The “Malloy Factor” in Connecticut’s 2014 race for governor

No Comments

In March 2013, 43 percent of Connecticut voters reported that Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy deserved to be re-elected, according to the Quinnipiac poll.

Nearly twenty months later, after Malloy, Foley and their supporters have spent about $30 million promoting their candidate and attacking their opponent, the Q-poll reports that 43% of Connecticut votes intend to vote for Dannel Malloy next Tuesday.

Over all of this time, Malloy has never exceeded 43 percent of the vote, despite spending the past year and a half as Connecticut’s Chief Executive Officer and having spent approximately $16 million on his re-election campaign, ($6.5 of which came in the form of a grant in taxpayer funds from the State Elections Enforcement Commission.)

Over the same period, Malloy’s Republican opponent, Tom Foley, has spent almost as much.  (Including his own $6.5 million grant in public funds.)

What will go down as Connecticut’s most expensive and nastiest campaign for governor has had no statistical impact on the level of Malloy’s support among Connecticut voters.

While Tom Foley may get the award for snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory, the real credit for Malloy’s predicament is Malloy himself.

The most accurate thing may be called the primary issue in Connecticut’s 2014 race for governor the “Malloy Factor.”

In April of this year, I published a Wait, What? blog entitled, “The growing list of reasons to vote against Dannel “Dan” Malloy’s re-election.” The article highlighted the issues in which Governor Malloy was failing the vast majority of Connecticut voters.  It focused on Malloy’s record of support for corporate education reform and his anti-teacher agenda, on his decision to make the deepest cuts in state history to our colleges and universities, on the issue of tax fairness, on the massive amount of corporate welfare, on the growing level of government secrecy, on his failure to engage in honest and sound budget practices and on his inappropriate treatment of Connecticut’s front-line state employees.

Five months later, I published a more focused list that was titled, “Why Connecticut Teachers SHOULD NOT VOTE for Governor Malloy.  This Wait, What? commentary piece outlined the most important areas in which Malloy has failed Connecticut’s teachers, parents and public school advocates, including his 2012 proposal to repeal tenure for all public school teachers and collective bargaining rights for teachers working in Connecticut’s poorest schools, his unwillingness to de-couple the teacher evaluation program from the use of unfair and inappropriate standardized testing, his  failure to settle the critically important CCEJF v. Rell school funding lawsuit, his excessive support for unaccountable charter schools and his ongoing commitment to the Common Core and the related Common Core testing scheme.

With Election Day 2014 in sight, Malloy and his political operatives have done a particularly good job of demonizing Tom Foley, although, as noted, the credit for that probably goes as much to Foley as it does to the Malloy campaign.

While it appears increasingly likely that Malloy will win re-election in an environment in which more than 50 percent of voters have a negative opinion of him, it is particularly incredible that he has been completely and totally unable to increase his level of support among voters beyond that 43 percent mark.

And the credit for that rests exclusively with Dan Malloy and his advisers.

Although Malloy has known for his entire term in office that far less than 50% of Connecticut voters have ever felt he deserved re-election, he and his administration have continually failed to successfully address the very issues that are of most concern to the majority of Connecticut voters.

Whether driven by utter arrogance or a total inability to listen to the people, a review of the issues laid out in the two blogs ­– “The growing list of reasons to vote against Dannel “Dan” Malloy’s re-electionand “Why Connecticut Teachers SHOULD NOT VOTE for Governor Malloy” show that Malloy has steadfastly refused to address a single one of those issues.

Many Democrat and unaffiliated voters remain extremely put off by Malloy’s support of the corporate education reform industry and his anti-teacher agenda, his decision to make the deepest cuts in state history to our public colleges and universities, his tax policies that coddle the rich at the expense of the middle class, his on-going commitment to give scarce public funds to extremely successful corporate entities, his disdain and disregard for Connecticut’s campaign finance laws, as well as for the state’s Freedom of Information and Ethics policies, his failure to engage in honest and sound budget and his inappropriate treatment of Connecticut’s front-line state employees.

Malloy’s problem with what should be his base is so severe that according to this week’s Quinnipiac survey, 1 in 5 Democrats are not even voting for him and only one in three unaffiliated voters say they will be voting for Malloy on Election Day.

As the 2014 campaign comes to an end, the real question is whether the Malloy Factor will be enough to keep Malloy from winning a second term as Connecticut’s governor.

Steve Perry’s plan – Turn Hartford’s Capital Prep into a charter, open charters in Bridgeport and New York

26 Comments

This is Part 1 of a series about Steve Perry and his ongoing effort to get public officials to help him build a financially lucrative charter school management company with taxpayer funds.

When the Hartford Board of Education rejected Steve Perry’s plan to transfer Hartford’s Capital Preparatory Magnet School and a nearby neighborhood elementary school over to his private charter school company last year, Perry took to Twitter saying;

 Dr. Steve Perry‏@DrStevePerry
“The only way to lose a fight is to stop fighting. All this did was piss me off. It’s so on. Strap up, there will be head injuries.”

If anyone else had Tweeted a similar threat they would have certainly been detained and questioned by the police.  But while Perry’s Tweet was covered by the Washington Post, Connecticut’s state and local officials simply looked the other way.

After all, Steve Perry is the one who describes himself as “America’s most trusted educator.”

But now Perry is maneuvering for a new deal that will prove far more lucrative.

For the record, Steve Perry is a full-time employee of the Hartford Board of Education and serves as the principal of Hartford’s Capital Preparatory Magnet School, a public school located on Main Street in Hartford, Connecticut.

In 2012 Perry created a Connecticut company called Capital Preparatory Schools, Inc.

For state registration purposes, Perry’s company is located at his residence in Middletown, Connecticut.  However, when it comes to filing his corporation’s federal paperwork and tax forms, Perry has been using the address of the public school in which he works.

Almost three months ago Steve Perry’s PR operation issued a press release announcing, “Dr. Steve Perry, and the founders of what US News & World Reports has called one of America’s top high schools, are coming to Harlem.”

While Perry’s media team made it appear that Capital Prep Harlem Charter School was already a “done deal,” in reality Perry’s plan is one of 15 new charter school proposals that will be considered by the New York Board of Regents at its November 2014 meeting.

Steve Perry’s Capital Preparatory Harlem Charter School application reveals a lot about Perry’s empire building plans.

And they start with the City of Hartford handing their Capital Prep public school over to Perry’s charter school management company.

According to the New York State charter school application, Perry’s Capital Preparatory Schools, Inc. is “designed to be a fiscally fit ‘boutique’ charter management organization (“CMO”).”

Perry goes on to explain,

“We are focused on distinguishing ourselves as a mid-sized network of schools…Geographic clustering will allow us to stay small yet generate the revenue necessary to effectively maintain a CMO. Hartford, Bridgeport and Harlem are the three cities in which we have decided to manage schools. It is our hope that we will manage two schools in Harlem. The first is to be Capital Prep Harlem, 6-12. The second would be a kindergarten to 5th grade school in or near the first…Managing four schools in three cities that are within a two-hour drive of each other allows us to support the schools without having to hire completely new staff for each school.”

Perry adds,

“Our anticipated enrollment across all four CPS network schools is approximately 2,500 students between 2015 and 2020. Capital Prep Hartford has 700 students. The Capital Preparatory Harbor School in Bridgeport Connecticut will have 765 students at full enrollment. Capital Prep Harlem will have 600 students in the next five years, and we hope to open a companion kindergarten to fifth grade school in Harlem that will serve another 600 students.”

As for the scope of management fees that he intends to collect, Perry’s New York charter school application boasts,

“Surpluses are projected in each year beginning in 2015.   The annual ending cash balance per year for CPS will be just over $500,000 in management fees collected.  Conservative five- year estimates have our year end cash balance at $2 million by year five between Hartford, Bridgeport and our Harlem 6 to 12 school.”

Besides assuming his company will be able to collect management fees from Hartford’s Board of Education, Perry is also counting on Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy to come through for him.

In a surprise move earlier this year, Malloy’s Commissioner of Education, Stefan Pryor, and the Connecticut State Board of Education rammed through a plan that would allow Steve Perry to open a new charter school in Bridgeport in the fall of 2015.

Although no state funding has been allocated for the Capital Harbor Charter School in Bridgeport and the state of Connecticut is facing a $1.4 billion budget deficit in next year’s state budget, Perry’s New York application makes it clear that he is expecting Malloy to cough up millions of dollars so he can open his Bridgeport operation and collect his management fees.

Among the many interesting things about the document that Perry has submitted to the New York Board of Regents is the fact that he intends to use the same core “Management Team” for Hartford, Bridgeport and New York.

Since most of the members of Perry’s “Management Team” are presently public employees, his plan raises extremely serious ethical and legal issues.

State and local laws prohibit public employees from engaging in private work that conflicts with their public duties and under no circumstances may public employee use concepts, materials or information developed with public resources to make money during or after their employment with the government.

But despite those legal issues, Perry writes,

“CPS enlisted its founders, current teachers at Capital Prep in Hartford, and strategic consultants to codify the mission, vision and key design elements of the Capital Prep model and operationalize the educational philosophy of the school in order to facilitate replication and training. In addition, this extensive team collaborated to refine the school design in light of the needs of the Harlem community and to develop this proposal. Through regular in person and telephonic meetings, as well as file sharing and other virtual collaboration tools, Dr. Perry…coordinated the production of the proposal with the team of Capital Prep teachers and consultants. Each member of the proposal preparation team has taken on different responsibilities based on their given expertise. The principle writers of this application are Dr. Perry, Ms. Rachel Goldstein, a consultant to CPS and faculty members from Capital Prep.”

Equally troubling is his statement that,

“CPS will launch operations with a core management team representing a mix of deep education experience, business expertise, and political savvy. This ‘hybrid’ team will be crucial to CPS’ success as a high-growth organization in a rapidly changing industry.”

In addition to himself, Perry’s “Management Team” includes Capital Prep’s present assistant principal, Richard Beganski, who is slated to serve as the charter school management company’s chief academic officer.

According to the application, other “Management Team” members include, Kelly Horan, a Capital Prep science teacher; Scott Kapralos, a Capital Prep math teacher; Kitsia Ferguson, a Capital Prep English teacher who presently serves as the Head of Capital Prep’s Lower School; Monique Ethier, another Capital Prep math teacher; Lauren Davern, a Capital Prep history teacher and Lisa Loomis, another Capital Prep English teacher.

Beyond the obvious management and financial issues, Perry’s New York proposal highlights a variety of other areas of concern that will be covered in upcoming posts.

Check back soon for the next post in this series.

Malloy ploy on Teacher Pension Fund takes center stage

8 Comments

In this case, the issue isn’t which major party candidate for governor will do more damage to teachers and public education, but whether the candidates and their supporters are accountable for the rhetoric and claims they make during this campaign season.

The backdrop of the story is that in order to persuade Connecticut’s public schools teachers to overlook Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy’s three year record of demeaning, denigrating and bashing teachers and the teaching profession, Malloy’s supporters have recently sent out a series of campaign pieces claiming that;

Governor Malloy is the “first governor in Connecticut’s history to annually fully fund teacher pensions during his first term in office and guarantee full funding in the future.”

The primary problem with the claim is that Malloy had no legal option but too fully fund teacher pensions and furthermore, he deserves absolutely no credit for guaranteeing full funding of the teacher pension system in the future.

The credit for Malloy having successfully made the necessary payments and fully funding the state of Connecticut Teacher Pension Fund actually goes to the Connecticut Education Association, the members of the 2007 General Assembly and Governor Rell.

And while trying to inappropriately take credit for something he did not do, Malloy and his supporters conveniently overlook the fact that, as governor, Malloy has taken dramatic actions that have actually jeopardized the financial stability of the fund that helps pay for health insurance premiums for retired teachers.

As was reported in the October 15, 2014 Wait, What? blog entitled, “Teachers misled with claim that Malloy deserves credit for “fully funding teacher pension,” Governor Malloy had no option but to fully fund teacher pensions.  In fact, had Tom Foley been elected in November 2010 instead of Dannel Malloy, he too would have been required to make those same payments.

The reason Malloy or Foley would have been required to fully fund the teacher pension system is a result of a 2007 law that authorized the state of Connecticut to borrow $2.3 million and use those funds to address the historic underfunding of the Connecticut Teacher Pension Fund.

The law not only required the state to make any and all necessary payments for the next 25 years, but that requirement was made iron-clad when the language was added to the bond covenants the accompanied the bonds when they were sold to Wall Street investors.

As previously noted the proposal to safeguard the teacher pension fund was pushed by the Connecticut Education Association, passed by the Connecticut General Assembly and signed into law by Governor Rell.

But seven years later, the Malloy political operation has been attempting to mislead teachers into believing that it was none-other-than Malloy who deserved the credit for something that took place before he even became governor.

Today, in a CTMirror article entitled, Fact check: Who really protected teacher pension funding? the truth about this whole controversy is laid out.

As the CTMirror explains,

Since their controversial endorsement of Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, leaders of the largest teachers’ union in Connecticut have portrayed the governor as the defender of what teachers worry about most: the future of their pensions.

But while touting Malloy as the first governor to “fully fund” the long-neglected pension system, the leadership message of the Connecticut Education Association doesn’t mention that Malloy had little choice but to do so. His hands effectively were tied by legal guarantees put in place by Gov. M. Jodi Rell and the 2007 legislature.

[…]

Each of the four budgets Malloy signed during his term does include the full pension contribution recommended by teachers’ pension analysts. Connecticut governors and legislatures have a history of contributing significantly less than the full amount.

That changed, though, in 2007, when lawmakers and Rell adopted a proposal from Treasurer Denise L. Nappier to borrow roughly $2 billion and deposit it into the cash-starved pension fund.

Connecticut promised in the bond covenant – its contract with investors who bought those bonds – to budget the full pension contribution required by analysts for the entire 25-year life of the bonds.

The CT Mirror story should be required reading for every Connecticut teacher and for all of those who follow the politics that surround Connecticut’s State Budget.

The entire CTMirror article can be found at:  http://ctmirror.org/fact-check-who-really-protected-teacher-pension-funding/

 COMMON CORE IS A LEMON (Guest Post by Joseph A. Ricciotti)

3 Comments

Governor “Dan” Malloy says it is too late to turn back on the Common Core and its associated unfair, ineffective and expensive Common Core Testing Scheme.  In fact, he has repeatedly said he will “stay the course” on his corporate education reform Industry agenda.

The following is a guest commentary piece submitted by educator Joseph Ricciotti.

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) were dealt a major setback when two states, New York and Massachusetts, decided to slow down its implementation. In New York, Gov. Andrew Cuomo has distanced himself from Common Core citing that it is “problematic” as well as “very controversial” in New York State. Hence, Gov .Cuomo now wants to ask the New York State legislature to “slow down the Common Core’s implementation” and not have any tests aligned with the new standards administered for  five years.

Likewise, Massachusetts also decided to slow down the implementation of Common Core for two years while it investigates how well the tests aligned with Common Core, referred to as PARCC, compare with the state’s existing Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS) exam.

The Massachusetts Commissioner of Education, Mitchell Chester, unlike Connecticut’s Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor, believes “that fully adopting the new testing deadline by the 2014-2015 school year is “too precipitous” for his state’s schools.” Massachusetts and New York will now join 15 other states that have decided to reconsider their involvement with the Common Core while Connecticut’s Governor Malloy and Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor plan to stay the course and do not plan to make any changes in the implementation of Common Core.

Undoubtedly, the uprising against Common Core (often referred to as “the Core) in the country has not gone unnoticed by President Obama and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan. Moreover, they also realize they are losing the public opinion battle as new strategies are being developed by the Obama administration and their Common Core allies to counteract resistance to the new standards. One of the staunchest proponents of Common Core is Mike Petrilli of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, a conservative think-tank, who has also received Gates Foundation funding for the support of Common Core. Petrilli is of the belief that if the Core proponents want to win the battle, they have to “get Americans angry about the current state of public education.”  In regard to the Core’s implementation, Petrilli is also responsible for the statement “ the chaos in the classroom will be great” so it appears that logic has not distinguished either Arne Duncan or Mike Petrilli.

In other words, as the corporate education reformers who have unsuccessfully attempted to do with No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Race to the Top (RTTT) by falsely highlighting so-called “failing” public schools, now want more of the same medicine with Common Core. In essence, they are trying to convince parents of public school children in the nation that their schools are failing. Needless to say, the “failing schools” strategy is the biggest hoax ever perpetrated on the general public in the history of American public education. It has failed to change the general public’s opinion in the past with NCLB and RTTT as parents and the general public continue to hold their public schools in high esteem. Petrilli believes that if parents can be made angry and convinced that public education and public schools are “failing”, it will then pave the way for acceptance and a smooth implementation of Common Core.

One of the leading opponents of Common Core in the nation is Dr. Carol C. Burris, an awards winning high school principal on Long Island who received her doctorate from Teachers College, Columbia University, and has researched and written extensively on the Core but perhaps her most famous and memorable quote is “ the Common Core is a lemon and no amount of professional development will make it right.” We have also heard from Barbara Madeloni, newly elected president of the Massachusetts Teachers Association (MTA) , a warrior against the corporatization of public education and a fierce critic of Common Core, cite that what is needed in public education today is a new vision “that must replace the dehumanizing data-driven madness that is choking the life from our schools.” One would have to think in light of these developments that the tide is turning for Common Core.

You can read more of Carol Burris’ assessment at http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2014/10/06/how-to-start-cleaning-up-the-common-core/.

 

Democracy Hypocrisy

2 Comments

Here we are, a week to go until Election Day and despite the fact that at least 50% of Connecticut voters have a negative opinion of Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy, he may very well be on the verge of winning re-election with 43% of the vote.

With the “finish line” in sight, the news is full of reports that Republicans are continuing to condemn third-party candidate Joe Visconti for being a “spoiler.”  These “political leaders” are demanding that Visconti get out of the race.

This, while Malloy has been uncharacteristically going out of his way to complement Visconti for his willingness to stand up and be honest about his beliefs.

Despite Malloy’s apparent public “endorsement” of Visconti’s 3rd  party challenge, my recent blog post informing people how they can write in my name for governor has generated a new round of emails and nasty comments from Malloy supporters blasting me for threatening to be a “spoiler.”

All in all it is a wonderful and terrible commentary about the shallowness of principle that guides our establishment political parties and those who blindly follow their lead.

It would appear that as far as leadership of the Democrats and Republicans are concerned, a spoiler is anyone who has the audacity to utilize their fundamental American right to participate in our democracy — if that person might possibly reduce the number of votes their establishment candidates might otherwise get.

Connecticut’s Ralph Nader once observed that the word spoiler is a “politically bigoted term.”  Nader went on to note that those who condemn 3rd parties believe that,

“All of us who think that the country needs an infusion of freedom, democracy, choice, dissent should just sit on the sidelines and watch the two parties own all the voters and turn the government over to big business?”

Or perhaps the outspoken populist, Jim Hightower, put it even better when he wrote,

“So now is the time, more than ever, for those who truly value all the principles of democracy especially including dissent, to be the most forceful in speaking up, standing up and speaking out.”

Here is a message for those who support Malloy or Foley, but claim to believe in democracy…your hypocrisy is showing.

Dissent does not undermine democracy.  In fact, dissent is essential to democracy.

Or as Frederick Douglas said,

“Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are people who want crops without ploughing the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning; they want the ocean without the roar of its many waters. The struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, or it may be both. But it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.”

Instead of blaming Visconti or myself for their lack of public support, Malloy and Foley should be looking in the mirror and contemplating the fact that significantly more voters dislike them than like them.

AFT President Randi Weingarten in Farmington today for Malloy campaign rally

8 Comments

Update:  After posting this piece, AFT President Weingarten and Malloy spoke at the AFT Get-Out-The-Vote rally and Weingarten tweeted: “@DanMalloyCT has apologized;affirmed pledge to coll barg.”  The media hasn’t reported what Malloy said, does anyone know?

RanRandi to farmingtondi Weingarten, the national president of the American Federation of Teachers, is headlining a Malloy Get-Out-The-Vote Rally for Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy’s re-election effort today in Farmington, Connecticut.

Although a number of public education advocates, including myself, have been critical of Weingarten on some issues, I have tremendous respect for her and the role she has played in the effort to speak up for teachers on numerous occasions including this week’s decision by Time Magazine to run with a cover bashing the nation’s public school educators.

Weingarten, along with the leadership of the American Federation of Teachers – Connecticut Chapter and the Connecticut Education Association have endorsed Malloy despite the fact that Governor Malloy remains the only Democratic governor in the nation to propose repealing tenure for all Connecticut public school teachers and unilaterally eliminating collective bargaining rights for a teachers working in the state’s poorest schools.

If Weingarten and the leadership of the AFT and CEA were serious about persuading Connecticut’s teachers, parents and public school advocates to get out to vote on Election Day and vote for Malloy they would use this opportunity to ensure that Malloy finally renounces his 2012 anti-teacher proposal.

HERE ARE THE FACTS:

Malloy’s effort to repeal collective bargaining for a sub-set of public employees:

Governor Malloy’s Corporate Education Reform Industry initiative was submitted to the Connecticut General Assembly in a bill entitled “AN ACT CONCERNING EDUCATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS.”  Malloy’s bill was submitted on February 9, 2012 and referred to the Education Committee for a public hearing.

Section 18 of the Senate Bill provided for the creation of what has become known as “Commissioner’s Network Schools.”

Malloy’s proposal was to allow the Commissioner of Education to override local boards of education and take control of Commissioner Network Schools by requiring local or regional boards of education to “enter into a turnaround agreement with the department regarding all aspects of school operation and management, without limitation.”

As part of that agreement, the proposal provided that the Commissioner of Education would have the power to, “Require the implementation of specific operating and working conditions in a commissioner’s network school.”

Since the unilateral control of the operating and working conditions would violate collective bargaining agreements, Malloy’s bill included the following language;

(F) The provisions of sections 10-153a to 10-153n, inclusive, [which are the state’s collective bargaining laws] shall not apply to any teacher or administrator who is assigned to a commissioner’s network school, except (i) that such teacher or administrator shall, for the purposes of ratification of an agreement only, be permitted to vote as a member of the teacher or administrator bargaining unit, as appropriate, for the local or regional board of education in which the commissioner’s network school is located, and (ii) insofar as any such provisions protect any entitlement of such teacher or administrator to benefits or leave accumulated or accrued prior to the teacher or administrator being employed in a commissioner’s network school. The provision of any financial or other incentives, including, but not limited to, compensation or the availability of professional coverage positions, shall not be subject to collective bargaining pursuant to sections 10-153a to 10-153n, inclusive.

Malloy’s proposed language unilaterally repealed teachers’ rights to collectively bargain – if they worked in a Commissioner Network School – and specifically stated that compensation or other professional working conditions – SHALL NOT BE SUBJECT TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.

Malloy’s bill was nothing short of a proposal to destroy the collective bargaining rights of teachers (and administrators) in what was supposed to be up to 25 public schools in Connecticut.

In response to Malloy’s proposal, the CEA wrote to its members on March 14, 2012 telling them that Malloy’s Education Bill would have “real and dramatic consequences for teachers.”

Leading the list of negative impacts, the CEA leadership explained that,

“The bill would take away collective bargaining rights from teachers in the lowest performing schools….”

The CEA letter went on to urge teachers to contact their legislators and tell them to “Fix the governor’s bill” and “Restore collective bargaining rights.”

Thankfully, the Democrats in the Connecticut General Assembly stripped Malloy’s effort to repeal collective bargaining rights before they went on to pass most of the rest of his bad bill.

Malloy’s effort to eliminate tenure for Public School Teaches;

Even the AFT and CEA have admitted that Governor Malloy’s 2012 Corporate Education Reform Industry Initiative sought to eliminate tenure for all public school teachers in Connecticut and replace it with a system of short-term contracts in which continued employment as a teacher would depend, in part, on the test scores teachers’ students got on the unfair and inappropriate Common Core Standardized Tests.

At the time Malloy introduced his anti-tenure, anti-teacher bill he famously observed that “teachers need only show up for work” in order to get tenure.

Weingarten and the leadership of the AFT and CEA have consistently told their members that Malloy has apologized for proposing his anti-tenure, anti-teacher bill.

However, that claim is absolutely untrue.

The truth is that Malloy has never publicly renounced his anti-tenure position nor has he admitted that he made a mistake when he originally introduced the proposal.

When the idiotic “all you have to do is show up” statement was raised at a candidate debate earlier this year, here is what Malloy DID say;

 “I should admit that was bad language. It wasn’t about them. It was about tenure… I shouldn’t have said it. I apologize for saying it.’”

Wait, What?

Malloy is now claiming that his attack on tenure wasn’t an attack on teachers but, “it was about tenure.”

The sad truth is that Malloy’s HAS NEVER retracted his anti-tenure stance and his effort to “apologize” to teachers has only made his anti-tenure position clearer.

With Randi Weingarten in Connecticut today, the leadership of the AFT and CEA have a unique opportunity to actually force Malloy to stand up, step up and come clean about his 2012 effort to eliminate tenure for all public school teachers and repeal collective bargaining for teachers working in Connecticut’s poorest school districts.

A Malloy statement renouncing his actions on tenure and collective bargaining would be the most effective Get-Out-The-Vote effort Weingarten and the AFT and CEA leadership could make.

Can we have a little honesty about Connecticut’s state budget problems?

9 Comments

No, because – That’s not how it works! That’s not how any of this works! 

Rather than honestly confront the projected $1.4 billion budget deficit in next year’s state budget and the shortfall of more than $4.8 billion over the next three years, the two major party candidates for governor have decided to simply lie their way to Election Day in the hopes that voters will not discover the magnitude of the fiscal problems Connecticut will face over the next few years.

At last night’s candidate’s debate, Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy, knowing that he will actually be forced to cut services and increase taxes, chose to repeat his “read-my-lips” pledge by saying, “Let me be very clear, there will not be a deficit, nor will there be a tax increase.”

Meanwhile, Foley, the Republican nominee who didn’t even bother to show up for the candidate debate, has taken an equally disingenuous approach to the state budget.

The two major party candidates’ — “Budget deficit? What budget deficit?” – strategy was on full display this week as the CTNewsjunkie reported, “Malloy, Foley Both Promise To Hold Towns Harmless.”

So Malloy and Foley are telling voters they will be no tax increases, no significant cuts in state services, no cuts in education or municipal aid and no mass layoffs of state employees.

The incredible truth is that the only candidate being honest about Connecticut’s budget problem is petitioning candidate Joe Visconti who says he’ll slash the state budget until it balances.  It would be a hard, even impossible, strategy to achieve and the impact would be disastrous, but give Visconti an A+ for his honesty.

Readers who want to know the truth about Connecticut’s ongoing fiscal crisis should read the Wait, What? posts of September 3, 2014 (Foley and Malloy are just plain wrong on taxes) and September 16, 2014 (Why Malloy’s (and Foley’s) anti-tax pledge is anti-middle class.)

As noted in the September 3rd post,

Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy is fond of saying that he inherited a $3.7 billion budget deficit when he was sworn into office in January 2011.  (The number comes from reports produced by the Legislature’s independent Office of Fiscal Analysis).

The candidate who is sworn in as Governor of Connecticut in January 2015 will be facing a combined budget deficit of at least $4.8 billion over the next three years. YES – You read that number correctly.  Even after taking into consideration increased revenue from an “improving” economy, Connecticut state government will be $4.8 billion short of what is needed to maintain the present level of services and meet its present statutory obligations.

On the campaign trail, Malloy claims that there is “no deficit” in the future; these projections come from the same independent Office of Fiscal Analyses, the entity he quotes in his regular campaign stump speech.

The truth is that Connecticut continues to face a budget crisis, but rather than tell the truth about the fiscal house of cards that has been built up over the past two decades, the two major party candidates have made a calculated decision that politics trumps reality and that their best tactic is to mislead the voters in the hope that Connecticut citizens will remain docile, compliant and unaware of the fiscal crisis that will not only swallow up their economic stability but that of their children as well.

Malloy has based his campaign on a promise never to propose or accept any tax increase in a second term, while telling voters that he will not cut vital services and telling state employees that he will not need to discuss further concessions with their union leaders.

Tom Foley, in turn, has made an equally strong commitment to a “no tax” pledge” saying that he will honor the existing state employee agreement and that he will not use state employee layoffs to balance the state budget.

In a recent attempt to prove that Foley’s “no tax” pledge is bigger than Malloy’s “no tax pledge,” the Hartford Courant wrote that Foley and his running mate, Heather Somers have even launched a new online “No New Taxes Petition.”

The “I’m no tax, no I’m no tax” charade make Foley and Malloy the modern day equivalents of  Frick and Frack, the two Swiss skaters who rose to fame as original members of the Ice Follies,  doing ice skating tricks while wearing Lederhosen.

But if the Democrat and Republican candidates for governor succeed in ducking the real tax issue facing the state, the people of Connecticut, especially our middle income taxpayers, will be the true losers.

The truth is that most of the expenses related to the $4.8 billion projected budget deficit over the next three years must be paid.  Neither Malloy nor Foley can wish or lie the problem away.

For example, Governor Malloy’s irresponsible borrowing policies mean that the state MUST increase its debt service payments by at least $672 million dollars over the next three years and mandatory payments to the state employee and teacher pension and healthcare funds will account for an additional $620 million.

Putting aside critically important issues like the increased costs for education, healthcare, transportation, support and services for citizens with developmental chalengees, our public colleges and universities and all the other areas of state expenditures, Malloy and Foley can pledge that they will not raise any taxes all they want, but the winner of the gubernatorial election will need to come up with $1.3 billion over the next three years just to pay the additional debt service on the state credit card and the minimum payments into the state pension and healthcare funds.

On top of which, while the “no tax” pledges sound good in a television ad, the major party candidates owe the voters a detailed list of where they are going to cut billions from the state budget and how they are going to sidestep having to sit down and talk with state employee unions about the financial crisis.

This isn’t a magic show.  It is an extremely serious decision about who will lead the state and how they will deal with the very real issue of increased taxes.

As taxpayers across Connecticut are aware…

When Malloy introduced his record-breaking tax increase in 2011, he increased the income tax rate for everyone except those making over $1 million a year.  He told a joint session of the Connecticut General Assembly that he wasn’t increasing the income tax rate on the wealthy because he didn’t want to “punish success.”

As if Connecticut’s middle class and working families weren’t the ones who really deserved to be called successful.

Furthermore, a growing number of people are aware that in Connecticut, middle income families pay about 10% of their income in state and local taxes, the poor about 12% and the wealthy about 5-6%.

When Malloy and Foley say they will not support any increase in state taxes, what they ARE saying is that the full burden for maintaining our schools and other important local services will fall on Connecticut’s already overburdened local property taxpayers.

In fact, every time a Connecticut voter hears a gubernatorial candidate say they he will not support additional taxes, they should understand that he is saying that he will continue Malloy’s strategy of coddling the rich and dumping the burden on homeowners, car owners and those who pay property taxes through increased rent.

When it comes to the 2014 gubernatorial campaign, one truth stands out.

Foley and Malloy will use their television ads to claim that they won’t raise taxes.

But there should be a huge disclaimer on those ads that should read:

If this candidate wins, vital state services will be cut and Connecticut’s middle class will be facing massive local property tax increases or face unparalleled cuts to their local public schools.

And no voter, liberal, moderate or conservative, should cast their vote for either Malloy or Foley until each is willing to explain how they will actually deal with the fiscal realities that are facing Connecticut.

Malloy and Democrats are violating Connecticut law with use of Federal PAC funds

20 Comments

With Election Day eleven days away, one thing is certain.  One of the biggest losers this year is the integrity of Connecticut’s once promising campaign finance reform law.

In addition to collecting $6.5 million in public funds for his campaign, Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy and his political operation have raised over $4.3 million into the Democratic State Central Committee’s “Federal Account.”  This $10.8 million doesn’t even count an additional $4.4 million that is being funneled into Connecticut in support of Malloy via a Super PAC ironically named “Connecticut Forward.”

Opposing Malloy’s $15.2 million is Foley’s campaign with $12.2 million, $6.5 million in public funds and another $5.7 million through the Grow Connecticut Super PAC.

As has been widely reported in the media, the ethical and legal controversy underling the 2014 gubernatorial campaign is the fact that the Democrat Party’s “Federal Account” received hundreds of thousands of dollars from people who have state contracts or have directly benefited from Governor Malloy’s corporate welfare program.

The use of campaign donations from state contractors to support Malloy’s re-election effort destroys the fundamental purpose of Connecticut’s landmark 2005 campaign finance reform law, a law that passed and signed into law to prevent any future governor from doing what helped send disgraced Governor John Rowland to prison.

However, less than ten years after Rowland went to prison and Connecticut adopted its sweeping campaign reform law, Malloy is using state contractor funds to pay for a series of campaign mailings to promote his re-election effort.

Even worse, the on-going violation of the spirit, and probably the letter, of Connecticut law goes well beyond the use of campaign donations from state contractors.

Malloy and his operatives have collected and deposited more than $425,000 from political action committees into that same Democratic Party “federal account.”

And the vast majority of those donations came from Federal Political Action committees THAT ARE PROHIBITED from using their funds to benefit a state-level candidate in Connecticut.

Connecticut law clearly requires that a political action committee (PAC) must register with the Connecticut Elections Enforcement Commission before it can give money to benefit state candidates.

According to Connecticut law and the State Elections Enforcement Commission,

“A political committee registered with the Federal Election Commission under federal law or with another state other than Connecticut may not make contributions or expenditures to or for the benefit of a Connecticut state or municipal candidate or a Connecticut political committee or party committee. A separate committee must first be registered in Connecticut (by filing a SEEC Form 3, designating a treasurer and a depository institution situated in Connecticut) and then must solicit funds specifically for use in Connecticut campaigns in accordance with Connecticut’s campaign finance laws”

However, the Malloy campaign has been directly benefiting from money donated by political action committees that are registered with the Federal Election Commission BUT HAVE NOT registered with the State of Connecticut.

The following chart lists political action committee donations that have been deposited into the Connecticut Democratic State Central Committee’s “Federal Account” and identifies contributions that have come from PACS that are prohibited from helping the Malloy campaign because they are not registered in Connecticut.

While it is appalling that Malloy and his campaign would use money donated by state contractors and people who have directly benefited from Malloy’s corporate welfare program, it is equally disturbing that Malloy and the Democratic State Central Committee would utilize PAC funds that violate one of the most fundamental aspects of Connecticut’s campaign finance law.

NOT Registered in CT Political Action Committee Name City State Amount
X AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL EDUCATION (COPE) WASHINGTON DC $15,000
X COZEN O’CONNOR POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE PHILADELPHIA PA $10,000
X HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP INC ADVOCATES FU HARTFORD CT $10,000
X IBEW PAC VOLUNTARY FUND WASHINGTON DC $10,000
X JOBS AND INNOVATION MATTER PAC (JIM PAC) WASHINGTON DC $10,000
X PFIZER INC. PAC NEW YORK NY $10,000
X THE TRAVELERS COMPANIES PAC HARTFORD CT $10,000
X UNITEDHEALTH GROUP, INC. PAC HOPKINS MN $10,000
X SHEET METAL WORKERS’ INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION PAC WASHINGTON DC $9,500
X ROBINSON & COLE FEDERAL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE HARTFORD CT $8,000
X UAW V CAP DETROIT MI $7,875
X BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE RIDGEFIELD CT $7,500
X COMCAST CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE- FEDERAL PHILADELPHIA PA $7,500
X COVANTA ENERGY CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMMITTEE MORRISTOWN NJ $7,500
UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS/JOINERS OF AMER NEW ENGLAND REG CARPENTERS LEGIS EMP CMTE NORWALK CT $7,500
X INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF IRONWORKERS WASHINGTON DC $7,000
X NEA FUND FOR CHILDREN AND PUBLIC ED WASHINGTON DC $6,850
X GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTE WASHINGTON DC $6,000
X ALVAREZ & MARSAL HOLDINGS LLC PAC WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION-COPE WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X AT&T INC. FEDERAL POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (AT&T DALLAS TX $5,000
X BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION PAC (FKA MBNA CORPORATION FEDERAL PAC WILMINGTON DE $5,000
X CIGNA CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X COMPUTER SCIENCES CORPORATION PAC FALLS CHURCH VA $5,000
X DEMOCRATS FOR EDUCATION REFORM WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X FOXPAC WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS PAC WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HEAT & FROST INSULATORS AND ASBESTOS WORKERS P A C LANHAM MD $5,000
X INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS & ALLIED TRADES POLITICAL ACTION TOGETHER POLITICAL COMM LEESBURG VA $5,000
X MACHINISTS NON-PARTISAN POLITICAL LEAGUE UPPER MARLBORO MD $5,000
X NEW DEMOCRAT COALITION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE WASHINGTON DC $5,000
NEW ENGLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS LEGIS EMP CMTE BOSTON MA $5,000
** NUTMEG PAC STAMFORD CT $5,000
OPERATING ENGINEERS LOCAL 478 POLITICAL ACTION COM HAMDEN CT $5,000
X PRAXAIR, INC. PAC DANBURY CT $5,000
X PURDUE PHARMA PAC STAMFORD CT $5,000
X SEIU COPE PAC PCC WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X SYNERGY PAC MCLEAN VA $5,000
X THE WALT DISNEY PRODUCTIONS EMPLOYEES PAC WASHINGTON DC $5,000
X WAL-MART STORES INC. PAC FOR RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT BENTONVILLE AR $5,000
X WELLPOINT, INC. WELLPAC INDIANAPOLIS IN $5,000
DOMINION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE RICHMOND VA $3,500
X PITNEY BOWES, INC. PAC STAMFORD CT $3,500
X THE PHOENIX COMPANIES PAC HARTFORD CT $3,500
X GHC ANCILLARY CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE KENNETT SQUARE PA $3,000
WEBSTER BANK PAC-FEDERAL WATERBURY CT $3,000
X PULLMAN & COMLEY FEDERAL PAC BRIDGEPORT CT $2,850
SENATE DEMOCRATS VICTORY PAC WEST HARTFORD CT $2,655
X AETNA INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE WASHINGTON DC $2,500
ASSOCIATION OF COMMUTER RAIL EMPLOYEES PAC NEW YORK NY $2,500
X CERNER CORPORATION PAC KANSAS CITY MO $2,500
CT STATE COUNCIL OF MACHINISTS PAC KENSINGTON CT $2,500
X FUELCELL ENERGY PAC DANBURY CT $2,500
X GENERAL DYNAMICS VOLUNTARY POLITICAL CONTRIBUTION FALLS CHURCH VA $2,500
X MINERALS TECHNOLOGIES INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (MTI PAC) NEW YORK NY $2,500
X MURPHPAC WASHINGTON DC $2,500
X NATIONAL CONFECTIONERS ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES, INC. POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE WASHINGTON DC $2,500
X NORTHEAST UTILITIES EMPLOYEES POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE-FED WASHINGTON DC $2,500
X OLDCASTLE MATERIALS INC. PAC WASHINGTON DC $2,500
X SPECTRA ENERGY CORP POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (SPECTRA-DCP PAC) HOUSTON TX $2,500
X UNITED ASSOCIATION POLITICAL EDUCATION COMMITTEE ANNAPOLIS MD $2,500
X WALGREEN CO PAC DEERFIELD IL $2,500
X XEROX CORPORATION POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE (XPAC WASHINGTON DC $2,500
CONNECTICUT BANKERS ASSOCIATION PAC, BANKPAC FARMINGTON CT $2,000
X DRIVE COMMITTEE WASHINGTON DC $2,000
X INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOILERMAKERS CAMPAIGN KANSAS CITY KS $2,000
X INTERNATIONAL UNION OF PAINTERS AND ALLIED TRADES WASHINGTON DC $2,000
X INTL UNION OF BRICKLAYERS & ALLIED CRAFTWORKERS PAC WASHINGTON DC $2,000
LD PAC FARMINGTON CT $2,000
X O’NEILL & ASSOC. PAC BOSTON MA $2,000
X THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC INC. PAC WALTHAM MA $2,000
CEUI PAC MIDDLETOWN CT $1,850
DREW PAC MIDDLETOWN CT $1,685
CT STATE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION PAC HARTFORD CT $1,615
DEMOCRATS FOR NEW LEADERSHIP WETHERSFIELD CT $1,500
X XL AMERICA. INC. – PAC CONTRIBUTION ACCOUNT HARTFORD CT $1,500
PROPEL PAC ( PRO PROGRESSIVE ENERGETIC LEADERSHIP ) PAC NEW BRITAIN CT $1,430
X CBS CORPORATION PAC WASHINGTON DC $1,000
CONNECTICUT STATE UAW-PAC COUNCIL FARMINGTON CT $1,000
X DAVID WEPRIN FOR CONGRESS HOLLIS NY $1,000
X GREENBERG TRAURIG, P.A. PAC ALBANY NY $1,000
X HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN OF GREATER NEW YORK FEDERAL NEW YORK NY $1,000
X LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION EMPLOYEES’ POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE ARLINGTON VA $1,000
X MARYLAND ASSOCIATION FOR CONCERNED CITIZENS POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE PIKESVILLE MD $1,000
X THE NESTLE WATERS NORTH AMERICA INC. POLITICAL ACT STAMFORD CT $1,000
LOCAL 387 CHESHIRE CORRECTION COMPLEX PAC MILLDALE CT $875
SEIU STATE COUNCIL PAC HARTFORD CT $875
** URBAN LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE BLOOMFIELD CT $850
** O’BRIEN ’13 WEST HAVEN CT $775
A BETTER CONNECTICUT PAC ROCKY HILL CT $725
C.P.F.U. (CONNECTICUT POLICE & FIRE UNION) PAC HARTFORD CT $600
** EILEEN HEAPHY FOR MAYOR STAMFORD CT $600
** MATT PAC WEST HARTFORD CT $570
STAMFORD PROFESSIONAL FIREFIGHTERS PAC FUND STAMFORD CT $525
THE GREATER HARTFORD PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATIC WOMEN’S CLUB SOUTH WINDSOR CT $525
AQN PAC BRIDGEPORT CT $500
CENTRAL CONNECTICUT CARPENTERS LOCAL UNION 24 PAC YALESVILLE CT $500
CONNECTICUT ASSOCIATION OF OPTOMETRISTS INC PAC ROCKY HILL CT $500
** PROJECT DEMOCRACY WEST HARTFORD CT $500
UNIFORMED PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS ASSOCIATION OF CT PAC WEST HARTFORD CT $500
139TH DISTRICT DEMOCRATIC PAC WEST HARTFORD CT $450
30 PAC MARION CT $370
CWA LOCAL 1298 PAC HAMDEN CT $370
HERE LOCAL 35 PAC NEW HAVEN CT $350
SHEET METAL WORKERS LOCAL 40 PAC ROCKY HILL CT $350
CONNECTICUT YOUNG DEMOCRATS HARTFORD CT $300
AFT CONNECTICUT PAC ROCKY HILL CT $250
CHARTER OAK PAC HARTFORD CT $250
CONNECTICUT HISPANIC DEMOCRATIC CAUCUS NEW HAVEN CT $250
UCPEA PAC STORRS MANSFIELD CT $250
X UNITY9 PAC WASHINGTON DC $250
CENTRAL CONNECTICUT DEMOCRATS ROCKY HILL CT $200
WORKING WOMEN AND MEN OF CENTRAL CONNECTICUT ROCKY HILL CT $200
MIDDLESEX COUNTY LEADERSHIP PAC CLINTON CT $185
CT FEDERATION OF DEMOCRATIC WOMEN EAST HARTFORD CT $175
SOJOURNER NETWORK OF DEM. WOMEN PAC HARTFORD CT $175
STAMFORD GREEN LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE STAMFORD CT $175
X COMMITTEE TO RE-ELECT BRIAN CURTIN BURLINGTON MA $100
GUARDIAN FREEDOM PAC STAMFORD CT $100
SHORELINE LEAGUE OF DEMOCRATIC WOMEN POLITICAL ACCOUNT GUILFORD CT $100
THIRD STREET PAC WEST HARTFORD CT $100
COLCHESTER DEMOCRATIC WOMENS CLUB COLCHESTER CT $50
DEMOCRATIC VOICES FOR CHANGE LAKEVILLE CT $50
DEMOCRATIC WOMEN’S CLUB OF EAST HARTFORD GLASTONBURY CT $50

** = Not registered with Connecticut State Elections Enforcement Commission but may be registered with local town clerk.

Malloy must come clean on his attempt to repeal collective bargaining rights

11 Comments

In defense of its endorsement of Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy, the Connecticut Education Association is using its EXAMINE THE FACTS campaign to tell teachers that Malloy, “Supports teachers’ rights to collectively bargain and negotiate contracts, benefits, and working conditions.”

At the same time, most of Connecticut’s other unions are trying to persuade their members that if elected, Republican Tom Foley will follow Wisconsin’s right-wing, anti-union governor and destroy collective bargaining altogether.

But the fact remains that Governor Malloy is the only Democratic governor in the nation to propose unilaterally eliminating collective bargaining rights for a group of public employees.

In Malloy’s case, as part of his corporate education reform industry initiative, he proposed repealing collectively bargaining rights for public school teachers working in the poorest schools.

Had the Connecticut General Assembly not stripped Malloy’s anti-union provisions, 1,000 – 1,500 public school teachers, in up to 25 schools across Connecticut, would have lost their rights to collective bargain.

In response to Malloy’s proposal, the CEA wrote to its members on March 14, 2012 telling them that Malloy’s Education Bill would have “real and dramatic consequences for teachers.”

Leading the list of negative impacts, the CEA leadership explained that,

“The bill would take away collective bargaining rights from teachers in the lowest performing schools….”

The CEA letter went on to urge teachers to contact their legislators and tell them to “Fix the governor’s bill” and “Restore collective bargaining rights.”

With less than two weeks to go until Election Day, Governor Malloy has an obligation to come clean about his position on collective bargaining. 

Malloy claims that he supports collective bargaining rights, the leaders of Connecticut’s unions are telling their members that Malloy supports collective bargaining rights…but it is worth repeating, yet again, that Dannel Malloy is the only Democratic governor in the nation to propose repealing collective bargaining rights for unionized public employees.

To earn the votes of Connecticut’s teachers and other union members, Malloy needs to stand up, explain why he produced such an anti-union proposal and renounce his 2012 effort to repeal collective bargaining rights.

While Malloy stays the course on the Common Core, Cuomo distances himself from it

12 Comments

According to Truth in American Education (TAE), a national, non-partisan group of concerned parents and citizens, “Andrew Cuomo Says He’ll Delay Using Common Core Scores for Five Years.

Like Governor Dannel “Dan” Malloy, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has been a long-time, out-spoken proponent of the Common Core and the Corporate Education Reform Industry.  However, faced with mounting opposition to the Common Core and its associated Common Core Standardized Testing Scheme, Cuomo is changing his position and has even begun to run campaign television ads distancing himself from the Common Core.

The new Cuomo anti-Common Core ad can be seen here.

Truth in Education reports,

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said in a campaign ad yesterday that he will delay using Common Core assessment scores for five years and then only if New York children are ready.

[…]

The Stop Common Core Ballot Line delivered over 62,000 signatures.  Over 30,000 students opted-out of Common Core assessments last spring including Cuomo’s Republican challenger, Rob Astorino’s children.

The TAE article also pointed to a July 2014 Siena College Poll that reported that 49% of New Yorkers want Common Core implementation stopped, while only 39% want to see the standards implemented.

The Siena College Poll also revealed that opposition to the Common Core was across the entire political spectrum noting, “More moderates, conservatives, union households, non-union households, men, women, suburbanites, upstaters, whites, Catholics, and members of all age groups want to see the Common Core stopped.”

But here in Connecticut, Governor Malloy and his Commissioner of Education, Stefan Pryor, have remained dedicated to the implementation of the Common Core and its related Common Core SBAC Standardized Test.

Earlier this year, State Education Commissioner Stefan Pryor told the New Haven Register’s editorial board that postponing implementation of the Common Core would be “ill conceived” and would be a step backward.

And Malloy himself has said that it is too late to turn back on the Common Core and his corporate education reform industry agenda.

Malloy recently old the Waterbury Republican-American Newspaper, “What we’ve done needs to continue to be implemented and rolled out” and the editorial board of the Day newspaper of New London spoke with Malloy and wrote, “The governor assured us he will stay the course on education reform if re-elected.”

The Hartford Courant has also reported that following another meeting, “the governor emphasized that he is not backing off his support for the teacher evaluation system or the Common Core. It’s ‘not that either one isn’t the right thing to do,” Malloy said.”

As appalling as Malloy and Pryor’s support has been, even worse is the fact that Malloy and his Commissioner of Education have spent countless hours engaged in a campaign to mislead parents into thinking that they do not have the right to opt-out their children from the Common Core Smarter Balanced Assessment Test.

It is worth repeating that while Governor Malloy and Commission Pryor claim that federal and state laws trump parental rights when it comes to taking the Common Core Standardized Tests, there are no federal or state laws that prohibit parents from opting their children out of the Common Core Tests nor is there any law that allows schools to punish parents or students for opting out of the tests.

Rather than protecting the rights of parents, Malloy’s Commissioner of Education sent out a memo to Connecticut’s school superintendents explaining how they should go about misleading, scaring and lying to Connecticut parents in an immoral effort to stop parents from opting-out their children.

Even if Cuomo’s “conversion” on the Common Core is nothing more than political self-preservation, it is certainly an interesting development that even New York Governor Andrew Cuomo has come to recognize that parroting the Common Core and Corporate Education Reform Industry rhetoric is not the right thing to do.

Older Entries