Connecticut Politics and Elections: Coverage, Analysis, Maps and Commentary
Monday, June 06, 2005
New Poll
There's a new weekly poll up about the campaign finance measures being proposed by the governor. What do you think? Should the bill be rammed through as quickly as possible (it can be done) or ignored?
5 comments:
Anonymous
said...
In principle, this is a great idea. In practice, it looks like Democrats might be giving up their hold on the state. Republicans are doing this because they always want to change the rules when they aren't winning. My question is, where will money seep back into the system? Are we going to see the creation of lots of astroturf organizations by lobbyists and special interests? Are we going to see the creation of lots of third parties that end up endorsing Republicans or Democrats? What will happen when someone starts a taxpayer backlash on the costs of public financing? And will there be adjustments for the cost of campaigns as they rise? I've heard someone say that a town election in some places will cost over $50,000 - and that's not including campaigns for the lower parts of the ticket.
Funny how everyone and his brother was lining up to demand this two weeks ago. Oh well.
Apparently, incumbent Democrats never figured on actually getting what they were asking for. Now that they are, it scares the crap out of them. This is very disappointing.
Money will seep back in, it always does. Non-specific issue ads will probably quadruple.
You're also quite right about the Republicans' reasons for backing the bill--it's one of the few ways in which they can get their moribund party off the mat. Let them. Connecticut Democrats in the GA, many of whom had no serious opposition last November, have become disgustingly complacent.
Opster, the Democratic leadership might back away from it if it began in 2006, especially Amann. 2010 softens the blow a bit for nervous incumbents.
I was at the Capitol tonight with other campaign finance reform supporters, and Andy Fleischmann was there as usual trying to work with his colleagues and the advocates to get a bill through. He has been a leader on this issue for many years and no one is more dedicated. He is the Education Committee chair, not the Govt Administration & Election chair, and reporters tend to interview only the "official" leadership on this issue, but he remains a strong supporter.
Things are very fluid at the Capitol tonight, and there was not agreement between the Senate & House on a bill late in the evening.
I agree with MikeCT. If you look at Andy Fleischmann's record, it is clear that he has been a strong advocate for campaign finance reform in the general assembly and continues to be an advocate on the campaign trail for the Secretary of the State race.
5 comments:
In principle, this is a great idea. In practice, it looks like Democrats might be giving up their hold on the state. Republicans are doing this because they always want to change the rules when they aren't winning.
My question is, where will money seep back into the system? Are we going to see the creation of lots of astroturf organizations by lobbyists and special interests? Are we going to see the creation of lots of third parties that end up endorsing Republicans or Democrats? What will happen when someone starts a taxpayer backlash on the costs of public financing? And will there be adjustments for the cost of campaigns as they rise? I've heard someone say that a town election in some places will cost over $50,000 - and that's not including campaigns for the lower parts of the ticket.
Funny how everyone and his brother was lining up to demand this two weeks ago. Oh well.
Apparently, incumbent Democrats never figured on actually getting what they were asking for. Now that they are, it scares the crap out of them. This is very disappointing.
Money will seep back in, it always does. Non-specific issue ads will probably quadruple.
You're also quite right about the Republicans' reasons for backing the bill--it's one of the few ways in which they can get their moribund party off the mat. Let them. Connecticut Democrats in the GA, many of whom had no serious opposition last November, have become disgustingly complacent.
Opster, the Democratic leadership might back away from it if it began in 2006, especially Amann. 2010 softens the blow a bit for nervous incumbents.
Lone Democrat,
Agreed.
Lone Democrat,
I was at the Capitol tonight with other campaign finance reform supporters, and Andy Fleischmann was there as usual trying to work with his colleagues and the advocates to get a bill through. He has been a leader on this issue for many years and no one is more dedicated. He is the Education Committee chair, not the Govt Administration & Election chair, and reporters tend to interview only the "official" leadership on this issue, but he remains a strong supporter.
Things are very fluid at the Capitol tonight, and there was not agreement between the Senate & House on a bill late in the evening.
I agree with MikeCT. If you look at Andy Fleischmann's record, it is clear that he has been a strong advocate for campaign finance reform in the general assembly and continues to be an advocate on the campaign trail for the Secretary of the State race.
Post a Comment