Dodd Calls for Bankruptcy Reform

By BRIAN DURAND

Senator Dodd called on the Bush administration today for a new mortgage plan that would work to reduce foreclosures among homeowners. From Reuters:

The Connecticut Democrat urged Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to prevent any further delays in helping troubled homeowners get the terms of their mortgages modified.

He added in a letter to Paulson, “The objective of modifications should be to make homeownership sustainable, rather than deferring foreclosure to a later date.”

At the same time, Dodd’s presidential campaign is rolling out a plan for bankruptcy reform. According to his campaign the plan would:

• Modify the means test to ensure families have sufficient resources to live on
• Protect children, not creditors
• Ensure all medical debts are dischargeable
• Permit bankruptcy courts to restructure mortgages so families can stay in their homes
• Allow private student loans to be dischargeable

More details on Dodd’s website here.

Keeping Perspective

By DAN MALLOY

I’m out of town tonight in Concord, New Hampshire with members of the US Conference of Mayors, where I’ll be speaking at an “Arts and Politics” event hosted by ArtsVoteNH, a grassroots organization that educates policy-makers and the general public about the importance of the arts. Representatives from a number of Presidential campaigns will be there as well to explain how their candidates have worked to support the arts, and how they might do so as President.

Given the multitude of grave and serious issues facing our state and our nation (the war in Iraq, lack of affordable health care for millions of Americans, growing environmental concerns… just to name a few) it’s easy to lose sight of other matters that can often seem less important in comparison. There are, after all, only so many hours in the day and only so many issues on which we can expend our energy.

I’m glad that tonight I’ll be learning about an issue that I haven’t heard many Presidential candidates get a chance to touch on. Support of the arts is crucial to basic education, to civic engagement, and to our American culture. During these trying times, it’s important not to lose sight of that – and of the many other “lesser issues” we all hold dear.

Thoughts on Criminal Justice Reform

By ANDREW McDONALD

I’m heading to Hartford this morning for public hearings on fifteen criminal justice reform proposals.  The ideas on the table vary a good deal from one to the next, and I urge you to read and learn more about them.  I’m hopeful that from them – and from the great effort being put forth by my fellow legislators – will emerge a comprehensive and effective reform bill in the potential special session this January.

Yesterday Governor Rell expressed her newfound support for a number of criminal justice reforms, such as a full time Board of Pardons and Parole and new advances in communication technologies for law enforcement.  Similar ideas have been put on the table recently by legislators such as Rep. Willam Tong and by other members of the Judiciary Committee, and will be discussed at our hearings today.

While I am glad that the Governor is committed to reform, I am troubled because it was only last month that she believed additional money was simply not needed for criminal justice reform in Connecticut.  Her change of heart underscores a very real problem with the way our state functions – too often reform is driven by changing headlines in the media, and not by thoughtful consideration for the future.

To achieve comprehensive reform (as opposed to smaller piecemeal bills that don’t meet our problems head on) it will take committed and deliberate debate in the coming months.  As a state, we’ll need to keep our focus on the long-term interests and safety of Connecticut residents, and not simply pay lip service to hot button issues born out of the tragedy in Cheshire.  Only through that type of systematic discourse can we hope to achieve the necessary bipartisan support.  I hope Governor Rell is on board.

Random Notes

By BRIAN DURAND

1) As most readers are likely aware, former Connecticut Governor Bill O’Neill died on Saturday. He was one of our state’s longest serving Governors, as well as its last Democratic. There is not much to say that hasn’t been said already, so instead I’ll point you to Mark Pazniokas’ post today at Capitol Watch, which includes the following quote from O’Neill, reflecting back on his time as Governor during his last day in office:

“No formal farewells. No cannon fire or anything else, trumpets, horns or bugles,” O’Neill said. “Just a few handshakes and a few slaps on the back and, hopefully, some thank-yous.”

Genghis at Connecticut Local Politics also had some interesting thoughts today on why Democrats have been unable to take back the Governor’s office in the last twenty years.

2) Employees at Foxwoods Casino have voted to join the United Auto Workers Union. Out of approximately 2700 dealers, 60% voted in favor of unionizing. The agreement is not quite finalized, as the National Labor Relations board is still reviewing the ruling of its regional officials that workers should be allowed to unionize. Attorney General Dick Blumenthal thinks that the vote will stand:

“This union is the first to be established by a tribal casino by contested vote,” Blumenthal said. “Its impact could be seismic in changing the landscape of labor relations at tribal casinos, not only in Connecticut, but across the nation.”

One can only hope that he’s right. The UAW already represents about 6,000 gambling workers in other states – there seems to be no reason that Connecticut employees shouldn’t be allowed to join that number. More from the AP.

3) Apparently, Connecticut is one of only three states that does not offer a hospice benefit in its Medicaid program.

The Connecticut Council for Hospice and Palliative Care has for years unsuccessfully lobbied the General Assembly to pass a law requiring the state’s Medicaid plan to cover the full complement of hospice care in all settings, including at home and in nursing homes. The group argues that the benefit would save money for the Medicaid program, which is funded by state and federal dollars and run by the state Department of Social Services.

They point to a study by consulting firm Milliman Inc. commissioned by the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization in 2003, which found that if all states discontinued hospice coverage, national Medicaid spending would increase by about $282 million a year, or $7,000 per beneficiary.

It’s ridiculous that as one of the country’s wealthiest states, we’d be one of only three not to offer hospice care through Medicaid. Anyone who has lost a family member to prolonged illness knows the importance of allowing that person to spend what time they have in the comfort of their own home. If having them do so is also more cost-effective to our state, then I’m shocked it hasn’t been done yet. You can read more from the Courant.

Happy Thanksgiving!

By DAN MALLOY

It’s that time of year when many people send nice wishes for holiday cheer. And of course, that’s a good thing. But this year, I’m finding myself a lot more reflective.

We are facing a lot of challenges as a community, at the national, state and local levels. We’re at war. Our environment is threatened on global proportions. The economy is teetering. And we are facing a significant health care crisis right here in Connecticut and elsewhere.

At the same time, I’m also finding myself more optimistic. As I continue to hear from people throughout the state, the dialogue and ideas they generate to address our challenges are inspiring. And, most importantly, my family and I are going into the holiday season together and supporting one another completely.

So I am optimistic across the board. For all those reasons and many more, I am giving thanks for many, many things. And I thank you for your support and friendship, as well.

From my family’s to yours, Happy Thanksgiving!

Giving Thanks for a Republican President

By WILLIAM TONG

Thanksgiving is about turkey, mashed potatoes, football, and family.  But it’s also about the Pilgrims.   We give thanks for the Pilgrims’ perseverance and resilience, and their vision for a new start and a new nation.  We also give thanks because the Native Americans welcomed the Pilgrims, helped them to survive, prosper, and live and worship free.  Thanksgiving is when we, as a people, celebrate our common heritage and destiny as pilgrims on a journey in the new world.

Thanksgiving is also at time for us all to give thanks for our freedoms and good fortune, and to reflect on our own personal journey.  This Thanksgiving, I’m thankful for Richard Nixon.  I am proud to say that President Richard Nixon occupies a special place in my family.  Nixon will always have a seat at our Thanksgiving table because, without him, life in America could have gone a very different way for us. 

Shortly after my parents started a small Chinese restaurant on Park Street in Hartford, Connecticut, and right after I was born, the Immigration and Naturalization Service detained my father because his immigration status was in doubt.  If he rolled in to Hartford tomorrow by Greyhound Bus, many would no doubt call him illegal.  As he faced deportation, my father hand wrote a letter to President Nixon asking to stay.  My father described the tremendous sacrifices he had made since war and homelessness forced him from China as a child. He told President Nixon how he completed college, and came to Connecticut to find work, started a business, and made a new life in the United States.  He talked about his young wife and his new baby, and his hope for the future.

President Nixon listened, and my father was permitted to stay.  My parents became citizens several years later. Over time, they became successful business people, raised five children — a journalist, investment banker, and state legislator among them — and for many years now have called Glastonbury their home.  Many relatives have joined my family since the early 1970s, and they too have built new lives in the Hartford area.  All of them working hard, all of them focused on educating their children, all of them Americans.   Richard Nixon may have a difficult legacy, but in a very important way, he is responsible for the life I am privileged to have earned.

Today, however, the men seeking to be the next Republican President would have denied my father the opportunity to work hard, build a business, raise a strong family, and make a lasting contribution to our state and our country.  These men would deny young people like me access to schools and higher education, as Governor Rell did when she vetoed the in-state tuition bill.  These men would deny access to medical care and winter heating, and send millions of families like mine back to countries long since departed.  These men would have turned the Pilgrim ships home.

That is why this Thanksgiving, I am grateful that at one time, in a different time, a Republican President named Richard Nixon chose instead to give my father, and my family, a chance.

Bureaucracy Continues to be Sheff’s Biggest Hurdle

By BRIAN DURAND 

More than ten years since the landmark Sheff v. O’Neill case, Connecticut is still struggling to make real and sustainable gains towards desegregation despite a great deal of effort and money being spent.  With plaintiffs from Hartford now back in Superior Court, local and state officials are once again pointing fingers at one another trying to determine who has the authority to make necessary changes.

Most of these discussions are familiar to Connecticut residents.  In 2003, the case’s plaintiffs reached an agreement with the state on common goals that should be met in desegregating schools, including plans for new magnet schools and an expansion of the Open Choice program.

 

Since then, results in Hartford have been spotty at best:

In the last school year, for example, 1,070 Hartford students were enrolled in suburban schools through the state’s Open Choice program – short of the 1,600 that the compromise settlement required … In the four years since the state and the plaintiffs agreed to a compromise settlement that sought to enroll 30 percent of Harford students in integrated schools by last year, just about half that number made it into integrated schools…

One of the main impediments seems to be a lack of consistent and strong leadership.  On both the state and local level, there has been a revolving door of decision makers since the 2003 decision:

During those years, changes in oversight included five state education commissioners, multiple reorganizations of the state Department of Education, four Hartford superintendents, a transition from state control over Hartford schools to local control and the creation and disbanding of a magnet school office in Hartford.

And now, just when you thought we couldn’t cram any more cooks into this crowded kitchen, State Education Commissioner Mark McQuillan said last week that he’s pushing to establish a “joint office between the state, the Hartford school district and the Capitol Region Education Council, which runs several magnet schools.”

Based on the lack of results so far, another layer of administration is probably not the solution, unless the office can take a definitive leadership role.  Focus on both sides of the debate needs to be on spending more time and energy making the already agreed upon reforms work, and making their case for these programs to Connecticut families.  Existing magnet schools have been unable to create a balance of students from different social and economic backgrounds, and local towns continue to push back on the costs of busing and educating inner city kids.

Until the local residents who are actually utilizing (and paying for) these programs are fully on board, no amount of state money or administration is going to work.  What is needed is consistent leadership — from the Governor on down — explaining to Connecticut towns exactly why desegregation is in our state’s best interest.  Hopefully we won’t have to wait another ten years.

“A Moral Imperative”

By ARIELLE REICH

 

Recently, the State Department of Labor issued a study that showed that the wage needed to afford a modest two bedroom apartment in Connecticut is the sixth highest in the country, with lower Fairfield County coming in first. State Treasurer Denise Nappier, along with several other elected officials were in Stamford on Thursday, at a lunch sponsored by New Neighborhoods, a non-profit housing organization. The topic at hand was affordable housing and awards were given for excellence in affordable housing efforts.

 

We all know about the need for substantial amounts of affordable housing in each city. It is essential in enhancing the sense of community and allows those who work tirelessly to serve the city live there as well.  It is well know that towns in Fairfield County are having trouble keeping young people who grew up in the area to stay here and raise their own families, and an influx of affordable housing can be a factor that encourages and allows for that to happen. I am proud to live in a city that has added about 4,000 units of affordable housing in the past several years and has concrete plans to develop about 1,700 more, but I know that we need to keep going.

 

Nappier astutely described affordable housing as a “moral imperative and an economic necessity”, and encouraged us to contact our political representative and urge them to support initiative that would increase funding for projects that will develop and support affordable housing. Let’s take her advice.

 Read more about Nappier’s statements here.

Making the Grade as a Parent

By CHRIS COONEY

As a parent of two public school kids — a kindergartner and a 20-year-old college kid who went to public school — the national media frenzy that followed a school board member in our own Manchester, CT really caught my eye.

Steven Edwards proposed a report card of sorts for parents on getting their children to school on time, clean and fed, with homework in hand. Sometimes you can see kids in the morning who are wiped out from lack of sleep and/or starting the day without breakfast and/or being over-scheduled and chronically late. And sometimes that points to lack of adult-level supervision and management. So “grading” parents on the basics makes some sense, on the surface.

That being said, I think my household is pretty good at adult-level management. But someone else, like a school system holding a report card on me, might feel differently. And what would be the consequences (if any) for parents who weren’t making the grade? Given that this national debate was sparked right here in CT, anyone else have a take on this issue?

Attention Young (or not) Democrats!

By ARIELLE REICH 

Whether or not you are under 35, getting involved with or contributing to the Young Democrats is a terrific idea! 

The Young Democrats of Connecticut work tirelessly to assist Young Democratic candidates with financial assistance as well as training and support for all kinds of elected positions from city boards to statewide office.  The YDs also encourage individuals to get involved in the political process by hosting a number of fundraising and social networking events, sponsoring debates, and participating in community service projects.

Please consider attending the Young Democrats of America Fall Conference in Manchester, New Hampshire this weekend. If you are looking for something more local, swing by the Southern Fairfield County chapter meeting TONIGHT at 7pm in the Government Center, 888 Washington Blvd, in Stamford. We will do a campaign roundup and plan our next event. Want to get the lowdown on what happened last week? Want to help plan a holiday party or YD happy hour? Be there!