The pursuit of the elusive unaffiliated vote has destroyed
more politicians in Connecticut than the usual and expected corrupt political
activity.
The notion of the virtuous outsider refashioning politics in
a state gone bad has become a totem of national and state politics. In a New
York primary just recently, Democrats reached very far outside the political
box and chose a leftist community organizer, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, to
replace incumbent Congressman, Democratic Caucus Chair Joe
Crowley in New York's 14th congressional district. Before he became
President, community organizer, civil rights professor and attorney Barack
Obama was a little known U.S. Senator from Illinois who ran for the presidency, and won, having completed only three of his six year term in the Senate. In the last Presidential
election, businessman Donald Trump beat back 17 Republican politicians with
substantial political experience – and former Secretary of State Hillary
Clinton, U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s bosom pal -- to become the 45th
U.S. President.
The two principal gubernatorial contenders in Connecticut
are both wealthy businessmen. Bob Stefanowski has clean political hands, never
having occupied public office before, and Ned Lamont’s prior political
experience might fill a thimble. Both are
Junior Varsity teams, to employ a phrase incorrectly deployed by Obama against ISIS.
It is a grave error to go a’ courting unaffiliateds with
empty hands.
The unaffiliateds in Connecticut have been in a rebellious
mood for decades. They gravitated towards Republican turned Independent Lowell
Weicker’s gubernatorial bid in 1991 because as senator Weicker had been a
Republican Party “maverick” for the greater part of his political career.
Senator Weicker had been voting with Democrats for years before finally being dispatched by then Attorney General Joe Lieberman. Weicker then shook the dust
of the Republican Party from his feet, as Griebel has now done, and proceeded
as Governor to grace Connecticut with an income tax, after having given
assurances to voters during his campaign that establishing an income tax in the
middle of a recession would be tantamount to pouring gas on a fire. The additional tax prolonged and deepened the recession. Connecticut
has been in perpetual recession since 1991. Having tripled taxes and spending since
Weicker vacated the governor’s office, the state is still struggling to lift
its head above water years after virtually every other state in the union had
recovered from the recessionary undertow. After imposing on Connecticut the
largest tax increase in its history, Governor Dannel Malloy – present approval rating 21 percent, who forgot everything and learned nothing from the Weicker years – threw more gas on the bonfire, imposing on his state
the second largest tax increase in its history. The additional gas prolonged and deepened a second Connecticut recession.
So, we’ve had experienced governors, Rowland and Rell, and
outside-the-Republican-box governors, Weicker, and a tax and spend Democrat Governor,
Malloy, and a Democrat hegemon in the General Assembly, all of whom have driven
Connecticut’s ship of state on the rocks – while Connecticut’s media somnolently supported the status quo .
And now…?
Unless a new governor and – hopefully – a radically reformed legislature
adopts a swift remedial change in policies, Connecticut will continue sleepily to wander
towards the gates of Hell, over which is written “Abandon hope, all ye who
enter here.” Everyone, not least those politicians and political commentators
who have championed a ruinous quarter century old status quo, knows this to be the case. We are
not witnesses to a failure of intelligence; our failure lies in the spines of
those who have not loved the state passionately enough to tell us the truth.
When Connecticut's ship goes under – as will happen, unless a course correction
is adopted -- honest analysts and historians will not be kind to these robotic and
cowardly politicians.
Nor will Republicans, Democrats and unaffiliateds, because
they too will be swimming with the fish.
There is one and only only one question that should rest on the minds of
voters who next November will seal their own fates, and it is this: Is the candidate I am voting for competent
enough, courageous enough and persistent enough to lash himself to the mast and
set a course radically different than that taken during the last few decades by
my state’s assassins? In a democratic republic, the people always get the ruined governments they deserve.
Comments