As a campaign seeking a primary in Connecticut’s 48th assembly district, we sometimes hear hints that we are being disloyal to the party in some fundamental way. We disagree. Although such decisions are never easy, the fact is that an in-party challenge is often the most loyal thing you can do. Institutions and incumbents never put to the test may grow complacent and sometimes become vulnerable to being picked off by Republicans. Yet there is a clear difference between battling within the party based on ideas and threatening the party with a third party race. Jonathan Pelto appeared on statewide TV Sunday saying that he is considering the third party approach. This is a line we will not cross, and we urge Mr. Pelto to refrain from doing so.
Our Campaign supports Governor Dan Malloy’s re-election. This is not because everything he has done has been perfect. In some areas, particularly in campaign finance, we believe the Governor risks taking the state in the wrong direction. We are in sympathy with most of the criticisms raised by State Senator Bye concerning the Governor’s education policies. We are also slightly more skeptical about the value of the state aid to corporations as a means of fostering economic growth. A legislature more willing to saying no to the Governor when necessary might do him some good.
No Connecticut voter, however, should lose sight of the fact that as a progressive leader the Governor has accomplished a great deal. He raised taxes to get the budget into balance rather than just cut spending as other governors have done. While his rhetoric about unions has occasionally been harsh, the deal he cut was reasonable. He signed an abolition of the death penalty; instituted a state earned-income tax credit; raised the minimum wage twice; allowed drivers licenses for undocumented immigrants; and signed a Connecticut version of the Dream Act. He has a generally strong environmental record. He signed a law barring discrimination on gender identity. And these are just the points that readily come to mind.
Connecticut progressives can be rightly proud of Governor Malloy’s record. Accordingly, a gubernatorial primary is neither necessary nor wise. Changing a Capitol culture that is sometimes too inclined to say yes might helps keep progressive causes moving. But this campaign believes keeping our Progressive Governor must be paramount. Of course, we understand that others may differ, and we would be open to hearing out any candidate who had strong arguments on the merits for a primary.
Primaries are an honorable way to take one’s case to the voters. And, Connecticut has demonstrated time and again that primary challenges can succeed. Daily Kos readers are perhaps most familiar with the 2006 defeat of a political giant by the Democratic primary electorate. This campaign is attempting to unseat an incumbent because her position on guns is simply too extreme, and she voted to move our State backwards on campaign finance reform, amongst other reasons. We will work tirelessly to put these issues into the hands of the voters.
Any Democrat seeking to challenge Governor Malloy should have opted for a similar primary route. If you genuinely believe in the power of your ideas, you should trust those in your party to embrace them. Given public financing the game is not rigged. A gubernatorial challenger can, if he or she is embraced by a sufficient percentage of the public, raise the money needed to receive a $1,354,250 state grant. However, and this is an absolutely key point, such a challenge would have required a tremendous amount of time to have had any chance of success or even to have raised the qualifying amount for the matching grant. The window to launch a primary has in all reasonable estimation closed, as the primary is only 106 days away. Perhaps this explains why Mr. Pelto is not publicly considering a primary run. Instead, Mr. Pelto in his Sunday appearance on Face the State, said he is exploring a third party run and that he would be consulting voters about this course of action.
We strongly urge Mr. Pelto to abandon the idea of a third party challenge. All this would accomplish is to make it easier for Tom Foley, the likely Republican nominee, to become out next Governor. Although the “spoiler” argument may sometimes be overused, in this case the stakes are very high and the value of a third party run highly questionable. Mr. Pelto sometimes talks as if the differences between Malloy and Foley are insignificant. This is nonsense, as we demonstrate here what Foley has in store for Connecticut. http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/...
Tom Foley is a George W. Bush Republican through and through. Pretending he is anything else is simply wrong.
Pelto also at times justifies the idea of a third party race on the ground that Malloy’s re-election bid is almost hopeless. This is also wrong . Polls have him essentially tied with Foley. And his situation resembles somewhat President Obama’s predicament following the 2010 midterms. Kos readers may recall at that time advice from pundits urging the President to quit the race. http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Thank goodness cooler heads prevailed. We urge Mr. Pelto to keep his cool now.
Governor Malloy is in a tough fight, which he can and deserves to win. Yes, the State does need a reforming spirit and energy. Both are necessary for moving forward with Progressive change. But a third party race now can be justified only with Naderite logic[Things have to get worse to get better]. We all know how that turned out. There is a right way and a wrong way to hold Democratic office holders accountable on the issues. A third party run now would definitely be the wrong way.
