Rudy Marconi for Connecticut

I'm in

2010-04-14T12:55:00.001-04:00

The financial report for this quarter is out, and my campaign’s bank account, quite frankly, is about as flush as the state treasury.

I am down, financially speaking, but I am not out. In fact, I am very much in: I have ended my exploratory committee and have formed a candidate committee for governor of Connecticut.

There is too much at stake now for me to fold my tent. Business as usual, and politics as usual, will only push Connecticut further along its path to financial ruin.

I entered this campaign last October because it was clear to me as first selectman that the state had lost its grip on reality—and was putting our cities and towns at risk. Nothing I have seen since then has convinced me we have come to terms with our situation.

Connecticut is facing economic disaster of almost unbelievable proportions. Or, I should say, refusing to face it, with the most egregious case of political denial I have ever seen.

And that’s why I am running for governor, and will do so until I believe we are on the way to correcting our course, or until I am elected governor—whichever comes first. Here’s what this means:

First, we must recognize that we cannot simply cut our way out of this crisis. Yes, we must make significant cuts, but we must raise revenue as well. I have proposed instituting tolls and making our income tax more progressive. I have heard no one else come forward with a proposal that would raise revenues.

And second, Connecticut must serve its cities and towns—not the other way around. This means end unfunded mandates, stop forcing us to increase property taxes and permit us to regionalize as we see fit.

I don’t have great personal wealth. I don’t have name recognition built over years of statewide campaigning. What I do have is the willingness to tell the truth and do the hard work.

I am down but not out because Connecticut itself is down but not out. We still have the time to turn it around. We can create jobs in Connecticut and we can return to the great state we once were.

Rudy

Don't show me the money

2010-03-15T18:16:00.000-04:00

Yesterday's Hearst newspapers profiled statewide candidates through the lens of personal wealth. I was interested but not surprised to learn that, of all the candidates reporting, my income most reflected that of a public servant.

I'm fine with that. After all, you don't go into this for the money. But I disagree with the article's unwritten implication—that great wealth is some kind of moral disqualification for office. Many great and selfless American leaders have come from privilege, starting with a Mr. G. Washington (who was the 59th richest American in history, measuring wealth as a percentage of GNP). And don't forget what the R stood for in FDR.

Further, I have great admiration for those who have become wealthy through ingenuity and hard work. Those two traits are the hallmarks of successful elected leaders.

But I continue to take issue with those would spend their wealth to buy positions of political power. Connecticut's Citizens' Election Program was hailed as a progressive step toward driving money from politics. And even though a recent study found 79% of CTers support the program, it is currently in jeopardy—and support for it in Hartford seems to be lukewarm.

Will Rogers once observed that "a fool and his money are soon elected." Only with public campaign finance can we ever prove him wrong.

A budget without a battle

2010-03-08T12:37:00.000-05:00

I didn't post on this blog last week, or on Facebook, for that matter. Too busy. It was budget week in Ridgefield.

Budget week is intense, but we did in one week what the state couldn't do in two months (and still hasn't done, when you look at where we are).

In Ridgefield, as in many municipalities, the budget is a roll-up-your-sleeves process. You gather all the players together, put aside partisanship and posturing, and create a balanced, responsible plan. And if you don't get the job done . . . well, you just do, that's all.

Meanwhile, our state legislature passed a wildly out-of-balance budget 60 days late, and then the governor refused to sign it, or to veto it. All efforts to fix it have failed miserably.

In Ridgefield, if we can't afford something, we don't spend on it. If it's something we absolutely must spend on, we raise the money. And if we have to borrow, we make a plan for paying it back. We have to behave responsibly.

From our state leaders, we get instead budgetary accounting tricks and shell games. We'd never tolerate that in Ridgefield—and we shouldn't tolerate it in Hartford.

I know the state budget is more complicated than Ridgefield's, but that's no excuse. Connecticut has an Office of Fiscal Analysis, teams of legislative staffers and financial people in every state department. They have the resources and the time to get it done. What they lack is a sense of responsibility to the people.

We need to replace them with leaders who know how to get the job done.

Rudy

No, we're not taking "no" for an answer

2010-02-23T14:28:00.001-05:00

One of the things I hear often in my job is "no." No, we're not ready. No, we can't do it that way. No, the funding is going elsewhere.

And an important part of my job is not taking no for an answer.

For example, our largest local employer was told no, they couldn't expand on their current campus, and therefore they said, no, we're not staying in Connecticut. I called together all parties and said, that's not good enough. I wouldn't take no for an answer. And today, they are still our biggest employer (and taxpayer).

Over the past week, Connecticut lost out on two important rounds of federal grant funding, one for transportation and one for health. Over a billion dollars in funding we needed, but didn't get.

I would not take no for an answer.

Connecticut is one of the most densely populated states, with urgent transportation needs. We're also the most rapidly aging, and we need the health funding to make sure we have the needed care available.

I would be on the next plane (or train!) to Washington. Together with our congressional delegation, I'd work my way up the ladder until I was face to face with the decision-makers, and I would explain why this decision cannot stand. Why it is counter to all our administration's priorities to shut us out. And I wouldn't leave until I had assurance the decision would be revisited, and that we would not be shut out of future rounds.

When it comes to leadership, what part of "no" don't I understand? Any of it.

Rudy

If public financing is out, then so am I

2010-02-22T10:37:00.001-05:00

An important hearing is scheduled for this morning in Hartford about the Citizens' Election Program, which provides for public financing of campaigns. I planned to be there on the original date, but it was rescheduled due to weather.

The testimony I had prepared was not about the challenges of public policy. It was a much more personal statement—because my decision to move forward was indeed a personal one:

For the past 10 years, I have been first selectman of Ridgefield, and since this past October, I have been an exploratory candidate for governor.

I grew up in Ridgefield, back when it was a tiny, rural town. My father was a laborer, who eventually started his own small construction company. My mother cleaned houses. We were not rich, not even affluent. My parents taught me to work hard and that honesty is always the best policy.

They also taught me to believe in serving the community. And so for the past 20 years, I have been active in Ridgefield government and politics.

I love my job as first selectman, and I would not trade it for any other (well, maybe one other). It is enormously rewarding in so many ways, but money is not one of them.

Over the past decade, I have developed leadership skills and practical ideas that I believe qualify me for higher office. I have gained experience at every level of local and state government. I have formed a very clear idea of what needs to be done in Connecticut to stop the bleeding and heal our state. But as a person of relatively modest means and no connection to high-rolling special interests, I believed that higher office was out of my reach.

Then Connecticut enacted the Citizens’ Election Program. Between the statute’s lines I read something I’d never heard before. It said, if you have ideas and experience, if you have passion and determination, you have a chance to lead.

This is not a free ride, the statue went on to say. You will have to earn access to public financing through small-donation fundraising. The statute set the bar high—and justifiably so.

The Citizens’ Election Program opened the door to me and to other potential candidates who do not have deep pockets and who are unwilling to compromise their principles to win the support of special interests.

Now some people say that the Citizens’ Election Program is a something we cannot afford.

Let me ask you: Is good leadership a luxury? Is clean government an extravagance? Is it frivolous to expect a government to be responsible to—and only to—the people who elected it?

I am considering a run for governor only because of the Citizens’ Election Program. If we don’t fix it, frankly, I don’t have a chance. And neither does good government in Connecticut.

Rudy

Response to a reader

2010-02-18T17:42:00.005-05:00

I received a lengthy, thoughtful reply to my post on tort reform, below, and I think it deserves an equally thoughtful response. My comments are in blue.

Re: the $38 million jury award that you cite --

Did you research the facts of that lawsuit?

In your opinion, did the doctor involved adhere to the standard of care of her profession, obstetrics and gynecology?

If she had, would the child now be healthy and whole?

Are you aware of the extent to which the child is damaged?

Are you aware of the type and amount of care he will need throughout his life?

Do you know much of the $38 million dollars was ECONOMIC damages for the care the child has received and will continue to need throughout his life -- as opposed to NON-economic damages?

Are you aware that the case is currently under appeal?

First, I think we can agree this is a tragic case for the family involved, and that they deserve substantial compensation. But in fact $7.5 million of the award was for non-economic damages, so you do not have your facts straight.

I do not presume to know what constitutes proper medical procedure. Frankly, neither does a jury, and I believe our current system of buying persuasive witnesses does not benefit anyone. I believe we need to bring more true expertise into the system through mandatory reviews by panels and impartial expert witnesses.

Ultimately, we need reasonable guidelines for non-economic damages. The awards swing wildly, depending on the jury and the lawyers’ performance. Why should one person’s non-economic damages be worth $1 million and another person’s be worth $7.5 million?

Re: "Tort reform":

Do you believe that the American judicial system is not a workable system?

Do you believe that an American citizen's right to be heard by a jury of his/her peers should be abolished?

Do you believe that citizens are too stupid or otherwise incapable of hearing evidence and making a fair decision -- and therefore should not be allowed to sit on juries?

Whom do you trust to decide what is fair for American citizens -- juries of their peers, or special interest groups such as professional associations or corporations?

You are trying to reduce my argument to absurdity. Of course I believe our justice system is workable. But I believe the rules by which it work need to be revised, as they often are, through legislation.

For example, medical malpractice cases tend to be highly technical and some cases confuse even the experts. So what constitutes “a jury of one’s peers” in these cases—a jury of doctors or of laymen?

As for special interest groups, I oppose their undue influence—and I believe it is the undue influence of trial lawyers that has prevented the changes we need in our medical liability system.

Re: The number of doctors in the state of Connecticut --

Have you obtained from the CT Department of Health the numbers of doctors licensed in the state over the last, say, ten years?

If so, can you provide your readers with those figures?

Can you document your claim that Connecticut truly has less doctors practicing today ten years ago, or faces a shortage -- or are you fear-mongering based on absolutely no evidence?

It’s not uncommon for physicians to have two or more state medical licenses. And when physicians retire from the active practice of medicine, many will keep their medical license—a number sure to increase as boomers age. The CT Department of Public Health does not keep statistics on the number of actively practicing physicians in the state.

But there is other evidence that a shortage is looming. A November 2009 report in Physicians' Practice magazine determined that Connecticut has the worst climate for physicians. It’s not surprising, therefore, that 35% of Connecticut practices report in a 2008 study that it is “very difficult” to recruit physicians. Today Connecticut is among the top five states in percentage of doctors over 55, and those baby boomers are heading toward retirement.

As a result, physicians are increasing their working hours. According to a study by the Connecticut State Medical Society, the average time a patient waits to see a doctor is now 17 days.

The shortage is greatest in areas where medical liability insurance rates are the highest. For example, between 2002 and 2004, Connecticut lost 6.3% of its obstetrician gynecologists, and the percentage delivering babies dropped 14.5%

The American Academy of Family Physicians predicts a nationwide shortage of 40,000 primary care doctors by 2020. Do we expect to attract doctors to Connecticut with the country’s worst practice climate?

Re: Expert Testimony

Are you aware that by law expert witnesses in medical malpractice suits must be BOARD CERTIFIED in their professions?

Are you claiming that, for example, the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists is not capable of certifying doctors?

Who do you propose should "screen" experts and their testimony, if not the national boards of medical professions?

Certainly the profession itself must police the credentials of its members. But competence is only part of the issue. The question isn’t just who screens the witnesses but who pays them. A witness has an ethical obligation to the truth but also a contractual relationship with the client. This inherent conflict of interest can lead to compromised objectivity and—and come cases—perjury.

Medical experts—both plaintiff and defense—should be court-appointed from a pool of physicians willing to offer their expertise.

Re: Reviewing a case for merit prior to bringing suit:

Are you aware that in order to bring suit in the state of CT, a board certified expert in the field must provide a statement that in his/her professional opinion the doctor in question did not adhere to the standards of care and did indeed commit negligence?

Who do you think should better decide merit, if not the doctor's board certified peers?

Connecticut’s requirement is inadequate, in part because the name of the physician who signs that statement is kept from the defendant physician. The defendant physician never has the opportunity to question or challenge its validity. I would prefer to see a panel review the case.

Re: Lawyers' fees

What do YOU consider a lawyer's "fair share." Be specific. Provide examples.

In the mid-1980’s, the Connecticut General Assembly passed legislation limiting the amount lawyers could charge their clients in medical liability cases. The fee declined as the size of the award increased. It didn’t take long before the law was challenged and the courts decided lawyers could charge their clients more than the statutory limit as long as the client agreed. Most lawyers have their clients sign statements allowing them to do so. That doesn't seem fair to me.

Mr. Marconi, I think you're looking for headlines, and I think we need to see how much special interest money you're getting from insurance companies and doctors' groups. While the SCOTUS may believe that a corporation is the same as a private citizen, most of us do not. We want a Governor who represents people, not special interests.

You’re right, counselor. Maybe the headlines can lead to reforms that make sure more money goes to patients, not their lawyers. Maybe we can help them receive compensation for injuries more quickly than the eight to 10 years it sometimes takes.

I believe that trial lawyers constitute the special interest here, and that their influence may jeopardize the rights of the people of Connecticut to receive the medical care they deserve.

Let them unionize!

2010-02-10T17:01:00.000-05:00

I stand strongly with our State Police captains and lieutenants in their unanimous effort to join the union. The Labor Board ruled they may do so, a decision upheld by the Superior Court. Now the matter is before the state Supreme Court.

The legal issue at hand is whether the captains and lieutenants fit a statutory description of 'managerial employees. and are therefore excluded from collective bargaining.

But the larger issue—the real problem—is our governor’s historic refusal to accept that state workers deserve a voice.

As first selectman, I have been working and negotiating with unions for over a decade. And while the negotiating process may sometimes put us at odds, I have never questioned their right to collective bargaining. That includes Ridgefield’s police captains and lieutenants, who are in fact union members.

It’s time for Governor Rell to stop squandering state resources on her mission to suppress these officers’ rights as state employees.

Rudy

Is there a doctor in the state?

2010-02-09T10:50:00.004-05:00

We need medical tort reform in Connecticut. Without it, we could be facing a full-fledged doctor shortage.

Connecticut is not doctor-friendly, and ballooning medical liability premiums are a big part of the reason. We're losing doctors, and we must act to prevent a public health crisis. Imagine having to drive to the next town just to find a pediatrician.

States that have enacted reforms have seen positive results. Texas, for example, has seen 15,000 doctors open practices or return to the state since 2004.

I believe we must enact the following reforms:

Separate liability from the award. Claims should be screened for merit by a panel before a case can go forward. If there is no liability, there should be no award.
Cap non-economic damages. Recenly one jury awarded a record $38 million in a Stamford case. The people who profit most from awards like this are lawyers.
Truly limit lawyers' fees. Close the loophole that lets them grab more than their fair share.
Provide a pool of impartial expert witnesses. Today's hired-gun witnesses make a mockery of justice. We need screened, objective experts whom juries can trust.
Make liability proportionate. Right now, any defendant could be economically liable for the whole award. They should be responsible only for their fair share.

Those opposed to tort reform, primarily personal injury lawyers, have been motivated by self-interest. Frankly, there is an element of greed here. This is evident in the way some lawyers require clients to sign a waiver that lets them charge more than the law specifies.

Tort reform is not a "magic pill" that will fix healthcare. I continue to support a range of efforts to extend coverage to all Americans. But medical liability tort reform is necessary if we are to continue receiving quality healthcare in Connecticut.

See my full statement on tort reform here.

Rudy

We don't need plans, we need action

2010-02-03T19:18:00.001-05:00

Today Governor Rell delivered her State of the State message and offered a new budget proposal.

In them, she puts forth many worthwhile proposals. But if past performance is any indication, they are not likely to lead to much worthwhile action. Commission reports and studies usually gather dust on Hartford shelves. We don't need more plans, we need plans of action.

We should also remember that facing us at the end of this budget cycle is a potential $6 billion shortfall in the next cycle. Bandaid cuts and enhancements are not going to do the job. That is why I have proposed we introduce barrier-free tolls at our borders, which could generate $1 billion per year. This worthwhile idea is contained in a million-dollar report that the governor herself exiled to a dusty shelf earlier this year.

Among the governor’s proposals are measures that would begin to relieve our cities and towns of the pressure of unfunded mandates. It is vital that these provisions be approved. And I welcome her continued support of public campaign financing—which is the only way we’re going to erase the influence of moneyed special interests.

The governor’s new budget shows that she has the right priorities: jobs, education and transportation. But we are in a tunnel of unprecedented length and it will take bold new leadership—that is, action—for us to reach the light at the end.

Rudy

Let it Train

2010-01-29T18:05:00.001-05:00

Yesterday, the federal government announced Connecticut would get $40 million toward a high-speed rail line from New Haven to Springfield.

That's good, but it's just a down payment toward the $1 billion or so this line is going to cost. And our leaders should be working right now to procure the remainder.

A commuter rail line through the Connecticut Valley is exactly the kind of investment that would attract businesses and jobs to the area. It would promote transit-oriented development, while helping to unclog our highways.

It's also why I support barrier-free border tolls.

These hard economic times should not daunt us. In fact, they should spur us toward investing in the mass transit system Connecticut needs.

The Supreme Court v. Abraham Lincoln

2010-01-21T15:29:00.001-05:00

After today’s Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case, I have to wonder whether the justices ever read the constitution from the very beginning. It starts out, “We the people.” Not “we the corporations and special interests.”

There is no force more poisonous to the common good than the influence of the moneyed interests on our political system. They are undermining the progress of healthcare reform, finance reform and consumer protection.

Here in Connecticut, our Citizens’ Election Program liberated candidates from having to sell themselves to the highest bidder. Yet that program is in jeopardy as well. Unless our legislature fixes it soon, we will revert to the system that earned us the nickname “Corrupticut.”

I am committed in public financing for my campaign, and I believe the others in the race owe it to the people of Connecticut to make the same pledge. Otherwise, we need to wake up President Lincoln and let him know that “government of the people, by the people, for the people” didn’t make it after all.

Rudy

Anger management

2010-01-20T17:48:00.000-05:00

Yesterday’s senatorial election in Massachusetts will be picked over by pundits for a long time. They‘ll dig deep for their answers, but they don’t need to. I think the answer lies right on the surface.

People are angry. They’re ticked off about the mess we’re in, and they will take it out on whoever is in power. They took it out on George Bush and the Republicans in ’08. And we saw what happened last night and in other bellwether elections this past fall.

This anger and frustration isn’t unique to the so-called “tea partiers” or even to Republicans. Out on the campaign trail, I see it everywhere and from every part of the political and economic spectrum. Sometimes I am asked directly, “How do I know you’re not just another politician, spouting platitudes and ideas—but who in the end won’t do anything different.”

My answer to that question is that, first, I understand their anger and doubt, and that I’m angry and doubtful, too. As a first selectman for the past decade, my job is to make plans, balance budgets and respond in real time to real situations, just as you have to in your home or business. I explain how I have suffered firsthand in my job from the irresponsible behavior and gamesmanship of our leaders in the state.

Then I explain, specifically, how I would go about bringing the change we need to the state. (I don’t have time to go into all the details in this blog post, but you’ll find my strategy on my Website. Click on “Where I Stand”).

Finally, I explain that I am committed to public financing, because our public offices should never be for sale.

Laurence J. Peter (creator of The Peter Principle) once said, “Democracy is the process by which people are free to choose the man who will get the blame.” I'm not quite so cynical. And that's why, in this campaign, I'm doing more listening than talking.

Persistence

2010-01-19T07:57:00.002-05:00

Yesterday morning I attended the Martin Luther King Day ceremony at the state capitol. It was one of the largest turnouts ever, and it was inspiring, as I expected it would be. The theme was hope.

In the afternoon, in Ridgefield, we held our own ceremony—our 14^th annual. Ridgefield was the first town in the state to establish an official event honoring Dr. King. Our theme is service. Each year, we recognize one Ridgefielder whose service to the community embodies Dr. King’s spirit.

Hope and service are two pillars of Dr. King’s legacy. But there is another one that enables the first two to stand: Persistence—the unwillingness to give up in pursuit of what is right.

We have made great strides over the decades, but Dr. King’s vision of a just and equal society still eludes us. Connecticut has the nation’s highest per-capita income, but some of its poorest cities. Our “achievement gap”—the performance disparity between poor schools and rich ones—is the largest in the nation.

Dr. King once noted, “All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.” But if we maintain hope and continue to answer the call to service—and we persist—we will prevail.

Wild Ride

2010-01-13T19:14:00.000-05:00

I'd rather talk about my ideas than inside politics, but the wild ride over the past week or so calls for comment.

First, I'm sorry to see Chris Dodd go. For his hard work and important accomplishments over the past 30 years, including his extraordinary recent efforts on finance and health reform, he deserves our enduring gratitude.

Dick Blumenthal has been a great attorney general for the past 19 years—one of the best in the country. He has also been a steadfast partners in our battles with the FAA. Dick's record of standing up for the people of Connecticut on everything from air pollution to industry business practices certainly qualifies him to represent us in the Senate.

Now Susan Bysiewicz, who was considering a run for governor, has chosen to pursue the attorney general's job instead. I have known Susan for many years. She is smart, hardworking and capable. I think she would make an excellent attorney general and wish her the best.

I have been asked where all of this leaves me. Now do I think I can win?

Now? Well, I wouldn't be here in the first place if I didn't think I could win. And the latest turn of events (including our good showing in the financial reporting) only adds to my confidence. If I run (remember, this is an exploratory campaign), I will be running to win, not to make a deal—or a point.

I've been traveling the state, meeting with Democratic Town Committees and other groups. And everywhere I hear the same thing: People are fed up with the way our state government in Hartford does business. Someone has to stand up for our cities and towns—for everyday people.

Looking around, I see only one person thinking about running who has the experience and the independence to do so.

Rudy

No more "puppets" in office!

2010-01-11T10:15:00.000-05:00

Connecticut's breakthrough public campaign finance law remains in jeopardy due to a US District Court ruling. Unless the state legislature fixes the law or the ruling is overturned on appeal, it disappears in April. We can't allow this to happen.

In my new satirical video, I point out what could ensue. Take a look. Then please visit RudyMarconi.com and make a small contribution to help me qualify for public financing.

Rudy

Tolls Could Be the Answer

2010-01-06T09:50:00.004-05:00

A great transportation system will help attract the business we need for economic growth. And tolls can fund that system—to the tune of a billion dollars a year!

I'm not talking about the old-fashioned toll booths where you have to stop. Today's All-Electronic Tolling systems read your transponder or your license plate as you drive by at 55 or 65 m.p.h.

I wrote all about it in a recent op-ed in the Connecticut Post.

We pay tolls to travel through Massachusetts and New York. Why shouldn't they pay to drive through Connecticut?

The state Transportation Strategy Board did a million-dollar study of tolling, then did nothing. That's typical of the way Connecticut works (or, rather, doesn't). I think we have to stop wasting time and move on this.

If you're really interested, check out the state study. And if you agree it could be a good idea, please support my exploratory campaign.

Rudy

I Faced the State

2009-12-28T15:46:00.000-05:00

I appeared on WFSB's Face the State this past Sunday to speak about my exploratory run for governor. You can watch it here.

In other news, don't miss our big New Year's Eve party on Thursday night in Ridgefield.

Where: 426 Main St., 2nd floor

When: 8pm-12:30am

How much: $50 per person

Call now for a reservation--attendance is limited: 203-244-9880

A Pause To Remember Why

2009-12-25T10:38:00.001-05:00

In a campaign, you can get so caught up in what you're doing that you can lose sight of why you're doing it. This quiet and happy morning seems like a good time to reflect.

My parents were humble hard-working people. They encouraged me to work hard and were proud when I went off to college—the first in my family to do so. They gave me the gift of opportunity. And that opportunity opened the door for me to a fulfilling life, rich with family and friends and wonderful experiences.

With some of the nation's poorest cities in this, the richest state, many young people here will never know that kind of opportunity. We have schools that, despite good efforts, still breed discouragement. We have families in which young people must make their education a second priority to helping pay the rent and putting food on the table. We have the scourge of drugs, which seduce young people with the promise of easy money and escape—only to leave them in ruins.

Connecticut will never live up to its promise until young people born in poverty have the opportunity to rise above their beginnings.

I do not know the answer, except to say it involves unflinching commitment from the state, even in the face of economic crisis. It involves devotion from parents, who, exhausted from working two or three jobs, must still involve themselves in their children's schooling. And it requires young people to fight the temptation of indifference toward what seems an unpromising future.

In this season of gift-giving, I want to make sure that each of them also receives the gift of opportunity, brightly wrapped and beckoning toward a beautiful future.

That's why I'm in this.

On behalf of Peggy and the whole Marconi family, I wish you a wonderful holiday.

NEW YEAR'S EVE PARTY!

2009-12-23T18:37:00.000-05:00

Celebrate the New Year and help us toward our goal of 500 contributions by 12/31 (talk about cutting it close!).

Where: 426 Main St., Ridgefield (above Raveis)
When: New Year's Eve 8pm-12:30am
What: Music, champagne, snacks, wine and beer
How much: $50 per person

Reserve now--space is limited. Call 203-244-9880 for reservations or information.

If you can't make it, please contribute anyway at our Website.

Have a wonderful holiday.

Rudy

Governor's Mansion for Sale! (a video satire)

2009-12-17T10:23:00.000-05:00

I appeared at a Common Cause press conference this week with a couple of the other candidates. Most have paid lip service to campaign finance reform—but seem to stop short of committing to it publicly.

I'm committed to the Citizens' Election Program. And to underscore that statement, I am pleased to offer this video. Enjoy. Then please visit my Website and make a contribution so we can qualify for public financing.

Rudy

Go Public or Don't Go at All

2009-12-15T13:33:00.001-05:00

There are three ways a candidate can run for governor in Connecticut:

Write a check for millions of dollars from their own personal bank account and pay for it themselves
Make a deal with big special interests to take their money in return for giving them your loyalty
Accepts lots of little checks from lots of people across the state of Connecticut in order to qualify for public campaign financing

Maybe I’ve got old-fashioned values, or maybe I’m just stubborn, but I think option #3 ought to be the only way to run for governor. I don’t think the people of Connecticut want their governor’s mansion to be for sale.

In fact, I feel so strongly about this that I am making a public pledge: If I cannot qualify for public campaign financing through the small contributions of ordinary voters across the state, I will not run for governor. It’s just that simple.

Connecticut has found a way to wrestle the reins of government away from special interests and millionaires. We candidates owe it to the people to fulfill the promise of that decision. We should go public or not go at all.

I’m not a millionaire. I come from a working-class family. The only interests I’m beholden to are those of the people. Public financing allows people with strong ideas and proven leadership skills to compete on a level playing field.

Unfortunately, this level playing field is now in jeopardy. I urge our legislators to act quickly to preserve this important program. And to those who say the money for this program would be better spent elsewhere, let me ask, is there anything more important than government being accountable to the people.

We must make sure that never again is Connecticut for sale to the highest bidder. And I call on my fellow candidates, announced and exploratory, to stand with me.

Rudy

Pressure

2009-12-14T18:21:00.000-05:00

Dear State Legislators,

Tomorrow you will be taking an unplanned trip to Hartford. The governor has called you back to deal with two incredibly important issues. And you're under pressure to get them right.

First, you have to fix the budget. We’re $500 million in the hole this year—heading toward an almost unfathomable $6 billion deficit over the next two. You have to cut drastically. Whatever you decide to cut, someone is going to be teed off. But if you do nothing, everyone will be.

Here in Ridgefield—and in every other municipality— people expect their leaders to make tough decisions and balance their budgets. You are under pressure to do the same.

Second, you have to fix the campaign finance law—the Citizens Election Program. If you do nothing, the governor’s mansion goes back on the market to the highest-bidding lobbyists and millionaires. Do you remember when we were derided as “Corrupticut”? You're under pressure to make sure we don't back there.

Yes, you’re under real pressure now. But as General Patton reminded us, pressure makes diamonds.

Rudy

Hijacked!

2009-12-10T14:51:00.000-05:00

This is Dave Goldenberg, Rudy's communications director. I have hijacked his blog today.

The reason: to tell you that, in order to qualify for public financing, we need 500 donations of $100 or less by 12/31.

This is serious. Without public financing, the governor's mansion goes back on the market, to be bought by special interests or well-heeled businesspeople. The kind who helped earn our state the nickname "Corrupticut" a few years back.

For a decade as Ridgefield's first selectman, Rudy has put it all out there for Ridgefield, the surrounding region and the state. Now it's our turn to support him. Please go to Rudy's website and donate now. Help keep the campaign going forward into the new year.

To put you into the proper spirit for giving, I invite you to enjoy this most inspiring of all YouTube clips.

Thank you. Now please donate $100 or whatever you can today, and forward this to your friends.

I now return this blog to its rightful owner. Sorry about that, Rudy.

Dave

Sacrifice

2009-12-07T14:37:00.000-05:00

After the attack on Pearl Harbor, Americans stepped up. My father, Nano Marconi, shipped off to clear airfields in the Philippines. But there was no less a commitment on the home front in the cities and towns all across Connecticut, as millions made sacrifices for the war effort. My mom, Lena, made brakes for tanks at Raybestos. It's no exaggeration to say they pulled together and saved the world.

The "greatest generation" showed us the meaning of sacrifice. They set an example for us, and we must work hard to live up to it.

Your personal Connecticut jobs program

2009-12-01T16:16:00.000-05:00

Did you see the news? The state’s unemployment fund is broke. This isn’t a surprise, though, given the 90,000 (and counting) jobs Connecticut has lost to this recession.

Obviously, the state must continue funding this critical safety net, and plans are underway to borrow the needed cash from Uncle Sam. But we must also accelerate our efforts to put Connecticut back to work.

There are many things the state government can do, like maintaining funds for training programs and supporting public transportation. But there are also things we ordinary Nutmeg Staters can do, right in our own cities and towns:

Shop Connecticut. Shop in-state—and in your hometown—this holiday season (and beyond). We pay the price in jobs for those online and out-of-state bargains.
Buy Connecticut-made. Local produce is abundant (and good for you). Connecticut makes wine, toys, furniture and, if you need, elevators.
Get involved locally. Most towns have an economic development commission. Many have affordable housing committees, whose work encourages local businesses to hire. Sign up.
Fly Bradley. When you have a choice, use Connecticut’s own international airport.
Go to a show. But think beyond the megaplex. Connecticut abounds with regional professional theater.
Get away nearby. With, mountains, coastline, cities and villages, Connecticut was made for daytrips and weekends.
Take stock in Connecticut companies—literally. Invest in Connecticut companies and encourage your employer’s pension plan to do the same.

Keeping jobs in Connecticut is our job, too. Let’s all pitch in.

"Rudy who?" THAT'S who!

2009-11-24T12:02:00.002-05:00

When I showed up at my first debate, my opponents’ reaction could be summed up as “Rudy who?”

This week, you, my supporters, helped answer them. In an informal Hartford Courant online poll, you put me ahead of all the other Democratic contenders! (The screen grab above is from this morning at 8, just before the poll closed.)

Statistically, this poll may not mean a lot, of course. But in another way, it is extremely meaningful. It shows we’re a motivated bunch, ready to make Hartford work for our cities and towns, and not the other way around.

It’s a long way to the state nominating convention, longer to the primary and longer still to the general election. If you stay with me, help build awareness of our mission and our message, we can win. This week, you proved it.

Visit my website today—and let's keep the momentum going!

A Simple Word

2009-11-11T15:52:00.000-05:00

From my remarks at Ridgefield's annual Veteran's Day observance:

Winston Churchill once said, “All great things are simple and many can be expressed in a single word. One of those simple words is freedom.”

Freedom—a single word that carries with it such great meaning. And we thank the men and women who sacrificed their freedom to serve our country.

Several years ago the Secretary of Veterans Affairs answered the question, “Why do we honor veterans?”

He said, “America’s service men and women, who became our nation’s veterans when they set their uniforms aside and resumed their civilian lives, distinguished themselves through their willingness to risk life and limb in defense of the freedoms we all cherish. America’s veterans did not shrink from battle; they did not yield to fear; they did not abandon their cause. And all too often they paid the ultimate price.”

Today, as American men and women defend our freedom in Iraq and Afghanistan, we must remember that today’s soldiers are tomorrows veterans. We must not lose sight of what has held us together through war and conflict. That is the resolve, determination and the tenacity it takes to protect our freedom, not only here but throughout the world.

Look at the veterans we honor here today. Men and women we see every day here in our hometown. They are schoolteachers, businessmen and -women; they are from all walks of life. Except in parades, these men and women wear no badge or emblem. They expect nothing extra. Just a simple thank-you for a simple word—freedom.

Ladies and gentlemen, today we honor the backbone of our freedom, our United States veterans.

Thank you, and God bless America.

An Open Letter to Gov. Rell

2009-11-09T15:05:00.000-05:00

Governor M. Jodi Rell
State Capitol
210 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106

November 9, 2009

Dear Governor Rell:

In September, you were proud to announce that Ridgefield would receive a grant of $200,000 to add dugouts and a press box to our Babe Ruth ball field. We never requested the grant, and I was surprised to learn about it.

After seeing your list of budget cuts this week, it’s clear the $200,000 could be much better spent. For example, you cut $76,259 for an autism services project, $88,650 for Head Start and $29,909 for an elderly rental registry and counselors.

Our grant alone could prevent these cuts.

You bonded $20 million to spend on things like all-weather tennis courts, sidewalks and library expansions and the ball field improvements we don’t need. I’m not saying these projects are unworthy, just unnecessary. Maybe it would have been better if you didn’t spend the money in the first place.

Ridgefield, like every other town and city in the state, has real, pressing needs. If you want to bond
$20 million for projects that can make a difference, my fellow mayors and first selectmen and I will be happy to give you a list.

Sincerely,

Rudy Marconi
First Selectman, Ridgefield

There Are No "Off-Year" Elections

2009-11-02T19:37:00.001-05:00

Tomorrow we will not elect a president, senator or congressman. But your vote this year is just as important as it was last year.

In a sense, it’s even more important. What happens at your local school board, zoning commission and board of selectmen affects your life every day. It affects the character of your hometown and your quality of life.

Yet half of eligible voters will stay home tomorrow, and that’s a shame.

On TV, we see Iraqis and Afghanis lined up to vote, despite real threats to their safety. But here in America, in so-called “off-years,” we see bored workers at empty polls. (We even have a serious gubernatorial candidate in California who admits she couldn’t be bothered to vote for decades!)

Am I being too preachy to remind you of the sacrifices people have made to win the right to vote?

Please go to the polls tomorrow. Do it for your family and your community. And do it because you can.

Cut Spending, Not Investing!

2009-10-29T18:46:00.000-04:00

The state budget debacle has triggered the usual political finger-pointing and knee-jerk chorus (“Cut! Cut! Cut!”). And with the recent downgrade by Moody’s from “stable” to “negative,” the panic has begun in earnest.

Let’s take a deep breath. In a situation like this, we need to act, not just react. And certainly not overreact.

Moody’s downgraded us not because of something we’ve done, but because of things we haven’t done: We have not made a plan for rebuilding our finances. And we haven’t made responsible decisions about spending in the face of declining revenues.

Being responsible means we must cut nonessential spending, including many legislators’ pet projects. Like ball field improvements in Ridgefield (which the governor proposed and to which I said "no thanks").

Essential, on the other hand, means we can’t do without it or afford to put it off. We should not cut spending, for example, on vital public safety and health programs.

Neither should we cut spending that amounts to investments in our future—investments that will give us a return. Education, for example, is an investment in a future workforce that attracts business to the state. Yet the governor is misspending stimulus funds intended to improve education.

Public transportation is another critical investment, attracting business and reducing wear on our roads. The New Haven-Hartford-Springfield commuter rail project, for example, must be built. We can’t cut there.

Finally, we should not recklessly cut spending that will eliminate jobs, accelerating the downward spiral. Stimulus spending works, protecting and creating jobs, as the governor herself admitted (contrary to some members of her own party).

In running a municipality, I have had to learn to make realistic long-term financial plans, which has helped preserve our AAA bond rating. I’ve learned to differentiate between what we need and what we want—and to make tough decisions. We need leaders in Hartford who can do the same.

Grab a Mop

2009-10-26T10:53:00.002-04:00

Peggy and I had the pleasure of meeting President Obama on Friday night at Senator Dodd’s fundraiser in Stamford. As you could imagine, the highlight of this lively event was the president's remarks. He is a gripping speaker on television—and even more so from just a few feet away.

President Obama touched on all the important issues his team is wrestling with—healthcare, the economy, foreign policy. And he lamented that, rather than help mop up the mess left behind by the last administration, many sit on the sidelines shouting, "Mop faster!" What they should be doing, what we should all be doing, he said, is grabbing a mop, making ourselves useful. He added:

"I think all of us in Washington -- Democrat and Republican -- we've got a responsibility to rise to the occasion; to look past our differences and understand this is a critical moment in our history; and we've got to move beyond the failed policies and broken politics that allowed our toughest problems to go unsolved for decades."

In politics, it's hard to look past our differences—after all, we tend to define ourselves by them. But in my town of Ridgefield we have made enormous strides by doing just that, time after time. It’s the way I work.

We must learn to judge ourselves not by the positions we take but by the progress we make. Don't just take a stand, take action. As the president said, let’s all grab a mop.

If we do, we can clean up Connecticut.

Hartford the Capital and Hartford the City

2009-10-22T14:18:00.024-04:00

Thank you to the Hartford Democratic Town Committee for welcoming me (and all the other Democratic candidates) last night. It was a healthy exchange of ideas and an engaged audience—politics at its best.

Most of my potential opponents had a lot to say about state government.

But Hartford is not just the state capital. It’s also the hometown of about 125,000 Connecticut residents. And that’s the Hartford I care about most. As I said last night, Hartford the capital is giving Harford the city short shrift.

There are many ways for the state to live up to its end of the bargain—funding state mandates, for example, and investing in more teachers and police. However, it begins with a change, not in policy, but in thinking: Our state cannot succeed unless it helps our hometowns succeed. It’s time we had a governor who understood that.

Connecticut Needs Slush Removal

2009-10-20T08:28:00.003-04:00

They call it a “discretionary fund,” but it’s slush—taxpayer dollars set aside for political insiders to dole out to their supporters and special interests.

Recently Governor Rell made headlines by apparently shoveling some of her slush fund into political research. But that’s just the tip of the slush-berg. For over a decade, our leaders have been awarding themselves millions upon millions in slush to spend at their whim.

This is wrong for two big and obvious reasons. First, there is no accountability. And second, it rewards a handful of inside players—at our expense.

When I took office as Ridgefield’s First Selectman, the town had a $600,000 annual slush fund they used to plug gaps and fund pet projects. I slashed about 90% of it, keeping the remainder only for winter-weather overtime. The only slush you’ll find in Ridgefield today is the kind they plow off the roads.

And that’s the way it should be in Connecticut. We have 169 cities and towns whose needs must be addressed transparently and fairly by the state. For real emergencies, we have the fund balance—the so-called “rainy-day fund.”

“Transparency” and “accountability” may just be words to some politicians, but I believe they are standards we should live by. These so-called slush funds should be ended now.

All Cities and Towns are Hometowns

2009-10-16T12:46:00.005-04:00

With more than 125,000 people, Hartford is Connecticut’s biggest municipality. Union, with about 750, is the smallest.

Despite the obvious differences, these communities are more alike than not. Both want to provide kids with a good education. Both are concerned with jobs and economic development. In both, people care about and for their neighbors.

The people of Hartford and Union—and the other 167 cities and towns in Connecticut—are motivated not by partisanship but by the shared desire to make their hometowns the best they can be.

But that’s not how our state leaders think. They put politics first. The recent budget fiasco (in which our governor just gave up and walked away) is a perfect example of this.

I believe the most important thing our state government can do is help our cities and towns—our hometowns—succeed. And that’s why I am thinking about running for governor.