Ned Lamont - photo by Chion Wolf
The early stages of Lamont’s run for Governor have been marked by an emphasis on job creation, given what he calls the state’s “dead last” ranking in creating new jobs. He says that for small businesses, the cost of health care is one of the biggest problems. So, he supports creating a health care pooling system, that he says would bring down costs for municipal governments.
“I got 169 towns, and they’re all paying retail. They’re all paying retail, because they don’t get together, there’s no group purchasing,” Lamont told me.
“If I as a governor could create a pool, and they’d be able to buy into that pool and we get some group purchasing, we could dramatically bring down the cost of their health insurance, and still provide a top-quality program for state employees.”
Lamont criticized state officials for not “hustling” to bring in transportation funds from the federal government, but also said the state goes after federal money for projects – like the New Britain to Hartford busway – without an integrated strategy. He wants to put that project on “pause.”
“One of the reasons we’ve been losing is we’ve sorta been throwing ideas down there (to Washington) hoping somebody wants to fund them,” Lamont said. ”I worry that end of this stimulus, we’re going to shake our head and say ‘where did the money go?’ Did we make good long-term investments, or did we just throw it at shovel-ready projects?”
“I want us to focus our transportation infrastructure around a strategic plan,” Lamont told me. And that means rail in the state’s most populated corridors. ”Where we think the economic future of the state is going to be, and make sure that workers and jobs are better co-located. I-95, all the way up the knowledge corridor there from Hartford down to New Haven. Those should be real priorities.” He also said Connecticut wasn’t aggressive enough in going after “Race to the Top” money for education reform.
“Rhode Island, Massachusetts, New York, they all got their application in on time. They didn’t leave any questions blank. They won, and their young people are going to be better for it. And, Connecticut lost.”
Lamont praised education reform efforts in New Haven as a model for the rest of the state. In talking about how he would solve budget problems, and get the state’s various constituencies - labor and business, legislators and executive branch workers – on the same page, he reiterated his campaign call:
“I’m ready to go up to Hartford and bang some heads.”
When asked whose heads, exactly, would be banged…Lamont demurred. ”Look, I’m not a ‘head banger,’ I’m a respectful guy.”
I heard the interview. Mr. Lamont is an earnest man but his appearance today following his interview on Face The State is a real disappointment. He does not list one specific cut or revenue increase. It is all platitudes. Not very impressive for a guy with his education and having run state wide once before.
All the money in the world wont bring this campaign across the finish line. Unless Ned gets specific.
Ben, you can’t solve the problems of the state during a campaign. John Kerry tried that in 2004 with the nation and he turned off enough voters that Bush won re-election and continued to run this nation aground onto the rocks of Reality.
Robert Greenleaf, who developed the Servant Leadership paradigm, said that the difference between leaders and followers is that the former has a vision of where they want to go and can convince at least 1 person to follow them. The responsibility of followers is to enable their leaders to lead or if the vision is really an illusion, disable the leaders before everyone falls off a cliff.
What the gubernatorial candidates can do is tell us their vision and where they think the state should head. Lamont did this in his formal announcement speech and he repeats the themes in his stump speech.
The corporate vice-president of the department I work for doesn’t know the details of my job, but she knows that I fixed a major problem that another group could not and the users of the application and environment I fixed are happy, so she is happy. Even in the business world, the top executives don’t strangle their vision of where the company should head with details. They see the trends in the market and determine whether the company should follow them or not. They leave the details of how the company should get to their vision to the middle managers and engineers, like myself.
In contrast to Ned Lamont and most candidates, Republican gubernatorial candidate, Tom Foley, did what you suggest. He wants to cut a billion dollars from the state budget, but the items he lists don’t add up to a billion. He says he won’t cut services to children and the poor, so where do you think he’ll make the cuts? This is a case where a candidate arbitrarily made up a detailed number and that is becoming an albatross around his campaign.
I don’t forsee any of the candidates presenting to voters a detailed state budget and plan to solve the state’s problems. It’s not feasible during a campaign. All we can judge them on is their vision and whether we think they can handle the job they are seeking.
Thanks for your comment.
I do agree that we are not electing a policy wonk. Leaders do not get caught up in details. That’s done by the people they hire.
The comparison with business does not work. As much as people like to say, “Im going to make the state run like a business”—such as Mr. Foley has said and almost every candidate, government has so many intangibles such as mandates from state or federal mandates, the poor, security, immigration etc., it is a much more difficult challenge.
That is why I believe that it is important during difficult times such as these that candidates come forth with specific ideas. Lets begin the discussion. Some may say we should cut this or that and for the following reasons. Other may advocate we need to raise this tax or that and here is why.
The fact is the public is far more willing to be told what you are going to do and why. The political consultants will and are currently are telling candidates such as Ned to simply stall for time and then win on name recognition. A winning strategy? Perhaps.
But let me suggest that the first candidate that is specific will set the agenda. These are very dire times. Our fiscal situation is much worse than when we installed the income tax. (Mr. Foley has begun to make suggestions on what we need to do will set the agenda. He must do much more.) Once that candidate sets the marker the media and public will look to the other candidates and ask, “what is your plan?”.
We simply disagree on how much we expect from a candidate. Mr. Lamont is a good man and Im sure were he to be successful he would do a good job but Im afraid the democratic party wont let that happen as I wrote about. http://www.theday.com/article/20091129/OP04/311299981