Double Standards

By this point, you probably know that Mayor John Fabrizi of Bridgeport used cocaine while in office.

You may also know that absolutely nothing is likely to happen to him because of it. So far he's indicated that he won't resign, and to this point he hasn't been prosecuted.

There's the interesting part.

Cocaine use is illegal. If I were to snort cocaine and then announce it during a press conference, I'd probably find myself spending time with a few thousand of my closest, meanest friends in the Enfield prison.

The Journal-Inquirer ran an editorial on the subject that's worth a read.

Say a 10th-grade history teacher gets busted for drugs.

Does he get to keep his job?

Even if he has done a great job at what he does?
...
How about a single mother?

Let's says she lives in a tough neighborhood in Bridgeport and is poor and unemployed. She gets swept up in one of those big busts the authorities like to conduct to show they are fighting the drug war. (Mayors always applaud them.) And she gets arrested. Does she get another chance?

No. She loses her kid and goes to jail.
...
If we don't think drug use is criminal for some people, why is it for others?

And if we don't really think recreational drug use is like theft or arson, why don't we decriminalize it and stop jailing people for it? ("The Case of the Cokehead Mayor")

Why, indeed? Green Party gubernatorial candidate Cliff Thornton makes a more direct case:

“It should be obvious that the mayor is being treated differently from average folk,” Thornton said. “It reminds me of George Orwell’s Animal Farm,” Thornton said, “where some animals are more equal than others. This hypocrisy must stop.”
...

Thornton’s campaign stresses the need for more treatment options for those seeking to kick the drug habit and showing how the root cause of violence in Hartford, New Haven and Bridgeport are centered on the failed “drug war” and the high profits associated with dealing drugs. “These Illegal drugs need to be brought inside of the law to ensure equal justice” Thornton stressed. ("Thornton")

There are two questions here, one small and one large. The first has to do with why some people can get away with crimes just because of the position they hold. Fabrizi broke the law. Why shouldn't he resign? Why shouldn't he go to jail? Yes, decent people can screw up. Fabrizi's been good for Bridgeport. But that doesn't put him above the law.

The second question, which Thornton is indirectly addressing in his release, is about whether decriminalizing drugs would lead to a less violent society. If we remove what he's calling "the root cause of violence," i.e., illegal drugs being dealt on the street, would our cities become less violent? If we focused on treatment rather than punishment, would we be better able to manage our serious national drug problem?

We won't know the answer to the second question for a long time. We may never know. But the first... maybe John Fabrizi can answer that question himself.

Source

"The case of the cokehead mayor: Why not one law for all?." Journal-Inquirer 21 June, 2006.

"Thornton: Cocaine Use has Double Standard as seen in Bridgeport's Mayor Case." Press Release. Thornton for Governor. 22 June, 2006.

Open Forum

The Courant is getting a new publisher.

Sen. Lieberman to start running "I Saved the Sub Base" ads.

A former Middletown mayor is expected to plead guilty to misusing clients' money today.

And we may not have NHL hockey, but we have a river, and now boats are coming to sail on it. Excitement city.

What else is happening today?

Keep Digging

To be fair, there's very little that Joe Lieberman could do about either of the Democratic resolutions to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq that would help him in any way. If he voted for the resolutions, he'd be a flip-flopper. If he voted for them, he'd be continuing to bury his head in the sand where Iraq is concerned.

He's going the head-in-the-sand route--sort of:

Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, D-Conn., plans to vote against both Democratic amendments calling for a troop withdrawal from Iraq.
...
Votes are expected Thursday. One resolution would call on the White House to begin phased redeployment of troops from Iraq this year, and to submit a plan to Congress by the end of the year for "continued phased redeployment."

The other measure, which is expected to gain little support even among Democrats, would have President Bush pull all troops out of Iraq by July 1, 2007.

Lieberman is expected to say he believes the U. S. cannot stay indefinitely in Iraq, and cannot write a blank check for its support. But, he plans to say, withdrawal of troops must be based on conditions on the ground, not fixed dates. (Lightman)

Much as I hate to admit it, he's actually right. As plans go, these are lousy ones. We could endlessly debate the pros and cons of a fixed date for withdrawal, but that sort of timeline won't help Iraq or, in the long run, the United States. The best the Democrats could come up with, I suppose.

Lieberman is sticking to his guns, sort of, despite the obvious backpedaling away from the Bush Administration and his earlier stances. If he really wanted to be the independent-minded statesman he so desperately desires to be, he could take a leadership role on the whole Iraq debate, and come up with some bold new directions besides just "stay the course" or "get us out of here now!"

Like, for example, doubling the number of troops, investing heavily in rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure and economy (a Marshall Plan for Iraq), and re-assuming some of the functions of Iraq's obviously inept central government until they can get back on their feet.

These ideas may not work. But they're a better direction than the two major parties are offering us. Positive action--any positive action--is better than either changing nothing or pulling up stakes and leaving a broken country to its fate.

Senator, they're yours for free. Take them and build on them. Lead, if you're capable of it. Put all that bipartisan capital you've supposedly been building up to work, for once! Get the moderate Gang of 14 who can still control the Senate behind you, and accomplish something history will remember you for. Show us why you ran for President.

Unless you can't. Maybe you're too wrapped up in saving your own butt here at home to risk the shreds of power you have left on helping to resolve a nasty overseas mess that you helped to create. Maybe you've been in Washington too long to act in anything but your own self-interest. Or maybe you really do think that things are going fine in Iraq. I don't know.

All just a fantasy, of course. No one is going to propose a better plan for Iraq. We won't pull out, the Democrats will get smeared as cut-and-run wussies, and in the end nothing will actually change. Maybe someday we'll have real leaders again. I can dream.

Source

Lightman, David. "Lieberman To Vote Vs. Troop Withdrawal." Hartford Courant 21 June, 2006.

Garfield Deletions May Reopen Fundraiser Hearings

State elections enforcement director Jeffrey Garfield deleted relevant sections of the report his agency submitted to the General Assembly, according to the Hartford Courant. Apparently the unedited version was slipped in with a bunch of "supplemental documents," and was not among the documents originally given to the legislature.

Here are a few of the deletions:

Investigators told Rell that Moody solicited the wife of a lobbyist (George is married to a lobbyist). Rell has proclaimed that her campaign will not accept lobbyists' contributions.

When Moody handed out invitations for the Dec. 7 fundraiser to subordinates in the governor's office, she allegedly said: "I am not giving you the strong arm, but I am."

Former gubernatorial ethics counsel Rachel Rubin said she warned Moody that it was wrong to hand out invitations at the Capitol. Moody said Rubin merely told her to "be careful" about giving an invitation to a staff member she had reduced to tears moments earlier. Garfield cut Rubin's version and left Moody's in. (Lender)

This may force the Marco Polo hearings back open, especially since there's evidence in the article that Moody may have seen the unedited version of the report.

In fact, the hearings should reconvene. Then Jeffrey Garfield and Lisa Moody should both be put out to pasture.

Source

Lender, Jon. "Deleted Scenes Add To Drama." Hartford Courant 21 June, 2006.

Open Forum

Alan Schlesinger says he wants to pull half of the troops out of Iraq by the end of the year. Maybe that's just what he actually, honestly wants to see happen, but I don't think it'll help him politically.

Dan Malloy points to manufacturing job losses in Enfield and Groton as a sign of Gov. Rell's weakness on jobs. I don't think we at the state level can do anything about jobs going to Mexico... and at least more R&D is coming to Groton.

Lewis the Cat is spared, striking fear into the hearts of Avon ladies everywhere.

What else is happening?

SurveyUSA: Lieberman Approval Below 50% Among Dems

SurveyUSA released its monthly tracking poll of U.S. Senators, today. Joe Lieberman isn't doing so well.

Among all adults, Lieberman's approval stands at 55% (41% disapprove). This isn't the trouble.

Among Democrats, Lieberman has slipped below 50% approval. Ony 46% approve of him, while 50% disapprove.

Among liberals, many of whom are likely primary voters, Lieberman is at 40% approval (56% disapprove).

So what does this say? It seems to suggest that if the election were held today, Lieberman would probably lose.

Source

"CT Jr Sen Approval." Poll. SurveyUSA. 20 June, 2006.

Lego Production Leaving Enfield

Lego is going to be moving production done in Enfield to Mexico, and is scaling back the distribution center in town.

Danish toy maker Lego Group said Tuesday it will end its production in Enfield, Conn., and lay off 300 people there in early 2007, while some 900 employees in Denmark will also be sacked over the next three years.

The production in Enfield is to be moved to Mexico, the group said in a statement. Along with the 300 production layoffs, the distribution facility in Enfield will also be affected, Lego said, without providing details. (AP)

This is going to hurt. Lego is a big part of life in Enfield.

Source

"Lego to lay off 1,200 in Denmark, U.S.; move production." Associated Press 20 June, 2006.

Lieberman Plays to his Strengths

Joe Lieberman is trying to salvage his swiftly sinking campaign as the primary, which he has stated he will remain in, approaches. He's doing so by playing to his stregth: his image as a principled, bipartisan Senator who is above the fray:

Lieberman, speaking to reporters after an address at the Middlesex County Chamber of Commerce, said he is fed up with what he sees as "rigid partisanship" on multiple issues facing the country, not just the war in Iraq.

"Washington has become much too partisan and that partisanship gets in the way of doing the job that you send us to do," Lieberman said. "I feel Mr. Lamont, in Washington, would add to the polarization."

He dismissed a question about whether he is taking a political risk by touting his bipartisanship less than two months before the Aug. 8 primary, as critics claim he is too cozy with President Bush and too supportive of the war.

"I'm telling the truth," he said. "Whether it's risky or not, I don't know." (AP)

Of course it's risky, especially when he's been attacking Lamont for not being partisan enough:

Lamont, a Greenwich businessman who has put more than $1.5 million of his own money into his primary campaign, said he's confused about why Lieberman accuses him of being too partisan, but is running television ads attacking Lamont for being too supportive of Republicans. (AP)

Of all of the accusations Lieberman has made against Lamont, this is the one with the most potential to do damage. Many voters are sick of partisanship.

Of course, one breed of voter who isn't sick of that partisanship is the likely Democratic primary voter. Many hard-core Democrats wish that Lieberman had been more partisan on the issues that matter to them. What he sees as compromise, they see as capitulation.

Still, it's the first smart attack Lieberman has made in this campaign. At least it isn't petulant, vicious or an unbelievable exaggeration or distortion. Lamont will be more partisan than Lieberman. But that's also his strength.

Source

"Lieberman touts bipartisanship, says Lamont would be polarizing." Associated Press 20 June, 2006.

Fabrizi Admits Cocaine Use

Oh, dear.

Bridgeport Mayor John M. Fabrizi has admitted he has used cocaine since taking office, but told the Connecticut Post he is both ashamed and humiliated.
...
The mayor said he quit using the illegal drug well over a year ago.

"I'm ashamed. I'm humiliated for myself. I never meant to let the world know. I didn't want my family to know," Fabrizi told the newspaper. (AP)

So far, there's no word of Fabrizi resigning.

Source

"Bridgeport Mayor Address Drug Allegations." Associated Press 20 June, 2006.

All Three Rell Vetoes Stand

Gov. Rell has vetoed three bills this year, all of which were allowed to stand by the legislature today.

The governor nixed legislation that would have set in state statute a new contracting standards board and created rules for privatized contracts. She also vetoed bills that would have allowed state prosecutors to bargain for additional pension benefits and allowed adopted children to obtain their birth certificates when they turn 21. (AP)

Click here to see list of Gov. Rell's vetoes from last year, none of which were overridden.

Of the three, the contracting reform bill is the one that most desperately needs to be passed. Maybe next year.

"Lawmakers opt not to try and override three Rell vetoes." Associated Press 19 June, 2006.

Hurricanes Win Stanley Cup

I can't stand it.

Oh, well. Who needs NHL hockey, arena football, ABL basketball, CBA basketball or the occasional Celtics game anyway?

Maybe we can get a curling tournament in or something.

Governor's Race: Rell Still in Lead

I was in Boston all day. It was hot there. Sounds like things were exciting back here! Figures.

According to a Rasmussen Poll released today, Gov. Rell is still in fine shape, although her lead has shrunk. Her lead is less than reported in the last Quinnipiac Poll, and because it measures likely voters and not just Connecticut residents it can be said to be a bit more accurate.

She outdoes her prospective opponents by a little more than twenty-five points—a decline from her 40 point advantage, but not a terribly worrisome one. Rell now leads Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy 58% to 31% and leads New Haven Mayor John DeStefano 59% to 31%.

In other words, the only bad news for Rell in today’s poll is that the election is still five months away.

Despite the chipping away at her lead, Rell remains very popular, including among Democrats, at least 40% of whom support her reelection bid in each match-up. She is viewed favorably by 75% of all voters, 86% of GOP voters, 70% of Democrats. (Rasmussen)

As the election approaches, the Democratic party faithful, which is about 30-35% of the vote, will rally behind any candidate who is a Democrat. What this poll shows is that Malloy and DeStefano can count on the base, but not much else. If the eventual nominee can get Rell's lead down to 15% by Labor Day, this race will be worth watching.

In other gubernatorial news, the Rell campaign is opening a campaign office in Stamford this Saturday. Michele Fedele, Lt. Gov. candidate and Stamford resident, will be there to open it. I notice that they aren't opening a New Haven office. Hm.

Also, John DeStefano has a new TV ad about universal healthcare. I have yet to check this out.

Sources

"Connecticut Governor: Rell (R) Leading by 25%+." Poll. Rasmussen Reports. 19 June, 2006.

Guilty Plea on DOT theft and Obstruction of Justice

Raymond Cox, 52, of Plymouth pleaded guilty before U.S. District Judge Mark R. Kravitz in New Haven to theft and obstructing justice, according to the U.S. Attorney's office.

Cox was the assistant DOT rail administrator who oversaw the renovation of DOT's offices at Union Station in New Haven.

The details are not pretty. Cox apparently arranged for a unnamed individual to prepare fake bids so that a renovation project had been bid competitively. No mention on whether this is part of the culture of DOT or not, but considering the pace of work on our roads, one has to wonder.

The Hartford Courant, Former State Employee Pleads Guilty To Theft, June 19, 2006 Associated Press

Trouble in Bridgeport

An FBI report surfaced in Bridgeport with an alleged drug dealer claiming there is a videotape of John Fabrizi using cocaine. The alleged drug dealer, Shawn Fardy, has plead not guilty. Records show that at least 13 phone calls were placed from Frabrizi's phone to Shaw Fardy between October and December 2004. Fardy is however, a member of the Bridgeport Democratic Town Committee.

Fabrizi could not be reached for comment. His spokeswoman, Caryn Kaufman, did not return telephone calls Monday.

Fabrizi, who took office after Joseph Ganim was convicted of corruption in 2003, said last week he has no plans to resign.

U.S. Attorney Kevin O'Connor said Friday that Fabrizi was not a target of the drug investigation. He said FBI reports, which summarize statements made by witnesses but are not always corroborated, are typically filed under seal. He apologized to Fabrizi after the document was released.

The Hartford Courant, Mayor urged to address drug allegations, June 19, 2006, AP.

N.H. Register: Senate Primary Could "Hurt All Democrats"

The New Haven Register posted this editorial today (tip of the hat to CommonSenseDem--as a rule, I don't read the papers that make me jump through annoying hoops like the Register does) defending Joe Lieberman on the premise that a primary threat jeopardizes a "safe" Senate seat. The salient points:

The insurgent strategy suffers from two major flaws. First, in potentially putting a safe Democratic seat in play for Republicans, it is extraordinarily short-sighted. Second, it rests on a faulty premise about Lieberman’s record in adhering to core Democratic principles in his voting and his advocacy.

The strategy contrasts sharply with how Pennsylvania Democrats are treating a similar situation. There, Democrats rallied around state Treasurer Bob Casey in his quest to unseat Republican Rick Santorum, the incumbent U.S. Senator — even though Casey’s pro-life position on abortion puts him on the wrong side of a core Democratic issue. (Haas)

The Pennsylvania situation is very different, however, in that Pennsylvania Democrats have chosen the best candidate to defeat an entrenched incumbent. In this case, there is no strong Republican alternative. Alan Schlesinger has yet to catch fire, although he may be waiting for the outcome of the Lieberman-Lamont fight. Most observers don't think that there is much of a chance of the seat swictching from one party to the next, especially if Republican voters stay home.

Then again, it may be worth asking what the consequences of a Lamont victory would actually be. Would the party unify behind him? Or break apart?

Source

Haas, Lawrence J. "Challenge to Lieberman could hurt all Democrats." New Haven Register 18 June, 2006.

Some Days the Bear Gets You

It's been a lousy week for Joe Lieberman.

It started off with a Lamont ad calling for him to support the eventual primary winner, and then got worse when Lieberman's friends tried to help by saying wild, dimwitted things. Lamont got endorsements from two big teachers' unions, then, even worse, a Rasmussen poll showed Lamont only six points behind among likely primary voters.

It was then that the strategic geniuses at the Lieberman campaign decided to unleash their secret weapon: Son of Bear Ad, which turned out to be a miserable, unwatchable flop. Lieberman ended the week with an acerbic interview with David Broder, in which he compares the Lamont campaign and its supporters to a "crusade or jihad." Nice.

The one bright spot in the week, in which the Lieberman campaign agreed to a debate, seemed like a bitter concession, especially given the venom of the Lieberman press release.

Now, newspapers which saw Lamont as something of a novelty (and Lieberman as a foregone conclusion) a month ago are now taking a hard look at the Joe Lieberman who has been revealed by this week's events, and asking tough questions about his character and motivations. Connecticut voters who were paying attention might be starting to ask those questions, too.

So it can't get worse, right? This has to be rock bottom for Joe Lieberman. The image he's spent years honing, that of a prudent, intelligent, thoughtful compromiser with a ton of integrity, has been tarnished, perhaps irrevocably so. His campaign is wasting time and money on ads and statements that hurt more than they help, and the media honeymoon Lamont is enjoying just keeps getting longer.

Lieberman is a smart guy with a ton of campaign experience. He'll find a way to pull out of the nose dive somehow. We may see some campaign shakeups, a couple of firings here and there, and maybe some better-made ads and a stronger defense of his record. The debate will give Lieberman a chance to gain back a lot of ground, if he can manage to show up as Joe the Statesman, and not as the bitter, arrogant candidate we've seen over the past week.

He'll come out of it. But by then, it may be too late. There is one way things could get worse for Lieberman, of course, and that's being Joe Unemployed next January.

Rowland! the Musical

In honor of the fact that both John Rowland and Bill Curry are back in the news lately, here is the song list for "Rowland! the Musical" (first conceived of in this post a long time ago).

Act the First: The 2002 Election

1. (Curry) The Corruption Song/Overture
2. (Rowland) It's Nice to Have Friends
3. (The Tomassos) Contractin'
4. (The Rowlands) Hot Tub of Love
5. (Barbara Kennelly) That Wascally Wolland
6. (Curry) Governor Me? ...Maybe.
7. (The Democrats) Oh, Great. It's Curry Again.
8. (Nancy Johnson & Jim Maloney) Incumbency Blues
9. (Curry) Mumbling is a Strategy
10. (Rowland) There's an Election?
11. (Jodi Rell) John Never Comes to Visit Anymore
12. (Rowland) Waterbury!
13. (Curry) Hey! Running for Governor Over Here!
14. (George Jepsen) Oops.
15. (The Democrats) We Really Need A New Candidate Next Time
15. (Curry) You Haven't Seen the Last of Me! Or Maybe You Have.

Act the Second: The Fall (2003 and 2004)

1. (Curry) See, Didn't I Say?
2. (Rowland) Bring me the Heads of the Journal-Inquirer Editorial Staff!
3. (Richard Blumenthal) The Lawsuit Rumba
4. (The General Assembly) Shh! We're Taking a Nap
5. (Jodi Rell) People Are Watching My Cable Show!
6. (Curry) Hot Tubs and Indiscretions
7. (Rowland) I'm Really (Kind Of) Sorry
8. (Patty Rowland) Patricia's Yuletide Lament
9. (Rowland) I Said I Was Sorry!
10. (Curry) See, I Told You So
11. (The Democrats) We Are Very Pure (Someone Hide Newton)
12. (Rowland) This is Everyone's Fault But Mine
13. (Curry) Nyah, Nyah, Nyah!
14. (The Media) We Finally Found an Interesting Story
15. (Rowland) The Resignation Blues
16. (Jodi Rell) I Was Knitting the Whole Time
17. (Curry) See? See? See?
18. (Full Cast) The Campaign Finance Dance
19. (Curry) The Corruption Song/Finale

I know. It's sad when I start going into reruns.

Courant: Bingham Succeeding in Torrington

This is an interesting article on Ryan Bingham, who last year was elected mayor of Torrington at the tender age of 22.

Since his election, Bingham has gone at the mayor's job studiously, as he did pursuing his political science degree at Marist. He's spent long hours talking to everyone from former city officials to department heads to citizens about what he needed to do and what he needed to know. He spent his first 100 days in office on a "listening tour"; and he has breakfast each Wednesday at Lamonica's, a city luncheonette where anyone can stop by to talk to him. He also makes it a point to personally respond to calls, letters and visits to his office at city hall.
...
At city hall, department heads say Bingham's work ethic and his willingness to ask questions and listen to answers have impressed them. Age simply isn't an issue, one said.

"He's wise beyond his years," Roraback said. (Owens)

I think a lot of us were expecting Bingham to be a one-term wonder, or a inexperienced mayor in over his head. Instead, it seems like Bingham has not only taken charge, but that he's actually good for Torrington. I'd say, given this article, that his chances of re-election next year are pretty good. Who knew?

When I was 22 and 23, I was busy graduating college, getting married, doing cruddy temp jobs and moving into a one-room apartment in Enfield. I had no idea what I was doing. That Bingham has somehow managed not only to figure things out but apparently make a difference is impressive. Republicans need to keep an eye on him.

Source

Owen, David. "Torrington's Young Turk." Hartford Courant: Northeast Magazine 18 June, 2006.

Weekend Open Forum

What non Senate race things are happening this weekend?

The Two Liebermans

Joe Lieberman drags out the ghost of John Bailey in an interview with David Broder to talk about the evils of primaries:

"John Bailey genuinely believed that primaries were not only divisive but often didn't pass the ultimate test of finding the candidate who could win," he said. If Bailey were alive, his attitude would be, "We have an incumbent senator who is quite popular in the state; we have an opportunity to elect three Democratic congressional challengers; we have a very tough race for governor. Why would we want to challenge an incumbent senator who could lead the other candidates to victory?" (Broder)

Bailey was a smart, strong chairman whose specialty was getting Democrats elected, and keeping them in power once they got there. He and other party bosses weren't especially good for democracy. The current system, which allows much easier access to primaries than was ever the case in Connecticut, devolves power away from the parties and puts it in the hands of the voters. Which is where it belongs.

Lieberman also made this troubling statement:

"I know I'm taking a position that is not popular within the party," Lieberman said, "but that is a challenge for the party -- whether it will accept diversity of opinion or is on a kind of crusade or jihad of its own to have everybody toe the line. No successful political party has ever done that." (Broder)

Well, first off, the Republicans have done that. The nearly-successful primary challenge to Arlen Specter is a good example of that trend within the GOP--and they're a moderately successful bunch.

Secondly--jihad? You're kidding. Please tell us you didn't mean that. Please?

The interview is a good example of the Two Liebermans. There's Noble Joe, who is principled and unafraid to put party aside and take a stand for what he believes in. This is admirable and all-too-rare in a politician. I like Noble Joe, even though I sometimes disagree with him. Then there's Baron Joe, who believes he deserves his seat for life, that his opponent has no right to challenge him, and that he is entitled to go to any and all lengths to retain his spot in the peerage. Baron Joe is the one who released that dumb bear ad yesterday. He's the one spouting nonsense about jihad, invoking kingmaker John Bailey's ghost and issuing vicious statements, press releases and advertisements. He's paranoid, angry and unafraid to put party, people and common decency aside in order to win. I don't like Baron Joe. He has no place in a democracy.

This split personality seems to happen to good men who spend too much time in Washington. It's sad. I have to think that if John Bailey were alive today, he'd be quietly taking Lieberman aside and saying:

"Joe. Too much. Back off. You're losing us. You're better than this. Right?"

But Lieberman has no one to do that for him. I wonder if he's even listening anymore.

Source

Broder, David. "Antiwar Crucible in Connecticut." Washington Post 17 June, 2006.