connecticut politicsIn an article in the Hartford Courant, (http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-govwatch0215.artfeb15,0,3329924.column), It has come to the attention of the public that she is willing to play the political game she so characteristically has asked others not to employ.
Last December, Melissa Farley, the judicial branch's executive director of external affairs and legislative liaison, called the governor's office to request that 9 judicial positions not be appointed because they were not needed. This would save about $2 million dollars that is so desperately needed for the budget deficit. In more than 2 incidents documented by the Courant, the governor's office refused to back down from nominating judges to save the money. The governor's office is claiming that the judges are needed. This is in contradistinction to the claims of Ms Farley. At at time when leadership should be exerted, Rell has chosen the easy way, politics as usual. This incident could be overlooked, had it not been for the recent discovery that the governor has no clue as to how much the deficit beginning in the new fiscal year will be. At first she had stated there would be a $8 billion dollar budget deficit. However, in her annual budget proposal is for only a $6 billion dollar gap. The latest number is $8.6 billion according to the Office of Fiscal Analysis. To cover up her latest blunder the governor is now calling for budget summit with members her budget team and the Office of Fiscal Analysis. This should have been done before the governor submitted her budget.
Now the story gets even more interesting as John Lender writes in the article noted above. As recently as last December, the chief court administrator, Judge Barbara Quinn had personally called the Governor's top aid Lisa Moody to head off filling the proposed nominations. The judicial branch simply did not need the judges. However, this is contrary to the Governor's spokesman Rich Harris who questioned the validity of the claim of the Judicial Branch's aggressiveness in addressing the issue. Harris stated that the Judicial Branch had not been aggressive enough in pursuing the non-appointment of judges. What should the chief court administrator have done? She called the top aid of the Governor. Should Judge Quinn have gone to the Chief Justice of the Connecticut State Supreme Court and have her call the Governor? Clearly, the Governor's office had every interest in naming appointees. Forget saving the much needed money.
What one gets from this latest turn of political events is that the Governor's aids are not serving her well. Clearly, they knew about the request of the judicial branch. They have placed the Governor in a position that most aids try to avoid. The question of leadership now arises among the public. If the Governor did not know about the request of the Judicial Branch, why didn't she? This makes one wonder who is in control in the governor's office. If the governor's aids did not inform her they are guilty of malfeasance and a house cleaning should be in order. Secondly, if the Rell did know of the request, she is now guilty of playing the old political game that she claims she is above. Judicial positions remain prized plums for political favors. In all likelihood, she probably thought this would never see the light of day, big mistake. Now, the governor's image as attempting to stay above politics is truly shattered. At a time of huge budget deficits, this could have been a political point to make, especially given the recent budget she just submitted cutting the health programs of the very poor. Instead, Connecticut will have 9 new judges that they don't need within the year.
When one works in the political arena, the political game can be a closed system. The role of making deals and doing favors is nothing new. Since 2004, Governor Rell has attempted to be above politics as usual. A refreshing change from the corrupt politics of former Governor and inmate John Rowland. This latest intrigue has caused more than one politico to pause for thought. This will not go down well with a legislature that is being asked to cut most state social programs nor will it bode will for up and coming budget negotiations.
