An Independent Controversy (Or, "As The State Turns")

It appears that the race for governor of Connecticut just got a little more interesting, if not more complicated.  Allow me to explain.    

This past Tuesday was statewide caucus night for a "minor party" (see definition) known as the "Independent Party of Connecticut", who were meeting in Guilford.  Regarding the group's endorsement for governor, the choice was between party member Rob Hoteling, Republican Ernestine Holloway, and Republican Bob Stefanowski (the latter appearing on a write-in basis) (1).   

After general balloting on the question of the nominee, the tally stood even, at seventy-five votes for each candidate.   

Announcing this result, Party Chairman Michael Telesca took it upon himself to break the tie, casting a vote for Hotelier.  Subsequently, the Independent candidate was announced to have won the party's endorsement. 

  

Bear with me, because here's where "shenanigans" come into play.    

It seems that Chairman Telesca had already voted once on the question of the party nominee.  Thus, according to "Robert's Rules of Order", he could not then cast another vote to break the resulting tie (2).  

In addition, the bylaws of the Independent Party clearly stipulate that the party nominee for office is  the candidate that, at caucus, "receives 51% of the votes" (3).  

Failing this, to wit:

"If there are three or more candidates for an office, and no one gets at least 51% of the votes, then...a new vote will take place until a candidate receives 51% or more of the vote" 

Pursuant to the party bylaws, a second round of voting should've been called for.  Yet the chairman failed to open such a vote, in admitted violation of these very bylaws.   

This issue aside, the matter gets even more complicated.  Connecticut General Statutes state thus:  

"Not later than five days before a minor party holds a party meeting to nominate a candidate for public office, the presiding officer of such meeting shall give written notice of the date, time, location and purpose of the meeting to, in the case of a municipal office, the town clerk of the municipality served by such office, or in the case of a state office or district office, the Secretary of the State.  

Concomitantly, the presiding officer of such meeting shall cause the written notice of such meeting to be published in a newspaper with a general circulation in the applicable town for such office"

"All minor parties nominating candidates for any elective office shall make such nominations and certify and file a list of such nominations, as required by this section, not later than the sixty-second day prior to the day of the election at which such candidates are to be voted for.

If such certificate of a party's nomination is not received by the Secretary of the State or clerk of the municipality, as appropriate, by such time, such certificate shall be invalid and such party, for purposes of sections 9-460, 9-461 and 9-462, shall be deemed to have neither made nor certified any nomination of any candidate for such office" (4)

It appears that the Independent Party may not have given notice of its caucus in a timely manner, nor have filed a list of nominations in such a way.  The Secretary of the State has not responded to inquiries as to whether or not this has occurred.  

On Thursday, the Stefanowski campaign formally objected to the Independent Party's endorsement/nomination, sending a letter to Secretary of the State Mark Kohler.  

The letter (particularly noting the violations, and admittance that those violations occurred) cited state statutes on the nomination of statewide candidates.  Further, it requested the Secretary "decline to accept the purported endorsement letter at this time", or alternatively to review the facts of the case.  

One day later, Secretary Kohler refused this request, saying that "there is nothing (that he) can do".  This is despite his constitutional duty to provide for free and fair elections (5).  

Frankly, I kind of saw this result coming.  After all, Secretary Kohler is a Lamont appointee, one that was not reviewed or consented to by the General Assembly to boot.  Mr. Kohler doubtless knows that "King Ned" himself signs his paychecks; thus, he wouldn't want to do anything to anger "His Highness" and master (6, 7).  

A word of advice to the Secretary; if you are unable or unwilling to perform your constitutional duties, then you should resign, just as your predecessor (former Secretary of the State Denise Nappier) did. 

So what will become of the legal case surrounding the Independent Party's nomination, which Mr. Stefanowski has said that he will contest in court? And how will this affect the very important race for governor of Connecticut?

As always, there's only one way to find out; "tune in to the next episode of 'As the State Turns'!" 

A Few Thoughts

Taking a little time out to address a few things that have been on my mind.  

On Cynicism and Criticism    

I find myself as a frequent critic of things that go on in the town where I was raised. Although proud of where I grew up, my attitude is one of cynicism, and not necessarily being proud of the current “state of the town”.

Some people might question why I’m so critical. Perhaps they think that since I don’t live in Fairfield any longer, I should mind my own business. To them, I say it is better to stand up for what I believe to be right, than to allow what I know to be wrong.

It's much more preferable to challenge ignorance than to let it spread in an unabated fashion; it is better to seek the truth than to allow the existence of a lie.

It has been said that there are two roads that you can go by; you can either be part of a problem, or part of the solution to that problem. I choose to take the latter road; "starve the beast", don't "feed the beast"! (1)

On Freedoms, and Mixed Messages

In today's society, we are endlessly told that the safety of others is of the utmost importance. The powers that be say that in order to secure this safety, each of us needs to sacrifice some of our own freedoms; "God, they're great at that stuff" (2).

It seems that we have forgotten the wise words of Benjamin Franklin; "those who would give up essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither".

For a moment, I will paraphrase a quote from actor Carroll O'Connor's "Archie Bunker"; I bet you won't find Joe Biden giving up any of his essential liberties.  

"If (he) did, (his) secretaries would get up and go home"      

Anywho, I move on to another matter of consideration.  

These days, we see an awful lot of "virtue signaling", and the sending of mixed signals regarding fact and fiction.  It's not only those messages going out to society as a whole, but specifically to our children which are worrying.  Let's look at some of these. 

We are increasingly told that:     

• Americans are racists and bigots by nature, and that our country is not exceptional in any way.

• Some people are superior to others; this superiority is solely because of the color of their skin (see note).  

• We should celebrate what makes us unique; yet we must apologize for who we are.  

• There is no truth other than that which the government and media tells you is the truth.  If you dare disagree, you are a lowlife/racist/bigot/idiot/danger to society.  

• There is no such thing as a "natural right", such as free speech and free press rights.  There are only those rights which the government sees fit to grant unto us.  

• The rights that we claim to have are not worth protecting, nor are they worth fighting/dying for.  Our best option is simply to surrender them without a fight.  

• And we're told that violence and killing are sometimes justified; that is, as long as acts of such are committed in order to get one's own way, or to shut down the speech of others.  

This isn't common sense, freedom, or the American way.  Rather, it is stupidity, hypocrisy, and the teaching of tyranny.  Be a slave from the cradle to the grave! That's all it really is.  

During my time attending the former Fairfield High School, there used to be (and presumably still is) a notable mural near the school's auditorium.  The mural read, "and this above all, to thine own self be true" (3).  

I wonder whatever happened to this idea?        

Note: Apparently, this is consistent with the thinking of a top employee within the Fairfield Public Schools (Director of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Digna Marte) (4).