Dan Malloy has a new ad on television to introduce himself to voters and fill them in on his record as Stamford Mayor. Have a look:
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.
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.
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
I like to think that in 2010, Connecticut Democrats have a great bunch of candidates for Governor. In my opinion, they are all are well-qualified to serve in the office and would run the state well. Their differences lie mainly in how they would do things.
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:
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.”
You must be 30 years old – See above.
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…”
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].
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.
A lot of great things from 2006 are making a comeback in 2010. Ned Lamont is running. Dan Malloy is running too. I’m even blogging semi-regularly again.
But it’s not all good. Joe Lieberman’s failed strategies are making a comeback as well.
You see, in 2006 Joe Lieberman’s strategist was Roy Occhiogrosso. Roy drove the message of the Lieberman campaign all the way to defeat in the hotly contested Democratic primary. His two key strategies were…
“Ned Lamont has decided that his only chance of defeating me is to try to buy this election with millions of dollars in negative ads full of distortions and deceits about me,” Lieberman said at a news conference. “A lot of it is going to be nonsense and lies, so beware.”
Facing his first serious challenge in 18 years as a senator, Mr. Lieberman has sought to brand Mr. Lamont as a wealthy dilettante who is trying to buy his way into office, and who is out of touch with ordinary Americans. One of Mr. Lieberman’s first advertisements began: “Meet Ned Lamont. He’s a Greenwich millionaire.”
Occhiogrosso is now working for Malloy, and he’s using the same strategies against Lamont in 2010 that didn’t work in the 2006 primary. Take a look:
Accuse Ned Lamont of trying to buy the election? Check.
“Ned’s strategy is clear: he’s trying to buy the Convention with TV ads. Dan’s trying to win the Convention the old-fashioned way: talking with delegates about his values and his experience. In the end, all the ads in the world can’t hide the difference in this race: Dan Malloy has the values and experience that money can’t buy.” [Dan Malloy for Governor Press Release - 4/8/2010]
“Ned seems to think his millions of dollars and his background as a cable executive are why Democrats should choose him over me.” – Dan Malloy
These strategies didn’t work in 2006, and they won’t work in 2010. Democrats have their best chance in decades to win the Governor’s office, and we can’t do it if our candidates are doing Chris Healy’s job for him. What we need is a campaign about ideas, not a bloody primary.
This is the kind of thing I’d like to see more of, but instead, we’re getting a replay of 2006.
Today Lamont announced the start of a television ad campaign, and the Malloy campaign responded by having staffer Matt Gianquinto send an under-the-radar e-mail to supporters using the ol’ Lieberman ‘06 strategies that Occhiogrosso sold ‘em. An excerpt:
Hey Team,
[...]
I heard a supporter once say they are supporting Dan because he has the values and experience that money can’t buy.
[...]
We have the best candidate, the best team, and the best supporters. Ned can buy a lot of ads, but no amount of money can buy the candidate, the team, and the supporters that we have.
[...]
PS – Feel free to forward this message as a heads up to any of our supporters, donors, and friends.
The only good reason to keep using Lieberman’s old strategies for the primary is if you plan to use his post-primary-loss strategy of forming a vanity party. Dan Malloy is not Joe Lieberman, and we will not see a Connecticut for Malloy Party forming this summer. But by using Lieberman’s failed strategies, Malloy is very likely to meet the same fate in the primary.
It is always critical for the state to tap the business insights and experiences, as well as the professional training and certifications, of our corporate citizens for public service…By enlisting such corporate leadership, government weaves the business community into the everyday rhythm of our state, thereby ensuring long-term, public-private cooperation and success.
Although it reads like a glowing endorsement of Ned Lamont’s gubernatorial candidacy, it’s not. It’s actually an excerpt from Dan Malloy’s letter in support of WWE CEO Linda McMahon’s appointment to the State Board of Education.
The fact that Dan believes he is the most qualified candidate for governor is neither surprising nor objectionable. What’s objectionable about this is not the fact that Dan heartily endorsed Linda on the basis of her private sector experience, but that he believes that hers would be an asset to public service and that Ned’s would not be.
Here are two examples of Dan diminishing Ned’s private sector experience:
Ned seems to think his millions of dollars and his background as a cable executive are why Democrats should choose him over me. I think he’s wrong. I think Democrats want a nominee who has the right kind of experience for the job.”
So he’s gone from thinking that business experience is critical to being critical of business experience.
The reason I point this out is because we have a great field of differently qualified Democratic candidates coupled with the best chance in decades for Democrats to win the Governor’s race. I think it’s important for them to differentiate themselves without tearing each other down. It’s no secret who I’m rooting for, but I would prefer to see the Democratic primary unfold as a contest of ideas rather than a battle to undermine everyone’s chances of winning in November. I think it’s fair to expect that Dan’s high regard for the value of Linda’s business experience would translate into at least some respect for Ned’s.
Today Ned Lamont released his business plan for Connecticut, which you can read in full here. It has only been out for about 15 minutes, so I haven’t had a chance to read it in full, but the bullet points indicate a very promising plan. Below are the ones I’m most excited about:
I will stop ineffective tax giveaways and instead make strategic investments, ensuring we provide more early-stage financing to promising firms and support industries where we already have the wind at our backs, like biotech and precision manufacturing.
I will modernize our transportation infrastructure, investing in our most congested areas, competing effectively for federal dollars, strengthening passenger and freight rail, and creating thousands of good jobs in the process.
I will invest in our people, improving our schools with innovative reforms, ensuring our kids graduate college with in-demand skills and well paying jobs, and offering full loan repayment for students at state colleges who stay in state after graduation.
Tax incentives are important for business development, but they are not the only factor considered by businesses. If tax breaks are all we are offering to get businesses into Connecticut, it shows a lack of imagination on our part. It also creates a “race-to-the-bottom” between states, and as soon as another state undercuts us, we have to give the business a bigger break to keep them here, or kiss them goodbye. The fact that Ned Lamont acknowledges the ineffectiveness of tax giveaways as a business development strategy is a good thing. It’s not sustainable in the long term, and it does little for the people and businesses who are already here in Connecticut.
Modernizing the transportation infrastructure is probably on every gubernatorial candidate’s list, although the issue is especially salient for Ned in light of the traffic that made him late for the debate. Even though it’s not particularly novel, it’s still a good idea. Improving the transportation infrastructure in the state will make our small state smaller, in a good way. Who loves commuting between Hartford and New Haven (or vice versa) by car? Not me. The easier it is to get from A to B in Connecticut, the better off we’ll all be, so I”m glad to see this included in Ned’s plan.
Investing in the people of Connecticut. I love this one, because I feel that we are our state’s greatest resource. Make it easier and cheaper for people to get an education in Connecticut, and provide them the right incentives to stay, and we’ll attract more jobs to the state. Just as good people will go to where the good jobs are, good jobs will come to where the good people are. We’ve got first rate higher education in Connecticut (in spite of Governor Rell’s attempts to kill it), and the only way to stop (and reverse) the brain drain is to give people a powerful incentive to stay. There’s already a blueprint for this, in the form of State Rep. Tim O’Brien’s Tuition Bill from ‘08, and with Ned Lamont in the Governor’s office, I’m hopeful that it will get passed.
“We spend $580 million per year on 102 initiatives administered by 24 separate agencies,” Lamont wrote in his Business Plan for Connecticut. “Our corporation tax credits exceed $300 million annually, 100 times what they were 20 years ago, yet we haven’t created a single net new job in those 20 years.”
“We don’t treat small and mid-size businesses very well,” Lamont said. “It’s not all about tax incentives, it’s about having a governor whose a partner.”
You are currently browsing the spazeboy weblog archives for the CT-Gov category.
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.
