New Haven Independent

Posted by: Gary Holder-Winfield | August 24, 2006 3:32 PM

Maybe I don't understand good faith but he is running against the party candidate is he not?

Posted by: Gary Holder-Winfield | August 24, 2006 3:37 PM

...represents is not affiliated with, or in good faith a member of, that political party and does not intend to support its principles or candidates, such registrar or deputy registrar, as the case may be, shall cite such person to appear before him and the chairman of the town committee of such political party, or before him and the chairman of the same party committee of the ward or voting district, if in a town divided into wards or voting districts; or, where there is no such chairman, or in the absence or disability of such chairman, before him and any enrolled member of the same political party chosen by such registrar or deputy registrar, to show cause why his name should not be erased or excluded from such enrollment list

Seems to me with the emphasis applied that this is a requirement unless she does not believe that Joe has an intention not to support the party candidate. She can not possibly think that as he runs against Lamont that he intends to support him.

Posted by: tjohnson | August 24, 2006 4:08 PM

Sharon Ferrucci should be recalled for violating her oath of office and refusing her duty. Joe Lieberman does not have a "good faith" affiliation with the Democratic Party or he wouldn't have started a phony political party to overturn the results of the election he lost.

Ferrucci should be recalled.

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | August 24, 2006 4:40 PM

Great, so Joe Lieberman's selfishness, (and the cowardice of Ferrucci and Voigt), somehow trump the political process?

If I remember correctly, Joe ran in the Democratic primary, and lost! Then he created a sham party, Connecticut for Lieberman, which he doesn't even have the decency to join?

Why should the Democratic Party even bother with primaries if it's going to allow selfish incumbents the right to immediately ask for a "do-over"?

$13 Million dollars was spent in our primary to decide who should represent Democrats on the November ballot. Now, not only do we have to bother with a Lieberman/Lamont repeat, (when we should be electing John DeStefano governor), we also get to look like absolute fools as Joe Lieberman goes around the state calling himself a "good Democrat".

Posted by: gary van ess | August 24, 2006 9:00 PM

What in the world is wrong with the dem "leaders" in Connecticut? Lieberman LOST the dem primary; he should immediately be cast out of our democratic party, and lose all dem privileges.
Many dems from around the country are watching this fiasco of gutless dems afraid to do the right thing in the Connecticut Democratic Party.
Joe is kaput as a legitimate democrat. Done. Finished. Washed Up. Bye-Bye.
Do your duty as a loyal democrat, not as one of joe's enablers, Ms. Ferrucci: get traitor joe out of our party.
Sincerely, Gary Van Ess, Green Bay, Wi.

Posted by: met00 | August 25, 2006 4:39 AM

Hi, I live in CA, but I want to vote in the CT elections since I was born in Ct and lived there until I was 21. Since the sate laws in CT are now are now a joke, could you please tell me where I should send my political donation so I can get on the voting rolls.

Posted by: Conn.-Lie. Party | August 25, 2006 8:31 AM

Laws are only meant to be followed by ordinary people.

Liberman and Bush are above the law.

I thought it said very clearly that running under another party is prima facie (no other proof needed) evidence of being disloyal?

I hope someone goes to court over this.

Posted by: gchaucer2 | August 25, 2006 10:21 AM

I believe TrueBlueCT nailed an important point here -- Lieberman is not a member of his own party! How does that work? And exactly who is registered with that party? What a continuing travesty on the part of the old Democratic machine. I'm not sure if there is an appeal process for this decision.

Posted by: RobN | August 25, 2006 1:31 PM

Registrar of Voters Ferrucci has ignored the resounding voice of CT Democrats who rejected Sen Lieberman...bad form. Sen Lieberman is, in effect, side stepping the primary and looking forward to regaining his seat and sitting as a Democrat. He lost the primary and should lose his party affiliation.

The title of the CT law appears to allow "discretionary erasure" from the party roles and one would assume that that would be triggered by voter intent, not the whim of the Registrar of Voters. Its worth repeating a footnote at the bottom of the law reads " Knowingly becoming a candidate for office on ticket of a new party automatically separates voter from his former party". Can any legal eagles help out here? Which is it? Discretionary or mandatory? What is the trigger if its discretionary?