“As Linda’s convention director, Tom did an incredible job that resulted in a 2-to-1 victory last week,” McMahon spokeswoman, Erin Isaac, said in an email this afternoon.

“As we enter [...]]]> Tom Scott, a former state lawmaker and veteran of the anti-income tax movement in Connecticut, has left his post with Linda McMahon’s U.S. Senate campaign.

“As Linda’s convention director, Tom did an incredible job that resulted in a 2-to-1 victory last week,” McMahon spokeswoman, Erin Isaac, said in an email this afternoon.

“As we enter the next phase of the campaign, we look forward to Team Linda being just as successful in the primary and general elections. We wish Tom all the best with what are sure to be great opportunities ahead of him. Linda is grateful for his service to the campaign,” Isaac said.

Scott could not be reached for comment.

“I’m proud to report that we qualified for the Republican primary election at last week’s party convention,” Bernier said in an email with the subject line, “We’re [...]]]> One week after losing the endorsement of Republicans at the state convention, 5th Congressional district candidate Justin Bernier announced he intends to participate in the Aug. 14 primary.

“I’m proud to report that we qualified for the Republican primary election at last week’s party convention,” Bernier said in an email with the subject line, “We’re all in.”

“Our goal is to give the voters a chance to support a reliable Republican who can win,” Bernier added. “We will deliver a positive message about the future of our country. And we will stand for the core principles that made America great in the first place.”

State Sen. Andrew Roraback won the parties endorsement but Bernier and two other candidates–Lisa Wilson-Foley and Mark Greenberg–all met the threshold to qualify for the primary. Both Wilson-Foley, who narrowly lost at the convention, and Greenberg indicated they would participate in the primary and have filed the needed paperwork.

Three Democrats–Speaker of the state House of Representatives Chris Donovan, Elizabeth Esty and Dan Roberti–are competing for their party’s nomination.

The seat is currently held by U.S. Rep. Chris Murphy, who is running for the U.S. Senate instead.

Meanwhile, there will be no primary in the 4th Congressional District. Chris Meek, who lost the convention endorsement to Steve Obsitnik, announced he will not participate in the primary, though he handily qualified by receiving more than 25 percent of vote at the convention.

State Republican Chairman Jerry Labriola Jr. said he’s pleased that the GOP won’t have to undergo a potentially divisive primary in the 4th. The seat has been held by Democrat Jim Himes since 2008.

“Chris was a great candidate, and he would have run a formidable campaign had he decided to continue,” Labriola said in a statement. “I applaud him…in placing a priority on party unity.”

The Stamford-based wrestling and entertainment company is again striking back at Journal Inquirer Managing Editor Chris Powell.

“It is with great dismay that we find it necessary to once again point out that you have made false statements of fact…regarding the business of WWE,” states [...]]]> WWE is continuing to aggressively defend its brand from critics.

The Stamford-based wrestling and entertainment company is again striking back at Journal Inquirer Managing Editor Chris Powell.

“It is with great dismay that we find it necessary to once again point out that you have made false statements of fact…regarding the business of WWE,” states a May 24 letter from Brian Flinn, WWE’s senior vice president of marketing and communications. The letter was sent to Powell and copied to Connecticut political reporters covering Linda McMahon’s U.S. Senate campaign.

The company is taking a more aggressive approach to correcting what it says are inaccuracies and misstatements about its content than it did during the 2010 election cycle, when McMahon, the company’s former CEO, first ran for office.

“This time, WWE is taking a proactive and aggressive approach to ensure that accurate facts and statements are made about our company and brand,” Flinn said via email. “This has absolutely nothing to do with politics.”

“In the past,” Flinn continued, “WWE operated with an open door policy and the assumption that we would be treated fairly by the media. Unfortunately that wasn’t the case, so this time we are taking an aggressive approach to ensure the media report the truth about our company and brand.”

On Thursday, the company responded to a column by Powell published in Monday’s edition of the Journal Inquirer. The column is critical of McMahon, a Republican seeking the seat held by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, but it never mentions WWE.

The column says McMahon’s “practical qualifications for office did not extend beyond her fantastic wealth, and that wealth derived from the business of violence, pornography, and general raunch.”

WWE took particular umbrage to the implication that it was in the business of peddling pornography, calling it “categorically false and especially malicious.”

“Simply put, WWE has never been in the pornography business,” Flinn writes. “As we previously advised you on February 2, 2012 when you first libeled WWE by such statements, our broadcast programming is TV-PG and has always appeared on basic cable or broadcast television…WWE is family entertainment.”

This isn’t the first time during the 2012 campaign cycle that WWE has fought back against those that have criticized the brand. In February, the company wrote to both Powell and Republican Christopher Shays after they each likened WWE’s programming to pornography. Shays is running against McMahon.

The company demands that Powell issue a retraction “by June 4, 2012 in as public a manner as that in which you made these false statements.” If the newspaper fails to comply, “we will seek legal and all available remedies,” the letter concludes.

Reached earlier today, Powell said he responded to Flinn and asked if he wanted his letter published.

“We’re not planning any retraction,” Powell said, adding that the column never mentioned WWE.

But, he added, he asked Flinn “if we could hold the deposition before the primary because I wanted to meet Trish .”

Flinn said this afternoon he had yet to receive Powell’s letter. “All I can say is we’re going to wait and see what the response is. Then we’ll make a decision.”

Meanwhile the company is continuing “Stand Up for WWE,” an effort launched in 2010 “to provide fans the opportunity to voice their support for WWE when the company comes under inaccurate and biased attacks,” Flinn said.

The Courant’s Wes Duplantier attended a press conference at the Capitol this morning with U.S. Rep. John Larson and Sen. Richard Blumenthal and filed the following report:

The [...]]]> Two members of Connecticut’s Congressional delegation have come up with a new way Americans can help veterans: by attaching an extra stamp when they mail a letter.

The Courant’s Wes Duplantier attended a press conference at the Capitol this morning with U.S. Rep. John Larson and Sen. Richard Blumenthal and filed the following report:

The symbolic postage stamp–which features an eagle and two American flags around a silver letter “V” for victory–would cost 21 cents and would have to be put on a letter in addition to regular postage.

Larson and Blumenthal said the stamp would give people a way to support troops in the Middle East, similar to the way Americans gathered donations, purchased bonds and bought three-cent symbolic stamps to support American efforts in World War II.

“Never before have so few borne the burden of war for so long at such a cost,” said Blumenthal, also a Democrat. “It (the stamp) is a means to give a voice and an urgency to causes Americans support.”

Larson said the 21 cents for each stamp would be split equally between funding the postal service, funding the Veterans Administration and paying down the national debt.

Larson said he did not know how sales of the new stamp would impact the national debt. He said the stamp might be popular with collectors, schoolchildren and people who have loved ones in combat overseas.

Neither Larson nor Blumenthal has filed legislation to create the stamp, but Larson said the idea has support from at least 100 House members, including several Republicans.

Rich Rochlin, who has tangled with Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration while representing employees for months, said the total far exceeds the number of 27 firings that Malloy has announced so far.

Rochlin made his statement [...]]]> An attorney representing state employees said Thursday that he believes more than 100 state employees have been fired for food stamp fraud.

Rich Rochlin, who has tangled with Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration while representing employees for months, said the total far exceeds the number of 27 firings that Malloy has announced so far.

Rochlin made his statement on the day that fired workers met with NAACP leaders and state Sen. Eric Coleman in a conference room on Maxim Road in Hartford. The state NAACP president, Scott X. Esdaile, received a standing ovation from a crowd of about 70 people when he said that the NAACP is looking into the firings that have mainly included members of racial minorities.

Malloy has not updated the numbers since mid-March when he said the scandal had led to 27 firings, 10 retirements, and five resignations. All 42 employees who have left state service are potentially subject to criminal sanctions, but no arrests have been announced.

The administration did not have an immediate update Thursday on the number of firings and the statement by Rochlin.

The employees were fired because the Malloy administration says they falsified their financial information when applying for emergency food stamp benefits under the federal Disaster Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which is known as D-SNAP. The program began following Tropical Storm Irene, which ravaged the state and knocked out electrical power to thousands in late August.  The emergency money was designed not only to replace lost food, but could also to cover storm-related expenses like property repairs and temporary housing costs such as hotels. Actual food stamps are no longer issued, and recipients instead received debit cards with a specified amount of money allocated to the account.

After saying for months that about 800 state employees were involved, Malloy announced in March that an additional 250 state employees had filled out applications for benefits. As such, an overall total of 1,053 state employees actually sought to receive emergency benefits.

Of more than 1,000 state employees involved, 685 have been cleared of any wrongdoing, according to a previous count by the Malloy administration.

The announcement in March was the first update since late January – when Malloy said that four state employees had been fired and four others had retired in the ongoing scandal. At that time, 98 state employees had been referred to their departmental supervisors for disciplinary hearings and possible firing. The eight employees who had left state service were included in that total, meaning that 90 disciplinary cases were still pending.

The vast majority of state employees who applied “were honest” about their incomes and liquid assets in bank accounts, Malloy said.

Rochlin said that some of his clients, some who have lost their jobs and others facing unemployment, are considering filing for bankruptcy. Overall, he has multiple clients facing disciplinary action in the probe. One of those suspended without pay for 20 pays was Lisa Prout, a state employee who went public with her complaints shortly after Christmas. Prout has filed a lawsuit against the state, which is still pending.

As the discipline has been handed out, more state employees have been seeking legal advice from Rochlin on how to file for bankruptcy and how to obtain HUSKY health benefits for their children. Many of his clients are single mothers who are raising their children and are “one or two checks away from no longer being middle class” if they lose their state jobs, he said.

 Malloy and his administration have repeatedly refused to release the names of state employees who have been fired, citing a three-page recommendation from Attorney General George Jepsen’s office. Jepsen and Malloy have a long relationship that dates back to their days as Stamford Democrats. Mark F. Kohler, an assistant attorney general, wrote that the names of anyone “applying for or receiving assistance from the Department of Social Services” for food stamps or other assistance should remain confidential under the law.

Rochlin has accused the state Department of Social Services, which administers the food stamp program, of muzzling its employees “to keep us from uncovering the truth” by an “unconstitutional gag order.” He filed a lawsuit on behalf of Prout to overturn the administration’s action. He cited a memo that was sent by an attorney for the department to DSS employees that ordered them not to speak to Rochlin about his investigation into suspected fraud in the food stamp benefits program.

Prout, a 45-year-old single mother who works at Connecticut Valley Hospital for the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services, applied for the benefits at the DSS office in Middletown following Tropical Storm Irene and received $524. She was investigated by the state “for allegedly understating income and allegedly committing fraud to obtain such benefit,” according to the lawsuit. State records show that, with overtime, Prout was paid about $82,000 in fiscal 2011.

Rochlin is seeking a ruling by a state Superior Court judge in Hartford that would rescind the memo, end the gag order and allow Rochlin to speak freely to state employees so that he could prepare a defense in Prout’s case.

“I would never risk everything that I have – my career, my dignity and my name – for $524,” Prout said at the time.

It still remains unclear whether any state employees will face criminal prosecution or might lose their pensions.  The law allows specific circumstances to revoke a pension, which can be done only by a Superior Court judge upon the recommendation of the state attorney general.

According to DSS spokesman Dave Dearborn, this was the situation at 3 p.m.: “Department [...]]]> The state Department of Social Services said Thursday that it has restored its computerized “eligibility management system” to operation after a two-day crash that made it impossible on Tuesday and Wednesday for the agency to process new applications for public assistance.

According to DSS spokesman Dave Dearborn, this was the situation at 3 p.m.: “Department of Social Services IT staff worked around the clock to restore the agency’s eligibility management system for regular business Thursday after a two-day computer service interruption. With the system back on-line, DSS staff across the state are able to resume processing eligibility determinations for new applicants and annual benefit redeterminations for current clients.  Electronic payments to medical providers were transmitted and will be available by Friday.”

However, DSS Commissioner Roderick L. Bremby said in a statement that “the underlying problems of the massive and antiquated eligibility management system – known since the 1980s as EMS – continue to pose significant risk of a future shutdown.”

“Our hard-working IT staff were able to resolve the short-term issues this time, but the fact is that our eligibility management system is woefully outmoded and needs to be replaced,” Bremby said.  “This reality is widely known, and the agency and our clients are fortunate to have support from the administration, legislature and partner agencies for a replacement system.”

The House Democratic caucus was notified Thursday about the session, which is necessary to finish the nuts-and-bolts before the annual budget actually takes effect on July 1.

The actual bills are often rewritten [...]]]> A special session has been set for June 12 to vote on the final bills to implement the $20.5 billion state budget.

The House Democratic caucus was notified Thursday about the session, which is necessary to finish the nuts-and-bolts before the annual budget actually takes effect on July 1.

The actual bills are often rewritten up to the last minute, and Democratic insiders said Thursday that there have been no final decisions yet on the exact details of the bills.

The House Democratic caucus is scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. that day, and the session is set for 11 a.m. A Senate insider said that particular date is looking increasingly likely for the upper chamber.

Pryor talks about whether he will have the authority to fix the state’s lowest-performing schools, which are largely concentrated in the cities. Pryor is later joined in the 30-minute telecast by Armand Fusco, an educator who is a longtime critic of [...]]]> The state’s education commissioner, Stefan Pryor, will be the featured guest on ”The Stan Simpson Show” concerning the state’s new education reform bill.

Pryor talks about whether he will have the authority to fix the state’s lowest-performing schools, which are largely concentrated in the cities. Pryor is later joined in the 30-minute telecast by Armand Fusco, an educator who is a longtime critic of Connecticut’s many previous reform attempts.

Every governor since Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. has touted education reform efforts. Weicker offered a broad package in response to the Sheff vs. O’Neill school desegregation lawsuit, but the bill was watered down before being passed by the Democratic-controlled legislature.

Pryor’s interview is available at www.ctnow.com/stan

But after listening to both candidates for [...]]]> NEW BRITAIN — Democratic U.S. Senate candidates Chris Murphy and Susan Bysiewicz sparred in their first one-on-one debate Thursday morning, with Murphy saying he’s the guy with the experience to get things done and Bysiewicz portraying herself as the outsider unafraid to shake up the established political order.

But after listening to both candidates for more than an hour, Ned Lamont, a Democrat who ran for the U.S. Senate himself in 2006, observed that “there’s not that big a difference between you guys on the issues.”

Bysiewicz is “trying to turn this guy into the next Gordon Gekko,” Lamont said, referring to the greedy villain of the movie “Wall Street.”
“And Chris, you’re saying she can’t find her way to the ladies room in Capitol Hill and she doesn’t have the experience you do,” Lamont said.

Yet despite the common ground, differences did emerge between Murphy, currently a congressman representing Connecticut’s 5th District, and Bysiewicz, the former secretary of the state. The 90-minute debate at Central Connecticut State University was organized by WNPR’s public affairs program, “Where We Live” and broadcast live; it was the first formal debate between the two, with none of the second-tier candidates present.

Murphy, the frontrunner in both fundraising and public opinion polls who received the endorsement of Democrats at the state convention earlier this month, said he’s not suggesting that experience is the key difference.

“Frankly, Susan Bysiewicz has been in government much longer than I’ve been in government,” he said. “The question is really who’s put their actions where their voice is…Susan Bysiewicz seems to have found religion on Wall Street reform in the last year and a half and mercilessly attacks me for taking contributions from the exact same groups she’s taken contributions from. I’ve walked the walk on these issues.”
Bysiewicz continued hammering Murphy on what has been one of her main lines of attack throughout the campaign: That he has failed to stand up to powerful Wall Street interests because he has accepted campaign contributions from big Wall Street firms.

“You’ve taken hundreds of thousands of dollars in [political action campaign] money from all the bad actors in the financial crisis,” she said, “and then you vote to keep the hedge fund loophole open. It seems to me there’s a [connection] there.”

But Murphy accused her of “hypocrisy” and said she, too, has accepted Wall Street money. “Secretary Bysiewicz seems to have a problem with the contributions that I’ve taken but when she takes contributions from AIG doesn’t seem to have a problem with those,” he said, saying her stance smacks of a “political double standard.”

And, Murphy noted, Bysiewicz’ efforts to run to the left of him on financial regulation have not netted her the support of traditionally progressive groups in the state, such as the Working Families party and the Connecticut Citizens Action group, both of which have endorsed Murphy.

When asked how they would reenergize the U.S. economy, Murphy said he’d back a large federal investment in public works projects.
“Costs for construction are the lowest in a generation,” he said. “You can get great deals today…on building new roads, bridges or rail lines. In addition, we’ve got the highest construction unemployment in the country…we should be making a massive investment in roads and bridges and infrastruture.”

Bysiewicz said the economy will not fully recover until the housing crisis is dealt with. She favors a plan to charge a small tax on every securities transaction. Such a charge would generate $150 billion annually; she said she’d use the bulk of the money to provide mortgage relief to middle class homeowners. The rest would be invested in renewable energy projects, she added.

Murphy said he also supports a transaction tax.

The two candidates were asked about national defense and whether they backed a return of the draft. Bysiewicz did not directly respond, but she said she doubted the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would have dragged on as long as they did had there been a military draft in place.

Murphy was unambiguous, calling the reimposition of the draft “a dangerous idea.” Instead, suggested a war tax as a way to ensure every American has a stake in the battles the U.S. engages in overseas. “If you want to go into an engagement that’s going to cost your country trillions of dollars…then let’s pay for it as a nation,” he said. “When was the last time you heard of a Victory Garden?…We didn’t do that over the last 10 years so it was just easy to put blinders on while other people fought those wars.”

Even though Murphy received the endorsement of delegates at the convention, Bysiewicz netted enough support to qualify for a primary, which will be held on Aug. 14. The winner will face the Linda McMahon or Christopher Shays, who are vying to become the Republican nominee. The U.S. Senate seat is held by Joseph Lieberman, who is not seeking reelection.

Bysiewicz noted that she would be the first female senator from Connecticut and invoked the names of Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand of New York and Elizabeth Warren of Massachsetts, who is seeking to unseat Republican Scott Brown in an intensely fought race.

When asked why they are undertaking the rigors of running for U.S. Senate, both Murphy and Bysiewicz invoked their children–and McMahon, the wealthy former CEO of WWE, a wrestling and entertainment company.

“I just couldn’t allow somebody like Linda McMahon to buy this election,” Murphy said.

Added Bysiewicz: “I’ll be darned if I let someone who sells sex and violence and pornography for a living be our next United States Senator…. We have to send the right woman to Washington.”

In her 2010 race for the U.S. Senate, many women voted for Democrat Richard Blumenthal over McMahon, the wrestling entrepreneur from Greenwich.

In the current election cycle, McMahon has held a large number of meetings specifically with women. There are literally no men at many of [...]]]> Linda McMahon has had a political problem with some women.

In her 2010 race for the U.S. Senate, many women voted for Democrat Richard Blumenthal over McMahon, the wrestling entrepreneur from Greenwich.

In the current election cycle, McMahon has held a large number of meetings specifically with women. There are literally no men at many of the meetings.

In a recent interview with Capitol Watch, McMahon said she will continue that strategy throughout the summer and into the fall if she wins the August 14 primary against former U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays of Bridgeport.

“I’m meeting with small groups – a lot of women’s groups,” McMahon said. “We have these conversations or coffees with Linda. We’ve done over 100, I guess, so far. We’re doing, sometimes, two a day. They’re very, very effective. You get up close and personal, and you really get to meet and sit down and talk to different women’s groups. We’ve been using a lot of social media to get that word out.’’

Concerning the future, she said, “We’ll continue all through the summer. Some of the groups are 70 to 75. Some of them are a dozen. … I’m on the road every day. Most of the time I get home around 10:30 or 11 at night. … I’ve toured over 125 small businesses. That really allows me to listen to the issues that small businesses have.’’

After spending $50 million of her own money in 2010, McMahon became a household name in Connecticut as her brochures filled up the mailboxes of many households. So, what is the difference the 2010 and 2012 races?

“From my standpoint, I clearly now have name recognition in the race,’’ McMahon said. “I really had to build that in the first race. Richard Blumenthal was clearly an icon in the state, who had over 20 years of political capital that he had built up around the state. The Democratic opponent, if it turns out to be Chris Murphy, has district recognition, but he has not run a statewide race. If he is the candidate, he has to sort of overcome that. Susan Bysiewicz was secretary of state. She does have statewide recognition. So, she doesn’t have to overcome that hurdle. I believe a lot more people have gotten to know me since the last race.’’

The Hartford Courant’s Daniela Altimari reports that McMahon’s name came up Thursday morning during a lengthy Democratic debate at Central Connecticut State University in New Britain. When asked why they are undertaking the rigors of running for the Senate, both Bysiewicz and Murphy mentioned their children–and McMahon, the wealthy former CEO of WWE, a wrestling and entertainment company.

“I just couldn’t allow somebody like Linda McMahon to buy this election,” Murphy said near the end of the debate.

Bysiewicz added, ”I’ll be darned if I let someone who sells sex and violence and pornography for a living be our next United States Senator. … We have to send the right woman to Washington.”

But McMahon’s campaign issued a response soon after that included a picture of Bysiewicz at a WWE get-out-the-vote effort.

“It’s amazing how memories fade when you’re a professional politician. Susan Bysiewicz is no different,” said Erin Isaac, a campaign spokeswoman. “In this morning’s debate, Susan launched a misguided attack on Linda McMahon that was dishonest and disingenuous. You see, Susan Bysiewicz was not only a strong supporter of WWE’s “Smackdown Your Vote” campaign, she also participated in events at local high schools with the WWE and some of its stars.”   
 
Isaac noted that Bysiewicz had been quoted in a WWE press release at the time. The quote by Bysiewicz was: “The distrust and cynicism toward politics and government among young people represents a trend that must be challenged, and Smackdown Your Vote! is doing just that.”

Isaac added, “Surprisingly, Susan not only supported Linda McMahon’s appointment to the State Board of Education, she wrote a letter to the Governor advocating her appointment!”