Scully Communications

After some very public prodding by Republican State Party Chairman Chris Healy, state Senator Sam Caligiuri (R-Waterbury) seems likely to switch races and run for Congress from the 5th district, a seat currently held by popular Democrat Chris Murphy. Caligiuri has spent months campaigning for the GOP nomination for the US Senate and the chance to face embattled incumbent Chris Dodd.

In an unusually high-profile move, Healy released a statement making the case for Caligiuri for Congress. The statement:
Over the last few weeks, State Senator Sam Caligiuri and I have discussed his candidacy for statewide office. After much thought and discussion with other leaders and activists, I have urged him to focus his energies on the Fifth Congressional district where I believe he would be a top candidate.
This is a sentiment shared by many Republican activists in the district. And while it is in no way meant to diminish the efforts of other Republican candidates, Sen. Caligiuri has established himself as a proven reformer and principled legislator.
Senator Caligiuri’s potential entry into the fifth congressional district race spells trouble for Democrat Chris Murphy and shows Republicans are ready to provide new leadership in the Congress.
In an interview with The Hanging Shad yesterday, Healy said his public call was not so much a push for Caligiuri to abandon the Senate race and switch campaigns as it was an airing of the sentiment among the GOP. Readers can make their own call on that one based on the content of Healy’s statement.
Healy notwithstanding, it would seem a smart move for Caligiuri to switch. He is currently lost in the shuffle in the GOP field looking to run against Dodd. Indeed, he was the only candidate (other than the enigmatic Peter Schiff) not to beat Dodd in a theoretical match-up in the latest Qunnipiac poll. Healy is correct that Caligiuri is too attractive a candidate to be an also-ran in the senatorial field. The bottom line is that Caligiuri lacks the Wells-Fargo trucks filled with cash that rivals Linda McMahon, Tom Foley and to a lesser extent, Schiff have.
Caligiuri has been the Republican most feared by Democrats since he won the state senate seat vacated by Murphy when Murphy beat entrenched Congresswoman Nancy Johnson. Democrats recognize Caligiuri is smart, articulate and possesses a power base in Waterbury, the heart of the 5th district. In fact, some in the GOP may be looking for some payback as a result of Murphy’s whipping of Johnson in a race in which Johnson’s incredibly negative campaign backfired.
A potential problem for Caligiuri should he switch, will be charges of “campaign shopping”—a charge that would be accurate. But if he could over come that, along with the fact that he is very conservative for Connecticut, he would be a formidable opponent for Murphy particularly in the present anti-incumbent political climate.
Murphy, for his part, would certainly kick it into gear if Caligiuri came on the scene. A brilliant campaigner and extremely popular (he may be ticketed for the US Senate sometime in the future himself), Murphy would put it into overdrive. It would be a great race to watch.

Caligiuri says he will decide in a few days whether to switch campaigns. The call here says he makes the move and makes the 5th Congressional District a race to watch.
*
The is a special event this evening at Hartford’s somewhat hidden gem, Real Arts Ways. Broadcasting gem John Dankosky takes his WNPR show “Where We Live” on location in his quest to locate creativity in the Capitol City. WWL is a true treasure in an otherwise virtual wasteland of FM radio in Connecticut (yes, this writer has been a guest on WWL, so he may be a bit biased).
Writes J-Dan, “Locating Creativity: Can Art and Innovation Revitalize Hartford? It’s not just musicians and artists. Its scientists and business people too. It’s potentially YOU.

Can Hartford, the former insurance capital of the world, support a creative class? What (and who) is already here – and how can we connect them? How does the greater Hartford region contribute to Hartford’s creative landscape? What are the elements of a dynamic city – and where should Hartford focus its energy? What are the city’s barriers to a bustling creative economy?”
Host:
Real Art Ways
Type:
Music/Arts – Jam Session
Network:
Global

Date:
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Time:
5:30pm – 7:00pm
Location:
Real Art Ways

NOTE: The author of The Hanging Shad will be a guest this weekend on FOX 61’s “The Real Story” with host Laurie Perez. We’ll discuss the political issues of the day. “The Real Story” airs on FOX 61 (channel 6 on most cable systems) Sunday at 10:30 am. Tune in if you can!

Republican US Senate candidate Linda McMahon has positioned herself a staunch opponent of government bailouts and as a candidate who has experience creating jobs without the helping hand of government. Further, she has laid job losses in Connecticut squarely at the feet of Sen. Chris Dodd who supported President Obama’s stimulus plan.

But a closer look shows McMahon may in fact have some government help tucked away in her tights—some foreign objects, if you will— as she enters the squared circle to do [political] battle. A report in the Journal Inquirer of Manchester says WWE Inc., is in line to collect $10.4 million in state film tax credits, or millions more than previously reported.

Records provided to the Journal Inquirer under the state’s freedom of information law reveal that “WWE has submitted 13 applications under the three-year-old Connecticut Production Tax Credit Program, which allows applicants to recover 30 percent of production costs incurred here.
The company cited a total of $34.6 million in expenditures made in the state in 2007 and 2008, including $7.7 million in the first year and more than three times that amount, $26.9 million, in the second.”

The J-I says the documents show that the Connecticut Commission on Culture and Tourism already has issued WWE $2.3 million in vouchers in connection with four of its productions in 2007.

Those credits, which were awarded eight weeks before McMahon entered the Senate race covered costs incurred by two TV shows, “Smackdown!” and “Raw,” the interactive “24/7 Videos on Demand,” and the company’s interactive Web site.

This latest report “led both Republican and Democratic opponents to pillory McMahon — who has taken a hard line against government bailouts and made much of her experience building a business ‘without the help of big government’ — for what they called her ’stimulus package’ and ‘taxpayer-funded bailout.’” reported the J-I.

The campaign of former US Rep. Rib Simmons, the leader is the race for the nomination, seized on the new numbers and said in a new release said, “Mrs. McMahon needs to answer why she was cutting jobs at WWE within months of receiving millions in taxpayer subsidies, how much taxpayer money ultimately ended up in her pocket as a result of this windfall, if any taxpayer money is being used to fund her U.S. Senate campaign, can she assure us the programming these funds subsidized was appropriate, and finally, has she received any corporate bonuses during the period of time that WWE was receiving taxpayer funds but cutting jobs?”

Stay tuned for the “ladder match.”
*

The Hanging Shad does not normally call its readers’ attention to other opinion pieces but when it goes to the very core of a potential candidate for governor’s thought process, it’s worth checking out. Noted attorney Norm Pattis in the Connecticut Law Tribune: http://www.ctlawtribune.com/getarticle.aspx?ID=35519 If Ned Lamont cannot adjust his thinking in the face or overwhelming logical reasons to so, what might that mean for the state if he’s governor?
*

There are some new twists and turns—or flips and flops—on a key issue in the race to succeed Ted Kennedy as US Senator from Massachusetts. The two leading contenders, state Attorney General Martha Coakley and US Rep. Michael Capuano, both Democrats, are having at it over the Health Care Reform bill recently passed in the House.

The first salvo came from Coakley, the presumptive leader in the race who is trying to become the first female US Senator from Massachusetts. She came out against President Obama’s Health Care Reform plan because of the amendment that prohibited the expenditure of federal funds for abortion procedures. The bill passed with the votes of many pro-choice Democrats who figured either the anti-abortion portion of the bill could be fixed later or that the bill was simply too important to defeat due to that one section.

Capuano jumped on Coakley immediately and railed against her stance opposing the bill. He went so far as to say Coakley’s position was “manna from heaven” for his campaign. He did in fact vote for the bill in the House. He then did a flip-flop a line cook at IHOP would be proud of. He announced that if the bill came back from the Senate the way it passed the House, would vote against it. In effect, he channeled John Kerry by “voting for before before voting against it.”

As way of explanation, Capuano said that his first vote was merely to advance the legislation so it could be amended later, not an indication of his final political judgment. If that’s the case, why the harsh criticism of Coakley who ostensibly has the same political judgment? “If the bill comes back the same way as it left the House, I would vote against it,’’ Capuano said in an interview. “I am a pro-choice person, and I do believe this is [necessary] to provide health care for everyone.’’

Coakley’s response to Capuano’s change of heart was predictable. “We are heartened to see that Congressman Capuano has reversed his position to follow Martha Coakley’s lead and no longer will vote for health care legislation that further restricts a woman’s right to choose,’’ a campaign spokesman, Corey Welford, said in a statement.
One wonders what Ted Kennedy would think of all of this.

NOTE: The author of The Hanging Shad will be a guest this weekend on FOX 61’s “The Real Story” with host Laurie Pereze. We’ll discuss the political issues of the day. “The Real Story” airs on FOX 61 (channel 6 on most cable systems) Sunday at 10:30 am. Tune in if you can!

There is something very troubling about the “interfaith prayer vigil” Sunday in Stamford designed to “pray” that Sen. Joseph Lieberman would somehow change his mind on the health care reform bill now before the US Senate. Not for a moment is this to question the free speech and free assembly rights of the 500 or so people who gathered outside Lieberman’s Stamford home. The crowd, including many members of the clergy, were there to use the power of prayer and persuasion to get Lieberman to at least allow a vote on the bill. Lieberman says he will not allow a bill to come to a full vote if includes what he see as a financially crippling public option.

The question here is: When did God declare his position on this public policy issue? This writer happens to agree with the clergy and followers on the issue. However putting the specific issue aside for a moment, offense is easily taken when religion is invoked to declare moral authority on any issue. The divinely inspired memo in favor of a senate bill with a public option didn’t make it to the e-mail inbox of Scully Communications.

For the clergy to invoke God-given moral authority on any issue is one thing. For politicians to manipulate it is is even worse. Gubernatorial candidate and Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy and Health Care for All chief Juan Figueroa, whose name has been tossed around as a potential candidate, were both on hand Sunday to jump on the “wrath of God requests” to alter Lieberman’s thinking. Malloy can probably be excused because the event was in Stamford and he is still invested in what happens in the town he ran for so many years.

There plenty of ways to engage in political discourse in our democratic system. The idea that one side or the other has God in its corner is alarming.

*

There are nine months to go before any primary is held in the race for governor in Connecticut. Now is a good time for watchdog agencies to start keeping an eye politicians who are seeking higher office and in doing so, are using his or her current office to further those efforts. Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz has been walking that fine line for months now. The job of secretary of state is crystal clear under the state Constitution and state statute. The SOTS’s duties are primarily to oversee elections and register new businesses in the state. Bysiewicz has done more than a thorough job in the last two months or so on the job of overseeing elections. She had pre-election voter turnout predictions for any media outlet that would listen and has since sworn-in newly elected officials in every corner of the state.

However the SOTS has also someone how decided that veterans affairs are her office’s purview as well. She has attended numerous event promoting veterans’ affairs since forming an exploratory committee to run for governor. One would think her office had such issues in its job description.

A Nov. 4 article in the Rocky Hill Post detailed a ceremony for “men who served in the Pacific and men who served in Europe. There were men who fought at Pearl Harbor, D-Day and the Battle of the Bulge. In all, more than 30 World War II veterans at Rocky Hill’s State Veterans Home were honored by Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz.” The article goes on to quote Bysiewicz as saying,“Meeting these veterans has really enriched my understanding of WWII…but also deepened my appreciation for what everyday Americans did in extraordinary times.’” The problem is, the people of the state don’t pay their secretary of state to improve her appreciation for what Americans did in extraordinary times or any other.

The RH Post goes on to say “Bysiewicz has made 122 presentations since she began in the fall of 2007 and she said she has 40 more towns to visit.” That is not the secretary of state’s job. Are taxpayers paying her to campaign for governor?

*

The post-script on Governor Jodi Rell seems to include more and more of a rewrite of history. Rell, who announced last week she is not seeking re-election, made it a point to reminisce about a gay couple who hugged her after she signed civil union legislation. Other reports on the governor’s likely legacy include her work on campaign finance reform, education, holding the line on taxes and ethics. Yet as often happens when a person of note leaves the scene (be it departing from one’s earthly existence or leaving an influential position) a fair review of the record shows far less heroic action.

Gov. Rell may have signed civil unions into law but she remained staunchly opposed to extending all legal protection and status to gay couples by opposing gay marriage. If the governor had her way, a certain segment of our population would still be treated differently than the any segments. A real profile in courage there, gov.

Rell backers also quickly point out that she signed landmark legislation to remove special interests and ‘big money” from elections in Connecticut some years back.. The fact is, the governor was dragged kicking and screaming to the camaign finance reform signing ceremony by the legislature. In fact, she vetoed the first version of CFR.

The same is true of her work on education. In her budget address of 2006, Rell boldly proposed a small increase in the income tax to infuse hundreds of millions of dollars into public education and thereby decrease local cities’ and towns’ dependence on property taxes. She quickly retreated from that proposal in the face of criticism from her own party and unfriendly poll numbers on the issue.

The most head-shaking is the assertion that the Rell administration stood for high ethics. Despite the talk, the governor was constantly dealing with ethical problems usually involving the state’s “walking ethics violation,” chief of staff Lisa Moody. From fund-raising violations, to using the governor’s office as her own little money-raising machine, to claiming under oath she didn’t read a memo that, when it surfaced, showed she edited it, to telling state agency heads to “pony up” for the governor, to using a taxpayer-funded study to further Rell’s political ends.

The Rell administration’s “achievements” that have bandied about lately don’t survive an honest review of the record.

In a story that no doubt will be “ripped from the headlines” by Law and Order, a Greenwich obstetrician-gynecologist has been practicing medicine for the last seven years while his patients have been oblivious to the fact that he was accused in a 2005 medical malpractice lawsuit of using his own sperm instead of that of a patient’s husband.

The Greenwich Time this week detailed the case of Dr. Ben Ramaley who was sued by a couple after their twin girls underwent a paternity test that showed the husband was not the biological father. The interracial couple has the test done because the girls had extremely fair complexions and elicited questions about whether they were adopted.

According to the newspaper report, the lawsuit alleged, “Upon information and belief, Dr. Roe [Ramaley] intentionally inserted his own sperm into (the patient), causing (the patient) to become pregnant and give birth to children biologically fathered by Dr. Roe…Dr. Roe intentionally concealed that he had inseminated (the patient) with sperm from someone other than (her husband), despite the fact that he knew he had done so.” The couple’s lawyer drafted a set of questions, asking Ramaley if he used his own sperm in the procedure. But before Ramaley had to answer under oath, the lawsuit was withdrawn, the case settled and a confidentiality ruling was imposed prohibiting anyone involved in the case from discussing it. Ramaley “always maintained this was an accident,” Ramaley’s attorney, Steven Errant, said. “There was never any proof of the allegations made in the complaint.”

Another part of the story that remains unanswered was why the state Department of Public Health (DPH), which investigated the complaint independent of the lawsuit, didn’t compel Ramaley to undergo a DNA test to determine whether he in fact, used his own sperm to inseminate his patient even though state law appears to give the department authority to do so. Instead, in a 2008 consent agreement negotiated with Ramaley’s attorney, they fined the doctor $10,000 for “using the wrong man’s sperm” in the procedure and allowed him to keep an unrestricted license.

When asked why the department never asked Ramaley to take a paternity test, state officials said they didn’t have the authority to do so. “The Department has no jurisdiction to order a respondent to undergo DNA testing,” according to a statement given by DPH to the Greenwich Time. However state statute makes it clear the department has full discretion to order any doctor under investigation to take a medical exam, the scope of which the department can determine.

Statute 20-13e (b) states that “the Department of Public Health may order the physician to submit to a physical or mental examination… The department may seek the advice of established medical organizations or licensed health professionals in determining the nature and scope of any diagnostic examinations.” The statute also says a Superior Court judge can order the respondent to submit to medical testing if he or she refuses.

Meanwhile, Dr. Ramaley continues to practice medicine although he no longer does the procedure in question. The doctor and the state DPH have a lot to answer for in this appalling case.
*

US Sen. Chris Dodd and his supporters have to be more than a little worried after a new Qunnipiac poll released yesterday shows his approval rating dropping yet again after several months of improving. As the author of The Hanging Shad pointed out on Channel 3’s “Face the State” program that airs Sunday, at this point in the campaign it’s all about the trend of the polls, not necessarily the number. Dodd’s approval numbers had been improving (although still below 50%) until yesterday.

54% of those surveyed disapprove of the job he’s doing and he loses or ties every hypothetical match-up with his Republican challengers except one. Troubling for Dodd is the fact that the poll was taken after President Barak Obama came to the state to lend his support to the senior senator. Possibly more telling is that his Democratic challenger, Merrick Alpert, who no one in the state knows unless you live next to him, got 23% in a match-up with Dodd. Those are clearly “anyone but Dodd” responses. The Republican pack is led by former US Rep. Rob Simmons and former WWE executive Linda McMahon )no surprise given the amount of money she has already spent on staff and advertising).

There were some interesting numbers in the race for governor as well. The poll, taken before Gov. Rell announced she would not run again, showed the governor’s numbers up again after several polls had her trending down. The Democrats were led by Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz (26%), and former US Senate candidate Ned Lamont (23%). Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy can’t be happy with the 9% he got especially having run statewide against Rell in 2006. He has a lot of work to do.

Before Lamont backers get too excited, they should realize the poll was taken just when he formed an exploratory committee to run and was featured in all the headlines. His numbers, like those of the others, are likely a function of name recognition.

NOTE: The author of The Hanging Shad is a guest of Channel 3’s Dennis House on “Face the State” that airs Sunday at 11:00 am. Tune in if you can!