It has been well
established ever since Governor Dannel Malloy had been hoisted into the
governor’s office by a slim vote margin that Mr. Malloy rarely has met a
political opportunity he has not eagerly taken advantage of.
If former Governor
Jodi Rell was modest in this regard, Mr. Malloy is in comparison shameless. In
the last few weeks alone, Mr. Malloy has appeared as a speaker at the Democratic National Convention where he gleefully skewered Republicans;
he joined a picket line to express his solidarity with union strikers; he
traveled to China, where forced abortions are routine, to curry favor with
Chinese leaders, presumably with a view of increasing China’s market share in
Connecticut. The long list unreels in tandem with Mr. Malloy’s crowded
calendar. Mr. Malloy’s grasp extends
much further than those of his Connecticut critics, none of whom make regular
appearances on National TV shows such as "Morning Joe.”
If Republicans ever
were to be so bold as to accuse Mr. Malloy of engaging in cheap political
stunts for opportunistic reasons, they instantly would be pilloried from
political post to political post as cheap opportunists, precisely the charge
Michael Lawlor, Mr. Malloy’s undersecretary for criminal justice policy and
planning in the state budget office, has publically leveled against several
Republican leaders in a media release sent to news outlets in Connecticut and beyond.
Those Republicans
cited more than once as political grandstanders by Mr. Lawlor might justly
reply to Mr. Lawlor’s effronteries by recounting well known maxims: pots calling
kettles black; politicians with logs in their eyes remarking critically on the
slivers in the eyes of their political opponents.
To all this the
Malloyalists might justly reply that Mr. Malloy’s crowded schedule and his
partisan posturing advance the public good. As to the charge of political
opportunism, well sir: Fish swim, birds fly and politicians do politics. One
politician’s opportunism is another politician’s patriotic endeavor to advance
the public good.
And here we come to
the nub of the matter. With regard to Connecticut’s early release program,
there is only one question worth discussing: Does the program advance the
public good? And there is a related question: If the Lawlor-Malloy early
release program did not contribute to the public good, how would we know it?
Connecticut’s early
release program is the much pampered brain child of Mr. Lawlor. The program was
hustled into a legislative bill without the benefit of a public hearing in the
closing days of the last legislative session – over voluble objections by
Republicans in the General Assembly that early release should not be given to
violent offenders. The program was smuggled past its critics, mostly Republicans who, at the very beginning of the Malloy administration,
had been shooed away from the legislative table as Mr. Malloy and union leaders
settled on a budget that likely was never in balance.
After a violent murder had been committed in Meriden by an early release prisoner who NEVER
should have been given get-out-of-jail-early-release-credits – distributed
retroactively by Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Malloy to 7,580 prisoners – State Victim Advocate Michelle Cruz,
Republican State Senator Len Suzio, who lives three blocks from EZMart where the murder
had been committed, and other concerned legislators began to call for a public hearing the purpose of which would be to review
shortcomings in the Lawlor-Malloy early release program. Following a careful
presentation of available data on the program, Ms. Cruz’s job was posted by
disgruntled, publicity shy Malloyalists, possibly in an effort
to intimidate her.
Mr. Lawlor, once co-chairman
of the Judiciary Committee, and his former colleagues in the General Assembly
signaled their strenuous opposition to the suggested review hearing. And when
Republicans announced they would hold a public hearing – because in their view
a suspension and review of the program was necessary to secure the public’s
safety -- even though the hearing were to be boycotted by Democratic
legislators, Mr. Lawlor, anticipating his baby would be thrown out with the
wash water, accused the following Republican Judiciary Committee members of
unconscionable politicking: Ranking members John Kissel and John Hetherington
and members Jason Welch and Andrew Roraback. Republican Minority leader John
McKinney, a courageous and outspoken critic
of the program, also attended. The lone Democrat in attendance was Vice Chair
Gary Holder-Winfield.
The broadcast
of the Hearing on the Risk Reduction Credit program, including testimony
provided by Ms. Cruz, may be found here at CT-N.
Ms. Cruz is much too
non-partisan and courageous to survive an administration that “takes names.’ In
addition to the real victims of Mr. Lawlor's poorly constructed early release
program, some of whom have seen their family members murdered by early release
prisoners, Ms. Cruz's job has now been farmed out to spare the Malloy
administration further embarrassment. This is not an administration that reacts
properly to inconvenient truths. There is not a single reporter in the state
who cannot vouch for her sterling character, though none of them carry enough
weight to prevent her head from falling into the Malloyalist basket. If Mr.
Holder-Winfied was not present at the boycotted hearing at the sufferance of
Mr. Lawlor and Mr. Malloy, one hopes he has a sufficient political insurance
policy.
Comments