New Haven Independent

Lamont Throws His Hat Near The Ring

by Paul Bass | November 4, 2009 12:00 PM | Permalink | Comments (19)

(Updated) Ned Lamont, who took on U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman three years ago, has formed an “exploratory committee” for a challenge to Gov. M. Jodi Rell in 2010. He plans to talk about Moody’s, not Moody.

Lamont made the announcement Wednesday, a day after the polls closed on the 2009 municipal elections and attention officially turns to the already crowded 2010 campaigns for governor and U.S. Senate.

Republican Gov. Rell is expected to announce this month whether she’ll run for reelection.

Lamont plans to strike his nascent campaign themes at an annual address he delivers Thursday at Central Connecticut State University, where he teaches. He plans to talk not about controversial top Rell aide Lisa Moody, but about a new report about state finances from Moody’s Investor Services.

The strategy, and the issues focus, promise to differ markedly from Lamont’s Senate campaign in 2006. (He’s pictured at the top of this story at a debate during that race.)

That year, Lamont ran as the “true” Democrat against conservative Democratic incumbent Joe Lieberman. Lamont was championed by anti-Iraq war, pro-public financing and pro-universal health care Democrats who have a disproportionate influence in primaries. And he indeed won the primary. (He lost the general election to Lieberman, who ran as a Republican White House-backed “independent.”)

This time, in the 2010 governor’s race, Lamont joins five other Democrats already “exploring” or actively mounting races. (Read about them here and here.) They include Secretary of The State Susan Bysiewicz and Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, who have strong party bonafides and ties to liberal constituencies (especially Bysiewicz). Because of Lamont’s personal wealth, he didn’t need to announce as early as the others in order to raise money. But his move Wednesday doesn’t come as a surprise: He’s been laying the groundwork for a run for months.

Malloy issued a statement within an hour of Lamont’s decision becoming public Wednesday.

“As I travel around the state exploring a run for governor, I’m getting an overwhelmingly positive response to the vision I offer and the track record I have
to back it up,” Malloy said in a release. “I’ve done what Gov. Rell has failed to do: I’ve created jobs, provided more health care, made my communities and neighborhoods safer, and helped lead the way on important issues like green technology and transportation. I’ve known Ned for many years and consider him a friend. I welcome him into the discussion about Connecticut’s future.”

State GOP Chairman Chris Healy said Wednesday that he’s not worried about a Lamont candidacy. “I’m not sold on him as a viable candidate,” Healy said. He said Lamont still has to demonstrate he knows what’s going on in this state.

Indeed, Lamont’s campaign faces different challenges this time from when the candidate was up against Lieberman. As a candidate for state government office, he doesn’t have a war to run against in this race. Some of his Democratic primary opponents this time share his support for health care reform and publicly financed campaigns. (Lamont said he plans again to refuse donations in this race from government contractors and political action committees, or PACs, if he runs. He was vague on whether he’d participate in the state’s new public-financing system; the future of the system pending an appeal of a federal court ruling striking it down.)

Lamont does have experience starting and running a business. He plans to talk about that, a lot.

Moody’s Blues

He’s positioning himself as the one successful businessman in the race, “the one guy who has started a business and met a payroll,” in a state that hasn’t created jobs since 1990. The state ranks last (below Michigan) in job creation.

“We don’t have a strategy. We have no idea why we’re losing those jobs and what to do about it,” Lamont said in an interview. “If you look around the rest of the country, some states are falling behind and some aren’t. It’s not because of natural advantages. Raleigh, N.C. could have given up and said, ‘History’s not on our side’ [when textile mills closed]. They created the Research Triangle.”

In his Thursday address and in subsequent public appearances, look for Lamont to talk about a certain “Moody.”

Lamont won’t be talking about Lisa Moody, the controversial top aide who runs the Rell Administration, and gets Jodi Rell in trouble, while the governor pops up at daily photo-ops.

Instead, Lamont wants to discuss Moody’s Investor Services. Specifically, he wants to call attention to an Oct. 26 report the ratings agency issued about Connecticut’s finances, and what that means for the future of the state.

Moody’s downgraded the “outlook” on the state’s general obligation bonds from “stable” to “negative.”

In an interview, Lamont called the Moody’s report a “powerful a warning shot across our bow.”

“It is a warning that our debt will be downgraded if we don’t get our act together,” he said. “A, they’re right. B, it’s a wake-up call. C, it makes our debt more expensive and the cost of government more expensive, especially as we continue to borrow. Borrowing gets to a be a bigger part of our budget,” and it drives up costs rather than other ways of paying bills.

The Moody’s report sharply criticized the governor’s and Democratic-led legislature’s budget decisions this year. It scored the state for closing last year’s budget and “balancing” the new biennial budget (it almost immediately went out of wack within weeks and continues unraveling) through heavy reliance on borrowing and one-time revenues. The state emptied its Budget Reserve Fund. It plans to issue new deficit bonds and securitize an as-yet unidentified $1.3 billion revenue stream. It’s counting on $411 million so far in one-time federal stimulus money and only a temporary increase in income taxes on the highest earners (individuals making $500,000 and households making $1 million). The state’s per capita debt is the highest in the nation, Moody’s noted.

All that spells trouble for future budgets.

Click here to read the Moody’s report, including a section that finds hope in the way Connecticut has bounced back from past downturns.

What would Lamont do differently if elected governor?

He pointed to a report he coauthored earlier this year with former state budget director Bill Cibes. He called it a “blueprint” for where he’d take the state. (Read it here.) He said the numbers are a bit out of date, because the state’s fiscal picture has worsened since February. At the time, he called for:

• At least a $700 million budget reduction, in part through outcome-based budgeting for state services; scrutinizing and reducing the use of outside consultants and vendors; leveraging investments in energy efficiency and renewal energy projects; emphasizing Medicaid home care for seniors who’d otherwise be in nursing homes; and switching non-violent offenders from jails to community programs. Rather than rely on early retirement programs, the plan called for negotiating with unions to cut health costs through prevention, finding cost-savings in government, and planning for “natural attrition.”

• Up to $700 million in new revenues, to avoid passing along cuts to cities and towns. Among the proposals: deposits on plastic water bottles; taxes on Internet sales; a crackdown on personal “use” taxes; a possible (“last resort”) “equitable” income-tax hike to fund property tax reform; taxes on junk food; and requiring out-of-state partners in LLCs, LLPS, and subchapter S corporations to register with the state, with an eye to finding people who are avoiding income taxes.

• Long-term strategic planning, including five-year capital plans; investments in innovation, promising new industries, and transportation and education; and spending now already-allocated bonding money.

Click here to watch excerpts from a speech Lamont made about the Obama administration at the New Haven Lawn Club, at a May gathering of Democrats For America.

Christine Stuart helped report this story.

Share this story

Share |

Comments

Posted by: cedarhillresident | November 4, 2009 12:12 PM

I love it! I looks to me that the Rein of Rell will be coming to an end soon enough! Good luck to all that are running!

Posted by: PrarieDog | November 4, 2009 12:22 PM

Not this guy again... Can we please stick with people who have experience actually doing things in Government.

Posted by: Paul Wessel | November 4, 2009 12:32 PM

Nice scoop.

Posted by: dee | November 4, 2009 12:50 PM

Yes, Prariedog, because the people who "have experience actually doing things in government" have done such a STELLAR job, right? Sheesh.

Good Luck, Ned. You're a good man.

Posted by: thebpp | November 4, 2009 1:00 PM

I like Ned but I'm for whoever can win. When Ned shows us some polling that shows he can be competitive in a general election against Rell, then I'll seriously consider another ride on the Lamont train. Right now the only candidate passing around a poll showing a competitive race is Bysiewicz, who has an internal poll showing a 5 point race against Rell. -If Rell even runs...

Posted by: J. Hart | November 4, 2009 1:17 PM

PrarieDog, I find that the best public servants often come from other fields. They bring fresh insight and haven't been immersed in the culture of "Politics."

I agree that experience is necessary, but management skills, the ability provide thoughtful analysis of issues, the ability to organize, lead, and problem solve are the key skills. Knowledge of finance, law, planning, infrastructure, etc.; all these things help as well but are not necessary. Though my field is not politics, I'll take intelligence and work ethic over experience any day.

But I would like to see a little more substance out of the Lamont campaign this time around as well. "I'm not Lieberman" got him through the primaries, but it kind of petered out from there.

Posted by: Time for change | November 4, 2009 1:26 PM

...State GOP Chairman Chris Healey said Wednesday that he's not worried about a Lamont candidacy. "I'm not sold on him as a viable candidate," Healy said. He said Lamont still has to demonstrate he knows what's going on in this state.

Really what has Gov. Rell done? We are better off without her. How's that for a reducing state deficit. Won't even sign a state budget...great leadership.

Posted by: Bill | November 4, 2009 1:29 PM

"We don�t have a strategy. We have no idea why we�re losing those jobs and what to do about it,"

We must mean democrats because the rest of us know why we're losing the jobs. High taxes on businesses, high income taxes fueling a higher cost of living requiring higher business costs for employees. The democrats hate business and are intent on driving them out of Connecticut.

Posted by: Thetruth | November 4, 2009 1:59 PM

Well the truth is the budget was a one sided budget by the democrats and now somehow it is everyone elses problem. The democrats again are being irresponsible in not passing nor a djusting the budget. I don't think we need another far left liberal in politics.

Posted by: dee | November 4, 2009 2:06 PM

J.Hart, the problem wasn't that Lamont's campaign didn't have substance--it had PLENTY of it, as did he. The problem was that the media, both local and national, chose to only cover him as the "not Lieberman" candidate, and only covered the POLITICS rather than the policy. And local media was especially bad. Mark Davis treated Lamont like he was a criminal for running. I remember attending a policy speech he gave at Southern during the campaign. Melissa Bailey was virtually the only reporter there.

Besides, this story alone already has more "substance" to it than anything Rell has said in the last three years.

Posted by: John H. | November 4, 2009 2:17 PM

First McMahon, now Lamont. Let's see how many other people can assume they are entitled to an office just because they have money.

Frankly, I'd take Jodi or Dan over Ned, Susan, or Jim. At least their job actually puts them in charge of something.

Posted by: 1Nutmegger | November 4, 2009 2:18 PM

I agree, Lamont just sort of slung mud at Lieberman to the delight of about 20% of Connecticut's furthest left...and he won 35% of the vote. He got trounced. Truth be told, he had the momentum in that election, and he lost. There's no good old Joe to throw mud at in this primary.

While business experience is great, it has to have some backing in government. What "business experience" means in this case, is a TON of money to throw at the election. While most other candidates are probably going to go for public funding, Lamont doesn't have to worry about that. He can just throw another $16 million at this race. Fantastic.

Posted by: PrarieDog | November 4, 2009 2:23 PM

I understand what each of you is saying - but this is for the Chief Executive of our state, while we are facing close to billion dollar deficits. We shouldn't consider the job for Governor as entry-level. Sure, he's shown some skill sets, but prove them in some Government form (which is not the same as business) prior to buying your way in.

I have no doubt Lamont would be a good public servant, but I cannot vote for him over others who have proven governmental experience. It irritates me (and should everyone) that we will let money talk over what really matters - ability.

Posted by: Ken Krayeske | November 4, 2009 2:31 PM

On February 19, 2009, Ned Lamont told the New Britain Herald he was not considering a run for senate or governor.

As reported in CT Local Politics.

Logic dictates that he absolutely was considering the run then, just hedging his bets.

Ned is a lightweight.

Posted by: AndersonScooper | November 4, 2009 4:06 PM

Ned Lamont defeated Joe Lieberman in a historic primary, and except for the CT GOP torpedoing their own candidate in favor of Lieberman, we'd be talking Senator Lamont right now. (and polls last fall showed Lamont beating Lieberman in a re-match.) So I don't know why Ken wants to dismiss Ned as a "lightweight".

The bottom line is that Ned would make a terrific governor, and an excellent change from 20 years of Republicans.

My only hope is that Dems somehow settle this at convention, and don't wage a prolonged and nasty primary battle.

It's wishful thinking, but it'd be better for our chances if the top three candiidates, Lamont, Malloy, and Bysiewicz would all commit to dropping out if they don't want the endorsement.

At the very least they should pledge not to go negative, as Malloy did last cycle. (remember the DeStefano in dress ad?).

Posted by: abg | November 4, 2009 4:19 PM

at the end: it's 'Democracy for America,' not 'Democrats for America'

Posted by: thebpp | November 4, 2009 5:59 PM

Democratic primaries are not necessarily a bad thing. Primaries can really help to build the party for the general election through voter to voter contacts... While it drove me crazy that Hillary Clinton refused to drop out until the very end, it allowed the two democratic campaigns to build an effective nationwide ground game for the general election and the staff on those campaigns really became veterans of their respective turfs by the time the primaries were over.

Posted by: Reality Check | November 4, 2009 6:04 PM

Andersonscooper:
The state's Democratic Convention favors certain campaigns; primary elections favor other ones. I, for one, do not believe for a second that the 2006 primary was what doomed Destefano's candidacy, even though there was plenty of mud-slinging in that race. The simple fact of the matter is that CT Democrats "torpedoed" their party and everyone in our state by voting for Jodi Rell in droves, though even that didn't really win her the election (nor did the Republican vote win the election for Lieberman). The really big voting bloc for both elections came in the form of independents, who mostly voted for Lieberman and Rell (though a good number of people--on the order of 50,000--who voted for Ned Lamont also voted for Rell).

At the end of the day, the determining factor in this election is going to be whether or not the Democratic candidate is capable of appealing to voters unaffiliated with either party more than the Republican candidate (who I'm assuming is Rell, for the sake of argument--this becomes a different ball game when she isn't running). Ditto for the 2006 senatorial election, and probably the 2010 and 2012 elections as well. Ned Lamont was incapable of getting the majority of independents to prefer him to Joe Lieberman--end of discussion. If there is a reason to believe that he would fair better against Rell, the he might have a chance, but at the moment I can't think of one, and personally consider him unlikely to win against her.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen | November 4, 2009 11:31 PM

Mr. Lamont will be doing CT a favor if he would take on Joseph Lieberman (the Republican in Independent garb), who is the worst kind of turncoat. Lieberman claimed he was going to caucus with Democrats, but that was only because he wanted to maintain his seniority in the senate. Of course, we have seen his TRUE colors over the pass several months. What I cannot understand is why doesn't he just admit to being a traitor and declare himself a Republican.

Ned Lamont would be a good and smart Democratic reprenstative for CT in the Senate, and hopefully either Dan Malloy or Susan Bysiewicz will unseat the caring pretender we now have in the governor's mansion. So Ned, please, we need you in Washington not in Hartford.

Lamont Throws His Hat Near The Ring

Comments

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed