Sections

Neighborhoods

Features

Follow Us

NHI Newsletter

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Malloy Plays To Base, Lamont To Middle

by Paul Bass | Aug 3, 2010 3:00 pm

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

Posted to: Politics, State

Paul Bass Photo One said he’s ready to raise taxes on the rich. One said he’s not. One said he’s ready to launch universal pre-kindergarten public education in Connecticut and spend more state money to promote tourism. One said he’s not.

Welcome to the first face-to-face televised debate in a month between Democratic gubernatorial candidates Dan Malloy and Ned Lamont—and the last debate before the Aug. 10 primary.

The high-stakes debate was taped in the studios of WFSB TV Tuesday afternoon. It will air on Channel 3 and on WNPR Tuesday night at 8.

The debate offered a 60-minute respite from the relentless slash-and-burn TV ads that have defined the race in its closing days. Well, 55 minutes. The two focused on the issues.

In the process, it seemed as though they were running in two different campaigns: Malloy made a traditional primary-strategy pitch to the party’s base, including his vow to raise taxes on the people in the top 1 percent of state wage-earners, and to commit money for universal pre-K and increase tourism spending.

“I think the middle class is bearing an unfair burden,” Malloy declared in reference to making the income tax more progressive. “I want to build a system that is fairer to the middle class.”

As has been the case on the campaign trail, Lamont offered an approach usually adopted during a general election campaign: avoiding offending any constituencies, but aiming at the ideological middle and holding back from committing himself to too many new-spending promises. He promised to keep education spending flat, for instance, but not to increase it. He suggested cutting health and pension benefits for state workers hired in the future (but not current workers).

“Dan, we just can’t afford all your promises,” Lamont told Malloy at one point. “I’m inheriting a $3.5 billion budget deficit. So I can’t make any promises unless I tell you how I’m going to pay for them.”

On a broader level, Lamont pressed his pitch that the state needs a businessman who has created jobs in the private sector as its governor; and Malloy pressed the idea that the state needs someone experienced in running government, that government is fundamentally different from private business.

Disarmed of the personal attacks both have been launching like machine-gun fire, the two candidates were also revealed to be in agreement on some major questions: Neither would look to expand casino gambling beyond Indian reservations. Both are open to electronic tolls but only under the condition that the revenues are dedicated to transportation spending. Both would consider spinning off management of Bradley Airport to an independent authority. Both support reducing the state’s reliance on the property tax.

Following is a blow-by-blow summary (with some running commentary in brackets) of the event and the post-spin aftermath in the WFSB studios, timed to when it was taped earlier Tuesday.

12:54 p.m. The moderators for the debate, Dennis House of WFSB (at right in photo) and WNPR’s John Dankosky (at left), take their seats. About a dozen reporters are crammed into the studio, mellower scene than four years ago when the national and international press corps crammed three separate rooms in Channel 30’s studios for the Lamont-Lieberman debates.

12:56 p.m. “Hey, Ned, how are you?” Malloy asks Lamont as they take their positions at two lecterns for the mic check. Big smile on Malloy’s face; Lamont’s manner is more cautious.

1 p.m. We’re off. House welcomes viewers to “the most important Democratic gubernatorial primary in decades.” Dankosky explains the rules: Each candidate gets two minutes to respond to questions, plus one minute for a rebuttal. Some of the questions came from viewers and listeners.

1:02 p.m. First question is about those negative ads. Malloy portrayed Lamont as “racist,” House says. Do you consider him unfit to serve?

Malloy: Claims he never said Lamont was racist. Lamont says he wants to serve as the “state’s CEO.”

Then Malloy repeats the charge that as a CEO at his cable company, Lamont cut workforce by 70 percent and had a “fully settled” but “sealed” discrimination lawsuit. So much for issues and civility! (Lamont has repeatedly responded that he didn’t cut jobs; he spun off part of the company and worked to ensure the employees kept working.)

“In public service, records are open,” Malloy says about the lawsuit, which is sealed.

Malloy has during the campaign portrayed a governor job as different from a private-sector job. Lamont’s argument has been that a businessman is needed to run government; Malloy says government is different. This bit here is a bit of a back door to that argument.

Lamont: “No, not at all” does he consider Malloy unfit to serve. (Malloy never directly answered that question.) “I’d like to set the record straight.” He discusses how he built up a business over 25 years, “taking on the cable industry, beating them at their own game.”

[So far, no real issues. But we’re only five minutes in. Maybe this will get the attacks out of the way.]

“The heck with the TV advertising!” Lamont declares.

Malloy response: “There are some very wealthy people running for office in Connecticut.” He lumps Lamont in with other self-financing candidates, Republicans Linda McMahon and Tom Foley. He notes that Lamont will outspend him by millions. He notes that Lamont refused to debate him for a month until now.

[OK. Debate’s started. Can we get there?]

Lamont response: “I don’t think we need a debate here on live TV about debates. And I don’t think we need to vilify anybody.” [Guess he missed his last series of commercials and flyers.]

Vote-losing Budget Fixes Avoided

1:08 p.m. Budget question. Deficit’s over $3 billion. How specifically will you balance the budget without raising taxes or fees?

Lamont: He’s looking at “best practices” around the country. Getting Medicaid spending down to national standards would alone save hundreds of millions of dollars, he says. More home care, more nursing care. Better tracking of fraud. And “we’re not going to be able to have it the way it is now” with state employees: future benefits won’t be as generous. And current employees’ benefits? He’d like the state to “price shop” for a better deal.

Malloy: First, he’ll reduce the size of the appointed non-civil service portion of government by 15 percent. Will ask legislative and judicial wings to do the same. Will “modify health care” to “bring down costs”; “constantly bid on items on a daily basis.” Will also “reach out to labor unions. I know you’ve been carrying around a list of suggested savings for a couple of years. You’re the first people I want to talk to. You’re the smartest people in the state of Connecticut. Please come and sit around the table.” State employees shouldn’t drive state cars to and from work. Downsize 200 state agencies by one-third. “Do not eliminate the services provided. Do not eliminate the people who are doing the day to day work.” Instead cut the “choking” administrative layers.

[If Malloy wins—will he really give up patronage appointments? I didn’t see any fingers crossed behind the back. No blood oaths either…]

Lamont: “How about 20 percent of the cronies?” We need more “fundamental” cuts than “nickel-and-diming,” Lamont says. They’ve both managed to give a few specifics to address a small fraction of the deficit without alienating primary constituencies, beyond Lamont’s vow to rein in future pensions and health benefits.

Malloy: “The difference between Ned and I is I’ve actually worked in government… So many of the things Ned is talking about I’ve already done,” as mayor of Stamford for 14 years. Malloy promises to pursue “money that has our name on it in Washington,” unlike the Rell administration.

Who Loves Taxpayers More?

1:15 p.m. Leslie Brisman, a Yale professor who lives in New Haven’s Westville neighborhood, submitted a question. On his behalf, House asks if the candidates would be willing to raise income taxes on people earning in the top 1 percent.

Malloy: [I think he’s saying yes.] He says he supports the idea of “making the income tax more progressive,” but will also make sure to “benchmark” tax rates to neighboring states. But ultimately “growing jobs” will do more than “taxing” or “spending” “our way out of this.” He lists companies that came to Stamford “as a result of our streamlining government.” (He doesn’t mention the city’s proximity to New York City.)

Lamont: [I think he’s not saying yes or no, but suggesting he’s less ready to say yes.] He says people are fed up about their taxes and about “shenanigans” in state spending. “I’ve got to do a better job of convincing them that their money going to Hartford is better spent… We have a lot to do before we talk about taxes.” Sounds like Democratic gubernatorial Bruce Morrison saying in 1990 that he’d put an income tax before a referendum before deciding whether to institute it.

Malloy: “That question was about whether you would support more progressive taxation. And I didn’t hear an answer ... I think the middle class is bearing an unfair burden ... I want to build a system that is fairer to the middle class.” [Sly—he’s trying to position himself as the anti-taxer by appealing to overburdened middle-class taxpayer, while Lamont was trying to present himself as the anti-taxer by being more hesitant to support higher taxes on the wealthy.]

Lamont: “The most regressive tax that each and every one of you pay is the property tax ... If you’re a senior on a fixed income, it goes up relentlessly ... I will do everything I can to reduce our over-reliance on the property tax.”

1:20 p.m. Question: Can we hit up drivers “clogging” our highways for more revenue?

Lamont: Before “talking about new revenues,” “stop robbing the transportation fund.” As in the last question, Lamont is seeking to avoid making promises that can haunt him later. It’s a general election strategy as opposed to a primary strategy aimed at core Democratric constituencies. Malloy is running the latter.

“We have an over-reliance on the gasoline tax,” Lamont says. He says “at some point in the future” he might look at new tolls, if they’re committed to transportation spending.

Malloy: He’s against tolls in Connecticut unless money is invested directly in highways and mass transit. Then he’d be open to them. “Tolls are a bad way to raise general revenue,” but a good way to invest in transportation. They agree, I think.

Malloy turns to Gov. Rell as the bogeyman (or bogeywoman), not Lamont, criticizing the state for getting “blown out of the water” on federal transportation TIGER grants.

Lamont: “A hundred years ago you could take a train to New York to New Haven in less time than it takes today.” He calls that proof we don’t invest in trains enough. [I’m not sure, but I’m pretty sure that there were fewer train stops along the way in those days.]

As Lamont talks, Malloy turns 90 degrees and stares intensely at him. When Malloy speaks, Lamont takes a sip of water, stares ahead at the anchors, glares into space, turns briefly toward Malloy, then back ahead…

Oh Yeah. Cities

1:27 p.m. A cities question! (Remember us?) “What can you say to suburban voters to convince them that it’s important to invest in urban areas?” And how will you revive cities?

Malloy: “We are a very small state. We have to get away from the politics of division.” He stresses that he’ll be everyone’s governor—including the farmers! He’s a city mayor, so he needs to reassure the state’s anti-urban suburban majority that’s been electing Republican governors for 24 years. [This question hasn’t helped urban Democratic candidates associated with cities (and let’s admit it, nonwhite people), like 2006 Democratic nominee John DeStefano. Malloy stays on the “unite” theme, issues like improving education, lowering electric rates, boosting transportation, for everyone.]

Lamont: As a bonafide suburban town guy, he embraces the urban. (He held a press conference on it at New Haven’s Science Park.) Now he boasts of how major cities’ mayors support him. “Connecticut won’t be great again until our cities are great.” He notes that 20 percent of our open space has been “eaten up” over past decades while no new jobs are created.

Lamont’s making the pitch that suburbs want open spaces so job creation and development can take place in cities, through brownfield remediation in cities, for instance. Protecting cities in turn helps protect the “culture and lifestyle” of suburbs, he says.

Malloy: I have city cred too! Touts his own proposed for a $5 million revolving fund to remediate brownfields.

Like DeStefano and 1994 and 2002 Democratic nominee Bill Curry, Malloy makes the case that property tax reliance hurts cities and suburbs alike.

Lamont: “In all of our cities, we’re losing jobs.” [Poke!]

1:32 p.m. Question: Is it possible to be “too business friendly and sell out” the state on the environment, for instance?

Lamont: We’re going to be “smart” about this. “We don’t sell out our core principles.” Speed up the permitting process for small businesses to expand, sure; “I’m not talking about dumbing down any standards.”

Malloy’s no longer giving Lamont the laser stares as he speaks.

Malloy: “I don’t think that’s possible [to be too “business-friendly] in Connecticut. We have a long way to go.” The state’s so business-“unfriendly,” he says. Example: High energy costs.

Like Lamont, he emphasizes that issue—as an example of helping the environment (lowering consumption, weatherization) while lowering business costs at the same time. He talks about “going after big business”—to bring jobs here, not to, say, stop polluting. In a recession, the latter issue doesn’t register.

Enough Slot Machines

1:39 p.m. Question: If Massachusetts legalizes casino gambling, will you try to expand it here beyond the tribes?

Malloy: “I grew up in America, there was one place to gamble. Nevada.” He’s not sure that was bad. But the $400 million a year from the Indian tribes’ casinos have become important to us; so has the tourism. “We have some skin in that game.” So he’s not really answering beyond saying he wants to “sit down” with the tribes to help them adjust if Massachusetts does legalize it. [Is it my imagination, or are candidates in all the campaigns this year making a lot of promises about “sitting down” with people? Time to invest in chairs!]

Now he’s answering the question: “We have a pretty good deal with gambling. I’m a little bit frightened” about expanding it.

Lamont agrees. “We don’t need more gambling.” We need to boost tourism.

Malloy: So why didn’t Ned “join [running mate] Nancy [Wyman] and I” in committing to spend more state money on tourism?

Once again: Malloy runs a primary strategy, making promises to spend money; Lamont runs a general election strategy, avoiding promising to spend more money than he knows he can if elected.

Lamont: “Dan, we just can’t afford all your promises… I’m inheriting a $3.5 billion budget deficit. So I can’t make any promises unless I tell you how I’m going to pay for them.”

School Reform

1:45 p.m. How will you close the country’s largest achievement gap (which Connecticut has)?

Lamont: He’ll “hold the education budgets harmless” rather than new money. Mentions he was a “volunteer teacher in an urban high school” and now teaches at a state university. Will push “real reforms,” he says. “I love the model you see going on in New Haven right now. You know why? Because it includes the teachers at the table, along with the parents.” He likes seeing work rules relaxed—longer school day, longer school year—with teachers helping to craft those changes.

Malloy speaks about growing up with learning disabilities, overcoming them; and about bringing universal pre-K to Stamford. It worked there, he said. So he likes that idea for the state. “Benchmark” how much school systems spend on administration, how much on the classroom, he says.

1:50 p.m. Question: How to improve Bradley Airport?

Malloy: Make it an independent authority. Don’t make decisions—like whether we can offer an airline a new hub—through the legislature. We need to act faster. “We need to spin this thing off… Operating an airport is different than operating a DOT [Department of Transportation].”

Lamont: [I think he’s agreeing with that idea.] Now he’s saying that a governor needs to “understand” the issue [suggesting, perhaps, that Malloy doesn’t?]. This debate has remained clean and “civil,” after all, if that’s how direct a criticism goes.

So Lamont now says as he begins closing remarks. Now comes a straw man argument: Those unnamed “people in Hartford” are “dead wrong” saying this recession’s no big deal and we’ll soon be “back to normal.” [I’d love to see the quotations he’s referring to!] He understands this economic downturn is a big deal. Jobs are the number-one issue, Lamont says. Next up, Malloy gets the last word…

They’re both sounding like commercials again with these closing statements. Those unnamed head-in-the-sand Hartford insiders are invoked again: “For too long we have sent people to Hartford who have not told us the honest truth,” Malloy says. But give them and the moderators credit—this has been an issues-oriented debate.

Malloy gets in one last dig at Lamont for losing jobs. Malloy fails to mention that Lamont sold part of his company, which is why some jobs were “lost”:

“He’s spent a lot of time running businesses and doing that sort of thing. ... He downsized his company by 70 percent,” says Malloy. “I want to build up Connecticut.”

2:02 p.m. The candidates huddle with advisers outside the studio, preparing to spin the press. (Pictured, from left: Annie Lamont; Lamont press spokeswoman Justine Sessions, campaign manager Joe Abbey, Lamont.)

2:05 p.m. Everyone’s ushered back in the studio for the official spin, and the conversation devolves back to the tone of the commercials. Malloy resumes attacking Lamont’s record as a private-sector CEO. Lamont resumes insisting that he has no choice but to blanket the state with attack ads because Malloy did it first, and complaining that reporters aren’t covering the story the way he thinks we should.

But for most of an hour, the candidates gave the state a clear look at where they stand on some major issues.

Click on the play arrow to watch snippets of the candidates addressing their supporters on the way into the studio before the debate.

Click here for a pre-game report.

 

Share this story with others.

Share |

Post a Comment

Commenting has closed for this entry

Comments

posted by: Joe on August 3, 2010  4:55pm

Deja vu 2006: Lamont says nothing beyond his canned lines. Please, Ned, go back home and count your millions (much of which came to you as an inheritance). Malloy has charisma. And he’s absolutely right that government is not a business. To all the liberals who support Lamont, I’m sure you feel differently when GOP candidates equate government to business.

posted by: Anaximander on August 3, 2010  4:58pm

Good G-d!

And to think you were once a journalist.

(Or is it that you want Malloy to get elected so you’ll have Ed Marcus to kick around again?)

posted by: FIX THE SCHOOLS on August 3, 2010  5:25pm

Both dems are WEAK on education.

Paul, There are plenty of clueless quotes from legislators like Chris Donovan on the not-so-serious fiscal situation.  Lamont is right on this lack of recognition among legislators about our situation.

http://www.ctpost.com/default/article/New-state-budget-already-in-trouble-155427.php

posted by: spacek on August 3, 2010  7:52pm

Let Paul do it. Be governor, I mean.

posted by: CTBullMoose on August 3, 2010  9:28pm

Maybe the fact that we’ve refused to look at government as a business (wait, businesses provide services and goods and government provides services and goods…...OMG!?) is part of the reason that we’re in this mess.

And Dan’s lines were what?  Extemporaneous?  If I hear him say, “Now let me be clear” one more time, I may have an aneurism.

posted by: Jeffery on August 3, 2010  9:29pm

Sorry,
Have to agree with Anaximander.
The slip is showing.

posted by: Bill Saunders on August 3, 2010  10:28pm

From the top two photos I just can’t tell who to vote for—Howdy Dowdy or Steven Colbert.  Is John Stewart running as an independent????

posted by: Townie on August 4, 2010  7:02am

The job of government is to provide a protection of liberty and to ensure and maintain the welfare and protection of the citizenry. Government is not a business, it does not operate for profit and it does not (or should not) provide superfluous services. The government is merely an administrative body which effectuates the will of the people. Both Lamont and Malloy failed to engage in a debate of issues and instead focused on rhetoric and talking points. The whole affair was more like an hour long campaign advert.
I think Malloy did touch on the issue of government size/cost. But, he didn’t go far enough. Connecticut’s government is way too big for the size of the state. We should have a unicameral legislature, and many of the agencies that operate now should be severely downsized or eliminated, i.e. CHRO, DCF.
But, given the field of candidates, both Republican and Democrat, I’m not optimistic for Connecticut. This State has lost all sense of itself a long time ago and is now controlled by the monied interests in Hartford, Stamford and Greenwich. Sadly it will continue to be nothing more than a tourist destination and retirement home for New Yorkers.

posted by: RR on August 4, 2010  8:42am

I received several unwanted calls to my cellphone from Dan Malloy. I couldn’t believe it! I was really angry, since I never give out my #, and since I have had no dealings with him. Is it because I donated to the DNC for the presidential campaign? If so, guess who will never donate again? And guess who is NOT voting for Dan Malloy… All the politicians’ junk mail and tv ads are bad enough; now they call us at our unlisted phone numbers?!

posted by: Linda on August 4, 2010  10:05am

Hey RR - guess what? those phone calls are being funded by tax payer dollars through the CEP.

Add they fund those the negative tv ads… Malloy’s priorities are clear.

My favorite parts of this debate?

1. The state of CT doesn’t have 200 agencies. Also, apparently they can be “downsized” by 1/3 without cutting jobs OR programs. Then how are you downsizing them Dan? Get a clue.

2. “Dan, we just can’t afford all your promises… I’m inheriting a $3.5 billion budget deficit. So I can’t make any promises unless I tell you how I’m going to pay for them.”

Malloy talks about a LOT of spending ... I’m pretty liberal, but I’m going to be swayed by empty campaign promises.

My vote’s with Lamont.

posted by: Concerned Citizen on August 5, 2010  11:13am

I was quite open to voting for either of these until Ned Lamont started with the lies and slander.  After the debate on Tuesday, Lamont said he hoped that he and Malloy would end the cycle of negative ads. He said, “Let’s end on a positive note.”

But already in the mail was a Lamont flier with the headline: “Dan Malloy’s dirty politics.” It resurrected details of an investigation into how contractors who built Malloy’s home while he was mayor ended up with city contracts. (The CT Mirror)

Lamont advertisement went on to say “This culture of corruption under Malloy even drew the attention of law enforcement,” the flier says. “State authorities eventually launched a criminal corruption investigation into Malloy’s pay-to-play schemes.”

Left unsaid is that Malloy was exonerated of criminal wrongdoing by the investigation.
When challenged to this misleading mailing, Lamont said Malloy was cleared of illegality, but his dealings with the contractors still raise a legitimate question about his judgment.

Lamont operated as a private businessman; he was not subjected to the same scrutiny Malloy has been. Even under that close scrutiny, Malloy was cleared completely. 

The fact that Lamont has millions to spend on this type of smear campaign- tells me that he will go to any length to win the governor’s chair. That makes him dangerous; maybe he is working so hard to become governor to keep the wealthiest people in CT wealthy and drain the middle class even more. 

Mr. Lamont you will not get my vote.  you have no scruples. I have no doubt that if your business practices were to be examined as closely as Malloy has been- there will be REAL DIRT FOUND. The mailer that arrived at my home yesterday titled “Dan Malloy’s Dirty Politics” and a wheelbarrow of money until the title Malloy’s home renovations is the DIRTIEST PIECE OF POLITICAL CAMPAIGN LITERATURE I HAVE EVER SEEN. you, Mr. lamont, know that this claim IS A LIE; YET YOU SEND IT OUT.  WHY?

Mr. Lamont, I hope you NEVER get into the governor’s mansion. You are basically unethical and dishonest.

get ANDI

Events Calendar

view the full calendar »

SeeClickFix »

Dumpsters Back on Sidewalk
Feb 9, 2012 12:54 pm
Address: 868 Whalley Ave New Haven, CT
Rating: 4

The old, graffiti-laden dumpsters (2) are back on the sidewalk in front of the newly renovated...

more »
Woman throws out cigarette butts at bus stop
Feb 9, 2012 10:25 am
Address: Edgewood Ave And Alden Ave New Haven, CT 06515, USA
Rating: 2

Illegal littering. please issue a fine.

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

smartpill design