Every newspaper and news outlet in Connecticut should be screaming from the rooftops in favor of multiple -- far more than two – debates between Governor Ned Lamont and his Republican challenger Ryan Fazio. Multiple debates between the two would reveal, however imperfectly, the strengths and weaknesses of both candidates.
Debates -- the more, the merrier -- cut across the grain of
modern political perceptions. Should Lamont be re-throned for a third term as
governor in the absence of serious campaign debates, he may rightly credit an
indifferent “business as usual” state media for his uncontested victory.
Lamont’s handlers, we know, will be advising him to maintain a low profile and
use his dazzling record in office as a blind hiding his imperfections in plain
sight. Lamont has so far relied on his millions to purchase anonymity from a
variety of sources that over the years have produced an artificially, highly
attenuated public persona, the result of choreographed public appearances.
Lamont is perfectly content to let TV ads, campaign
spokespersons -- cheaper by the dozen – and Connecticut’s obliging left of
center Democrat controlled General Assembly do his debating for him, provided
his carefully crafted political persona remains pristine and unchallenged by
Connecticut’s left of center media. Lamont might make a serious error in an
unmanaged debate, but prearranged media appearances usually go off without a
damaging hitch. These appearances are political melodramas whose scripts are
usually determined by Lamont and others whose business it is to shape his
public persona. Debates are much different presentations -- to be avoided at
all costs. Running out the campaign clock is a perfect way to escape unscripted
public scrutiny. Lamont may already have won this battle. So far he has agreed
to only two debates with Fazio.
In recent days, Lamont has been running away from unscripted
debates – and costly administrative scandals.
Democrat functionaries have recently decided that a cursory
investigation into the resignation of Connecticut Central State University (CCSU)
President Zulma Toro by Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU) should
be safely shelved. An earlier possible impeachment of Marissa Gillett, PURA’s Czar, was also
shelved following her resignation. (See here for more on PURA.)
The shelf space in the Lamont administration is getting
mighty crowded.
Sam Norton, spokesperson for CSCU tells us, “In light of
President Toro’s resignation and retirement, continuing the investigation to a
final report is no longer necessary. The information shared during the
investigative process will continue to inform how we establish and maintain a
culture of respect. That is where the resources need to go… A prolonged
employment dispute would have created continued uncertainty and a distraction
for the university at a time when our students, faculty and staff need clarity
and stability.”
“Toro’s resignation,” Hartford Courant reporter Livi
Stanford reminds us, “follows the scandal-plagued departures of two Connecticut
State Colleges and Universities chancellors. Last week, an independent review
examining Connecticut State Colleges and Universities system’s response to
sexual harassment allegations against former interim Chancellor O. John Maduko
found ‘serious failures in how CSCU responded to concerns about sexual
harassment and gaps in the Board’s process for selecting the former interim
chancellor, according to an announcement Board of Regents Interim Chair Ari
Santiago sent to the CSCU community.”
Two “eyes wide open” Republican leaders -- Senate Minority
Leader Stephen Harding and Senator Henri Martin, the Republican ranking member
of the Higher Education and Employment Advancement Committee, found the
decision to bury the accumulating scandals “absolutely unacceptable… So this
all magically ‘goes away’ because President Toro resigned? That isn’t going to
fly. What about the abuse allegations? The meat cutting? The dog watching? The
verbal assaults on staff? What about the whistleblowers and the victims? What
about the people whose lives have been derailed? Where’s their justice?”
West Hartford Democrat and co-chair of the Higher Education
and Employment Advancement Committee Senator Derek Slap rose to a defense of those
shelving necessary public information that might easily be brought forward
through a serious legislative investigation -- were it not for Derek Slap. The
Grand River Solutions independent review, Slap told reporters, “provides a
pretty good roadmap for some of the changes that need to take place… I don’t
think it’s fair to say there hasn’t been accountability. We’ve had two
chancellors and one president who have all left. I hope that nobody’s trying to
use this as an opportunity to score political points six weeks before an
election.”
Stanford tells us in her report: “Grand River Solutions, the
national consulting firm conducting the review of the CSCU system’s handling of
sexual harassment allegations against Maduko, recommended CSCU should “cease
the actual or perceived general practice of not conducting an investigation
whenever a respondent is no longer affiliated with the system (
emphasis mine)” according to its independent review.”
Slap crowned his statement with the following diadem, both
hypocritical and misleading: According
to Stanford “He said if Republicans have a list of tangible things that are not
known yet and warrant an independent investigation, he is open to it, but in ‘all
fairness I have not seen that.’”
Sure, sure – in all fairness, it would not be possible for
Republicans, or anyone else, to offer Slap “a list of tangible things that are
not known yet” in the absence of investigations snuffed by Slap, Lamont, Democrat
gate keepers in the General Assembly and incurious members of Connecticut
media, given to chastising loudly pro-open-government Republicans. The arrogant
Lamont administration appears to have an “invincibility” problem.
Comments