New Haven Independent

Dodd Challenger: Dem Turncoat Or Dem Savior?

by Thomas MacMillan | October 15, 2009 2:21 PM | Permalink | Comments (18)

In town to promote his new memoir, Merrick Alpert went about developing the next chapter he hopes to write — in which he deposes a powerful five-term senator from his own party.

Democratic U.S. Sen. Chris Dodd and his party allies aim to prevent Alpert from making that story a reality.

A series of scandals and embarrassments have made Dodd a target of would-be senators already running hard a year before the November 2010 election. Five Republicans are seeking their party’s nomination. An independent’s running. And one Democrat has emerged to challenge Democrat Dodd in a party primary: businessman Alpert.

Alpert, who lives in Mystic, came to New Haven Tuesday evening for promote both his campaign and his memoir about growing up as the child of a single mom in Colchester, Morning Sun. Before the event, held downtown at Claire’s Corner Copia, Alpert sat down to talk about why he’s running for U.S. Senate.

Alpert said that voters no longer trust Dodd, who has been damaged by recent controversies involving a mortgage on his house provided by a subprime lender he was supposed to monitor as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee; a real-estate transaction in Ireland involving a felonious insider trader whom Dodd helped get a pardon; and CEO bonuses in the stimulus bill.

Dodd can’t win reelection, Alpert argued. So rather than cede the seat to a Republicans, Democrats should nominate him, he said.

He faces a touch fight. After 30 years of building alliances with Democratic interest groups and rising to a top position in the Senate, Dodd has rallied party leaders around his reelection campaign. He has also enlisted the liberal activist groups that play a crucial role in primaries.

State Democratic party spokeswoman Colleen Flanagan charged Wednesday that Alpert is playing into the hands of the Republicans by attacking Dodd for issues that should be left in the past.

Done With Dodd

Alpert, who’s 43, arrived at Claire’s on Tuesday wearing a black leather jacket over a checked button-down shirt and black slacks. He took a seat at a table in the back, placing his black canvas backpack on the bench next to him.

While Alpert has never run for office before, he is not a stranger to politics. In the early 1990s he worked for the Clinton-Gore campaign and then as a staffer for Al Gore and an organizer for the National Health Care Campaign in Oklahoma. He was a policy adviser to Oklahoma Gov. David Walters before moving into the private sector, where he has been a successful entrepreneur. He served as an Air Force officer in Bosnia in 1998 and 1999.

His decision to challenge Dodd for his seat was the result of one particular day earlier this year, Alpert said. It started with a trip to his barber in Hartford who has been cutting his hair for over 25 years. The man told Alpert about how he was struggling to stay afloat as a small business owner.

Then Alpert dropped in on his elderly mother in Colchester. She was at the kitchen table, holding a statement from her retirement investments, which had recently been decimated by the plummeting stock market. “Merrick, half of everything I worked for is gone,” she said.

Then Alpert went home, put his three kids to bed and sat down to watch TV with his wife. Sen. Dodd came on, denying involvement in the bonuses for AIG executives that were included in the stimulus bill. “I watched him stand up there and not tell the truth,” Alpert recalled. “It’s one thing to lie. It’s another thing to lie about lying.”

The events of that day convinced him he had to challenge Dodd for his seat, Alpert said. While the economy lags, Dodd has lost voters’ trust, Alpert said. He described the senator as “out of touch,” “not honest and trustworthy,” and without “empathy.”

“People have already decided,” he said. “They’re done with Sen. Dodd.”

Speaking later about Dodd’s controversial mortgage deal with Countrywide, Alpert said, “If the best we can hope for is that our senior senator is not convicted of a crime. It’s time for a change.”

Alpert said that there are three main planks in his platform. The first is private sector job creation. “I’ve created hundreds of high-tech, high-wage jobs,” he said. Among other investments he founded a software company and a power plant services company, Alpert said.

Dodd, who has served a U.S. senator since 1980, has never created a private sector job, Alpert said. “You don’t look for a lifeguard that doesn’t know how to swim,” he said.

Alpert’s second plank is clean government, an area where he said he is “starkly juxtaposed to the incumbent.” He said that he is in favor of publicly financed elections and term limits. He noted that Dodd, the chair of the senate banking committee, has taken in over $20 million in contributions from financial services companies. “I don’t take any corporate PAC [political action committee] money,” Alpert said.

Alpert’s third key issue is foreign policy, namely “getting us out of Iraq and Afghanistan.” He spoke about his time as a volunteer peacekeeper in Bosnia, a “Muslim nation.” That experience gives him the perspective to approach the two current wars wisely, he said. He said he opposes sending more troops to Afghanistan. “The course we’re on is a failure,” he said. “Dodd has supported it.”

Asked about areas where he agrees with Dodd, Alpert said, “The Family and Medical Leave Act [which Dodd sponsored] was the pinnacle of his career.” Alpert also mentioned support of gay marriage, where he now agrees with Dodd, who has changed his position since last year. The senator didn’t support it when he was running for president, “when we were paying him and he moved his family to Iowa,” Alpert noted.

Alpert also backs a public option in health care reform, as does Dodd.

Alpert called “a canard” and “a red herring” the argument that Connecticut Democrats should vote for Dodd because his years in the Senate give him seniority.

“Did Sen. Dodd’s alleged seniority prevent the collapse of banking” or stop his support for the AIG bonuses and Iraq and Afghanistan? Alpert asked. “Sen. Dodd’s seniority benefits Sen. Dodd … He picked a good committee from a fundraising standpoint.”

“Credit card reform is a great example of the difference between appearance and reality,” Alpert said, referring to Dodd’s recent bill. “It does not cap the overall fees you can be charged.” That oversight is a result of the “millions of dollars” that Dodd has received from the financial services industry,” Alpert said. “This is a bill they can live with.”

Alpert said that after decades in Washington, Dodd has lost the trust of Connecticut voters, who will no longer vote for him. “That’s my absolute belief. There’s no way he can win.” POlls have shown Dodd even with or behind the leading Republican challenger, former U.S. Rep. Rob Simmons. That’s unusual for a long-term incumbent.

On the other hand, Alpert described himself as a “nightmare for the Republicans.” With his background as the child of a single parent, a self-made businessman, the husband of an immigrant wife from Colombia, and the father of three children, Alpert said, he is the “electable Democrat.”

“Republican Talking Points”

Far from being a “nightmare for the Republicans,” Colleen Flanagan claimed, Alpert sounds like he’s ready to join the GOP.

Flanagan is the communications director for the state Democratic Party. In a phone call after Alpert’s visit to town, she rebutted some of his criticisms=.

Alpert described Dodd as having been in office too long. “I find that sort of line of attack to be questionable,” Flanagan said. The senator has a “record of delivering results,” she said. She described Dodd as a “leading voice on health care reform” and regulatory reform.

Four of the first five bills signed by President Obama came from Sen. Dodd, Flanagan said. Those included the credit card act and a tobacco regulation bill intended to prevent cigarette companies from marketing to children.

And “there is no stronger advocate for keeping jobs in Connecticut” than Dodd, Flanagan argued.

“Last week he won a huge victory on the C-17,” she said. The senator worked to make sure that the most recent Defense Appropriations bill included money for the 10 C-17 aircraft engines, which are manufactured by Connecticut’s Pratt and Whitney company. “Those jobs could have gone out of state or out of the country,” Flanagan said.

Dodd’s success on the appropriations bill resulted his seniority and his relationships in the Senate, Flanagan said.

In response to Alpert’s criticisms of Dodd’s acceptance of finance company contributions, Flanagan said, “I would encourage Mr. Alpert to read the newspaper.” Dodd has been “leading front and center” to protect consumers from predatory financial services, she said. The senator is talking about creating a Consumer Protection Agency that would help prevent predatory lending and mortgages, she said.

Flanagan said that Alpert sounds “a whole lot like the other Republicans” when he brings up the scandals that have dogged Dodd recently. The Senate Ethics Committee investigated his mortgage deal with Countrywide and cleared him of any wrongdoing, she said. Talking about mortgage misdealings and AIG bonuses amounts to “parading Republican talking points,” she said.

“The Republicans would like nothing more than for this election to be about issues that have already been dealt with,” Flanagan said.

Alpert later defended his critiques of Dodd as part of a healthy democratic (and Democratic) process. “I am of the belief that Democratic debate and a vigorous primary helps the Democratic Party and the United States. I didn’t give Sen. Dodd a sweetheart mortgage deal” or “a house in Ireland in exchange for a presidential pardon” or “convince him to move his family to Iowa,” or give bonuses to AIG.

“Senator Dodd needs to learn to take responsibility for his actions,” Alpert said.

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: AndersonScooper | October 15, 2009 4:13 PM

This is a debate Connecticut Democrats should be having, AFTER the current legislative session concludes.

What everyone needs to realize is that Dodd's U.S. Senate seat is seriously at risk. If the party decides to back Dodd for another term, we're all going to have to pull together and work our butts off to make sure we don't lose the seat to the Republicans for the next six years. (Connecticut is once again looking to be a primary battleground for national politics.)

Personally, I'd prefer it if Dodd retired in favor of Atty. Gen. Dick Blumenthal. In one fell swoop we could put an end to this madness, as Blumenthal would bury whoever they put against him.

But I understand the loyalty to Dodd, who has been a lion in the U.S. Senate, and now stands as potential heir to the Kennedy legacy of fighting for the interests of the less fortunate in America.

As to Alpert, he lost me when he gleefully went on FoxNews, the very day of his announcement. And Ms. Flanagan is right, Merrick repeats way too many of the GOP's talking points to ever go anywhere in Democratic circles.

Posted by: THREEFIFTHS | October 15, 2009 5:26 PM

Anderson scooper
Why should we surport the two crooked party system
when we should fight for.Proportional Representation.

http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/globalrights/democracy/abcs.html

Posted by: MVD | October 15, 2009 10:05 PM

AndersonScooper says "As to Alpert, he lost me when he gleefully went on FoxNews, the very day of his announcement. And Ms. Flanagan is right, Merrick repeats way too many of the GOP's talking points to ever go anywhere in Democratic circles."
I agree completely!!

Posted by: jon | October 15, 2009 10:41 PM

Someone should ask this guy if he's going to lay off the Fox News talking points and support the Dem after he loses.....

Posted by: terrapin | October 16, 2009 12:49 AM

Enough of the "but he's a Democrat" argument. I'm a Democrat, but am I supposed to not agree with anyone (Republicans included) who points out that Dodd sat on his hands while this banking mess unfolded? Dodd couldn't figure how bad that Countrywide loan looks, and then he talks down to anyone who questions him on it? Dodd had his chance to work on regulating the lending industry, and chose to stand back and let the drunken lending party go on. Too late. We're all tired of Senator Salt-of-the-earth and his riverfront home and second home in Ireland. Enjoy your retirement, Senator. Maybe try looking for a job in this mess of an economy you helped create.

Posted by: ctkeith | October 16, 2009 8:10 AM

The Banking Collapse was Ws Fault not Sen. Dodds and no matter what the Senator did it wouldn't have been avoided.

Every regulator appointed by W was told to keep his hands off and mouth shut and allow the Banksters to do whatever they wanted.When questioned by Congress they lied consistently and proved how incompetent they were.

In our system of government if the Executive Branch is willing to lie and contmptuous of the rule of law and Congress there is nothing but an election that can change the course of our country.

The people elected W and got exactly what they deserved for their stupidity and will be paying for that for a very long time.Blaming Dodd or anyone else but W and the Republicans for what happened between 2000-2008 is pure garbage.

Posted by: YES TO DODD | October 16, 2009 8:54 AM

Terrapin said: "Dodd couldn't figure how bad that Countrywide loan looks"?

How could he when HE DIDN"T DO ANYTHING WRONG. The interest rate he received was well within industry standards at the time. He has been cleared by the ethics committee. ENOUGH. Dodd has delivered time and time again for Connecticut. He didn't cause the economic mess -- we all did. You don't want a Democrat in office? Vote Republican. If you want a Democrat in office then get your a$$ in gear and start supporting Dodd.

Posted by: ctkeith | October 16, 2009 9:51 AM

By the way,

As the comments are showing NOONE takes Merrick what's his name seriously.

His politican instincts show he couldn't win an uncontested race for Justice of the Peace.He's in the same category as Ralph Ferrucci,Boaz ItsHaky and the other clowns who the NHI gives way to much coverage to.

Posted by: Sean | October 16, 2009 11:24 AM

Journalist Thomas MacMillan writes, "A series of scandals and embarrassments have made Dodd a target of would-be senators..." What scandals, Thomas? Really, what scandals? Are you referring to Nationwide's VIP mortgage loan to Dodd? The one that the Ethics Committee found offered Dodd absolutely nothing that wasn't offered to regular Nationwide customers; in fact, those so-called "VIP loans" usually carried terms that were worse than those that could have been obtained just walking off the streets. Is that what you're talking about?

Really, a responsible journalist cannot write that a politician has "a series of scandals" when there are none, when he can't name one. And being absolutely cleared not just of a potential crime, but of any ethical violation whatsoever by the bi-partisan Ethics Committee hardly constitutes either a scandal, let alone a "series of scandals". And what embarrassments are you talking about? Senator Dodd's courage in putting in a provision to deny bonuses to financial firms that are being bailed out by the government? If you bothered to check the facts, it was the Obama administration that insisted on an exemption for AIG, and it was Chris Dodd who was the one to propose eliminating those bonuses in the first place.

You need to revise this article- and fast- to eliminate any mention of "a series of scandals", unless you can actually list a scandal or two. If you can't come up with a single real scandal, then journalistic ethics requires that you take down the article and issue an apology. And what embarrassments? Is running for president something about which the people of this state should be embarrassed? Again, if you can't come up with any, than you need to take it down.

And you need to put in both sides of the story about Mr. Alpert, and not just publish a puff piece to boost his prospects. What do his critics say about him? What is the downside of his positions?

If you want to print puff pieces, simply print Alpert's press releases and tell us that's what you're doing. But smearing Mr. Dodd by accusing him of "a series of scandals" is wrong.

Posted by: ROBN | October 16, 2009 11:46 AM

We should have known we were gonna get sucker punched when the Dems stocked the White House with Goldman Sachs guys.

I'm not so sure they're trying really hard to undo the Bushies piss-poor management...seems more like a cover-up and more status quo.

Posted by: Brian J. Donovan | October 16, 2009 12:38 PM

Credit card reform legislation has a long way to go.

The average interchange fee in the U.S. is seven times the interchange fee set by Visa and MasterCard in countries throughout the rest of the world. Using 2008 figures, if the interchange fee charged by credit card issuers was decreased (via comprehensive credit card reform legislation) from the current 2.10% to 0.60%, the result would be an annual savings of approximately $34.3 billion for U.S. merchants and consumers. Credit card issuers could retain 0.3% as a processing fee, the remaining 0.3% could be a "tax" used to fund a Natural Disaster Trust Fund (NDTF). In 2008, this would have generated $6.86 billion in funding for a NDTF.

The following articles discuss how comprehensive, standardized, simplified, and transparent credit card reform legislation may fund a Natural Disaster Trust Fund.

http://www.csnews.com/csnews/images/pdf/creditcardreform.pdf

http://www.csnews.com/csn/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1004019107

Posted by: digitaldem | October 16, 2009 4:10 PM

Wow - great to see that not ONE of you has done any research on Merrick Alpert, but are so quick to write him off.

First of all; if you were running for office, and were offered air time, would you turn it down?

Second;

You're talking about Merrick Alpert without mentioning ANY of his issues.

Pro-gay marriage, pro-public option, wants us to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq.

How long did it take Dodd to support gay marriage? Oh, that's right - only AFTER the majority of Connecticut voters made it clear that they wanted it.

Senator Dodd also had the chance to be a real "lion"; when he could have taken the position left vacant by Kennedy and stepped up to the plate of healthcare reform. Yet he stayed as the Chairman of the Banking Committee - big surprise there! I guess he was too worried about the money drying up once he couldn't help the banking system bleed this country dry.

I am sick and tired of faux-progressives and pseudo-liberals like the bunch of you who don't do ANY research, and then come on these websites and hide behind your fake names and distorted views. Go out and do some research before you try to label someone as right-wing or conservative.

It's no wonder that former service members run primarily as Republicans - at least they show some respect!

I for one am sick of Dodd, and Blumenthal - who as far as I'm concerned is just another hack looking to advance his career. I've met Blumenthal MANY times and he is NOT someone I want representing my state in one of the highest offices of the land.

Get a clue you guys. Get rid of career politicians before it's too late.

Posted by: angelo | October 16, 2009 5:51 PM

Uh, Digitaldem - Aren't you hiding behind a fake name? If so, are you sick of yourself?

Posted by: AndersonScooper | October 16, 2009 7:45 PM

DigitalDem--

Had Alpert come out of the gate talking issues, and shown Senator Dodd some modicum of respect, -- then he would have received a much different reception than the one he received.

But the fact that he announced in attack mode really hurt Merrick's chances. (if he ever had any as a complete unknown who has never held political office.) Basically they way he conducted himself made him radioactive, at least among those most involved.

Anyway, I will grant you that Alpert's a nice guy, and a man of great achievement. His resume is impressive, he's got a beautiful family, and he could make a fine political leader.

Someday. Just not today, tomorrow, or next year, as the damage has been done. Moral of the story is that you don't announce on FoxNews, and you don't start your campaign tearing down a Democrat of Dodd's stature. (especially when everyone else was already doing that for you.)

Posted by: terrapin | October 18, 2009 3:11 PM

Please, by all means vote to re-elect Dodd. And then shut ... up when nothing changes. The only thing that's really changed in the mortgage business is that now these 100% loans are being funnelled through the FHA program, which means we get to pay for these, too, when they tank.

Posted by: abg | October 18, 2009 6:15 PM

Bosnia is not a "Muslim nation." It has a large Muslim population but is an ethnically and religiously diverse, secular country with many Catholics, Orthodox Christians, and some Jews. So he's wrong about that. And regarding Afghanistan what does he disagree with Dodd about? "The course we're on is a failure... Dodd has supported it." Huh? Dodd has said he supports the Levin approach of building up the Afghan army, not sending more troops.

I agree with AndersonScooper that going on FoxNews like that tells you all you need to know.

Posted by: digitaldem | October 19, 2009 7:30 PM

Okay, I'll start from the beginning...

@Angelo: This is probably the second time I've posted up here, whereas Andersonscooper and CTKeith seem to have made a habit of attacking without doing their research. I'm not up here randomly attacking Dodd or any other candidate, I'm merely defending someone who had the gall to stand up for what he believes in. The idea that a primary is bad for a party is a twisted notion that has no basis in democracy, or the system that the founding fathers set up for this country.

@Andersonscooper: Actually, he did come out of the gate talking about the issues. The issues of campaign donations, lying to the public, and being a self-serving career politician. The good Senator has been positioning himself for a career move for a long time, and makes it painfully aware to the rest of us that he'll do what is necessary to get elected. Do you think he WANTED to announce on Fox? Or is it more likely that the other news stations decided not to cover it? Are you naive enough to believe that he would contact ONE news agency to announce? Please, be a little more realistic about what really happened. Fox covered it because they are obviously anti-Dodd, and want him to have some trouble. The real question you should be asking yourself is why not one other news station picked up the story. However, that has since changed. I've watched Merrick Alpert on Channel 3, heard him on NPR, and many other radio stations since then. How can you fault an unknown for taking any press coverage he can get? He doesn't have Dodd's millions (check out where that comes from, by the way), or name recognition. If you had the guts to run, you wouldn't complain about where the coverage came from.

@ABG: Bosnia is a heavily Muslim nation; do you disagree? It might have a secular government, but the people are most certainly Muslim. And the whole point is that Bosnia, like Afghanistan, has a long history of being invaded and abused. The people DO NOT want us there, and will continue to fight us as long as we are. Watch the news; ever since we started the policy of ask questions first, then shoot, we've seen more and more service members die. We aren't accomplishing anything, and we should not have gone in the first place. There's a lot of talk about building up the army, but after almost 8 years on the ground there's been very little progress, and we see more fighting there now than we did when we first invaded.

Really? Going on Fox news tells you everything you need to know about someone? Congratulations; you've proven yourself to be quite intentionally uninformed. The point of the whole matter is to learn more about the candidates. I know everything I need to know about Senator Dodd, but it'd be nice to see a little more about Merrick Alpert. Andersonscooper said it best himself;

"Anyway, I will grant you that Alpert's a nice guy, and a man of great achievement. His resume is impressive, he's got a beautiful family, and he could make a fine political leader."

I appreciate your openness, Mr. Andersonscooper. And I'll make a concession as well; if Mr. Alpert can't win the primary, and doesn't make it to election, I will HAVE to vote for Dodd, because I don't want a republican in that seat. Dodd was a good democratic vote for decades; but when it came to the punch (Glass-Steagall Act, look it up) he sided with the companies that fund his campaigns, and screwed the entire country. I don't care where he stands anymore, because he obviously does NOT stand with us.

Posted by: matt | November 11, 2009 10:38 AM

I find it stunning that a spokesperson for the State Democratic party is openly attacking a Democratic candidate for office. The blatancy of the machine is perhaps what is most shocking.

As to the substance re the candidates, after having been away from Connecticut for many years and now recently returned, I am going to support Alpert. The suggestion that Alpert is taking right-wing talking points is patently absurd. End the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq? Public financing of campaigns? Yeah, he's a real right-winger.

Dodd Challenger: Dem Turncoat Or Dem Savior?

Comments

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed