Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Signing Tues and Wed (Bushnell Park – near the food trucks 11am – 1pm)

No Comments

Reminder:

Looking for an opportunity to ensure that our voices are heard in this year’s gubernatorial election?

If you are in the area, swing by Bushnell Park from 11:00am  to 1:00pm today or tomorrow.

We’ll be near the food trucks.

You signature will allow us to be on this year’s ballot.

With your help we can put Connecticut back on track

Thanks so much,

Jonathan Pelto and Ebony Murphy
Education and Democracy Party
 

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

The Time for Action is upon us

5 Comments

Following a great weekend of collecting signatures for the Pelto/Murphy 2014 petition effort, we continue to ramp  up our historic effort to get on the November ballot and ensure that the people of Connecticut have a real choice in this year’s election for governor hangs in the balance…

As supporters know, the August 6th 2014 deadline to submit 7,500 signatures to get on the November Ballot is fast approaching.

Regardless of whether you’ve been collecting signatures all along or are part of the group willing to join the effort now, we need your help!

PLEASE DOWNLOAD AND PRINT OUT the Pelto/Murphy petition form and get ten to fifteen family, friends, colleagues, neighbors, and other fellow citizens to sign. 

REMEMBER:  Any voter can sign and every name moves us closer to our goal.

You can download the Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition form by clicking on the following link – Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Form

Here are the Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Form Instructions:

#1:  This exact form must be used. No other form will do.  The form must be doubled-sided with one side to collect the signature, name, birth date and street address of each voter. If necessary, securely glue or tape the two sides together if you can’t print on both sides.

#2: There must be separate page for each town.  This means that if you are getting a signature from a voter who lives in Middletown and one who lives in Avon you must have them sign separate petition sheets – note that at the top of the page it says Petition Circulated in Town of __________.  Please put in the name of the town you are the petition signer is from.

#3: We are instructed to print the form out on legal paper – HOWEVER – if you use regular 8 ½ x 11 paper and the forms are completed correctly they will be accepted.   So you can print and copy this page on legal or regular paper BUT make sure that the final document HAS BOTH SIDES COPIED.

#4: When you have collected some signatures and want to submit them: 

(a)  Take the sheet(s) for your town to your local town clerk who will watch you sign the back, notarize it and take the sheet for that particular town.  They can also notarize the other towns you have but we will need to get those sheets to the appropriate towns.

(b)  If you have sheets for other towns and don’t have time to deliver them or can’t stop by your local town hall, you MUST still get all the sheets notarized and then send the sheets to following address – but we need them soon so we can get them to the appropriate town:

Pelto 2014
PO Box 400
Storrs, CT. 06268

If you have any questions, please drop me a note at [email protected] or call me at 860-428-2823.

Finally, we will be conducting petition drives at locations throughout the state over the next week.  If you have a couple of hours to help at one of these locations – please send us a note – as soon as possible – so we can get you scheduled to help – again the email address is [email protected]

As always,

Thanks!

Jonathan

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

Sign a Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Today:  Bushnell Park – near the food trucks 11:30 – 1pm

4 Comments

Looking for an opportunity to ensure that our voices are heard in this year’s gubernatorial election?

If you are in the area, swing by Bushnell Park from 11:30 to 1:00pm today (near the food trucks) and sign the petition that will allow us to be on this year’s ballot.

Thanks so much,

Jonathan Pelto and Ebony Murphy
Education and Democracy Party
 

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

I didn’t leave my political party, my party left me

6 Comments

I’m often asked why, considering I’m a life-long Democrat, I am “leaving” the Democratic Party and running as an independent for Governor.  I start by explaining that as hard as it is to run as an independent, I thought the institutional barriers to winning a Democratic Primary were even greater.

But then I add that, to be blunt,  I don’t believe I am “leaving” the Democratic Party, I believe the Democratic Party has left me and tens of thousands of other people who understand that many Democratic leaders have turned their backs on Democratic ideals, principles and constituencies in order to kowtow to the corporate elite.

Former Democratic State Senator, State Comptroller, and Democratic candidate for governor, Bill Curry has an extraordinarily powerful piece on Salon.com today about this very issue.  While I’ve had my differences with Bill Curry through the years (probably more often my fault), he is one of the smartest, most astute, political observers on the scene today. In his latest piece for this national audience, Bill Curry writes;

 My party has lost its soul: Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and the victory of Wall Street Democrats

In 2006 the Atlantic magazine asked a panel of “eminent historians” to name the 100 most influential people in American history.  Included alongside George Washington, Abe Lincoln, Mark Twain and Elvis Presley was Ralph Nader, one of only three living Americans to make the list. It was airy company for Nader, but if you think about it, an easy call. Though a private citizen, Nader shepherded more bills through Congress than all but a handful of American presidents.

If that sounds like an outsize claim, try refuting it. His signature wins included landmark laws on auto, food, consumer product and workplace safety; clean air and water; freedom of information, and consumer, citizen, worker and shareholder rights.

In a century only Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt and Lyndon Johnson passed more major legislation. Nader’s also the only American ever to start a major social or political movement all by himself. The labor, civil rights and women’s movements all had multiple mothers and fathers, as did each generation’s peace and antiwar movements.

Not so the consumer movement, which started out as just one guy banging away at a typewriter. Soon he was a national icon, seen leaning into Senate microphones on TV or staring down the establishment from the covers of news magazines. What lifted Nader to such heights was the 1965 publication of “Unsafe at Any Speed,” an exposé of the auto industry’s sociopathic indifference to the health and safety of its customers. In little more than a year Congress put seat belts in every new car and created the forerunners of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Washington’s rapid response affirmed Nader’s belief that people provided with critical facts will demand change and that sooner than one might expect politicians, however listless or corrupt, will give it to them.

This faith in the power of ideas and of public opinion — in the educability of people and thus in the viability of democracy — distinguishes Nader from much of what remains of the American left.

[…]

Throughout the 1980s Nader watched as erstwhile Democratic allies vanished or fell into the welcoming arms of big business.  By the mid-’90s the whole country was in a swoon over the new baby-faced titans of technology and global capital. If leading Democrats thought technology threatened anyone’s privacy or employment or that globalization threatened anyone’s wages, they kept it to themselves.  In his contempt for oligarchs of any vintage and rejection of the economic and political democratization myths of the new technology Nader seemed an anachronism. His critics would later say Nader was desperate for attention.

For certain he was desperate to reengage the nation in a debate over the concentration of wealth and power; desperate enough by 1992 to run for president. His first race was a sort of novelty campaign — he ran in New Hampshire’s Democratic and Republican primaries “as a stand in for none of the above.” But the experience proved habit-forming and he got mottre serious as he went along. In 1996 and 2000 he ran as the nominee of the Green Party and in 2004 and 2008 as an independent.

The campaigns defined him for a new generation, but he never stopped writing. His latest book, “Unstoppable,” argues for the existence and utility of an “emerging left-right alliance to dismantle the corporate state.” The book is vintage Nader and ranks with his best. The questions it poses should greatly interest progressives.

The question is, will any read it. It’s a question because on top of all the hurdles facing even celebrity authors today, Nader is estranged from much of his natural readership. It goes back, of course, to his third race for president, the one that gave us George W. Bush, John Roberts, Sam Alito, the Iraq War and a colossal debt. Democrats blame Nader for all of it. Some say he not only cost Al Gore the 2000 election but did it on purpose. Nader denies both charges. Both are more debatable than either he or his critics allow. In 1996 I served as counselor to President Clinton and met often with Nader to discuss that campaign. Early on he told me he wouldn’t be a spoiler. Judging by his message and schedule and the deployment of his meager resources, he was true to his word. In 2000 his allocation of resources was little changed: He spent 20 days in deep blue California, two in Florida; hardly a spoiler’s itinerary. But he was in Florida at the end and his equation throughout of Gore with Bush — “Tweedledum and Tweedledee” — outraged Democrats.

The Democrats’ dismissal of Nader in 2000 was of a piece with our personality-driven politics: a curmudgeon on steroids; older now and grumpier; driven by ego and personal grievance. But Nader always hit hard; you don’t get to be the world’s most famous shopper by making allowances or pulling punches. The difference was that in 2000 Democrats as well as Republicans bore the brunt of his attacks. What had changed? It says a lot about the Democratic Party then and now that nobody bothered to ask the question, the answer to which is, a whole lot.

Bill Curry’s complete piece can be found at:  Bill Curry article.

I urge all of you to take the time to read it. Had we done a better job of listening to Ralph Nader and Bill Curry we very well might not be in the mess we are today.

There is no need to agree or disagree with Nader and Curry on every issue to recognize that they speak the truth about the fact that we did not leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left. Us.

The question is how best to re-build a political movement that will ensure our beliefs and principles are heard and acted upon. That is one of the very reasons I am running for Governor this year.

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

If you want change – now is the time to step up and make it happen!

3 Comments

Apologies to those that have already received this call to action – but the historic effort to get on the November ballot and ensure that the people of Connecticut have a real choice in this year’s election for governor hangs in the balance…

The August 6th 2014 deadline to submit 7,500 signatures to get on the November Ballot is fast approaching.

Many people have and will continue to collect signatures – but we need everyone’s help to make sure that sufficient signatures are collected.

If you have been collecting signatures please do all you can to collect even more names.

But this is vital; If you haven’t had a chance to get some names – PLEASE DOWNLOAD AND PRINT OUT the Pelto/Murphy petition form and get ten to fifteen family, friends, colleagues, neighbors, and other fellow citizens to sign. 

REMEMBER:  Any voter can sign and every name moves us closer to our goal.

A Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition is attached to this email and you can also download via the following link:

Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Form

Here are the Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Form Instructions:

This exact form must be used. No other form will do.  The form must be doubled-sided with one side to collect the signature, name, birth date and street address of each voter. If necessary, securely glue or tape the two sides together if you can’t print on both sides.

There must be separate page for each town.  This means that if you are getting a signature from a voter who lives in Middletown and one who lives in Avon you must have them sign separate petition sheets – note that at the top of the page it says Petition Circulated in Town of __________.  Please put in the name of the town you are the petition signer is from.

Third, we are instructed to print the form out on legal paper – HOWEVER – if you use regular 8 ½ x 11 paper and the forms are completed correctly they will be accepted.   So you can print and copy this page on legal or regular paper BUT make sure that the final document HAS BOTH SIDES COPIED.

Fourth, when you have collected some signatures and want to submit them: 

(1)  Take the sheet(s) for your town to your local town clerk who will watch you sign the back, notarize it and take the sheet for that particular town.  They can also notarize the other towns you have but we will need to get those sheets to the appropriate towns.

(2)  If you have sheets for other towns and don’t have time to deliver them or can’t stop by your local town hall, you MUST still get all the sheets notarized and then send the sheets to:

Pelto 2014
PO Box 400
Storrs, CT. 06268

 If you have any questions, please drop me a note at [email protected] or call me at 860-428-2823.

Thanks so much for all your help

Together we can change the course of Connecticut – but we need everyone to help collect more signatures

Jonathan

If you simply can’t collect signatures, but still want to sign, watch the website for locations where you can go and sign or drop me a note and we’ll see what we can do to find another way that you can sign the petition. [email protected]

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

 

 

 

Today’s “MUST READ” Columns on the Malloy/Pryor Charter School scandals

8 Comments

Another Week, Another Scandal (By Sarah Darer Littman)

Another week, and another education scandal here in the Nutmeg State. The FBI served subpoenas on charter school operator FUSE last Friday morning, and shortly after their visit Hartford Courant reporters found the receptionist shredding documents. “Asked what was being shredded, she said the documents were associated with the state-subsidized Jumoke charter schools.” Obstruction of justice, anyone?

Meanwhile, after the notoriously opaque state Department of Education declined to issue reporters a copy of their own FBI-issued subpoena, the Courant received this statement Monday from Department of Education spokeswoman Kelly Donnelly: “We have been assured that the department is not a subject of this investigation.” Okay then. That’s clear.

Yet by Tuesday, it was another story. Apparently, the subpoena seeks, among other things, “All emails of Commissioner Stefan Pryor” since January 2012.

Read the complete piece at: http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/archives/entry/op-ed_another_week_another_scandal/

 

A charlatan in charge of children (By Wendy Lecker)

It is becoming painfully clear that in Connecticut, the refrain that education reform is “all about the children,” is a sad joke. To Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor and his allies, children are merely collateral damage.

Recently, there was the scandal involving Hartford’s Milner school, in which the children were used as pawns in a scheme to expand the charter empire of now-disgraced Jumoke/FUSE CEO Michael Sharpe. Pryor never bothered to discover that Sharpe is a former felon and falsified his academic credentials. Instead, while Milner was floundering under Sharpe, Pryor, a longtime Sharpe supporter, handed him two additional schools. The fate of public school children was clearly the last thing on Pryor’s mind. Currently, the FBI is investigating Pryor’s, Sharpe’s and Jumoke/FUSE’s connections.

And now — New London. In 2012, Pryor decided to take over New London’s school district. His pretext was that the school board was dysfunctional and “rife with personal agendas.” Pryor never provided any causal relationship between the board’s behavior and student performance.

On the contrary, Pryor acknowledged that “many of the problems of New London and the New London School District are the direct result of economic decline and poverty.”

Instead of providing New London with adequate resources, the Malloy administration, through Pryor, appointed Steven Adamowski as New London’s powerful special master.

Adamowski was simultaneously the special master of another impoverished district, Windham. Adamowski’s reign in Windham was characterized by pushing unproven reforms while gutting services that actually helped children. He cut funding for Windham’s successful pre-K program and reduced the capacity of Windham’s bilingual program-even though over a quarter of the students are English Language Learners. He pushed the use of Teach for America, replacing experienced local teachers with temporary recent college graduates; and promoted “choice” for a select number of parents who could afford transportation to an out-of-district school.

 Read the full article at: http://www.stamfordadvocate.com/news/article/Lecker-A-charlatan-in-charge-of-children-5647661.php

 

Search Firm Faulted For Overlooking ‘Ph.D.’ Claims In Carter’s Past; Says It Will Make Good (By Jon Lender)

You’re in front of a Google search screen. You type in “Terrence Carter” — in quotation marks — and then add Chicago, his hometown. Hit “Enter.”

On the first page of results there’s a link for some speakers’ biographies for a 2011 education conference. One of the “Presenter Biographies” is about “Terrence Carter, Ph.D.” and it says he holds doctorate from Stanford University — which he doesn’t.

That’s the process that The Courant went through two weeks ago, finding a public document listing Carter as the holder of a doctorate — several years before his scheduled receipt next month of a Ph.D. from an accredited institute, Lesley University in Cambridge, Mass.

Expanding the search terms slightly — to combinations such as “Terrence Carter, Ph.D.” and Dr. Terrence P. Carter” — yielded a dozen such references.

A member of the search team Nebraska-based McPherson & Jacobson — a Nebraska-based human resources consultant — said she didn’t come up with any Ph.D. or Dr. listing. Carter was never asked about those references during the application process that led to his selection last month by New London’s Board of Education for the job of school superintendent effective Aug. 1.

As a result, the questions that could have been asked in the relatively relaxed setting of a job interview now will be asked in an overheated pressure-cooker situation. The school board Thursday night postponed a vote to approve a contract with the superintendent’s job and ordered its law firm to investigate Carter’s background. The probe is expected to take a month.

The action came after a series of Courant stories starting July 18 raised questions about Carter’s use of the titles Ph.D. and Dr. dating back at least to 2008.

Some officials and citizens in New London said they are wondering why the search consultant that pledged in March to perform “extensive background checks” on the candidates didn’t turn any of this stuff up.

“Why did it take someone from the Hartford Courant to vet the whole situation?” New London resident Eric Parnes asked the school board at its meeting Thursday night.

Read the complete article at: http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-lender-carter-resume-0727-20140726,0,1585462.column

 

And one more – file this one under – What the heck was “Dr.” Terrence Carter and the corporate education reform industry geniuses thinking?

PDF: Comparison Of Terrence P. Carter’s 2011 And 2014 Biographies

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

Looking for a place to sign a Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition this weekend

1 Comment

[Just back often - additional locations will be added]

Saturday July 26th

Storrs Starbucks: 10:00 – 11:00am
1244 Storrs Rd., Storrs, CT
 
Rocky Hill Starbucks 10-noon
412 Cromwell Ave, Rocky Hill, CT 
 
Naugatuck Stop and Shop 10-noon
727 Rubber Ave, Naugatuck, CT
 
New London City Pier 2:00-4:00pm
 
West Hartford Barnes & Noble: 10:30- noon
Blue Back Square, 60 Isham Road, West Hartford, CT 
 
Manchester Barnes & Noble: 12:30 – 3pm
Barnes & Noble Booksellers, 270 Buckland Hills Dr., Manchester, CT
 
Milford Barnes & Noble: 4:30 – 6pm
Barnes & Noble, 1375 Boston Post Road, Milford, CT
 
New Haven Green 4-7pm
 
Bushnell Carousel [Time TBD]
Bushnell Park, Harford, CT
 

Sunday, July 27th

Coventry Farmers Market 10:30 – 12:00
Nathan Hale Homestead, Coventry, CT
 
Stamford Farmers Market 11:00 – 1pm
39 Scofieldtown Rd, Stamford, CT
 
Cafemantic 12-2pm
948 Main St, Willimantic, CT
 
Greater Hartford Irish Music Festival [Time TBD]
132 Commerce St. Glastonbury, CT.
 
Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

What is this race for Governor all about – take a look at the new article from In These Times

7 Comments

I recently conducted an interview with Cole Stangler, a reporter for “In These Times.”

Although not everyone reads “In These Times,” they should.

Kurt Vonnegut once said, “If it weren’t for In These Times, I’d be a man without a country.”

In These Times was created by author and historian James Weinstein in 1976.  His goal was to, “”identify and clarify the struggles against corporate power now multiplying in American society.”  You can read former Senator Paul Wellstone’s observation about In These Times at the end of this article.

Here is the In These Times article about the race in Connecticut;

Pelto-Murphy

Spoiler Alert, Connecticut: Jon Pelto Says He Isn’t One

Meet the blogger and former legislator who just might be incumbent Governor Dan Malloy’s worst enemy.

At first glance, Jonathan Pelto seems like another run-of-the-mill Democrat—a time-tested party loyalist. He was first elected to the Connecticut State House in 1984—his senior year at the University of Connecticut—where he served until 1993. During that time, Pelto worked as political director of the state party; after leaving the Capitol, he made a living as a high-profile liberal political consultant. In recent years, however, Pelto has explicitly concentrated his energies on reform: He has emerged as one of the state’s most prominent left-wing critics of Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy, elected in 2010.

On his highly trafficked blog “Wait What?” Pelto regularly serves up acerbic columns interrogating Malloy’s stances on a variety of subjects, including education reform, taxes, labor relations and budget cuts. “Jon Pelto,” the anti-corporate education reform crusader Diane Ravitch recently proclaimed on her own blog, “is standing up for teachers and parents and everyone else who is not in the 1%.”

On June 12, Pelto announced he was running for governor under the self-created Education and Democracy Party ticket. He and his running mate Ebony Murphy need to collect a minimum of 7,500 signatures by August 6 in order to appear on the ballot; they expect to reach that goal.

The major unions—the state AFL-CIOConnecticut’s SEIU localseven the American Federation of Teachers-Connecticut—have all endorsed the incumbent Democrat. (“I love Jon Pelto and am supporting Gov. Malloy,” tweeted AFT President Randi Weingarten last month.) The Connecticut Working Families Party is expected to follow suit when the state committee makes its final decision, which likely won’t be until August.

Speaking to In These Times on the phone last week, Pelto says he’s frustrated by the lack of official endorsements, but insists he’s committed to the campaign. This interview has been abridged and edited.

Why are you mounting a challenge to Dan Malloy?

I supported Dan Malloy. I worked with Dan Malloy. But when he was sworn in as Dannel Malloy, he reversed course on a lot of policies.

In Malloy’s first year, for example, he really went after state employees. What really changed my mind about his work, though, was when he became a huge advocate of the corporate education reform industry. He is the only Democratic governor to introduce a plan to do away with teacher tenure, which he did in February 2012. At that point, my blog really shifted to focusing on education issues and the education reform effort.

That was a key topic, although there were many others. What was clear was that Malloy had no intention of pivoting leftward on a variety of things I perceived to be major issues.

What are those issues?

The privatization of public education was number one.

Number two is tax policy. When Governor Malloy introduced a $1.5 billion tax package to balance the budget in 2011, he said to a joint session of the House and Senate that he didn’t want to raise taxes more than 0.2 percent on those making over $1 million because he didn’t want to “punish success.” The taxes he have issued have disproportionately affected the middle class. We have the highest gas tax in history; the sales tax is fairly narrow and hits a lot of people in the middle-class and working families. We’ve created a perfectly regressive tax structure.

Number three is that Malloy has pushed through the biggest cuts in Connecticut history to our public colleges and universities.

Number four, he is—for lack of a better term—a fan of these corporate welfare programs that give nearly $1 billion in state funds, either in tax breaks or low-interest loans, to major companies. The most famous of these is Bridgewater, the largest hedge fund in the world. Its CEO, Ray Dalio, was paid $3.9 billion three years ago, and made $3 billion last year. Malloy offered Bridgewater $115 million in incentives if it agreed to move to downtown Stamford. He gave ESPN $25 million for a new studio, even though the studio had already been built. He gave more than $50 million to CIGNA Corp. to move their headquarters from Pennsylvania back to Connecticut. Malloy has been a real aficionado of giving money to companies with the promise that they create jobs over the course of 10 years.

And finally, Connecticut used to have the best campaign finance law in the country. But Malloy and the Democrats have really cut back its effectiveness by creating massive loopholes that allow for lobbyists and PACs—and even state contractors—to give money to candidates.

Why not run as a Democrat like Zephyr Teachout in New York?

In Connecticut, it would have been, in my mind, impossible to win a Democratic primary.

My fear was that Malloy would win and claim that those issues were not as important, because he won by 70-30 to win the Democratic primary. Running as a third party ensures that once you get on the ballot, you get to be heard all the way through the process.

In campaign management, we look at the percentage of people who want to reelect the incumbent. The highest that Malloy’s ever gotten was 46 percent. Compare that to Andrew Cuomo, who has a 54 to 60 percent, depending on the candidate: Malloy is on the ropes anyway.

In the polls that have been conducted so far, you’re not showing up. They’ve shown a very small percentage of people chose the option of somebody other than Malloy or Foley. Do you really think you have a chance of winning this election? And if you don’t, what’s the point of running?

These questions weigh heavily on me as I’ve thought about the issues, and I have to say my answer has changed a little bit over time. I stuck with the line—“I would only run if I was a credible candidate. I wouldn’t run simply if I was a spoiler.” But credible is a relative term. The goal is to win, but it’s also to impact the debate on what it means to be a Democrat and the corporatization of government. And the best way to do that was to run as a third-party candidate.

I think I am already having an impact on the debate. I was an opponent of the Common Core, for example. The only one left in the field [of potential candidates] who still supports Common Core is Malloy. All the other candidates have pledged to do away with Common Core if they’re elected and that has happened, in part, because of my positioning in the debate.

The idea of a credible candidate is one that can have an impact, and I believe that we are and we will have a significant impact on the race.

Do you think you can win this race?

I think there is a scenario, an outside chance, particularly in a four-way race. This guy Joe Visconti is also collecting petitions [to run for governor]. [In 1990], Lowell Weicker won with 40 percent of the vote as an independent candidate for governor. It was different; he was well-known and well-financed. And coming from the Republican side, John Rowland became governor in 1994 with 36 percent of the vote. Is there a scenario where I can get 35 or 36 percent of the vote? Yes, I think there is.

You’re regarded as something of a spoiler candidate. The former Senator Joseph Lieberman has compared you to Ralph Nader. The political director of the eastern states conference of Machinists made the same case—that you’re a spoiler siphoning off votes from the Democrats. The alternative to Dan Malloy is Tom Foley, who is this viciously right-wing hedge fund guy, who’s made no secret of his admiration for the policies of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker. What do you make of those spoiler charges?

I have two different but parallel responses, the first is that this is not Wisconsin.

So Tom Foley famously said Connecticut needs a “Wisconsin moment.”

Yeah, we don’t know much about Foley. He’s not a Teabagger. On the other hand, he said that.

But more importantly, thanks to gerrymandering in 1990, 2000, and 2010, Connecticut will remain Democratic for generations to come, so there will be a Democratic legislature—unlike in Wisconsin where you had a [Tea Party] governor and [Tea Party]-controlled House and Senate. Here we will have a Democratic legislature. And it did its job. For example, when Malloy introduced a bill that did away with tenure, the Democratic legislature stripped it of that provision. The idea that Foley would make Connecticut the next Wisconsin is just fearmongering and just not true.

Now, would Foley be worse than Malloy on some issues? Undoubtedly he would. But on education, I don’t think we could get much worse than Malloy. He is anathema to everything we Democrats, liberals, and progressives [stand for].

The fact is that Dan Malloy, at any point, could have addressed the concerns of educators and the middle-class people who are against corporate welfare and he chose not to. It’s not like these are issues that they would agree with him on—it’s just that the union leadership has said, “Suck it up and vote for him because the alternative is worse.” My feeling is that if there is a spoiler in this, it’s Dan Malloy for not being willing to come to the base of the Democratic Party and the people of Connecticut and address their concerns.

The Education and Democracy Party you are running with, is that a vehicle that will last beyond this campaign? Do you see this as building any long-term political power or is it just focused on this one campaign?

I think that’s yet to be seen. Watching the Democratic Party, I’m convinced that big segments of it have moved away from its base. Here in Connecticut, the leadership of the Democratic Party is not speaking out about representing the middle class, it’s not speaking out for teachers and higher education; it’s so aligned with corporate interests.

If this battle ends up with the Democratic Party retrenching into its own corporate approach, then I’d see the Education and Democracy Party as a long-term effort to provide an alternative to the Democratic Party or to elements within it. I’m not opposed at all to using this as a vehicle towards long-term change.

Let’s say you get 5 percent of the vote, or something that’s greater than the margin of victory for Tom Foley and Malloy loses. Is there a certain amount of success in something like that, where you’re sending a message to Democratic leadership? Do you see that as a positive thing?

I wouldn’t be running if I wasn’t comfortable with the fact that that might be an outcome. I feel strongly enough about these issues. After campaigning and talking to many people, lots of other people feel strongly as well.

While I’d like to do more than that—get more than 4 or 5 percent of the vote—and I certainly do not want to throw the election to a Republican, I feel comfortable with that outcome. I feel comfortable that I will be able to impact the system and impact the debate in a positive way, regardless of whether I win or not.

Read the entire article at: http://inthesetimes.com/article/16997/jon_pelto_dan_malloy_governor_connecticut

Cole Stangler is an In These Times staff writer and Schumann Fellow based in Washington D.C., covering labor, trade, foreign policy and environmental issues. His reporting has appeared in The Huffington Post and The American Prospect, and has been cited in The New York Times.

Finally, as for In These Times, “The late Sen. Paul Wellstone, one of the first subscribers to In These Times, put it this way: ‘Meaningful democracy cannot survive without the free flow of information, even (or especially) when that information threatens the privileged and the powerful. At a time of growing media concentration, In These Times is an invaluable source of news and information that the corporate media would too often prefer to ignore.’”

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

State Seeks “Dr.” Terrence Carter’s Withdrawal

36 Comments

From the Hartford Courant’s Jon Lender and Kathy Megan;

State Seeks Carter’s Withdrawal As Incoming School Chief After Doubts About Use Of ‘Ph.D.’

The state Department of Education asked Terrence P. Carter to withdraw from consideration Thursday as superintendent of schools for New London – after a week of damaging disclosures that he used the titles of Ph.D. and Dr. for at least five years without holding an accredited degree.

“On behalf of the Department, Special Master [Steven] Adamowski has asked for his withdrawal. At the request of the Commissioner, the Special Master is participating in ongoing conversations with the local board regarding this evolving situation and potential next steps,” said education department spokeswoman Kelly Donnelly.

There was no answer yet from Carter as of 2:45 p.m.The message was delivered to Carter only hours before a scheduled 5 p.m. meeting in New London at which the local Board of Education planned to grill him over what he has said, or not said, about his education credentials.

The board had planned to question him behind closed doors before considering whether to approve a contract for Carter to take over the city’s troubled school system on Aug. 1.

The state holds more sway in this local hiring decision than it typically does with municipalities. That’s because the low performance of the New London schools brought about the decision by the state education department, more than a year ago, to install a “special master.” Adamowski, the former Hartford schools superintendent, oversees the system.

The New London school board asked state Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor to interview Carter last month after it voted to select him after a national search. However, no contract was yet approved.

The request for him to withdraw came the day after The Courant reported that a national research organization said Carter submitted a biography in 2011 that indicated he had received a Ph.D. from Stanford University, an assertion that contradicts what the embattled educator has said.

Stanford has said that Carter never attended, which Carter has acknowledged. Carter has previously told The Courant that he was not the source for either the 2011 biography or a 2008 biographical article that also indicated he had received a Ph.D. from Stanford.

Larry McQuillan, director of public affairs for the American Institutes for Research in Washington, D.C., on Wednesday emailed to The Courant what he said was “the original bio submitted by Carter.” It indicated that he held “a Ph.D., in Organizational Leadership from Stanford University.” The institute used the biography in a “Presenter Biographies” document for a June 2-3, 2011, education conference in Rosedale, Ill.

That story was the latest in a series that began last Friday with a Courant report revealing that Carter has been calling himself “Dr.” and “Ph.D.” for more than five years on the basis of what he described as a degree from an unaccredited university — Lexington University, for which no campus address can be found, and which offers no website for online instruction.

The Courant found more than a dozen documents listing him as a Dr. or Ph.D. Carter first said that he had earned a doctorate in theology in 1996 from an unaccredited school called Hamersfield University in London. Educators in London told The Courant that they never heard of it, and, when pressed for more information two days later, Carter emailed a copy of a transcript from Lexington University. Hamersfield has changed its name to Lexington since he attended, he said.

The Lexington University transcript indicated that Carter received an A in each of 45 graduate courses on the way to a Ph.D. However, the transcript says that the degree was in Human Resource Management and Organizational Learning, not theology. The Courant was unable to locate a school by either the name Hamersfield or Lexington.

There is a website headed “Lexington University,” which advertises for people to obtain their degrees at prices of up to several hundred dollars but doesn’t include working links that allow enrollment. It was unclear if that website is connected with the transcript sent by Carter — and he has declined to answer more questions about it since Thursday.

However, a cached webpage from 2002 – found via the Internet Archive “Wayback Machine” – is headed “Lexington University” and displays the same two toll-free phone numbers that are printed on the transcript that Carter provided to The Courant last week. One number has been busy since last week, and the other, a fax number, rejected an attempt to fax a document. The cached web page bears the motto “Order Now, Graduate Today!”

Carter completed requirements in late May for a Ph.D. in education from an accredited school, Lesley University in Cambridge, Mass., and is scheduled to receive the degree on Aug. 25. He and some New London school officials say he has the right to call himself “Dr.” since he completed the degree requirements in May.

The full Courant story can be found at: http://www.courant.com/news/connecticut/hc-carter-resume-0725-20140724,0,7482548.story

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

A call for action – A request for help

No Comments

Whether the voters of Connecticut get the option of voting for a candidate other than Dannel “Dan” Malloy or Tom Foley/John McKinney depends on whether we collect a sufficient number of signatures by the August 6th 2014 Deadline to get on the November Ballot!

We have less than two weeks to reach our goal and ensure the people of Connecticut have a real choice in this year’s election.

Here is the link to download the petition:  Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Form

While we’ve made great progress toward the goal of collecting 7,500 signatures, additional names are needed to ensure that we end up with a sufficient number to get on the ballot.

If you’ve been collecting signatures – please continue to do all you can to collect even more names.

And if you haven’t had a chance to help with the petition effort yet, please download and print out a Pelto/Murphy petition form and use the next 14 days to get family, friends, colleagues, neighbors, and others to sign. 

REMEMBER:  Any voter can sign and every name moves us closer to our goal.

Here is the link to download the petition:  Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Form

If you can’t download the form, email me at [email protected] and we’ll email you a pdf or send you a hard copy…but time is running out.

Also, here is the Pelto/Murphy 2014 Petition Form Instructions;

This exact form must be used. No other form will do.  The form must be doubled-sided with one side to collect the signature, name, birth date and street address of each voter.  If you can’t print double sided then securely glue or tape the two sides together.

There must be separate page for each town.  This means if you are getting a signature from a voter who lives in Middletown and one who lives in Avon you must have them sign separate petition sheets – note that at the top of the page it says Petition Circulated in Town of ________.

Third, we are instructed to print the form out on legal paper – HOWEVER – if you use regular 8 ½ x 11 paper and the forms are completed correctly they will be accepted.   So you can print and copy this page on legal or regular paper BUT make sure that the final document HAS BOTH SIDES COPIED.

Fourth, when you have collected some signatures and want to submit them: 

(1)  Take the sheet(s) to your local town clerk who will watch you sign the back, notarize it and take the sheet for that particular town.  They can also notarize the other towns you have but we will need to get them to those other towns.

(2)  If you have sheets for other towns and don’t have time to deliver them to those downs (or can’t stop by your local town hall), you MUST still get them notarized and then send the sheets to the following address and we’ll have them delivered to the appropriate town clerk.

Pelto 2014
PO Box 400
Storrs, CT. 06268

 

If you have any questions, please drop me a note at [email protected] or call me at 860-428-2823.

Thanks so much for all your help

Jonathan

Paid for by Pelto 2014, Ted Strelez, Treasurer, Christine Ladd, Deputy Treasurer, Approved by Jonathan Pelto

Older Entries