Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations

Then Please VOTE YES For A Constitutional Convention.� When the question passes, the Federation will work for Statewide Initiative and Referendum which will give us the tools to pursue Property Tax Reform.�

***************

After reading the following two news articles, the Federation feels confident that you will agree that our only alternative is to� VOTE YES for a CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION.� A YES VOTE will enable us all to take our government back from the special interests which are controlling our elected officials while bankrupting taxpayers.��

***************

Outsiders Fuel House Races

By JESSE A. HAMILTON, Washington Bureau Chief, The Hartford Courant November 3, 2008

WASHINGTON � - Connecticut's five U.S. representatives have raised some $16 million this election season, nearly 80 percent coming not from constituents, but from lobbyists and special-interest groups in Washington.

This is not new, and Connecticut members of Congress are not exceptions to what happens nationwide, but the phenomenon is a stark example of what the head of a campaign-finance research group calls our "broken" system of government.

MAPLight.org, the nonpartisan research group that quantified the flow of money to Congress, determined that a House member has to raise $2,500 each working day of a two-year term to get the average $1.3 million needed to keep his or her seat. Daniel Newman, its executive director, said, "How can we expect House members to do the people's business and put the country first when they have to raise so much money to stay in office?"

Special-Interest Money Graphic

MAPLight.org, http://maplight.org/

Among the state's five incumbents, Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-3rd District, raised the most cash from outside her district, at 88 percent. Article is continued at the following website�. http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-outsidehelp1103.artnov03,0,1570905.story

*******************************

State budget panel created in 1993 never held meeting, By Keith M. Phaneuf, Journal Inquirer, Published: Thursday, October 30, 2008 9:58 AM EDT

HARTFORD � State officials looking for ways to cut spending and improve government efficiency face a difficult task, but they have help. Fifteen years ago, the General Assembly and then-Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. created a special panel that unites lawmakers, administration officials, and union leaders. Their yearly charge is to �examine ways to increase state government productivity, reduce costs, and provide the highest quality services.�� There�s only one problem: The panel never has met��

Susan G. Kniep, president of the Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, said Wednesday. �Now that we know it�s on the books, let�s implement it.�� Kniep, who served as East Hartford mayor from 1989-93, added that for too long finding ways to save taxpayer dollars �has not been a priority on the plates for a majority of legislators up there.� The organization, a coalition of about 30 taxpayer groups, is supporting a constitutional convention in hopes of establishing statewide initiative and referendum. If the constitution was amended this way, voters could, for example, have an annual referendum on the state budget.� Article is continued at the following website� http://www.journalinquirer.com/articles/2008/11/03/news/doc4909bd35222bd997517944.txt

*******************************

State Representative Arthur O�Neill is one of the good guys on the hill in Hartford.� A very good guy who is consistenly and tirelessly working for the taxpayers of our State.� Below is a letter he had submitted to the Hartford Courant which they failed to print�..�

On November 4 the voters of Connecticut will be given the opportunity to vote on the following ballot question: "Shall there be a Constitutional Convention to amend or revise the Constitution of the State?" This is a safeguard of the rights of citizens. Article Thirteen of the existing State Constitution requires that this question be presented to the voters every 20 years. At the Constitutional Convention of 1965, a provision was added to Article Thirteen that guarantees each generation of voters the opportunity to require the legislature to call a Constitutional Convention. Historically, the legislature has failed in its duty to amend the Constitution.

We, the citizens of Connecticut, should vote "YES" to call a Constitutional Convention and seize this moment to make at least one important change in our system of government: empower the citizenry of Connecticut to exercise the right of initiative and referendum. The right of initiative and referendum exists in many states from Massachusetts to California as well as in the majority of Connecticut towns. Under initiative and referendum, citizens would be allowed to circulate petitions to place proposed laws directly on the ballot. This would enable citizens to bypass the legislature in cases when the legislature is unable or unwilling to act whether due to: partisan deadlock, special interest influence, or the obstructionism of one well placed Senator or House member.

Consider the following example of obstructionism. In 2005, the Connecticut Education Association urged the legislature to adopt a Constitutional Amendment to require the General Assembly to fully fund the Teacher Retirement Account (TRA), which is responsible for the payment of local teacher pensions. The legislature has under funded the TRA by so much, for so long, that the TRA is now short nearly seven billion dollars. Some steps have been taken to address this shortfall, but if this problem is not solved soon, Connecticut taxpayers will be faced with huge tax increases in order to pay teacher pensions or teachers will not get their full pensions.

The proposed Constitutional amendment to prevent future under funding was co-sponsored by 134 legislators and unanimously passed all committees to which it was referred. The Speaker of the House of Representatives, who had sole power to call the Constitutional Amendment to vote, prevented the Amendment from being voted on or debated by the House of Representatives. In 2006, a similar proposed Constitutional Amendment, co-sponsored by 107 legislators died in the Senate, because it was never called for a debate and vote, even though it was co-sponsored by a majority of the members of the Senate. One Senator had the power to call the Amendment to a vote, but he never did so.

Opponents of a Constitutional Convention and a citizen initiative referendum claim that neither is necessary because the General Assembly should be trusted to pass any necessary laws or constitutional amendments that citizens seek. As the foregoing examples clearly illustrate, the will of the General Assembly and will of the people can be thwarted by the action or inaction of one person. The Constitutional Convention and citizen initiative referendum will prevent any one person. The Constitutional Convention and citizen initiative referendum will prevent any one person from holding and misusing legislative power, thus restoring a system of checks and balances to our state government.

By voting "YES" for the Constitutional Convention, the citizens of Connecticut will have the opportunity to reclaim the legislative process to which they are entitled.

Arthur J. O'Neill

State Representative

http://www.housegop.ct.gov/members/oneill.asp

*******************************

A Message from Paul� Jacob on why you should vote Yes for the Constitutional Convention.� Paul Jacob is President of Citizens in Charge and a Senior Advisor at The Sam Adams Alliance,� You can reach Paul at www.CitizensinCharge.org� or� pj@citizensincharge.org .

�Change�: the official buzzword of Campaign 2008. Everyone seems to be for change. Barack Obama and his supporters first shouted it as a slogan, but John McCain and his backers have long since dittoed their fondness for it.

The �why� is obvious: Both camps desire to connect with voters, who have long been denied the political change they so overwhelmingly favor. Yet, while political folks have learned to annunciate the word �change� and to use it correctly in many, many sentences, not quite everyone is really for it.

A question on Connecticut�s ballot next Tuesday makes this painfully obvious.

The question automatically appears, by constitutional mandate, on the Constitution State�s ballot every 20 years. It gives voters the opportunity to call a convention where delegates can propose amendments or revisions to the state constitution.

The question amounts to, in more simple language: Should we select delegates, and have them sit down, talk about and hopefully propose some changes?

I note that proposing actual changes certainly seems to be associated with the whole idea and motto of �change.�

So, yes indeed, Connecticut voters now consider a Yes vote. A convention to debate and write constitutional changes, changes that would then be approved or rejected by the voters, might produce the kind of reform voters desire. In instances where that is not the case, poor ideas can be rejected. Given the alternative � the special interest-dominated legislature � those who really do want change see a convention as by far their best opportunity.

Top of the reform list for Connecticut voters is a process for direct voter initiative, like neighboring Massachusetts has � as do 23 other states, including California, Florida, Maine and Ohio. That�s smart, because initiative and referendum is the path to all kinds of other reforms like term limits, tax limitation, protections from eminent domain abuse, and much more.

Of course, voter initiative is anathema to politicians and special interests (who don�t fancy giving an inch to the general public interest) and thus it is not likely to fair so well in the state legislature.

This week, a poll conducted by the Center for Survey Research and Analysis at the University of Connecticut showed 50 percent of the state�s voters have voted or plan to vote Yes on calling a constitutional convention. With 39 percent opposed, there remain 11 percent undecided.� That same poll found that 65 percent of Connecticut citizens favor establishing a statewide ballot initiative process.� Meanwhile, the forces opposing change (and even its mere possibility), slapped together a million dollars to begin a barrage of TV ads to frighten voters against a possible convention.�

The group formed, �Vote No � Protect Our Constitution,� received� a $325,000 check from the National Education Association in Washington, DC, another $315,000 was quickly kicked in by the Connecticut Education Association. The state�s chapter of the American Federation of Teachers plopped down another $105,000, along with $10,000 from each of the professors� unions at the Connecticut State University system and the University of Connecticut. Other big checks rolled in from groups including the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (Council 4) and the Connecticut AFL-CIO.

These are some of the most powerful � if not the most powerful � political forces in the state, organizations designed to gain specific funds and particular policy benefits from government for themselves. And yet, they actually have the arrogance to suggest they are seeking to protect voters from the bad, ole �special interests.� Like them.

In fact, it�s the message of their campaign: Fear. Fear of ourselves and our ability to self-govern. Fear of special interests (like them) and their power to rip us off no matter what. The �Vote No� campaign�s television advertisements argue, �Question One means special interests set the agenda. Eliminate our basic rights. Ban gay marriage and abortion. Tax giveaways to corporations. Cut workers rights and benefits.�

The arguments are almost too ridiculous to warrant a response. The so-called special interests urging a Yes vote had raised just $12,000 at the time the No forces approached the million-dollar mark. As John Woodcock, a former Democratic state legislator and a leader on the Yes side said, �We are being outspent 83 to 1. It�s the individual vs. behemoth special interests. It�s the grassroots vs. the establishment. It�s David vs. Goliath.�

Attack ads to the contrary, none of the freedoms recognized by the Bill of Rights is open for tinkering. Furthermore, supporters of a Yes vote, like the Federation of Connecticut Taxpayer Organizations, are most assuredly not seeking �tax giveaways to corporations.�

It is true that the state supreme court�s recent 4-3 ruling recognizing a right to same-sex marriage in Connecticut has mobilized the Catholic Church, The Family Institute and some religiously motivated activists to support a convention even more than before. The recent UConn poll, however, showed a majority of state voters opposed to a ban on gay marriage.

At the No website, one reads this ominous warning: �The public has no say on what the lobbyists propose to do to the constitution.� But most certainly the public does. The people get to vote any proposed change up or down. This omission is, of course, essential to whipping up irrational fears of a convention.

Perhaps Connecticut�s political bigwigs exclude this important fact also because they dare not mention what they most oppose: The voters having �more say.� Voters get the final word on both the changes proposed by a constitutional convention and ballot issues proposed by citizens, should the convention lead to the enactment of a ballot initiative process.

Similar constitutional convention questions appear on the Hawaii and Illinois ballots this year, similarly mandated by their constitutions. And the campaigns in those two states echo the Connecticut campaign. Voters seeking initiative and referendum to check the power of politicians and special interests are also urging Yes votes on those state convention questions. And, likewise, find themselves bullied in the battle by the well-heeled insiders.

In Illinois, the company of David Axelrod, Barack Obama�s campaign guru, has the $3 million contract to convince voters to say No to change.

There is good change and bad change. The entrenched political insiders in every state and in Washington don�t want either one . . . no matter what jingles you hear this time of year.

That�s why the change we most desperately need is more citizen control of government. In Connecticut, there is a real chance for real change.

********************