aside, be quite moral in other respects. So, craigslist was an easy target for Blumenthal, a stinking heap of disreputable activity in which Blumenthal could plant his flag to convince voters in Connecticut who are not kindly disposed to his candidacy for the U.S. senate to change their minds. Come on now, someone who hates prostitution can’t be all bad.

But there is a problem – several problems, in fact.

Unlike the attorney general of Massachusetts, Blumenthal is only a civil and not a criminal attorney. And even if he were a criminal attorney, no one of the several attorneys general who Blumenthal has joined in attempting to force the owner of craigslist to give up his “social advertising” has yet alleged that such ads as appear in craigslist are illegal. True, the ads fall under the protection of First Amendment rights of free speech. But as President Barack Obama has reminded us in connection with the attempted building of a mosque near the New York crater where the city’s Trade Center once stood – what is constitutional is not always advisable.

The First Amendment is a daunting hurdle, even for such a high stepping attorney general as Blumenthal. If, for example, you successfully harass the owner of craigslist to surrender his First Amendment rights to publish legal ads on his site, can you, in good conscience, withhold your disapproval from Connecticut newspapers and other media outlets that run similar ads? Might not one of your political opponents charge that you have extended the long arm of your displeasure all the way to California, conspicuously reaching outside your own state, where charges that you are playing fast and loose with the First Amendment might sting and harm your chances to realize your life’s ambition – to become, after January, Connecticut’s junior U.S. senator? What happens in California may, one hopes, stay in California.

There are no sharp differences between the ads in craigslist and – just to cite one instance that might excite Blumenthal’s disapproval – similar ads in the Advocate chain of newspapers here in Connecticut. Last June the Hartford Courant ran a story that should have awakened the interests of those investigators in Blumenthal's office who were exploring the connection between service ads and prostitution.

According to the story, a woman arrested for prostitution in Meriden had been soliciting business through ads she placed on websites and in the Hartford Advocate. The sex ads in the Advocate certainly are splashy enough to grab the attention of the wide-awakes in Blumenthal’s office.

Zachary Janowski, the investigative reporter for the Yankee Institute, reports on his blog, Raising Hale, the reaction to Blumenthal’s actions concerning craigslist:

“Advocate publisher Joshua Mamis said Blumenthal’s actions could lead down a slippery slope.

“’I don’t want to be in the business of policing advertisers and policing our community,’ Mamis said.

“’Do I know that a massage provider is on the up and up,’ he said. ‘I wouldn’t unless I went there myself.’

“’I don’t think the attorney general knows either,’ Mamis added. ‘It all begs the question, what’s the state’s interest in this?’

“Mamis acknowledged that law enforcement officials have ‘named us in their press releases.’

“He also pointed out that the last prominent attorney general to crack down on prostitution, New York’s Eliot Spitzer, had some trouble later in his career.

“’I’m not implying anything. I’m just having fun,’ Mamis said.”

In yet another story, "The Best Little Whorehouse In New Haven," YaleDailyNews reported on Aug.27 that four months after police had raided Star Sauna in New Haven, a new massage parlor, advertising itself in the New Haven Advocate in the paper’s “Massage/Escort” section, was opened in the same location. Both operations offer table showers and full service sex.

The story, written by Jialu Chen, points out that the Asian connected operation in New Haven may have engaged in sex slave trafficking:

“Two major activities of Asian organized crime networks are the trafficking of women from Korea into the United States and the operation of massage parlors that offer Korean prostitutes, according to “Modern-Day Comfort Women: The U.S. Military, Transnational Crime, and the Trafficking of Women,” an article published in the book, “International Sex Trafficking of Women & Children: Understanding the Global Epidemic.” The author, Donna Hughes of the University of Rhode Island, explain that these networks are usually able to re-open massage parlors within days or even weeks of police raids.”

If Blumenthal – a cross between P.T. Barnum and J. Edgar Hoover -- and his inspectors overlooked such readily available information, it may be because the attorney general’s office, hungry for dollars and well publicized moral uplift yet anxious not to alarm First Amendment supporters in Connecticut, did not want to make a mess in their own back yard.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 10– Conclusions

This is the tenth and final article in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

Over the past two weeks, I have presented each section of the two candidates’ plans side by side. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better. Obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I left out most of the explanatory text in the plans and just noted the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I kept that same format as I quoted or paraphrased from each plan.

As noted by my moniker, I am a former naval person and one of the first things we learned in military planning was that no plan survives intact from first contact with the enemy. However, having a detailed plan with options based on possible reactions to the plan will generally lead to more success than a brief plan with few alternatives. I also learned to adhere to the “seven Ps- Prior proper planning prevents p*** poor performance.”

So, I will conclude this series with some direct comparisons between the two plans and leave the reader to decide which plan would be best for Connecticut in the next four years.

Where the plans are the same or similar
1. Both candidates plan to work personally on recruiting new companies to Connecticut.
2. Both candidates will ask the legislature to adapt the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) for budget and spending analysis at the state level just as it is required for municipalities.
3. Both candidates will look to other states as “benchmarks” for tax rates and tax policies.
4. Both candidates are in favor of electronic health records as one item to help reduce healthcare costs and increase benefit to the patient.
5. Both candidates see alternative energy sources as one of the ways to improve the environment and reduce the cost of using energy.



The Emphasis of each plan
“Governor” Foley’s plan has two points of emphasis. The first is to reduce taxes and spending. To quote – “. In my first year, I pledge to reduce the cost of state government by at least $1 billion to help balance the budget and make state government affordable again.” Foley also promises to veto any attempt by the legislature to raise taxes. Foley also states that he will not take a salary as Governor. The second point of emphasis is the aim to be “business friendly” to the exclusion of any other constituency. Not only reducing taxes on businesses but also reducing regulations and red tape and anything else that will hinder the conduct of free enterprise. For example, the only comment on transportation is that he will direct the Transportation Strategy Board to incorporate employer’s needs into any proposed plan.

When Foley’s plan gets beyond business development and reducing taxes and government spending, it becomes very general and mostly what I would call “boilerplate”. For example, healthcare costs may be reduced by permitting the interstate sale of health insurance. A general statement that Connecticut energy costs are too high and that energy efficiency and sources of alternative energy should be encouraged. Public Safety is summarized by saying the state law enforcement agencies should communicate with neighboring states and the Federal Government about potential terrorist threats.

“Governor” Malloy’s plan is very detailed in all areas. In my analysis I only picked out the action statements. If you read the plan on line you will see that each action item is detailed and surrounded by how a similar action was done in Stamford successfully. For example, Mayor Malloy successfully lobbied the Federal Government for funds for Stamford to improve the city’s infrastructure. He also was personally involved in recruiting businesses to Stamford.
Malloy has a unique plan in economic development that will involve local political and business leaders in planning and carrying out the economic development for their region assisted by the support of the state.
As noted in the individual posting, the Education portion of the plan reflects Malloy’s own educational experience as well as his efforts in making education available for all in Stamford. His Health Care plan covers mental as well as physical health.

The Malloy plan is superior to the Foley plan in all respects. Rather than a series of bullet points, it is a well thought our listing of actions “Governor” Malloy believes are necessary for Connecticut to succeed in the immediate and the far future.

Voter Decision
The voter will have to decide if a governor that is pro business and anti taxes and spending with little else to offer in his plan is the best for Connecticut or if a governor that has thought about what to do as a governor in nearly all areas of state government and offered a detailed outline of his plans with extensive backup and has shown experience in running a government of a large city in the state is the best choice.
The real question is whether the Malloy campaign will be able to distill the details of his plan into “bite sized” nuggets in thirty second commercials. The vague generalities of the Foley plan are more conducive to the campaign ad. It is not likely that most voters will see any of the planned debates where Malloy’s knowledge of the workings of government and debating ability should serve him in good stead when compared to Mr. Foley so campaign commercials will be key in defining Malloy to the voter.

Blumenthal’s Twin Personas

According to a report in the Hartford Courant, Linda McMahon, Republican candidate for the U.S. congress, has received, on a Freedom of Information request, a copy of Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s daily calendar.
The calendar entries are sketchy and unencumbered by red meat, reminiscent of the results of an earlier FOIA request made by various parties interested in Governor Jodi Rell’s daily calendar at a time when the governor was being assaulted by her political opponents as a do-nothing figurehead.

Reporter Daniela Altimari notes:

“If last month's entries are typical, the datebook isn't exactly crammed with events.

“In fact, most dates have just one event listed -- and several pages are completely blank. The remainder of the entries involve public events, interviews and the like.

“A sampling:

“Wed., July 14 11:45 a.m.--Interview here w\Fox 61 re: Craigslist

“Thur., July 15 5-8 p.m.--St. Francis Hospital Cancer Center FR @ home of Mark and Barbara Gordon

“Sat., July 17 11 a.m.-- St. Vincent's Park City Regatta 2010 at Fayerweather Yacht Club

“11 a.m.--Deep River Ancient Muster Parade…”

There is a reason for this, according to Mr. Blumenthal’s spokeswoman Tara Downs:

Blumenthal’s attorney general’s calendar, Downs said, "typically has never included any of his daily internal staff meetings or other activities in the office. His calendar generally has recorded invitations, meetings or events involving the general public and others, whether or not he actually attended the events.

"Because many public events may be perceived as political, few -- if any -- are now included on his office schedule [emphasis mine].

"Nothing has changed about Dick's commitment to fighting for Connecticut consumers and taxpayers."

This last claim – that Blumenthal is committed to fighting for Connecticut consumers and taxpayers – a boast made or implied in virtually all the attorney general’s promotions for U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd’s soon to be vacant seat in the congress, surely points back to Mr. Blumenthal’s exhaustively covered 20 year career as attorney general.

Public events perceived as political, the public is now given to understand by Ms. Downs, will be rescinded from the attorney general’s calendar of appearances. It is for this reason that the present purged calendar looks so thin and wispy.

The people in Blumenthal’s joint attorney general-U.S. senatorial campaign must have a fine sense of discrimination to tell which of Blumenthal’s attorney general appearances are “non-political” in the sense urged by his political supporters.

In fact, there is little division between the twin aspects of Blumenthal’s public persona. The melding of the two positions, that of attorney general and prospective U.S. senator, suggest it may be prudent for Mr. Blumenthal to resign his position as attorney general while pursuing Mr. Dodd’s seat in the congress.

Others – significantly, George Gombossy, once a consumer protection watchdog for the Hartford Courant – have called for Mr. Blumenthal’s resignation as attorney general for having intentionally misrepresented his military service, a claim that has leeched into Mr. Blumenthal’s senatorial campaign.

The bulwark Mr. Blumenthal hopes to erect between his twin personas – but only when it suits him -- will not hold back the tide.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 9– Veterans and Affordable Housing

This is the ninth in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on veterans and affordable housing issues. This presentation is not a contrast but a presentation of the two issues that appear in one plan but not the other. Since I started with “Governor” Malloy in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Foley in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.




“Governor” Tom Foley
“Governor” Foley does not discuss affordable housing in his plan. However he does have two short paragraphs on veterans.
All Americans understand and respect the sacrifices our military personnel make for the country. I served in Iraq as a civilian alongside our brave men and women in uniform. More than ever, we must continue to support our veterans and their families during and after active duty by sustaining the medical and other benefits they have earned for their service.
America is engaged in multiple conflicts around the world. The men and women in our armed services make sacrifices everyday so that those of us at home are safe. Many return with physical injuries and emotionally stressed. We must ensure that all our veterans and their families are well cared for and supported after they return from overseas.

“Governor” Dan Malloy
“Governor” Malloy only mentions veterans once in his plan – under taxes the plan states:
Real tax reform must Relieve the local property tax burden on low and middle income seniors, veterans, and individuals who are disabled.
However, the Malloy plan has a lengthy discussion on Housing Affordability and Opportunity. Here are the action statements from that plan.
One important ingredient in Connecticut's renewal is housing affordability. Affordability is key to attracting and retaining young skilled workers, and it's key to attracting and retaining small innovative companies that can grow to be major employers. In fact, I view it as critical to enhancing Connecticut's quality of life for all.
Connecticut must do more to address homelessness, particularly by enhancing its commitment to successful "sustainable housing" programs that help those who are at risk of revolving-door homelessness to find stability and to be at home.
Connecticut should do more to support applicants for federal funding and tax credits. It should expand the affordable housing bonus in its Historic Preservation Tax Credit program - a program that creates jobs and preserves our historical assets by encouraging rehabilitation of old buildings.
Connecticut should consider bonuses for affordable housing that are consistent with Transit Oriented Development. It should approach affordable housing expansion in a way that builds community and grows neighborhood connections.
And, it must tackle homelessness by doing more to support sustainable housing programs and addressing the root causes of homelessness linked to mental illness and economic opportunity.
We also cannot look at "housing" as a singular issue. Housing, like education and economic development, is an issue that is interconnected to the most significant issues facing our state.
We should consider affordable housing not only as a tool to make Connecticut more competitive, but also as an important investment in Connecticut's economic renewal.
Additionally, housing affordability in Connecticut is worsened by our overreliance on a property tax system that is among the costliest in the country.
In addition to the economic reasons we need to do better on affordable housing, there's another reason: family…. By making housing more affordable in Connecticut, we might just begin to reverse the trend where grandchildren only see their grandparents during the holidays.
For all these reasons - economic competitiveness, job creation, quality of life, and family - affordable housing needs to be at the top of the agenda for our next Governor.

Comment
The two topics considered by this article are the only two that are different in the plans (“Prospectus”) proposed by the two gubernatorial candidates. I suspect they arise from the different experiences of the candidates. Foley spent time with the armed forces during his tour with the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) in Iraq and Malloy dealt with the housing issue almost daily as the mayor of Connecticut’s fourth largest city. It doesn’t mean that Malloy will ignore veterans if elected governor or that Foley will not have a stand on housing. The ranking of the two issues in the minds of the two candidates is obviously different.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 8– Energy

This is the eighth in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on energy issues. Since I started with “Governor” Foley in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Malloy in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.

“Governor” Dan Malloy
Connecticut must act now to ensure immediate rate relief to all consumers.
As Governor, I will look to expand opportunities to finance and invest in energy efficiency and renewable energy by leveraging federal dollars, using the state's bonding authority, incenting private investment, and giving municipalities new options to finance investments.
As Governor, I will tap into expertise in our state agencies, universities, and elsewhere to refocus our energy experts on the goal of reducing costs for residential and business customers.
As Governor, I will create an energy policy leadership team and ensure coordination of our energy expertise to meet the state's energy needs in a way that maximizes benefits to ratepayers, the state's overall economy and our environment, without creating costly new State agencies.
I will fight to increase competition, which will help drive prices down. I will seek to use our purchasing power to negotiate better prices with energy companies - relief with the ultimate goal of reducing costs for every residential consumer in the state. In addition, my administration would be guided by goals to reduce costs for industries critical to competitiveness, provide relief to consumers in energy-congested areas that trigger costly fees, and reduce energy costs paid by state and local government.
I also fully support our current law that stipulates that, by 2020, at least 20% of the energy Connecticut consumes be generated from renewable sources. As Governor I will work to ensure that we make progress each year towards meeting the goal, and that the law remains intact.
Finally, we must make a real and concerted effort to reduce our overall energy consumption. As Governor, I will lead a statewide energy efficiency drive among Connecticut residents with a goal of reducing our energy usage by 15% over the next two years, making Connecticut one of the most energy efficient states in the nation. My administration will promote the importance and necessity of energy efficiency in making our businesses more competitive, saving consumers money, and reducing pollution. We will require the use of timers on hot water heaters to lower energy usage in off-peak hours, and direct utility companies to provide comparison information to residential customers so that they know exactly how their usage stacks up against homes of similar size.
Leadership is also the key to reversing the record on past rate increases and restoring Connecticut's standing as a desirable place live, work, and grow business. As Governor, I will provide the leadership Connecticut needs to achieve that goal.



“Governor” Tom Foley
Connecticut energy costs are too high. We must find ways to more efficiently consume energy and become less dependent on foreign oil. Connecticut has a triple opportunity to improve our air quality, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and create jobs by promoting development of alternative energy technology here at home.
America is too dependent on foreign sources of energy. Nearly a billion dollars every day is sent overseas to pay for foreign oil. Relying on foreign governments for our critical energy needs threatens our national security. Connecticut can make its own contribution to reducing U.S. dependence on foreign energy by encouraging more energy efficiency and developing sources of alternative energy. In doing so, we also contribute to better air quality and will stimulate job growth.

Comment
“Governor” Malloy presents a challenging energy program and relates it to job and business growth as well as the environment. Again, in the backup for the action items, Malloy points out the work he did in Stamford and shows how it may be accomplished in each other city and town with state support. “Governor” Foley does not provide any examples outlining how he expects to decrease energy cost or encourage energy efficiency.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 7– Environment

This is the seventh in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on the environment. Since I started with “Governor” Malloy in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Foley in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.


“Governor” Tom Foley
Connecticut has a triple opportunity to improve our air quality, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, and create jobs by promoting development of alternative energy technology here at home. Connecticut has some of the most beautiful natural assets in the world. Our shoreline, lakes, rivers, and open spaces must be protected and preserved for future generations.

“Governor” Dan Malloy
Clean Water
Work with environmental experts to find innovative ways to reduce the pollution, toxins and chemicals flowing into Long Island Sound. Invest in clean water projects such as sewage treatment plant upgrades Engage municipalities in the fight against water pollution by incentivizing green infrastructure like permeable pavers, vegetated swales, and greening of public areas to prevent runoff from reaching the storm system. Ensure that DEP has the resources and support it needs to seek out polluters and hold them accountable Encourage homeowners and businesses around the state to adopt greener and cleaner habits Work with leaders from neighboring states, including Congressional delegations, to ensure that Long Island Sound gets the best defense against misguided energy projects like Broadwater, and moves up on the federal priority list when it comes to funding projects.
Clean Air

Energy Efficiency: Push for advanced energy codes for new buildings, including requirements that new construction be "electric-vehicle ready" Establish a state goal for "net-zero energy buildings," or buildings that produce at least as much energy as they consume. Protect the Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency Funds Support initiatives found in this year's energy bill which Gov. Rell vetoed, including:
Allow municipalities to bond for PACE (Property Assessed Clean Energy)
Established current Energy Star guidelines as the minimum performance standard for televisions sold in the state
Add jobs to the solar industry by pushing for an increase in solar power usage.

Transportation: Improve public transportation to take cars off our roads and help clean up our air.
Supporting local communities in building out parking at train stations
Building new rail connections from New Haven to Springfield
Working with Metro North to send more frequent cars up and down their lines
Partnering with Amtrak to increase Shoreline East service.
Work with our neighboring states to implement a Low Carbon Fuel Standard that reduces the carbon content of transportation fuels by 10% over the next decade, including taking the steps necessary to facilitate the roll out of electric vehicles.
Land Use
Preserve open space throughout the state. Call for the creation of a $500 million revolving account to assist communities in paying for cleanup and restoration of brownfields, with the expectation that the state would recover all costs of that account in a reasonable time period.

Comment
“Governor” Foley combines Energy and the Environment in his plan so I just lifted the one sentence regarding the environment. Foley ties energy efficiency with improving the environment. “Governor” Malloy, on the other hand, has a detailed action plan that precedes and expands upon the Executive Summary that I reproduced for this article. Malloy again points out the programs he established or aided as mayor of Stamford and reflects on how this will help him establish the program as governor.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 6– Public Safety and Security

This is the sixth in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on public safety and security. Since I started with “Governor” Foley in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Malloy in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.


“Governor” Dan Malloy
Job One" for our next Governor is creating jobs and we can't do so without safe and secure communities to attract employers and their workers. As Governor, I will enhance public safety by investing in the following priorities:
1. Putting More Cops on the Streets
We must re-invest in the State's commitment to community policing and ensure that Connecticut meets and exceeds statutorily required State Police staffing levels.
2. Removing Illegal Guns
I will work collaboratively with local leaders and police forces to develop creative solutions for reducing illegal gun activity and the threat it poses. I will also seek to enhance the state's gun trafficking task force and partner with the federal government to trace guns seized in a crime.

3. Focusing on Prevention
I believe that we can do more to intervene in the unfortunate pipeline some young adults follow from school to prison. As Governor, I will consider strategies such as Community Policing Forums and the highly successful Juvenile Review Boards, which are partnerships among local police, schools, and social service specialists to help divert first-time youthful offenders from the criminal justice system.
As Governor, I will be guided by the traditional model of justice - if you commit a crime, you pay the penalty. But, I will also be guided by the principle that those who served their time are entitled to a second chance. For the non-violent offenders who have successfully paid their debt to society, my administration will expand programs that can integrate non-violent offenders back into their communities by providing job experiences, expanded services, and pro-active career training - all at a significant savings to the State.

“Governor” Tom Foley
Keeping our citizens safe is the first duty of government. We must be sure our law enforcement agencies remain vigilant and communicate with neighboring states and Federal law enforcement agencies about potential terrorist threats to ensure Connecticut citizens are safe.
As Governor, I will ensure that we coordinate closely with neighboring states and federal security agencies to guarantee our citizens are safe.


Comment
In the backup to his plan, Malloy points out his efforts that made Stamford one of the ten safest cities in the nation and explains how that will translate to action at the state level. Again, his experience as a prosecutor in New York and a mayor in Stamford define his approach at the state level. Foley only addresses communication with neighbors and the Federal Government to “guarantee” citizen safety.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 5 – Transportation

This is the fifth in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on transportation. Since I started with “Governor” Malloy in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Foley in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.

“Governor” Tom Foley
. I will order the Commissioner of Transportation and the Transportation Strategy Board to ensure that the needs of employers are incorporated into the state’s transportation master plan


“Governor” Dan Malloy
As Governor, I will be committed to pursuing strategies that reduce congestion and that provide attractive mass transportation options.
Over the past few years, the legislature approved a number of key projects. Funding them has been a different story. The administration has expressed a concern about debt financing during recessionary times. I, too, share this concern.
However, leadership also requires the right choices. One result of this budget is that we have borrowed over $1 billion just to pay bills - the worst kind of debt-financing. Connecticut should have instead prioritized debt-financing for purposes with the greatest stimulus to the local economy. Connecticut projects like new rail stations, or connecting new commuter lines from New Haven to Springfield, Danbury to Milford, or New London to Worcester, have the potential to stimulate job growth and should receive priority.
More recently, Connecticut was shut out - completely - in a competition for $1.5 billion in federal transportation grants. Shut out, as in zero dollars.
Here's a promise I'll make, and be held accountable for: that will not happen when I'm Governor.

Comment
Transportation is one of the shortest sections in Malloy’s plan and Foley just had the one comment in his “Jobs and the Economy” section regarding transportation. Malloy points out in his plan the success he had in Stamford in increasing commuter rail service and the necessary amenities such as commuter parking and upgrading the train station. He believes he will be able to directly apply this success across the state.

Mr. Blumenthal, This Is Your Wake Up Call

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s lead, a robust 40% when he first entered the U.S. senate race, has now been whittled down to 7%. The whole of the loss cannot be attributed to his casual relationship with the truth, and only part of it can be put down to Linda McMahon’s millions.

The lady sure knows how to advertise.

Mrs. McMahon’s considerable fortune permits her to sidestep the usual power brokers, including the mainstream media (MSM), who recently stepped up, to little avail, to revive former Rep. Rob Simmon’s moribund and penniless campaign. The MSM has contracted McMahonphobia in part because she is rich. The MSM has always suffered from pecuniaphobia. Note to the reader, if there is a reader: Don’t bother to look it up. The word has been newly minted from the Latin "money" (pecunia) and "fear of" (phobia) and, as its step-father, I fully expect to be credited whenever it is used.

This annoying sidestepping steams the MSM because they want a hand at determining events. In the old days, when the good old boys in the smoke filed rooms determined the make-up of political tickets, esteemed representatives of the MSM were in the room with the rest – political bosses, captains of industry, union leaders, campaign financiers -- smoking up a storm and determining the fate of state and nation.

Times change.

But why does it make sense, some Blumenthal watchers are asking, for the patron saint of citizens oppressed by lawless capitalism to pass his campaign days drowsing in a coffin and declining to confront Mrs. McMahon at every possible opportunity?

Mr. Blumenthal is a perfect target for ad-battering – ONLY if he absents himself from frequent direct engagement. Eventually, even given the support of the MSM he has earned during 20 years of truckling to it as attorney general, that 7% will be whittled away to zero, at which point people are bound to wonder: What are ya a’feared of Mr. Blumenthal?

As attorney general, a righteous wind of 200 and more lawyers at his back, Mr. Blumenthal has been a familiar actor on Connecticut’s political stage for two decades, and no one, during his many press conferences, has seen him blanched, timid, hanging back, drooping with anomie, listless, non-confrontational, docile.

Is this sad sack, some are now wondering, the battling attorney general who brought the cancer causing tobacco industry to heel, fearlessly confronted the makers of Fruit Loops, and valiantly protested erotic service ads on Craig’s list but not, unaccountably, in Connecticut’s Advocate newspapers?

When, Mr. Blumenthal’s fan base is asking, will Achilles come out of his tent and do battle? What the deuce is all the moping about?

Although Mr. Blumenthal has been running for U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd’s soon to be abandoned seat ever since Mr. Dodd threw in the towel months ago, there is not a single person in Connecticut who could tell you what Mr. Blumenthal’s position is on an array of important issues. His thin soup U.S. Senate campaign site is full of the most glittering generalities.

President Barack Obama, the nominal head of the national Democratic Party, announced on August 14, during an Iftar meal at the White House for Muslims breaking their Ramadan fast, his position on the siting of an Islamic mosque and cultural center close to the cavity in New York where once stood the World Trade Center towers destroyed on 9-11 by jihadist terrorists. The issue certainly is a matter of some importance to Connecticut and other states contiguous to New York. Many Connecticut citizens died in the attack.

Mr. Obama said the United States could not deny a recognized religion, Islam, the same constitutional rights that other religions in the United States enjoy. Muslims, he said “have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country," which includes “the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan… This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are." New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who favors the building of the Mosque and cultural center, dubbed the president’s remarks a "clarion defense of the freedom of religion."

One looks in vain for a similar clarion call in Mr. Blumenthal’s campaign site, which is passing strange, since 9-11 directly touched hearts and minds in Connecticut with its red tooth and claw. Mr. Blumenthal also has a direct family connection to important properties in New York. His wife’s family owns the Empire State Building and other significant properties in the city. In addition, Mr. Blumenthal, as attorney general, has prided himself on a thoroughgoing understanding of both property and constitutional law.

It is a little disconcerting for those who admire such a bold and active attorney general to watch his mind and heart break down as he moves from his present position towards the U.S. congress. If five months before possibly being sworn in as Connecticut’s junior U.S. senator, Mr. Blumenthal cannot venture an opinion on matters of such moment to Connecticut, why should anyone trust him to come down on the right side of all the other important issues unaddressed on his campaign

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 4 – Education

This is the fourth in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on education. Since I started with “Governor” Foley in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Malloy in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.


“Governor” Dan Malloy
Flat out, I refuse to accept the false choice that you're either "pro-reform," or "pro-teacher." I'm both, and not only do I not think that's contradictory, I think it's in perfect harmony.
What can we do to help make sure our children have the best possible teachers? First, let's give teachers the resources they need in the classroom. Second, the overly burdensome requirements of the traditional routes to the profession create roadblocks that turn away too many talented, capable people who desperately want to teach. Let's change that to ensure that successful alternate certification programs can genuinely thrive and place highly competent new teachers and principals in schools that need them most. Third, let's be smart about how we evaluate teachers
The most important thing we can do to harness the influence of parents in our schools is to enhance parenting. In order to accomplish this, I want to propose employee release time for school-time activities (volunteering, parent conferences, etc.), and establish a parental involvement challenge grant to promote innovation and adoption of effective parental involvement strategies. And I'd like to find a way to work with local school boards to adopt policies that ensure parents can access homework assignments and their children's attendance and available grades in real time, online. Many districts are doing this already, and I think all should.
I'd like to examine the feasibility of transitioning toward a new, smarter system of funding for all of our public schools where money follows children based on their needs. I'd also look to refocus state school funding by indexing foundation aid to rising costs, adding measures of essential classroom resource equalization, and weighting more for pre-school and elementary grades where the greatest educational gains can be made.
As Governor, my guiding principle will be for our schools to maximize opportunities for students, while not losing the flexibility they need to help each student reach his or her potential.
I'm a supporter of charter public schools, because they serve a different, very important function: they provide families with options within the public school system. We should seek to expand charter schools that are fully funded by the districts in which they're located.
As Governor, restoring education funding will be among my highest priorities and the lynchpin to reforming the property tax system that has become so unfair and unwieldy to homeowners across the state. It is also critical to continually improving our schools and the essential work taking place in our classrooms.
I believe "life-long learning" strategies are essential to the future prosperity and economic security of all Connecticut students. As Governor, my initiatives to enhance education across the state will be guided by these goals:
1. Focusing on Early Childhood Education
Pre-schools are becoming a necessary extension of our traditional elementary schools. Studies have long shown that children who receive pre-kindergarten education are more likely to graduate from high school, less likely to repeat a grade or need special education classes, and less likely to be disruptive in the classroom and hinder teaching. The investment we make in pre-K education pay us back dramatically. Cost savings from reduced education expenditures later in life, fewer social service costs, and higher economic earning capacity are significant.
2. Innovations in Teaching and Learning
I believe that we should do all we can to promote innovation and to rethink the ways our schools work. I believe that we can accomplish much by ensuring collaboration among parents, teachers, administrators, and community leaders. We must also promote innovation in a way that doesn't diminish the good things that are already happening in schools across the state. We must not sacrifice the art of teaching, an art that made a big difference in my life, for the next generation of children.
3. Connecting Students to College and the Workplace
With the expansion of the global economy, our world has changed. We must change the way we prepare young adults for the world if they are to be able to thrive in it. Connecticut can enhance educational opportunities by strengthening connections between high schools and colleges. And we can complete the connection by broadening opportunities for high school students to gain valuable work experience as well. As Governor, I will work to build better connections between high schools and colleges to ensure more opportunities for students to transition into higher education.
4. A Smarter Higher Education Agenda
If we want to succeed economically, we must make increasing our state's postsecondary educational attainment level the foundation of Connecticut's economic development strategy. And we need a Governor who will aggressively lead our state's schools and colleges in facing this challenge. Here is what we must do:
Higher education institutions must fight their dropout challenge with the same commitment that we expect from our high schools in reducing the high school dropout rate. Students must recognize that education is challenging and requires a lot of work outside the classroom, but it offers great rewards to those who succeed. Families must support their children's college-going plans starting in middle school and assure that their children succeed in the courses that get a high school graduate ready for college on day one. Employers also have an important role in encouraging their employees to join the increasing ranks of adults returning to higher education later in life.
Build regional partnerships to increase student success
I am proposing a voluntary testing program which high school students could choose to participate in during their junior year, which would ascertain how prepared they are for basic college level math and English. Where needed, the student's 12th grade curriculum would be adjusted to help them better prepare for their freshman year of college.
I will annually convene the education, community and business leaders in each region of the state to report on our progress and develop local plans for increasing the number of graduates. We need our high schools and local colleges to actively partner for student success in the same way that high performing school districts expect elementary, middle and high schools to actively work together to prepare students for the next level.
Increase the commitment in our teacher education programs to meeting the needs of our local pre-K through 12 schools
Maintain our commitment to financial aid
Focus higher education spending on students and learning
Build a world class research and development sector
Enhancing Workforce Development and Job Training
Malloy Plan summarized
Early Childhood Education
Expand access to pre-Kindergarten programs across Connecticut, the goal being to make it universal within 4 years

Primary and Secondary Education
Innovate in learning
Encourage local school districts to restore a broader and deeper curriculum for all students that include hands-on science, history, civics, foreign languages and arts
Allow districts to self-fund new charter schools
End the "seat time" later years of high school by allowing successful seniors to graduate early for higher education
Better fund adult education for those unlikely ever to graduate
Create a community college "grade 13" option for those not quite prepared for college level education.
Promote high-quality, standard-based assessments
Innovate in teaching
Expand access to alternative teaching programs
Enhance teacher evaluation systems
Involve parents
Champion employee release time for school-time activities (volunteering, parent conferences, etc.)
Establish a parental involvement challenge grant to promote innovation and adoption of effective parental involvement strategies.
Require local school boards to adopt policies that ensure parents can access homework assignments and their children's attendance and available grades in real time. Many districts are doing this already, all should.
Funding
Examine feasibility of transitioning toward a new, smarter system of funding for all of our public schools where money follows children based on their needs
Refocus state school funding by indexing foundation aid to rising costs, adding measures of essential classroom resource equalization, and weighting more for pre-school and elementary grades where the greatest educational gains can be made
Limit school district administrative expenditures and instead offering incentives to retain and recruit classroom teachers in the face of cutbacks and a growing teacher shortage
Higher Education
Move some of the existing community colleges to four year degree granting programs Build regional partnerships to increase student success Allow optional testing in high school to gauge college preparedness levels in math and English, and tailor senior year curriculum accordingly Maintain our commitment to financial aid Focus higher education spending on students and learning, not administration Build a world class research and development sector

Workforce Development & Job training
Provide more opportunities for high school students to participate in apprenticeship training, earn community-college credit, or gain real workplace experience Increase the commitment in our teacher education programs to meeting the needs of our local K-12 schools Create a more responsive and integrated rapid reemployment and job training infrastructure that focuses on emergency services for displaced workers Enhance economic security by expanding customized and incumbent-worker job training to help workers enhance their skills and better protect against more jobs being lured from our state






“Governor” Tom Foley
Connecticut has some of the best schools in the country, but we also have the country’s largest achievement gap. We have an obligation to provide an excellent education to all of our young people. We can and must do better. Our economy and the future of our state depend on it.
The lessons learned in our best charter schools can be used to improve regular public schools that are not performing well. Among other things, we must end social promotion and should introduce performance pay for teachers. Parents and children who are not served by well-performing regular public schools must have other choices. Connecticut should strive to be a leader in the ‘Race to the Top.’

Comment
The reader is able to see that Malloy has a definite dedication to Education based on his experience as a learning disabled child making his way through the educational system with support from family, teachers, and the community. This experience has given him a grounding and an emotional commitment to education. Malloy’s plan seems fully developed and shaped by his personal experience while the Foley plan is standard “boilerplate.” As noted in the Health Care review, the reader will have to decide if Malloy’s Education plan is unaffordable or if it is unaffordable for Connecticut not to carry out some or all of his proposals.

Best on Blumenthal

Possibly the best single piece of journalism written on Attorney General Richard Blumenthal – that has not been written BY Mr. Blumenthal – is this one turned out by Bill Cummings, an investigative reporter for the Connecticut Post.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 3 – Health Care

This is the third in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on healthcare. Since I started with “Governor” Malloy in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Foley in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.


“Governor” Tom Foley
We must reduce those costs by reducing state mandates on coverage, promoting wellness programs, capping medical malpractice claims, moving to electronic record keeping, and permitting interstate sales of healthcare insurance.
Connecticut has some of the best healthcare businesses and facilities in the country. As Governor, I will seek to place Connecticut in a leadership role in lowering healthcare costs for everyone.


“Governor” Dan Malloy
Malloy briefly mentioned Healthcare costs in his policy on Jobs and the Economy but goes into more detail in the Healthcare portion of his plan.
I believe health care is something everyone should have. In fact, I view it as a moral issue. If a state can't work with the private sector to put in place a system to care for its people when they're sick, especially children, the frail, and the elderly, what does it say about the kind of society we are? Not something good. And not something I will allow it to say when I'm Governor.
I hold a fundamental belief that quality medical care shouldn't be a luxury affordable only to some.

State government is the largest purchaser of healthcare services in the state. I've been a vocal supporter of state legislation to use this purchasing power and large number of covered lives to help drive down costs for municipalities and boards of education – as well as other employers.

As Governor, I would use the purchasing power and influence of state government to convene all parties -- insurance companies, employers, unions, medical practices, hospitals and others -- to improve the quality of healthcare delivery and lower costs for everyone. The current system is broken. We need to connect all providers with electronic medical records, reduce duplicate testing and procedures, and change the way we pay for healthcare services in the State.

I was also an early supporter of legislation that would have established a health insurance option for Connecticut residents called SustiNet. In the end, the final legislation did not go as far as I had hoped. It did not create the SustiNet Health Insurance option, but did set the wheels in motion toward developing a plan that could become law.

No discussion of health care is complete without a discussion of mental illness. Mental illness is not discriminating. It can happen to our co-workers and neighbors, our men and women returning from extended combat, our friends and our families.
Connecticut needs to invest smartly, save money and save lives:
Assuring access to effective mental health care for all in need
Ending stigma and increasing awareness
Emphasizing prevention and early intervention
Adequately funding and staffing state facilities
Investing more in community-based treatment and support that sustains long term recovery through mental health care, housing, employment and peer support.
We can also work to improve care by caring for concurrent addiction and mental health issues. We treat alcohol addiction in one place and mental health issues in another. We need collocation of services and concurrent programming because each one feeds on the other. There are ways to incentivize this type of programming and we should be moving in that direction. When they are separated out, the care doesn't work.
Finally, we need to have insurance parity. In other words, we need to recognize that mental illness is an illness just like any other and should be covered at the same rates and levels as any other illnesses, not stigmatized and shunted aside with lower reimbursement rates that limit access to care.

As Governor, I will:
1. Change our fiscal focus from paying exorbitant costs of advanced preventable illness to prevention, early detection and treatment, thus saving lives as well as resources.
2. Push for a comprehensive pooling bill to allow municipalities, small businesses and the self-employed access to better coverage at a lower cost. In addition to providing more health care coverage, this will make Connecticut a more business friendly state – i.e., it's a job-creator.
3. Form strategic partnerships with Connecticut's community health centers, which play a vital role in our health care system by treating those who have been denied or cannot afford health insurance, or who don't live in close proximity to a hospital.
4. Properly fund our nursing homes to cover the actual costs of providing care. In urban areas, I will ensure the homes are kept open so local residents can remain near family.
5. Properly fund privately-operated (non-profit) group homes and day programs to maintain and improve care services and job standards. These services have been severely under-funded for years, leading to high staff turnover rates.
6. Establish a ‘Workforce Council' for the growing home care industry so that our caregivers have a voice in the development of care requirements and job standards, including wages, benefits, training, and more. This Council could also maintain a statewide list of caregivers to assist consumers in finding referrals.
7. Expand Connecticut's Primary Care Case Management (PCCM) system, HUSKY Primary Care, to 400,000 low income children and parents in the HUSKY program. Participants in PCCM receive comprehensive care that is coordinated by a primary care physician to optimize and integrate all of their healthcare needs. PCCM is key to prevention, early treatment and maintaining health. Like the pooling bill, this will deliver better health care at a lower cost.
8. Work with our congressional delegation to get our fair share of Medicaid and Medicare dollars.
9. Make mental health care the priority it should be, but still isn't.
10. Provide leadership to create all-payer Patient Center Medical Home primary care practices throughout the state to improve quality and lower medical costs for everyone.
11. Work with the federal government and medical schools in the state to train more primary care physicians, nurses, and other providers who will remain in the state to meet the needs of our residents.
In conclusion, We've made some progress on healthcare in Connecticut in the past year, and Congress and the President made history in Washington, DC. But the fact is that too many people in Connecticut still don't have access to quality, affordable healthcare. That will change when I'm Governor. So too will the incredible, job-killing burden the cost of healthcare places on employers. I am completely convinced that, with Nancy Wyman's as my partner in this effort, we can expand access and bring costs down. We can improve people's lives, and make Connecticut a more business friendly state. That's a promise we have a moral responsibility to keep.

As you can see, “Governor” Foley has a short list on reducing the cost of health care with little detail. “Governor” Malloy has a detailed list on actions his administration would take to both manage health care and reduce its cost to consumers and businesses. In fact I have shortchanged the Malloy plan by deleting all of the background information showing how he did similar actions in Stamford or how his running mate, Nancy Wyman, has managed some state health care systems. His plan is ambitious and I will let the reader decide if it is possible in the State’s current fiscal condition or whether the plan is one of the key items in getting the State out of its current fiscal problems.

Obama, The Mosque And Property Rights

President Barack Obama and family stuck their toes in Florida for 26 hours on their way to a ten day family stay at toney Martha’s Vineyard. Peter Nichols of the Tribune’s Washington Bureau explains the motivation for the trip:

“Having urged people to visit the Gulf Coast, the Obamas risked looking elitist, so White House aides arranged the trip to the Florida Panhandle. They got the pictures they wanted. Obama took a dip in the bay and high-fived his daughter, who made a hole in one at a miniature golf course.”

While in Florida, Mr. Obama stuck his toe, once again, into the New York mosque-cultural center controversy.

While he appeared have approved the building of a mosque and cultural center a little more than a stone’s throw from the place where, more than 9 years ago, jihadi terrorists had rubblized the World Trade Center Twin Towers, Mr. Obama now began to massage the message. The nineth anniversary of the terrorist incident in New York is coming around this September 11th.

The earlier message of the former constitutional law professor – that the U.S. Constitution makes no distinction between various faiths but extends the religious protections of the first Amendment to all alike – remained unchanged in Mr. Obama’s new formulation; however, the president wanted his critics to understand that he was not commenting on the “wisdom” of siting the mosque and cultural center so close to the crater where the towers once stood:

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there," said the vacationing president.”

Nichols supplies the obvious gloss:

“He was not necessarily endorsing ‘the wisdom’ of putting a mosque at that location. Rather, the former constitutional law professor said he was standing up for the landowners' right to put a mosque on private property, even if the building would be near the site of the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.”

Some of Mr. Obama’s fiercest critics would consider the president’s new found concern for property rights touching. Others on the left who favor those programs of Mr. Obama that impinge on property rights may well consider the emphasis Mr. Obama has placed on them dangerous and alarming.

The Foley and Malloy Prospectus Compared Part 2 – Taxes and the Budget

This is the second in a series of blog posting regarding the plans of the Republican and Democratic candidates for governor, Tom Foley and Dan Malloy. All of the information provided in the posting is from the candidate’s web sites, http://www.danmalloy.com/policy and http://www.tomfoley2010.com clicking on the “Issues” and “Tom’s Plan” selections. The opinions are my own and not cleared with either candidate’s staff. In the interest of full disclosure, I am a supporter of Dan Malloy and worked as a volunteer on his 2006 campaign as well as the current 2010 campaign.

I will begin with some general observations about the plans that the candidates have posted on their web sites. If less is more, then Foley wins hands down. His plan turns out to be seven pages in my word document. The Malloy plan is a whopping forty eight pages with great detail. I guess that is fitting since most Republicans believe less government is better, obviously a short plan will lead to less government. From the Democratic perspective, government is good and Malloy shows just how he plans to shape and change much of the state government in great detail.

Of course, there is no guarantee that either of the candidate’s will do what they lay out on their web site when actually in office, but like a stock prospectus, it is an indication of the plan and direction each candidate will pursue once in office.

I am leaving out much of the explanatory text in the plans and just noting the planned action items. Both plans are written in the first person, so I will keep that same format as I quote or paraphrase from each plan. The reader will have to remember that the occasional “I” is either “Governor” Foley or “Governor” Malloy.

This comparison continues with the prospective governors’ take on taxes and budgeting. Since I started with “Governor” Foley in the last post, I will start with “Governor” Malloy in this post. I will continue this alternate presenting throughout this series of postings.

“Governor” Dan Malloy
We have to be committed to getting our fiscal house in order, budgeting within our means, and being better prepared for downturns in the economy. I will focus our attention on the problem and our resources on the right solutions. I recognize that sensible state budgeting is connected to fairer local budgeting. As governor-after-governor has proven, we simply cannot fix the system without addressing this relationship.
Reform can only be completed with the commitment of a Governor to end our over-reliance on local property taxation. Change starts with fixing education funding and finally meeting our State's constitutional obligation to provide a fair share to Connecticut's communities. Sensible state budgeting is connected to sensible local budgeting.

As Governor, I will initiate long overdue comprehensive tax reform for our State. Reform will be guided by 5 key goals. Real tax reform must:
Be sustainable, comprehensive and address the balance of state and local taxation
Provide for a fairer and more progressive sharing of taxation
Ensure a greater and more equitable state share of local funding for schools
Strategically generate job growth and encourage business development
Relieve the local property tax burden on low and middle income seniors, veterans, and individuals who are disabled
To that end, my administration will review and consider the following strategies:
Joining with a number of other states that allow municipalities to tax different types of property at different rates, particularly low and moderate income housing, housing for the elderly, and housing for individuals with disabilities, as done in Minnesota.
Allowing buildings to be taxed at a different rate than land, as is done in Pennsylvania, to encourage smart growth, reduce blight, and encourage property improvements.
Permitting cities and towns to further diversify their revenue sources by levying limited sales and use taxes, as is done in Nevada, to pay for open space and parks.
Instituting revenue sharing and permitting a portion of taxes generated in a municipality to be retained.
Encouraging flexible changes that could allow cities and towns to share in the revenue generated from utility, cable, sales, and hotel taxes.
Expanding personal income tax credits, providing homestead exemptions, or instituting property tax rebates as is done in Kansas, Minnesota, New York, South Carolina and Wisconsin.
We also cannot truly fix our system of taxation without spending more wisely. We also must reduce our reliance on debt and prioritize projects based on their ability to stimulate job growth.
One of the most fundamental budget reforms we should consider enacting is requiring state government to abide by generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) - as local municipalities currently do - to gain a more complete and accurate picture of our budget.
Overall, and perhaps most important, we must restore the fundamental goals of state government: to protect the state's most vulnerable citizens, enhance economic security, provide educational opportunity, maximize public safety, and to promote equity, fairness, and justice.

“Governor” Tom Foley
As Governor, I will veto any attempt by the legislature to raise taxes. I will order a review of state tax policy to ensure the way we tax our citizens and our businesses is fair and equitable, doesn’t put us at a disadvantage versus other states, and supports strong economic growth and job creation.
I will aggressively reduce spending so that we can reduce taxes and still comply with our constitutional requirement to balance the state budget
I will compare our tax rates and tax policy to other states, particularly neighboring states, to be sure our taxes are not driving businesses and working families away from Connecticut
I will aggressively reduce spending so that we can reduce taxes and still comply with our constitutional requirement to balance the state budget
I will increase transparency so that Connecticut taxpayers aren’t being hit with “stealth taxes” they can not see, such as the gross receipts tax on gas stations
I will work with the legislature to agree on a bi-partisan, long term tax policy for Connecticut that is based on sound economic policy and fairness, and which puts an end to the old-world politics of pitting groups of citizens or regions of the state against each other
As Governor, I will act immediately to increase transparency and eliminate deceptive practices. I will have Connecticut adopt Generally Accepting Accounting Principals (‘GAAP’) to reduce financial game playing by the legislature. I will fight to repeal mandates on businesses and towns that raise their costs.
As Governor, I will use my 25 years of executive experience and negotiating skills to bargain hard with the legislature to pass a budget that reduces state spending. I will move to stop Hartford from borrowing to pay for ordinary operating expenses, an irresponsible practice that the legislature is currently using to avoid cutting spending.
I will seek a stronger line item veto and then use it to protect spending reductions and block attempts by the legislature to raise taxes
I will not be afraid to make tough decisions to protect the future of our state
I will work hard to generate a more bi-partisan, cooperative culture in Hartford focused on solving problems rather than partisan bickering and infighting
I will immediately move to eliminate loopholes that allow funds intended for dedicated purposes such as investing in our transportation infrastructure and supporting our schools to be used instead by the legislature for general fund pet projects
I will eliminate other ‘tricks of the trade’ Hartford uses to avoid compliance with our prudent state spending cap and constitutional requirement to balance the budget
I will put an end to the Bonding Commission borrowing to pay for ordinary operating expenses, an irresponsible practice that the legislature is currently using to avoid cutting spending
I will insist that the state upgrade its internet portal to make it easier to use, provide citizens the opportunity to transact more business with the state on-line, and provide more transparent information about what your state government is doing with your money
. I will end the practice of Hartford imposing unfunded mandates on towns and otherwise restricting towns’ ability to conduct their business
I will review and seek repeal of mandates on towns that unnecessarily raise their costs
I will work to assure that Connecticut’s towns have more of a voice in determining state policy and decision-making by holding quarterly forums including town leaders, legislative leaders, and the Governor
I will work with the legislature to produce timely budgets so that towns can better plan their own budgeting
I will work to assist towns who want to participate in regional cost sharing by, for example, allowing joint permitting and otherwise simplifying the process and reducing the cost of complying with state laws

Except for the promise to veto any tax increase by “Governor” Foley, the two plans are very similar. Both “governors” favor the state using GAAP just as cities and towns are currently required to do. Both will bench mark against other states to find best practices. “Governor” Foley also is more specific in what actions he would take to reduce state expenses. Again, it is up to the reader to decide which plan has the most chance for success.

The Essential Blumenthal

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, some Blumenthal watchers will tell you, cannot be left unattended. Like a toddler used to the steadying hand of his nanny, Mr. Blumenthal topples easily when he is left to himself. Propped up by his subalterns – numerous attorneys in his office and, now that he is the front runner in a campaign for the U.S. Congress, any political adepts the Beltway can spare in an important election season for congressional Democrats – Mr. Blumenthal expertly navigates past the political shoals. Left to himself, he shivers the timbers of his handlers.

Recently, Mr. Blumenthal traveled to the Norwalk Inn to celebrate a victory of sorts. Almost eight years ago, the owner of the inn purchased an adjoining property, intending to knock down a house in disrepair that squatted on the property. The owner had no difficulty getting from the town a demolition permit, and he bought the property intending to demolish the long vacant house, which would permit him to expand the Norwalk Inn horizontally.

But the owner’s plans were soon torn asunder. It turned out that the house the property owner wished to level once stood on Grumman’s Hill, no longer there, from which British Revolutionary War Gen. William Tryon watched his troops looting and burning Norwalk. A legend, since discredited, held that Tryon sat in a rocking chair on the hill. The dilapidated house, its windows boarded up and its porch sagging, was very much in need of a patron to restore it.

Blumenthal’s office decided that the patron should be the owner of the Inn, who apparently had purchased a litigatory albatross. In vain did the owner produce his demolition permit. The house, set in an historic district since 1986, was considered historically significant.

Litigation commenced -- and continued for six grueling years, in the course of which, arguing the case himself in Superior Court, Blumenthal maintained the owner had purposely neglected the house he proposed to demolish, frozen for half a dozen years in complex litigation, because he wanted the house to collapse in ruins. Leveling such a meretricious charge is not an effective way to gain friends and influence people, nor could it possibly have improved any negotiation process. The charge urged against Blumenthal by those who oppose his high handed tactics is that he is 90% stick and 10% carrot.

Blumenthal’s charge, as well as the seeming unending litigation, stung because the owner had four years earlier, according to a November, 2006 story in the Norwalk Advocate, proposed to all the disputants in the controversy an offer he thought they could not refuse. The owner offered to refurbish the house or sell it for a dollar to preservationists if he could be certain he would be allowed to add to the Norwalk Inn a third floor, without which he would not be able to afford the rehabilitation.

The inn’s owner, according to the news report, “cited an offer he made in 2002 to save the home if he could build a third story on the inn. Current zoning regulations do not allow a third story.”

The Inn’s owner needed help with a zoning board. He got six years of litigation in the neck.

"The last five years, where were you?” he asked. “We have made offers to you. Nobody responded."

More litigation ensued.

Four years after the knout of litigation, everyone apparently got what they wanted. The owner would restore the house in ruins, a casualty of protracted litigation. It was the time consuming litigation – not any attempt by the owner of the ruined house to sabotage his own property – that brought the house to its knees.

The breakthrough moment came when State Senator Bob Duff and State Representative Larry Cafero intervened to unfreeze the ice. Cafero -- who served as a mediator during the successful year-long negotiation prior to the resolution of the problems – gave a presentation showing the improvements that would be made both to the Norwalk Inn and the historically significant wreck of a house.

Now, at the tail end of the painful process, Mr. Blumenthal would have his moment before the cameras.

At the end of the presentation, Mr. Blumenthal made some brief remarks, as did the President of the Norwalk Preservation Trust and the owner of the inn, pleased that at long last -- pending zoning approval -- he would be given his additional story, without which he could not pick up the tab for repairs. An awkward moment occurred, when Blumenthal mentioned that such legal struggles as occurred during the preceding six years sometimes made friends of the bitterest enemies.

At the end of Mr. Blumenthal’s remarks, Mr. Cafareo said, “Are there any questions? Okay,” and everyone stepped off the dais. There was no pause between Mr. Cafero’s terminal question and his “Okay.” The cameras were immediately shut off.

No one asked the owner of the property if he intended to vote for Mr. Blumenthal, his newfound friend, during the upcoming U.S. senate election.

The cookies provided by the Norwalk Inn owner were irresistible. Mr. Blumenthal, having been suitably attended by the lawyers that came with him and his staff, left on his own steam after a bit of mingling. No awkward moments were recorded after the cameras had been quickly shut down. No hard questions were asked of Mr. Blumenthal. And the abstemious Mr. Blumenthal ate no cookies