YourCT.com header image 2
← DeLuca’s resignation official - and the plot thickens in the 32nd Norwalk: Events In December →

32nd Senatorial - another Democratic hat in the ring


by Chris MC


November 30th, 2007 · 1 Comment

John T. McCarthy, a retired diplomat who has made Woodbury his permanent home since 1996, is running for the Connecticut State Senate seat vacated today by the resignation of Lou DeLuca.

McCarthy worked for the State Department for over thirty years - primarily in Lebanon and Tunisia - and still does consulting work for the State Department; he has also served as Chairman of the International Save the Children Alliance.

But, the Connecticut State Senate? “I’m interested in a lot of the problems that involve the State of Connecticut - energy, suburbanization of a lot of the nice towns in this part of the state; taxes - how you manage to live in a small town on a fixed income with the education going up every year; energy - alternative sources, deregulation of energy companies was supposed to produce a great big benefit to consumers and it didn’t really pan out as far as my electric bill is concerned; transportation - I grew up in in New York City, and used to spend summers in Connecticut, and we’re been traveling on the same roads we’ve been traveling on since late fifties and sixties. It’s not enough resources taking care of more and more people.

McCarthy has active support of Democratic State Central Committeewoman Sharon Sherman, whose counterpart (the other State Central Committeeman representing the 32nd District) Ken Curran was until now the only Democrat to declare his pursuit of the seat.

This intra-party intrigue is matched on the Republican side of the campaign…

Tags: CT House

One Response so far ↓ “32nd Senatorial - another Democratic hat in the ring”



  • 1 Rocco J. Frank Jr. // Dec 4, 2007 at 9:29 pm

    Good luck I hope you make it. Just wanted to share a letter with you about your future mailers. The below example is what not to do when communicating with your constituents.

    My open letter to Jim Amann:

    Today, in my mailbox arrived the Jim Amann 2007 legislative update. This was a very exciting document to read because for certain I expected to read about all the wonderful things that Jim had in store for us here in Milford.

    Eagerly I read the entire document from cover to cover and at first glance I saw all these wonderful things that Jim touted about. They all sounded absolutely wonderful until I came to think how much of Jim’s hard work in 2007 has made my life and the life of the CT people I know any better. But the bigger question remains how well has Jim addressed the issues of Milford’s residents, the issues that were so passionately debated in the last election for mayor?

    If we are to use that standard than absolutely nothing in his 2007 legislative update has any bearing on your life. He has not addressed the state law resulting in unfair property assessments, he has not touched the issue pertaining to your outrageous electric bill, he has not mentioned a word about Broadwater, a massive Liquefied natural gas facility underway off our coast. Jim did not address the 14.5 billion state debt crisis, nor did he touch on crime and early parole of violent felons due to prison construction and overcrowding. Jim has not addressed state tax burdens, or our state energy conservation in lieu of the “peak Oil” crisis, and most disconcerting he has not mentioned a word about why a massive carcinogenic mercury polluting power plant is reopening in the heart of our district. A plant that is using a brand new power grid the taxpayers built with no remittance of a savings to us.

    So how did Jim represent us? To begin lets address each point in his legislative update and see how any of this helps you or your family.

    Point 1: Keeping Our Kids Safe, Megan’s Law, Jessica’s Law. I would of voted in favor of these laws but certainly I would not tout it as an accomplishment to my district. These laws are aimed at so few predators that it is of little concern to the main issues mentioned above in our district. Most everyone in Milford is a law abiding citizen, and I pray we never have the problems of Bridgeport, New Haven or Big cities in America.

    Point 2: Improvements to Husky Health care. Point one is pay more money out to Dr.’s and hospitals. (I suppose Jim feels they charge too little.) Point 2 is newborn enrollment for the first 4 months of life. Point 3 is an outreach program to find more qualified residents. (How is this is going to be funded is my main question.)

    But to recap the challenges facing Husky, Jim failed to address the big issues, first the Federal Wellcare raid in Fla. has put a major portion of the Husky program at risk, and sent Gov. Rell scrambling for solutions, but more importantly the Bush administration has been cutting money to the SCHIP program that includes Husky. Looks like Jim did manage to expand a financially troubled program without being able to first procure the lost federal funds, let alone the additional funds his touted expansion will require. As the funds dry up faster, expect Dr’s. to avoid Husky a like a “midnight drunk” making any SCHIP card holders have a more unpleasant experience than they already know.

    Point 3: Teachers Retirement: Bonds were used to honor a contract that was due the teachers in the first place. (I assume that this problem resulted from financially misplaced Lottery proceeds that he has not mentioned.) Quite sadly this mistake now marks 25 years of your children’s future debt, but Amann touts a savings of 2.8 Billion! Make no mistake here, this is not an achievement but rather a case of “pay up” or “get sued.”

    More curious, what is the actual amount due if this 2.6 billion is just the savings? To begin on this point I will say again that absolutely CT needs to honor its contracts to teachers, but a 2.8 Billion dollar savings just sounds like “Voodoo Economics to me.” That translates to $100,000 per each retired teacher. That is just the underfunded savings part for 28,040 retired teachers in this state. This does not add up, unless the cost of retiring a teacher in CT is upward of $1,000,000.00 per teacher. In that case the underfunded pension and mismanaged lottery money should be the least of Amann’s concerns.

    Point 4: Investments for Milford: This part is just aggregate to what I said earlier about Jim and his less than sincere use of appropriations. My previous post (highlighted) deals with this issue very eloquently, and to see yet another person brandishing a giant state welfare check just proves the Robin Hood mentality of our Speaker who buys your vote with other peoples tax money. See my previous post: Amann and Welfare Bonding One other point not mentioned in Jim’s Money for Milford section is his $140,000.00 check to St. Mary’s Catholic School. I guess churches being exempt from property taxes is not enough, Jim has to give our state tax dollars to fund controversy engaging those who believe in a separation of Church and State. Meanwhile CT, cannot meet its own legal obligations ordered by a Supreme Court judge in the Sheff v. Oneill legal loss.

    Point 5: Devon Revitalization: This project has been a long ongoing project, it has the potential of being really good if handled properly, however the Devon revitalization committee is comprised of religious clergy and politicos, not a single architect, designer or engineer yet this panel continues to tout “smart growth.” “Smart Growth” is an idea originated by architect “Peter Caltrope” in the 1970’s that has become quite controversial. Some communities have rejected “Smart Growth” with the opinion that it has turned into an ideological cult movement aimed at circumventing the zoning and planning laws. Laws we are all forced to follow while municipalities enjoy more freedom and in some cases broadened powers of eminent domain.

    I believe that Amann or any politician for that matter is not qualified or educated enough to be on a panel that is responsible for urban planning and design. He is neither an Architect nor an engineer but rather an ideological politician who endorsed a candidate Kerry Rowland who called the Devon revitalization a “Waste,” further demonstrating his marred judgement. The 7 plus million in my view is mis-prioritized. One point in particular is $3,000,000.00 to expand our local government complex of which I respectfully object to, as I believe in shrinking government and keeping it out of our lives, not making it bigger.

    Point 6: Money for Milford Projects: All the same points apply here as in Point 4. This is just more State Welfare at the expense of bonding debt. Essentially it represents your children’s future being mortgaged for special interests many of which do not even pay tax. This model is identical to the Federal Debt model of spending without regard to consequence of debt. The USA is 9.5 Trillion in debt and CT 14.5 Billion in debt. This failed at the federal level and will fail even worse at the state level.

    Point 7: Hollywood East, this about the only other thing we can agree on, besides honoring a state teachers contract. Hollywood east brings money to local businesses, and develops community pride. This is a small step in the right direction, however, it was not a principal focal point of Milford’s Residents during the last Mayoral election. Although, I agree having big screen actors run around our city is exciting, in other ways it can be challenging, as these film crews create traffic jams, close down our streets and offer a modicum of financial relief to local businesses. This will become even more exciting, should Hollywood East actually invest commercially in Devon, of which, to my knowledge, they have not.

    In conclusion what is important to note here is that the brochure that has been sent out to you, has missed all of the vital issues that we in town raised during the Kerri, Richetelli mayoral race. His legislative report is more indicative of Mr. Amann’s disconnect from the voice of the people he claims to represent. One last major point in particular is the high Cost of energy and his poor choices. To explain, Jim opposed the State’s Attorney’s advice regarding the “Windfall Profits Tax.” Instead he Introduced H.B. 7432 returning UI lost profits, and stopped the Gas tax plan making our gasoline even more expensive.

    Jim has sent us all a brochure reminding us of how disconnected he is from our true social needs. While I personally enjoyed all the photos of Jim with our children, I will not be so naive as to think that is somehow representation. Our children deserve more than a proponent of industrial mercury polluters, like UI, who have put us all at risk for grave diseases, more especially children.

    Posted by Rocco J. Frank Jr

Leave a Reply