$5 A Head, Pizza Included

Sections

Neighborhoods

Features

NHI Newsletter

Legal Notices

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

by Paul Bass | Dec 11, 2009 1:06 pm

(12) Comments | Commenting has been closed | E-mail the Author

Posted to: Politics, State

Ned Lamont set the door price low—and the expectations higher—as he brought his nascent gubernatorial quest to New Haven’s BAR.

Around 100 people paid $5 apiece Thursday night to get into the Crown Street hotspot’s backroom and hear Lamont pitch them on joining the 2010 version of a campaign that sold like hotcakes, or brick-oven pizza, in New Haven four years ago.

The admission price had something to do with the sell, as did Lamont’s remarks to the crowd.

Lamont took New Haven when he ran an insurgent campaign against then-hometown U.S. Sen. Joe Lieberman in a 2006 Democratic primary. He rode a wave of discontent with the Iraq war, among other issues. Lamont got worldwide attention for winning the primary. He lost the general election for senator (when Lieberman ran as an independent) but helped change the national political climate.

This time around, Lamont, who last month launched an exploratory committee to run for the Democratic gubernatorial nomination in 2010, needs to spark the same kind of excitement among the grassroots and left-leaning primary activists. But he has to do it without a war to run against, or a Democratic Party villain. Several other Democratic gubernatorial hopefuls, such as Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz and former Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy (as well as possible candidate Juan Figueroa) agree with Lamont’s universal health care position. They have similar ties to progressive groups that have a disproportionate influence in party primaries.

Lamont does enjoy residual loyalty from liberal voters for taking on Lieberman. So the trick for him this year is to tap into that gratitude while avoiding appearing to be running for the wrong office. As the crowd devoured trays of BAR’s popular brick-oven pies Thursday night, the candidate sought to connect the spirit of his current gubernatorial quest to that last crusade, while also introducing the new toppings.

He climbed the metal stairs at the back of the room to address the crowd.

“A few years ago it was about the war,” he said of the 2006 Senate campaign. He added that even that campaign was about more than the war, too. It was “about a country that was kicking the can down the road when it came to the big decisions” on energy policy, job creation, and health care. He called in that campaign for more investment in alternative energy sources and a greater state focus on job creation.

Connecticut’s government in 2009/2010 has been punting on those same big decisions the way the Bush administration did when Lamont ran for Senate, he argued.

“We’re still not doing it,” he said. “We spend a lot of money” in “stupid” ways. For instance, the state prison population has grown fourfold since the 1980s, he said. The state is spending more on jails than higher education. Meanwhile, job creation has remained flat since 1991, the state an “economic dead zone.”

Better schools will help revive the economy, he argued. He called a “shout-out” to New Haven Mayor John DeStefano, who made an appearance Thursday night at BAR (pictured), and who ran for governor four years ago. (DeStefano’s running New Haven instead this time around.) As he did during his first speech as an “exploratory” governor candidate, Lamont praised DeStefano’s new school-reform plan as a model for the rest of the state.

A $375 Ceiling

So far Lamont has also stood out from his opponents in an unwelcome way: They’ve made an issue of his decision not to declare yet whether he’ll make use of the state’s voluntary public-financing system, an idea he has always backed in concept. Opponents argue that Lamont’s personal wealth gives him an unfair advantage.

A wealthy businessman, Lamont bankrolled much of his last campaign with $16 million of his own money. He said he plans to announce later whether he’ll participate in the public-financing system instead this time. In any case, as in in his Senate race, he’s refusing contributions from state contractors, lobbyists, and political action committees, he said.

In a series of public events across the state this week, including BAR, he laid the groundwork to participate in the public system if he so chooses. That means limiting the size of donations. When candidates are seeking to meet thresholds to qualify for matching public money, they have to raise contributions of no larger than $375.

(That’s if they’re running “exploratory” campaigns. The limit drops to $100 for officially declared candidates. A New Haven candidate for a different statewide office, Gerry Garcia, Thursday called on candidates to eschew the “exploratory” label in order to run more honest campaigns; click here for Mary O’Leary’s report on that in the Register.)

So in addition to low-admission public sessions like the $5 BAR event, Lamont has been setting a $375 ceiling on contributions at his smaller get-togethers, which are targeted to larger donors. He has one such event scheduled Sunday in New Haven at the home of Yale professor Douglas Rae, cosponsored by longtime Democratic fundraiser Carl Feen (pictured with DeStefano above).

The price was set low at venues like BAR also in recognition of hard economic times, claimed Jared Kupiec, Lamont’s 26-year-old campaign manager (at right in photo). Kupiec is leaving his job Jan. 1 as clerk of the state legislature’s Government, Administration and Elections Committee to work full-time on the Lamont campaign.

The biggest point of these early events is to get Lamont’s message out, and get people excited, not to raise the maximum amount of money, Kupiec said. “People need to be a part of the process.”

Comments

posted by: The Count on December 11, 2009 2:59pm

It’s going to be a long campaign…

posted by: brickbat on December 11, 2009 4:45pm

I voted for Ned Lamont for U.S. Senate because he was the only anti-war alternative. But what qualifies him to be Governor? What does he know about running a government? Has he served in any state level capacity?

It’s a ridiculous candidacy predicated on the idea that someone deserves to be Governor because he’s got enough money to run (by the way this is the same reason Linda McMahon thinks she can be a US Senator. Unlike Lamont’s run against Lieberman there is no political-philosophy reason to vote for her against any of the other R candidates).

Malloy, Marconi, Amann, Bysiewicz, LeBeau…all are more qualified than Ned. Sorry.

posted by: FIX THE SCHOOLS on December 11, 2009 4:57pm

The federal momentum around ed. reform has produced a set of potential gubernatorial candidates from both main parties, who universally suppport an ambitious effort to close the achievement gap.

Among the current list of wannabe govs, (Bysciwiecz, Amman, Fedele, McKinney, Cafero, Malloy, Lamont) most, with the exception of Malloy and Bysciwiecz have come out with strong proposals (or at least ideas) to turn our state’s urban education policy around. Malloy and Bysciwiecz say they “want” to close the achievement gap but have yet to put forth any strong proposals that might offend the purveyors of failure, the CEA and the AFT.

Lamont understands the problems and hopefully will propose strong legislative and policy changes that will get CT. out of the urban education basement. We will certainly be looking for these candidates to be very specific about their intentions and how they plan to move CT. from its shameful position of 50th out of 50 states.

With respect to education, Rell has been an utter disappointment and is apparently content to retire without having done anything substantial in this area.

posted by: cba on December 11, 2009 5:18pm

It is unique to politics that losers get second,third,fourth and fifth bites opportunities to run. There should be a limitation on how much air pollution one individual can force on the citizens of this State. Al Gore should in addition to the carbon footprint proposal initiate a
hot air footprint and these perennial gas bags should be taxed

posted by: Walt on December 11, 2009 6:47pm

CBA

Don’t expect your tax proposal to be submitted/.

It would cost Al Gore too much money

posted by: THREEFIFTHS on December 11, 2009 10:05pm

Ned Lamont and Tom Foley are the same. One is a box spring and the other is the mattress. Both are corporatist. Both are from the same cloth like
Bloomberg of New York. Money Rules!!!

posted by: matt on December 12, 2009 8:51am

It is unique to politics that losers get second,third,fourth and fifth bites opportunities to run.

Is this a joke? Maybe you haven’t heard of the banking industry?

posted by: mikepc45 on December 12, 2009 6:30pm

Rell was an excellent Guv because she was like a good doctor, who “first does no harm.” Dems are like drug addicts who cannot stop shooting up with tax money instead of drugs. They need to go to rehab. Working people pay taxes. Rich people dodge taxes and poor people don’t pay them.

posted by: terrapin on December 13, 2009 6:06pm

I worked on the Lamont Senate campaign and think that Ned’s an honest and honorable guy, but I don’t understand why he’s launching this campaign. How about (as in 2006) being the one viable candidate willing to take on the increasingly unpopular sitting Democrat Senator who’s up for reelection? I’ll come out to work on THAT campaign!

posted by: streever on December 14, 2009 3:54pm

Mike,
what an ignorant comment. I wish sometimes that the NHI screened comments for factual inaccuracy.

Actually the tax base was examined in CT and found that the poor and working classes pay the highest percentage. The rich do indeed dodge them.

As for Rell, under her stewardship the state spent more money and took in less taxes, and focused on taxing small business & the lower classes.

This is why we are in this bind.

I’d rather a “tax and spend” democrat with a progressive tax than a “spend and spend” republican who makes promises to not tax anyone, and leaves the office in financial ruin.

What’s “reality” Mike, is that services (roads, plowed roads, police) require money. Building a stable state (preventing crime by having good education & job programs and social welfare programs, all of which have been proven to save money by reducing crime & welfare needs later on when applied to children) requires money.

Operating a government requires money, and we need politicians who are willing to tax. We especially need a progressive tax.

posted by: Pedro d'Ibazo on December 15, 2009 2:16am

Lamont, the Greenwich multi-millionaire, called the Lehman collapse last year “Our Katrina”. What a disgraceful and insensitive statement that betrayed what an elitist phony he is. How anyone could compare billionaires losing millions to the suffering and deaths of hundreds of poor people, and tens of thousands more who lost their homes and possessions, is just unforgivable. And Lamont has changed political positions so many times in his life that it is impossible to know what he really believes. I could never support him.

posted by: abg on December 31, 2009 6:41pm

Barbara Harshav (pictured at top with Lamont) should be Ned’s running mate - go Barbara!

New Haven Independent

New Haven Independent Login Form