DeLauro Nominated For 13th Term

Lucy Gellman PhotoWith more hearty Ayes! than a convention of pirates, Democrats officially nominated Rosa DeLauro Wednesday night to a 13th two-year term in the U.S. House of Representatives, portraying her as a fighter for the people.

DeLauro, whose district includes New Haven, was nominated at a Third U.S. Congressional District convention held at North Haven High School

The evening’s tone was one of both citing DeLauro’s past accomplishments – a celebration that included some of the district’s youngest members leading the Pledge of Allegiance (above), national anthem and a musical interlude – and of looking forward at the possibility of another term and the work in Washington that still needs to be done.

“Rosa’s compassion for all of her constituents is unheard of,” Linda Marks of New Haven, a single mother whose son Henry was shot to a point of near-death in 2010, told the crowd. DeLauro was a vocal supporter of a gun tax credit program and a sponsor of the Support Assault Firearm Elimination and Reduction for our (SAFER) Streets Act. She also helped Marks and son Henry obtain an Amtrak pass that got them between New Haven and Washington, so that he could receive desperately needed care at Georgetown’s medical center. 

Maryann Wasil, a single mother of three and founder of The Get in Touch Foundation, spoke of how, when she discovered that her treatments for breast cancer would cost hundreds of thousands of dollars, she begged DeLauro – a survivor of breast cancer herself – to fight for the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) with everything she could muster. She did work hard on behalf of the controversial law.

In her acceptance speech, DeLauro promised to keep fighting if reelected: “My new resolve in the face of this Congress is to roll up my sleeves and use every tool and ounce of energy to help people now…We need to push and squeeze the federal agencies to help people.”

She said she’d continue to work to make and keep health care affordable and to work toward truly equal pay for women. “The legislation in very simple. Men and women in the same job deserve the same pay,” she stated.

She spoke of fights ongoing and ahead: She said she has kept on top of the Veteran’s Administration to ensure that veterans return with employment and health services and can retire comfortably; has fought to preserve funding for Head Start for the young, Meals on Wheels for seniors; and pushed for increased mental health care in schools, a step she argued can reduce and ultimately eliminate tragedies like Sandy Hook before they happen.

Standing in white, lace-up cowboy boots (she has suggested to the president that they go shopping one day, and he should probably take her up on it), DeLauro told the crowd: “I take this nomination not as a reward for past service, but as an incentive to work harder. The congress can be frustrating. It can be like groundhog day. But people don’t have time for that. And I don’t either. I believe in the brand of politics that I learned from my mother and from my father: government was meant to work for people, and my job is to make sure that it does.”

Republican Rival Differs On Regulation, Fence

A Republican candidate seeking the nomination to run against DeLauro in November, Steve Packard (pictured) of Hamden, suggested that the two differ most strongly on the economy and how to best jumpstart it. A day before the Convention, he wrote to the Independent:

“If you are looking for a major issue that is going to contrast her with myself, I believe it would be economics and job creation. I would argue that the policies of Connecticut and the Federal Government have largely failed to create jobs. Although some recent reports show improvements, overall, the past few years have seen stagnant job growth in the U.S. and especially in Connecticut.

“My distinguishing core issue is that I believe the first step to improving the employment situation is to reduce the regulatory burden directly associated with job creation, as illustrated in this website post.”

“Well, he’s entitled to his views,” responded DeLauro, who in Congress has championed regulatory causes from increased food inspections to avoid the spread of diseases like e. coli to flame-proof children’s pajamas. She argued that guarding public safety through regulation does not equal being anti-business or anti-jobs. “There are a number of ways in which we can help to create jobs. We can help to provide incentives for businesses. We can also look at wages. ... We’ve got to create the environment in which we are dealing with wages. We can close so many of the tax loopholes that are out there. ... I’ve done a lot of work with manufacturers because we’re a manufacturing state. How do we provide incentives to small manufacturers in order that they can grow, they can train? There are a lot of ways you can do it [create jobs]. There’s no magic or silver bullet.”

Packard subsequently issued a press release criticizing DeLauro for proposing tax credits to help manufacturers. He argued that offering financial help to employers isn’t the answer, that cutting employers’ costs is instead: “Tax breaks and other subsidies have cost state and federal tax payers billions of dollars, and yet we’re still at the bottom of the list of job creators. ... We need to stop burdening companies with overly complex regulation and end policies that make everything from energy to payroll more expensive in the U.S. than elsewhere.”

DeLauro and Packard were also weighed in on the so-called “Berlin Wall”—a longstanding fence—that has begun falling between Hamden and New Haven.

Packard came out against the decision by New Haven to tear down the fence and build a new access road. New Haven officials acted after a mediation process in which the federal government threatened to sue Hamden for discrimination and withhold other federal funding if the town sought to block the fence’s removal.

In a recent press release, Packard called for a compromise: let pedestrians cross the border, but not cars: ” The street is not a thoroughfare.  It’s a residential street with a twenty five mile per hour speed limit.  Residents have told me that there’s already too much traffic on the road.  Adding an access road will make the problem worse.  It will bring in huge volumes of traffic from both the residences and from Southern Connecticut State University.” Click here to read the full release.

Asked about it Wednesday night, DeLauro said she doesn’t consider the matter a federal issue.

“The issue is a local issue, but people have come to a conclusion,” she said, “and I think that they will work through whatever the tensions are.”

Tags: , , ,

Post a Comment

Commenting has closed for this entry


posted by: Steve Packard on May 15, 2014  1:55pm

Thank you for this important story.

Rosa Delauro’s comments are exactly what I was expecting and a pretty transparent attempt to imply I am saying something I am not.

Am I against regulations?  No.  Of course not.  We need to have safeguards and nobody would argue otherwise.  They do not need to be overly complex, difficult to comply with and burdensome.

Why, for example, do we require that a company submit the same information multiple times to multiple agencies on different forms?

The system was designed by those who have never been on the receiving end of it.  I’m sure Rosa has never had to actually hire someone herself and deal with the payroll aspects of it.

The other important thing to remember is simpler regulations are more effective because they are more easily enforced and complied with.  The more complex you make them, the more loopholes and potential conflicts you create and the more time regulators lose on the unimportant technicalities.

There shouldn’t be hyper-technicalities.  Only important regulations to protect what needs protecting.

And if you need to pay “incentives” to anyone to be in your state, something is wrong with your state.  The only incentive to open a business should be that you’re in a good place to do business.

posted by: cswir on May 15, 2014  4:22pm

Actually Steve, I do not think the Congresswoman was doing anything with your words at all. I think she was stating her long held beliefs about providing relief to manufacturers, raising wages, and keeping people safe. I am actually surprised that NHI gave you as much ink in this as they did about Rosa’s 24 year record and convention.

posted by: Atwater on May 15, 2014  6:09pm

No one should be allowed to sit in the Congress for 13 terms. DeLauro needs to be replaced or else the New Haven area and the State of Connecticut will continue its decline.

That being said I wouldn’t vote for Mr. Packard either. He seems like the typical “small government” Republican who is good with rhetoric but in reality seeks only to serve a moneyed interests.

There has to be a third party candidate or an independent.

posted by: Christopher Schaefer on May 15, 2014  8:23pm

DeLauro:“I take this nomination not as a reward for past service”—because if you check her record of “past service”, you’ll see that not a SINGLE bill she has introduced in the past 23 years has passed—regardless of whether Democrats or Republicans held the House majority  DeLauro also scores ZERO on govt transparency. No doubt that’s because she has used her office to funnel campaign donations to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee—which then hires her husband with those very same funds to be a “consultant”. Thus, she essentially enriches herself with campaign donations: 
Open a free account here and you’ll see that this scheme has allowed DeLauro to accumulate a personal wealth of $26 MILLION: 
“She said she has kept on top of the Veteran’s Administration”—but was unprepared for the disastrous report about the VA hospital system. She also was unprepared when UnitedHealth dropped physicians & hospitals from Medicare Advantage after clients had signed up. Perhaps if DeLauro hadn’t been so busy hosting cocktail parties for Washington elites—she wouldn’t have allowed these messes to develop in the first place:
“She said she’d continue …to work toward truly equal pay for women”: a reference to her continuing false statement about the “23-cent wage gap between women and men”. Even the Washington Post on Apr. 9 gave Pres. Obama a fact-checking 2 Pinocchios rating for continuing to repeat this false, misleading—and ultimately dishonest—“statistic”:
“Politicians are like diapers; they need to be changed often—and for the same reason.” Mark Twain

posted by: ChrisTheContractor on May 16, 2014  6:54pm

Mr. Atwater, “Republicans seek to serve moneyed interests” That shows that you can only prejudge a Republican. Prejudice is the word for it.
Do the voters in New Haven think that Rosa is above that? Somehow pure and innocent?
Most politicians (R&D) have their own survival at the top of their list. They will say whatever it takes to get as many voters to keep them in office. Their office and political career is the best way they have to make their fortune.
Harry Reed is a perfect example.He is worth millions. The same with the Clintons. Rosa has quite a net worth above and beyond her salary.
All we can expect from her is the same old stuff. No great ideas except tax and spend. How far has that gotten us.
Maybe Mr. Packard has a better way. Don’t be so prejudiced. Open your mind.
If after that you still like Rosa, then so be it.

posted by: Arcadius II on May 19, 2014  1:05pm

Thank you for allowing criticisms of Rosa on your site, Paul. The rest of the media in CT refuse to post letters challenging Rosa in any way. What they owe her is a mystery to me.

I noticed you edited Rosa’s quote on the “number of ways to create jobs.” The ellipsis suggests she offered “more ways” but since they were not included, they must be even more inane than “closing tax loopholes” or “looking at wages”, two things that have nothing to do with job creation.

But that’s the point: Rosa never has to say anything significant to the issue at hand. Her job is to celebrate anniversaries, applaud policy, attack enemies, and dismiss opponents as insignificant. And maybe they are—with Republican approval.

Now, “Red Rosa” is well-known as the most radical and ideological member of Congress. Aggressive and combative to her foes, she has also publicly struck out against her own friends on the floor of Congress.

A political animal of genius, Rosa has plenty of war stories to litter any review of her accomplishments—except for actual legislation. When confronted by this in her sole 2012 debate, she skilfully countered “[Winsley] does not understand how Congress works”, demeaning valid criticism while uplifting crass partisan politics.

Her reckless behavior has cost her more than one opportunity, though, most recently when she was nominated for HHS, only to be beaten by Sebelius. The reason?

Rosa was an ardent Hillary partisan, but her political instincts forced her into Obama’s camp in spring 2008. This allowed her to claim to be the “first CT Rep. to support Obama” but branded her as a flip-flopping traitor. The Obama camp was not about to reward such blatant opportunism.

So, I suspect the RNC decided that Rosa is best left where she is—making a ghastly scene, ringing Congress in a barbed wire of brutal partisanship, and proposing legislation so extreme that not even a Pelosi controlled Congress would touch them.

Maybe Rosa IS best left alone…