Donovan Wants Minimum Wage Boosted

Speaker of the state House of Representatives Chris Donovan, now running for the U.S. Congress as a Democratic candidate in Connecticut’s 5th District, will be leading a group of Democrats who want to make changes to the state’s minimum wage laws, according to a notice from WTNH news channel 8.

“They have scheduled a news conference on Tuesday at the Legislative Office Building to discuss their proposals, including increasing the current hourly rate of $8.25 an hour.

“Another possible change under consideration is imposing automatic increases in the state's minimum wage, based on the cost of living index. Several states already have such a requirement on the books.

“House Speaker Christopher Donovan, a candidate for the 5th congressional district seat, is expected to be joined by several lawmakers, a union official, a business owner and a minimum wage worker.

“The issue will likely be taken up in the new session of the General Assembly, which opens on Feb. 8.”

Most economists believe that artificial boosts in the minimum wage create significant distortions in the labor market.

A minimum wage above that set by free markets limits employment opportunities for workers in training, college students, interns and part time workers. Some low paying jobs provide entrée points for workers without marketable skills, placing their feet on the lower rungs of a labor ladder that will carry them upwards to success and higher wages.

Forcing companies to pay politically inflated labor costs increases the likelihood that companies will outsource jobs to foreign parts where the cost of labor is less; or worse, it may drive small companies out of business. Mega-companies rarely have difficulty in meeting minimum wage demands.

Artificially increased labor costs particularly impact nonprofit and charitable organizations.

Increases in the minimum wage incentivize companies to replace mechanized job functions with robotic replacements, depriving low and mid-wage workers of employment opportunities.

Some economists opposed to the minimum wage argue that its elimination would provide more jobs for U.S. workers, boost tax revenues and reduce incentives that lead to illegal immigration.

The minimum wage generally creates competitive advantages for foreign companies, where the cost of labor is less. This imbalance creates obstacles for American companies competing globally.

When the minimum wage is set by politicians, personal choice is curtailed, since American citizens are deprived of the ability to say yes or no to job offers.

It is extremely doubtful, so long Mr. Donovan as Speaker continues to direct the business of the House, that any of the above points will be urged against yet another artificial hike in Connecticut’s minimum wage.

Vanderbilt Chancellor Issues Edict Affirming New Policy Offensive To Religious Groups On Campus

The new policy in place deprives religious groups on campus of effectuating their mission because the policy removes standards of leadership, according to Chris Godfrey, the National Advisor of Beta Upsilon Chi, Inc.

Mr. Godfrey has sent out the following media release:

“Dear News Team,

“I would like to inform you about a situation at Vanderbilt University that has escalated over the past few weeks and would like to encourage you to get the word out about this story. The Chancellor at the university, Nicholas Zeppos, sent out an e-mail two weeks ago informing the student body about a new non-discrimination policy that will that undermine the integrity of many student religious organizations. This issue deals with our First Constitutional Right, Freedom of Religion, Press, and Expression.

“He says in his e-mail that ‘I want to assure you the university does not seek to limit anyone's freedom to practice his or her religion. We do, however, require all Vanderbilt registered student organizations to observe our nondiscrimination policy. That means membership in registered student organizations is open to everyone and that everyone, if desired, has the opportunity to seek leadership positions.’ No matter how the facts are framed, the reality is that the student organization handbook was altered last December, when a section specifically protecting religious association was removed. Last April, a number of organizations were placed on provisional status as constitutions that had been easily approved in previous years were evaluated under this new standard.

“Now, with a new policy in place, religious organizations can no longer have standards for their leadership. They can no longer require that their leadership believe what the organization stands for. A Christian could lead a Jewish organization, a Muslim a Christian, etc. If a student says that they feel that they cannot join an organization or be elected an officer in it, there will be grounds for a university investigation.

“We need your help getting the word out about a Town Hall Meeting tomorrow that the university is hosting. The meeting is at 6:15pm tomorrow evening in Room 114 in Furman Hall. I have attached four documents that I think you will find helpful in highlighting important information regarding this issue. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask. Give me a call at (877) 250-4512 or e-mail me back if you need anything at all. Here is a video link that is relevant as well: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOmpzQh6J7c

“Sincerely,

“Chris Godfrey

“National Advisor, Beta Upsilon Chi, Inc.

The missive sent by the Chancellor of Vanderbilt University in Nashville Tennessee was as follows:

“From: Chancellor Date: Friday, January 20, 2012 Subject: Message from the Chancellor To: VANDERBILT-COMMUNITY@list.vanderbilt.edu

“Dear Members of the Vanderbilt Community, As we settle into the spring semester, which will conclude with many of our students taking on new roles - as alumni - in our Vanderbilt community, it is a good time to reflect on the core principles and values of our university. As an institution of higher education, Vanderbilt values above all intellectual freedom that supports open inquiry, equal opportunity, compassion and excellence in all endeavors. We are committed to making our campus a welcoming environment for all, and we are dedicated to encouraging and supporting diversity of thought and opinion among our students, faculty and staff. We believe this sense of inclusiveness, of everyone being able to take part fully in the Vanderbilt experience, is essential to our being able to give students the most enriching educational experience we can provide, both inside and outside the classroom. We believe we all have the opportunity to learn greatly when we are exposed to new people, and to ideas and beliefs different from our own. Equally, we believe that in gaining exposure to the unfamiliar we may discover common ground. Religious freedom is also a fundamental value of our university community. Historically the intellectual freedom that is central to university life has its roots in respect for freedom of conscience. We also believe that Vanderbilt registered student organizations are an important part of the overall Vanderbilt educational experience. That is why we invest university funds in them and afford them the privilege of using the Vanderbilt name. We want to be certain that all of our students have an opportunity to join and fully participate in the registered student organizations that interest them. Questions have recently been raised about how our nondiscrimination policy applies to our registered student organizations. At Vanderbilt, we firmly believe that discrimination is wrong. Individuals must be judged as individuals, not as members of groups. This foundational belief is codified in our nondiscrimination policy, which covers all Vanderbilt students and all registered student organizations. Discussion concerning Vanderbilt's application of our policy, like discussion about other matters of communal concern, is healthy and welcome. What the discussion suggests to me is that, while there is widespread agreement with the principle of nondiscrimination, application of this principle to student religious organizations has prompted concern from some quarters.

“I want to assure you the university does not seek to limit anyone's freedom to practice his or her religion. We do, however, require all Vanderbilt registered student organizations to observe our nondiscrimination policy. That means membership in registered student organizations is open to everyone and that everyone, if desired, has the opportunity to seek leadership positions. We have great trust in our students to select their own leaders of these organizations. In an effort to ensure the content and purpose of our nondiscrimination policy are more fully understood and to continue to discuss any concerns, we will host a town hall meeting later this month. University leaders will explain and take questions about our position regarding registered student organizations and our nondiscrimination policy. We hope this forum will provide an opportunity for the intelligent, dedicated and compassionate members of the Vanderbilt community to make themselves heard, and we want to emphasize that all views are welcome. While the meeting is principally for our students, faculty and staff are welcome to attend and express themselves as well. Details of the town hall meeting will be announced soon. Meanwhile, thank you for all you do every day to advance the mission of Vanderbilt. As always, I am honored and privileged to serve as your Chancellor.

“Sincerely, Nicholas S. Zeppos Chancellor”

Some students at Vanderbilt responded to their Chancellor by means of a video:



Mr. Zeppos’ edict confuses important issues. Schools should not discriminate in their admissions policies, but an admissions policy that cannot set standards for admissions would launch colleges on a journey of suicidal recklessness. Colleges insist, for example, on certain standards for the hiring of staff. A non-discriminatory policy that would abolish standards of hiring would permit students, say, to teach courses at the university and even administer the functions that fall to the chancellor – which, in Mr. Zeppos’ case might not be a bad idea. It is always possible that one of the students “selected” -- though we must be careful of using such words in the absence of standards of selection -- as Chancellor of Vanderbilt might be more discriminating, in the good sense, than its present Chancellor.

The rule that applies to admissions to the college must also apply in some degree to the various clubs the college supports. A Newman club at any university would suffer greatly if, in the absence of standards, a leader of the club should be chosen who practices Wicca – not that there’s anything wrong with Wicca. Likewise, a conventicle of Satanists at Vanderbilt would reasonably wither in indignation if a member of the Newman club with were to be appointed as a club leader just because the chancellor of Vanderbilt was unable to distinguish between rightful and wrongful discrimination.

The chancellor is also climbing out on a very risky limb. Only recently, in a 9-0 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States for the first time the “ministerial exception” to state and federal employment discrimination laws, while rejecting the Obama administration’s argument that churches should be treated no differently than other employers.”

Reasoning that rights extended beyond reasonable bounds sooner or later collide with other important rights, chief justice John Roberts, writing for the majority, pointed out that “The interest of society in the enforcement of employment discrimination statutes is undoubtedly important. But so too is the interest of religious groups in choosing who will preach their beliefs, teach their faith, and carry out their mission,” a triumphant declaration of common sense that, for some reason, is beyond the ken of the chancellor of Vanderbilt University.

We The People Press Release On FOI Request

Following below is a Press release issued by We The People Of Connecticut Inc.

1
PRESS
RELEASE
–
1/27/12

Hartford, CT— On January 26, 2011, We the People of Connecticut, Inc., utilizing a team of representatives in a coordinated effort, simultaneously filed six formal Freedom of Information requests with six state agencies, including Governor Dannel Malloy’s office, seeking to obtain all documents relevant to the issuance of Governor Malloy’s Executive Orders Nine and Ten.

After waiting approximately four hours at Governor Malloy’s Office, Governor Malloy’s General Counsel, Andrew McDonald provided We the People of Connecticut with a single compact disk containing 44 documents. The documents provided, however, were primarily copies of agendas, minutes, and related materials created by, or presented to, the working group at its open meetings. We, the People of Connecticut, Inc. requested the following:

“We request the inspection and copies of any and all communications in the possession, or under the control or direction of, you and/or your office, wherever and in whatever form they exist – on paper, digital, electronic, or in any other form – to and/or from any public and/or private person and/or entity regarding all matters included in, and/or relating to:

(1) Governor Malloy’s Executive Orders 9 and 10;

(2) Any and all policies, procedures and processes regarding the establishment and implementation of any system of collective bargaining relating to child care workers and/or personal care attendants;

(3) Any and all policies, procedures and processes regarding the establishment and implementation of any election procedures for representatives of child care workers and/or personal care attendants;

(4) The results of any and all election procedures already undertaken regarding child care workers and/or personal care attendants;

(5) Any and all policies, procedures, processes, minutes, notes and all other documents regarding and/or resulting from any and all “meet and confer” sessions or proceedings relating to child care workers and/or personal care attendants;

(6) Any and all policies, procedures, processes, discussions and/or implementation of the possible and/or actual unionization of child care workers and/or personal care attendants;

(7) Conversations, meetings, notes, and any other communication with, any and all SEIU members or representatives, and/or any other union, representative entity, and/or third party, relating to child care workers and/or personal care attendants;

(8) The amount of money spent to date by any and all state agencies or individuals in discussing, planning, relating to and/or implementing Governor Malloy’s Executive Orders 9 and 10; and We the People of Connecticut, Inc.

(9) Communications, in any form, of any kind, to and/or from, any and all state agency or agencies, employee or employees of any and all state agencies, and individual child care workers and/or personal care attendants.

We are also hereby requesting that you immediately provide us with the following information:

(1) the names of all state employees who have worked on issues relating to Executive Orders 9 and 10:

(2) the state agency or agencies for whom they work or worked, the dates they began working on those issues, the dates they stopped working on those issues, whether they are continuing to work on those issues, how many hours per day they worked or are working on those issues, how many total hours they have worked on those issues from the time they began working on them until the date of this letter, and the subject matter of the work they performed or are performing on those issues;

(3) how much money from every state agency has been spent working on issues directly related to Executive Orders 9 and 10 from the first day those agencies began working on those issues until the date of this letter.”

The state’s Freedom of Information Act allows individuals to “inspect” documents of government agencies, with certain limited exceptions, at any time during the regular business hours.

None of the six teams of We the People of Connecticut, Inc. were allowed to inspect any documents requested, despite remaining in the offices of the six agencies for anywhere from four to six hours.

The CD of documents provided by McDonald contained only the following:

1.10 FCC Agenda.pdf

1.10 PCA Agenda.pdf

12.9.2011 FCC Working Group Minutes.doc

12.9.2011 PCA Working Group Minutes.doc

12.21 FCC Minutes.pdf

12.21 PCA Minutes.pdf

12.21 PCA Working Group Minutes.doc

12.21.2011 FCC Working Group Minutes.doc

CGA 19a-77 - Child Day Care Services Defined.doc

Executive Order No. 9.pdf

Executive Order No. 10.pdf

FCC - Maryann Parker testimony 1-10-12 FINAL.pdf

FCC - Maryland 2011 Report to MGA.doc

FCC - Maryland ChildCareProviders - Executive Order.pdf

FCC - Maryland Final SEIU Agreement62911css.pdf

FCC - Maryland HB 465_2010 annual report1.doc

FCC - Maryland hb465.pdf

FCC - Maryland SB 0284 - Collective Bargining.pdf

FCC - Maryland SEIU Memorandum of Agreement.pdf

FCC 1.10 Harry Elliot Presentation.pdf

FCC 1.10 Jennifer Harris Letter.pdf

FCC 1.10 meeting minutes draft.doc

FCC 1.10 Working Group Minutes.pdf

FCC 1.25 Meeting Agenda.pdf

FCC Agenda 12.9.doc

FCC Agenda 12.21.doc

FCC Draft Agenda 1.10.doc

FCC Draft Agenda 1.25.doc

FCC Providers Care4Kids.xls

NAFCC Best Practices for FCC Union Organizing.doc

Oregon HB 3618 Home Care Ammendment.pdf

Oregon Home Care Commission Constitutional Article.doc

Oregon Home Care Commission Legislation ORS 410.600-410.625.doc

Oregon PCA Contract.pdf

PCA - 1.10 Harry Elliot Presentation.pdf

PCA - CA SEIU-UHW 2009-11 AGREEMENT 3-09.pdf

PCA - Walter Kamiat Testimony 011012 (2).docx

PCA - Walter Kamiat Testimony 011012 (2).pdf

PCA 1.10 Draft Minutes.doc

PCA 1.10 Working Group Minutes.pdf

PCA Agenda 12.9.doc

PCA Agenda 12.21.doc

PCA Draft Agenda 1.10.doc

Wash. State SEIU Home Care Contract.pdf

McDonald also provided a letter in response to the requests, acknowledging receipt of the Freedom of Information requests and indicating, “We are in the process of reviewing what documentation may be responsive to your request, and whether or not any exemptions to disclosure may be applicable.” The letter also stated, “We have endeavored to comply with that request to the greatest extent possible, given our other responsibilities, workload, staffing levels and access to certain computers where such information resides”, and “When we complete the balance of our document review, we will respond in the appropriate manner.”

We would note that “endeavoring to comply” is not the same as actual compliance, and “responding in the appropriate manner” is not the same as actually providing non-exempt documents. It is obvious that only a limited number of documents concerning the issuance of Executive Orders 9 and 10 were made public after the FOI requests were received by the Governor’s Office and that only the information surrounding the meetings involving the working groups was released.

We the People of Connecticut, Inc. is certain that there were numerous other conversations, emails and meetings at the State Capitol, in the Governor's Office, and among the various state agencies, related to the issuance of Executive Orders 9 and 10 concerning the Governor's push for child care workers and personal care attendants to unionize. The people of Connecticut have a right to see every kind of information under the law concerning the background of the issuance of these orders, and they must be put in full view of our citizens when FOI requests are issued.

We the People of Connecticut, Inc. sincerely hopes that the Governor’s Office and the other state agencies fully comply with the law, allow for inspection during regular business hours of all non-exempt materials whenever a citizen makes such a request.

Although our request for inspection was met with total non-compliance by all six agencies, it is our sincere hope that the Governor’s promised response to our request will be swift, complete, and in full compliance with the law.

We the People of Connecticut will continue to work for the citizens of Connecticut in this matter, and in defense of the Constitution whenever, and however, necessary.
For further information contact:

Attorney Deborah G. Stevenson, Chief Counsel, (860) 354-3590, (203) 206-4282 (cell), email:
dgs31@yahoo.com.

PRESS RELEASE 1-27-12.pdf (288KB)

Malloy And His Critics

Kevin Rennie, a political columnist who writes for the Hartford Courant, very likely can expect a sling or an arrow to be coming his way sometime soon. Malloyalites do not react with equanimity to sharp criticism, and in a recent column Mr. Rennie notes that Mr. Malloy, short on cash he needs to plug a reappearing budget deficit, is “squeezing the Mohegans,” owners of one of Connecticut’s two Indian casinos, “for political contributions at the same time he is wielding the power of his office.”


Mr. Rennie notes that the Clean Election Fund, which gave Mr. Malloy more than $8 million to level the playing field between candidate for governor Malloy and his Republican rival, has tapped itself on the shoulder in its annual report for having made it possible for Connecticut citizens to reclaim “their government with the already dramatically reduced role of special interest influence in Connecticut elections."

But they haven’t, Rennie writes:

“No, it hasn't. On Feb. 3, the head of the Mohegans will hold a funding luncheon for Prosperity for Connecticut, Malloy's political action committee, at a casino hotel. The price per ticket is $750, the maximum the law allows. The pressure is on to sell a lot of tickets. The Mohegan PAC slipped a maximum contribution to Malloy's committee on Dec. 28, so it's allowed to give again in the new year.”

The Mohegans have little choice but to play the usual political game: “Competition is increasing. The recession and stagnant aftermath damaged their business. The tribe is trying to refinance more than a $1 billion in bonds. It faces February and April deadlines to pay investors. It needs a piece of online gaming.”

Mr. Rennie may be mistaken in part. While Mr. Malloy is raising money for Prosperity for Connecticut, it is not his PAC. Mr. Malloy’s PAC, DanPAC, was discontinued earlier last month.

The chairperson of Prosperity For Connecticut is James Wade, one of the Grand Poobahs of the Democratic Party and for twenty years its outside counsel. Mr. Poobah, associated with Robinson and Cole, drafted the procedural and substantive rules of the party and occasionally represented it before the United States Supreme Court. Many of the contributions to Prosperity For Connecticut come from lobbyists or dependents of lobbyists.

Mr. Malloy’s real problem, however, is what it always has been: funny budget numbers.

Connecticut once again is in the red, according to a below the fold story in the CTNow section of the Hartford Courant written by Christopher Keating .

And the lede, which probably should have run on the front page: “Gov. Dannel Malloy's estimate of pension savings over 20 years was wrong by $3.1 billion, the legislature's nonpartisan fiscal office said Friday.”

The non-partisan Office of Fiscal Analysis was NEVER able to verify the savings figures claimed by the governor and his Malloyalites when, weeks before a much publicized set-to between Mr. Malloy and SEBAC, Connecticut’s fourth branch of government, the state budget was presented to the Democratic dominated legislature for approval. The legislature approved the budget with its penciled in figures before negotiation between Mr. Malloy and SEBAC were complete, an astounding dereliction of constitution responsibility on the part of a General Assembly that did not want to leave its fingerprints on a budget close to the coming elections. The legislature simply took a hike when the governor was negotiating with unions for putative givebacks, pre-approving the budget before negotiations were complete and by default investing Mr. Malloy what amounted to plenipotentiary power to finalize the budget.

As an amusing sidelight, a group of budget conscious rebels associated with The Roger Sherman Institute last June took the state to court a few weeks after the Malloy-SEBAC document, full of fanciful figures, had been approved by the General Assembly, arguing that it was not in balance. They implored Superior Court Judge James Graham to order the legislature to produce a constitutionally required balanced budget.

Fat chance there. The judge decided that a balanced budget was more or less a term of legislative art. Now, months after the suit, we discover that the state budget is off by $3.1 billon, which ought to bring a blush to the cheeks of derelict Democratic legislators in the House and Senate.

Fat chance there. The Democrats in the General Assembly who surrendered their constitutional prerogatives to Malloyalists and SEBAC have no sense of shame.

One of them, Speaker of the House Chris Dovovan, is asking the people of the 5th District to send him to the U.S. House, so that he can represent the interests of all the people in the state that he, the governor, SEBAC, the Malloyalists and the constitutionally flaccid House he runs have so successfully hoodwinked.

ADDENDA

I am advised by Christine Stewart of CTNewsJunkie that Mr. Rennie was wrong in writing that Prosperity for Connecticut was Mr. Malloy’s PAC: “He's raising money for it yes, but he got rid of his PAC which was DanPAC earlier this month.” It is important to leave this ADDENDA in place, along with the original posting, because it appeared in other venues, a newspaper among them. The text has been corrected.

The Brave New World Of Political Campaigns

The pre-nominating convention battle, now in full swing among Republicans, is a painful winnowing process. Already a number of Republican presidential hopefuls – Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, businessman and entrepreneur Herman Cane, Texas Governor Rick Perry – have succumbed to the political grim reaper.

Former Governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney, former Speaker of the U.S. House Newt Gingrich, Senator Rick Santorum and U.S. Representative Ron Paul have been left to tell their tales. They continue to battle, mostly against themselves, with occasion forays against President Barrack Obama who, one supposes, is enjoying the show – and taking notes -- while political operatives outside the closed circle of his campaign advisers are editing Republican clashes for YouTube. Mr. Paul has a tight-fisted articulate crowd of libertarian admirers following him wherever he goes; Mr. Santorum has done remarkably well among conservative Republicans; Mr. Romney and Mr. Gingrich have pasts, which continue to haunt them.

The knock on Mr. Paul is that, while his message is convincingly anti-Obama, he cannot win a general election. Mr. Romney has been attacked by both Democrats and BigPAC, money raising groups operating outside the failed campaign financing laws promulgated by McCain-Feingold in the Senate and Shays-Meehan in the House, as a conscienceless corporate raider intent on putting American workers out of work. The same ploy was used successfully here in Connecticut by friends of Dannel Malloy in his gubernatorial campaign against Republican Party nominee for governor Tom Foley. Mr. Santorum has been attacked as a benighted social conservative. Mr. Gingrich, perhaps the most adept debater in the group, has been attacked by movement conservatives as an ambitious faux conservative, by Democrats as a loopy idea man, and as unelectable by scorched-earth conservative Ann Coulter. In his climb up the greasy ladder of political success, Mr. Gingrich has left in his wake at least one wife who spilled the beans to a reporter hiding under the Gingrich marital bed. Mr. Gingrich, those unfriendly to the former House Speaker have intimated, has Achilles’ heels on both his cloven feet.

On Tuesday, Mr. Obama delivered his “State of the Union” address, an exercise in redundancy since most everyone in the nation understands that the state of the union, after three years of re-inventive stroking by Mr. Obama, is perilous. The national debt has inched past $15 trillion. The gross debt of the United States as a percentage of its gross national product – the value of everything produced by the nation – is 100 percent; a comparable figure for Greece, the economic basket case of Europe, is 130 percent; in Italy, on its side in the Mediterranean and run up against the rocks of reality, somewhat like the stricken Costa Concordia cruise ship, the rate is119 percent; Asia, led by China, which holds the largest proportion of U.S. Debt, is 41 percent.

Before the State of the Union address, Republican political watchers suspected that Mr. Obama – whose job approval ratings have dipped after his third year in office to 44 percent from a high of 57 percent during his first year in office – would use the occasion as an opportunity to let loose upon the union his campaign script. They were not disappointed. Mr. Obama’s State of the Union address was only a few hours old when fact checkers with the Associated Press, hardly a conventicle of Republican anti-Obamaites, tore it to shreds.

Republicans continue to tear themselves to shreds. At some point, the winner of the Republican Party nominating convention will meet Mr. Obama on the field of battle, by which time super PACs operating outside the party system and beyond the reach of McCain-Feingold-Shays-Meehan will have assembled enough YouTube clips of Republican Party family quarrels to wallpaper the walls of Hell. Republican super PACs will be doing the same to Democrats.

Everything will be fair game because the money laundering – and, even more importantly, the inventive, semi-fictional narratives captured by partisan non-partisan outliers – will not betray the fingerprints of either party.

Behold the fruits of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, which has moved both money and responsibility away from political parties towards the brave new world of bare-knuckle anything-goes campaigning.

Is The Mayor Of East Haven A Disabled Idiot

The following note is taken directly from the minutes of a meeting of the State Employees Retirement Commission, an agency under the direction of Comptroller Kevin Lembo:

“I have a matter in the MERS [Municipal Employees Retirement Services] Unit that I would like to bring to your attention. A member of the system was receiving a disability retirement. In November he was sworn in as the Mayor of East Haven. At that time we provided him with a letter advising him that it was necessary to terminate his disability retirement benefit effective November 30, 2011 related to two provisions for MERS. First, under the rehired retiree provisions and second under the disability retirement provisions that to be eligible for a disability retirement you must continue to remain disabled. The member is appealing the decision to terminate his disability retirement benefits.”

The unnamed member in the MERS unit “sworn in as the Mayor of East Haven” is Joseph A. Maturo Jr., who recently came under heavy fire as a possible racist for having ineptly answered a question put to him by a New York TV Reporter.

Following an announcement that the FBI had arrested police officers in East Haven for unjustly hassling Latinos, the reporter asked the mayor, “What do you plan to do for Latinos tonight?”

The mayor responded that he might or might not have some tacos for supper that night. And then realizing he had dug himself a bottomless pit, clumsily attempted a tortuous explanation, jumped into the hole and covered himself in infamy.

The mayor apologized, acknowledged that his was a shallow answer to a shallow question – and what have you done TONIGHT for Latinos? -- said he was fatigued at the end of a long day, went to bed and rose up in the morning a roundly denounced bonafide racist idiot.

From snow swept Davos, there to commingle with the one per-centers denounced by the Occupy Wall-Streeter Movement, Governor Dannel Malloy got in a pretty good lick:

"The comments by East Haven Mayor Joseph Maturo are repugnant. They represent either a horrible lack of judgment or worse, an underlying insensitivity to our Latino community that is unacceptable.”

If Mr. Maturo’s appeal of the judgment already made by the State Employees Retirement Commission fails, he stands to lose $43,184.76-a-year in disability payments for back injuries he sustained on the job as an East Haven firefighter.

Continuing to serve as mayor of East Haven, it would appear, would not only stress Mr. Maturo’s fraying nerves; it might strain his bank account as well.

The betting among the large Italian community in East Haven is that Mr. Maturo is not so much the idiot that he can’t do simple math.

This Is A Republic?

In the wake of a downgrade by Moody’s, Governor Dannel Malloy has deployed his recision authority to trim Connecticut’s budget.

A few points ought to be made. These are recisions made by the governor unilaterally, which means that legislators who will be running for office soon will not be leaving any unsightly fingerprints on what may be temporary budget cuts.

Temporary cuts – the funding can be restored any time – cannot solve permanent problems.

The monies Governor Dannel Malloy will be wringing out of the Department of Children and Families, $28.4 million, and the Department of Mental Health and Addiction services, $14.5 million, are either necessary or unnecessary funds used to provide services for abused children and people afflicted with mental disorders. If the funds are unnecessary, the cuts should be made permanently by a legislature constitutionally charged with the authority to approve budgets. If the funds are necessary, they should be restored to the agencies. It would be much less painful for people afflicted in Connecticut by abuse or mental disorders if the governor and the legislature were to reduce the salaries and benefits of state union workers or raise the retirement age of such workers. But of course in that case both the governor and the Democratic dominated legislature would receive vocal and political opposition from organized unions. The victim of domestic abuse and the mentally ill, fortunately for both the governor and the legislature, are neither organized nor unionized.

Budgets are all about making proper choices. Legislators up for re-election, one must suppose, must be delighted that such choices will not mar their chance at regaining office. Nor is this the first time the legislature has abdicated its constitutional responsibilities. In Connecticut, the legislature simply took a hike when the governor was negotiating with unions for putative givebacks; the legislature pre-approved the budget before the negotiations were complete and by default invested Mr. Malloy what amounted to plenipotentiary power to shape the budget. Yesterday was the anniversary of the 1,000th day the United States has been without a budget.

This is a hell of a way to run a Republic.