Cross-post from My Left Nutmeg:Says short term savings costs everyone in long term
State Representative Gary Holder-Winfield (D-94), who represents New Haven in the Connecticut General Assembly, has joined with activists and other legislators in saying that the state must resist the minority legislative Republican attack on our clean election system.
Yesterday (Thursday), Republicans offered a last second budget proposal that includes raiding the new Clean Election Fund as a cost cutting measure.
"Some of us have chosen to look solely at the numbers, and in this case when the system is so new I don't know that using that as a measuring device is fair. Beyond that, the system is not in place simply to reach a numerical goal but to offer the opportunity for citizens who are otherwise essentially barred from interjecting their voice by running for office," he said. (italics mine)
Holder-Winfield participated in the system during the last election cycle and has been an advocate of clean elections having spoken on the issue at the annual Congressional Black Caucus event this past fall.
"For people in certain communities this is akin to a civil rights issue," Winfield remarked. "We must work together to protect the voice of all of Connecticut's residents and seek their best interests as we tackle very tough economic realities. I am sure that we, as a body, can do better than the total evisceration of this program which my Republican colleagues have called for when it does so much good for so many."
8 comments:
Referring to the Union Boss Enrichment Act as anything "clean" is laughable.
EVERYONE knows the drill.
The accepted Democratic candidate has his or her paperwork picked up by some union steward who returns it all in under a week flat with the required number of donations thus allowing those Democrats that have sold their souls to the unions to receive full public funding in no time at all.
A clear advantage.
Dems that don't tow the union line 100% are both out of luck and sometimes find themselves in a primary.
Republicans?
Forget it.
The whole scheme is about as "clean" as mud wrestling.
Jeez ACR...cynical much?
You only need 150 donors and 5000 bucks total to qualify to run for state rep; you know, those guys I quoted in my last two articles. Any jagoff who can't reach those extremely modest totals doesn't deserve a place on the ballot.
I know you ain't a big fan of the unions, but c'mon man...it's not like there's not a union organizer hiding under EVERY bed out there! (They're much too busy with their socialist agenda to bother with that!)
>>but c'mon man...it's not like there's not a union organizer hiding under EVERY bed out there!The hell there isn't.
Take a look at what the Dems put their own guy through in the 80th and then review the flunkies in both the 81st and the 30th.
ACR -
As someone who has had to advise a minor party on this matter(a party opposed to the DEMOCRATS), I can honestly say this plan is good for any democratically minded individual who wishes to represent us in this republic of ours.
We waste our tax money on other idiocies; but this is money well-spent.
Find your demons elsewhere.
>>We waste our tax money on other idiocies; but this is money well-spent.
Find your demons elsewhere.
ACR! - You gonna believe your own eyes, or are you gonna believe me!
No sale.
Both the 30th & 81st Democratic incumbents did exactly as I described; while the Dem in the 80th found himself in a union-funded primary as his punishment for failing to sign the union loyalty blood-oath.
The state is close to being broke, the assembly wants to increase taxation on buisnesses thus destroying more jobs and gutting any chance of a recovery and we should worry about a system that gives us crap like what sits in Hartford? We are in an extremely dire economic crisis, not only have we had a national economy devestated by republican deregulation, but here we have the added burden of democratic economic cluelessness. And yes the democrats can override any of Rell's vetos so they own Ct's added mess. Yet we are supposed to be more concerned with a clean election law when with or without it we have a dysfunctional government? It sort of is pointless when out of state interests pour millions to Dodd anyway.
As a follow up to my post above: 3500 CT employers went out of business 1st quarter of 2009. Damn glad our priorities are in order (sarcasm in case you missed it).
Nopartisan said...
"As a follow up to my post above: 3500 CT employers went out of business 1st quarter of 2009"
And the Democratic response?
Raise Taxes!
Post a Comment