This is a good ad that highlights some of Dan’s proudest achievements as Mayor of Stamford. As Mayor, Dan Malloy helped to create 5,000 new jobs. He helped reduce crime by 63%. He…well, those are the only two achievements he mentions, but 30 seconds is not a lot of time, and he has to mention what he’d do as Governor. And so the ad goes on to say that as Governor, he’d invest in green technology and high tech companies, which are vague, general ideas that I think we liberal Democrats can all vaguely, generally get behind.

But…is Malloy’s jobs claim accurate? That’s what Christopher Keating wondered today, on the front page of the Hartford Courant:

While Democrat Dannel Malloy says repeatedly in his campaign for governor that he created nearly 5,000 jobs during his 14 years as Stamford’s mayor, state labor statistics show that employment in Stamford actually dropped during Malloy’s tenure.

Employment exploded during the late 1990s and peaked in 2000, but Stamford has lost more than 13,000 jobs since then. That includes the loss of more than 5,000 jobs from June 2008 to June 2009, according to state labor statistics.

[...]

Malloy did not count the many jobs that left the city during his 14-year tenure, including during the recent recession. “They’re not subtracted, nor are the self-employed [included],” Malloy said.

So one could say that Malloy’s claim that he created 5,000 jobs is technically accurate, but the way he portrays it in his ad is disingenuous. Not unintentionally, the ad comes across as saying “While Dan Malloy was Mayor of Stamford, not only did the city keep all the jobs it had, but Dan was instrumental in bringing 5,000 more to the city,” when in fact Stamford lost jobs faster than Dan Malloy could replace them.

It’s easy to understand what’s wrong with his claim when you think about it in another context. Hypothetically, let’s say that for 14 years I oversaw the investment of $200,000, and invested it in a variety of ways to spread out risk and hopefully maximize returns. Some of the money I invested was in savings bonds, which have paid me a total of $5,000 in interest over that time. The other investments did not fare as well, and about $13,000 of the principal invested was lost on my watch. The net loss is $8,000 and it’s a matter of public record. So when I’m looking for a new job, if I put it on my resume that during the time I managed the fund I helped it earn 5,000 new dollars, you would be spot on to tell me that I’m full of shit.

Now, I’m not saying that Dan Malloy is full of shit, I’m just saying that if Dan Malloy wants to take credit for the jobs created during his tenure, he has to take blame for the jobs lost during the same time period.

Update:
mattw weighs in on this at MLN
Kirby also has a post up about this over at CTBob

In a not so surprise (if you’ve been following the news over the weekend) announcement, Ned Lamont is announcing today that he will run with Mary Glassman as his Lt. Governor candidate of choice. I’ll have more to say about this later, because this is a post from my phone, but for more info in the meantime visit www.nedlamont.com

Here is a short list of what I believe are self-evident reasons why I think it is a bad idea for any Democrat to support for Jarjura:

• Michael Jarjura hired John Rowland as Waterbury’s economic czar
• Michael Jarjura is on the legislative advisory council of the Family Institute of Connecticut
• Michael Jarjura is on “the cutting edge” of anti-choice advocacy
• Michael Jarjura is anti-gay rights (although given his membership on the FIC board, this probably goes without saying)

I have said many times on this blog that Democrats are fortunate to have a great bunch of candidates running for Governor this year. I would be delighted to support whichever one wins the primary. However, the surest way to lose my support is to run with Michael Jarjura in the primary. I can’t trust the judgment of anyone who would choose to run with someone who is anti-choice, opposed to marriage equality, and so willing to hire Mr. Corrupticut himself, John Rowland.

[UConn College Republicans recruitment chairman Joseph] Gasser emphasized there was no intention to promote the drive as a McMahon event and said he recognized there might be some concerns about the payments.

“I approached this extremely carefully. The last thing I want is to be embroiled in some scandal,” he said. “I’m making sure to approach this on a very non-partisan basis, making it clear she may be funding (the registration) but it’s not a Republican-leaning process and we’re following the Secretary of the State’s guidelines.”

But McMahon spokesman Ed Patru said the intention of the drive and others being planned is to help McMahon.

“We’re absolutely registering voters on college campuses and growing the party through voter drives. Every student who is brought on to help with this effort signs a participation agreement — a legal document. Students cannot pressure a potential voter register with a party affiliation,” Patru said. “Having said that, their job is to promote Linda McMahon and people who come and ask about Linda and say they want to support Linda, we share with them we’d love to have your support but you have to be registered as a Republican to vote for her in the primary.”

I’m all for paying college students for their time, but a $5 bonus for Republican registrants raises all kinds of red flags. It also sets up some perverse incentives that may result in fraud.

Update [2010/04/26]: Linda has decided not to pay the $5 bonus after all. The fact that she was ever considering it should raise serious questions about her critical thinking skills and sense of right and wrong.

But in light of the qualification questions raised about one of the candidates for Attorney General, I decided to take a look at the Connecticut State Constitution to see what the minimum requirements were for the Governor’s office. Here’s what I found:

1. You must be a voter – According to Article 4, Sec. 5, “No person who is not an elector of the state, and who has not arrived at the age of thirty years, shall be eligible.”
2. You must be 30 years old – See above.
3. You must have a pulse – According to Article 4, Sec. 18, “In case of the death [...] the lieutenant-governor shall, upon taking the oath of office of governor, be governor of the state…”
4. You might have to be a dude* – Article 4, Sections 8-12 of the constitution outline some of the governor’s duties, using gendered pronouns where it could have used “The governor” instead (emphasis added):
   

   SEC. 8. The governor shall be captain general of the militia of the state, except when called into the service of the United States.

   SEC. 9. He may require information in writing from the officers in the executive department, on any subject relating to the duties of their respective offices.

   SEC. 10. The governor, in case of a disagreement between the two houses of the general assembly, respecting the time of adjournment, may adjourn them to such time as he shall think proper, not beyond the day of the next stated session.

   SEC. 11. He shall, from time to time, give to the general assembly, information of the state of the government, and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall deem expedient.

   SEC. 12. He shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed.

By those measures, every single one of the candidates (on both sides) is qualified to serve. We’ve had our fill of Republican rule under Rowland and Rell, and for all that’s gotten us I think it’s safe to say that we can do without people like Tom Foley and whoever else is running under the GOP banner.

So that leaves us with our candidates on the Democratic side. Since each one is vastly superior to any of the Republican alternatives, all we have to do is choose the one we think will do the best job:

• Juan Figueroa wants to take the state in a new direction. [As of this writing, his site is still very new, and there's not much in the way of specifics on it].
• Mary Glassman believes that one of our top priorities should be to close the state’s educational achievement gap.
• Ned Lamont has a business plan for Connecticut, which I’ve written about here.
• Dan Malloy believes that we need more affordable and renewable energy in the state.
• Rudy Marconi has an idea about reintroducing border tolls on Connecticut’s highways, so that drivers who pass through pay their fair share.

Those issues are, of course, just the tips of each candidate’s iceberg. And although I’ve got a preferred candidate, I’m comforted to see that every single Democrat for Governor shares at least some of my priorities…and that they’re all technically qualified for office under the state constitution.
_____
*There is no way that being a dude is a requirement for office. I’m fully aware that “he” is used in this case as a default pronoun, and isn’t meant to exclude/disqualify people who do not identify with the male gender. I just want to point out that there’s no need to gender things like political offices. It’s a shitty and unnecessary holdover from a more patriarchal past.