Since I have had such a smash hit these past couple of weeks starting my weekly article off with some definitions, I decided to give this another try.
Today’s subject is “Ethics”
“Ethics” is defined as the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group, an awareness of the moral importance of a specified thing.
“Ethics in Connecticut” is defined as an evaluation of circumstances that is acceptable if it fits 1) the moment, 2) me, 3) a family member, 4) a friend, 5) a crony, 6) some marginalized group, or 7) abuse of a citizen, (because no one cares about them, anyway).
Welcome to the wonderful world of Ethics in Connecticut.
Believe it or not, Connecticut actually has a state ethics code. I highly recommend all Connecticut State Taxpayers read it and quote from it frequently as I am led to believe that most state officials, both elected and appointed, have no clue as to what rules and laws they need to be following in their positions of power. And nor do they care.
Here are some of the highlights to this massive, not widely read or followed code of law in the state:
Sec. 1-83. Statements of financial interests. Filing requirements. Ethics statements. Confidentiality. Waiver. (a)(1) All state-wide elected officers, members of the General Assembly, department heads and their deputies, members or directors of each quasi-public agency, members of the Investment Advisory Council and such members of the Executive Department and such employees of quasi-public agencies as the Governor shall require, shall file electronically with the Office of State Ethics using the software created by the office, under penalty of false statement, a statement of financial interests for the preceding calendar year on or before the May first next in any year in which they hold such an office or position. If, in any year, May first falls on a weekend or legal holiday, such statement shall be filed not later than the next business day. Any such individual who leaves his or her office or position shall file electronically a statement of financial interests covering that portion of the year during which such individual held his or her office or position. The Office of State Ethics shall notify such individuals of the requirements of this subsection not later than sixty days after their departure from such office or position. Such individuals shall file such statement electronically not later than sixty days after receipt of the notification. https://portal.ct.gov/ethics/statutes-and-regulations/statutes-and-regulations/codeofethicsstatutes#S1-83.
One may wonder when the last time anyone saw King Governor Ned Lamont The Unaccountable's financial disclosures? Certainly, no one has ever seen his income tax summary forms as he has never released them to the general public. (And nor, does he care to).
One may also note that the penalty for noncompliance or lying with the above provision is the "wrist-slap" penalty of “false statement” as opposed to the legal standard of “perjury” which carries criminal penalty. If you say such a provision is harsh, it is the same provision of lying under oath you stipulate when you file your yearly income tax return. (Idea: Try scratching out “perjury” on the declaration of your next tax return and replacing it with “false statement,” and when you are arrested, you can try claiming immunity from prosecution by claiming you are a member of the Connecticut State Legislature)
Let’s move on.
"No public official or state employee or employee of such public official or state employee shall agree to accept, or be a member or employee of a partnership, association, professional corporation or sole proprietorship which partnership, association, professional corporation or sole proprietorship agrees to accept any employment, fee or other thing of value, or portion thereof, for appearing, agreeing to appear, or taking any other action on behalf of another person before the Department of Banking, the Office of the Claims Commissioner, the Health Systems Planning Unit of the Office of Health Strategy, the Insurance Department, the Department of Consumer Protection, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the State Insurance and Risk Management Board, the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, the Public Utilities Regulatory Authority, the Connecticut Siting Council or the Connecticut Real Estate Commission; provided this shall not prohibit any such person from making inquiry for information on behalf of another before any of said commissions or commissioners if no fee or reward is given or promised in consequence thereof. For the purpose of this subsection, partnerships, associations, professional corporations or sole proprietorships refer only to such partnerships, associations, professional corporations or sole proprietorships which have been formed to carry on the business or profession directly relating to the employment, appearing, agreeing to appear or taking of action provided for in this subsection."https://portal.ct.gov/ethics/statutes-and-regulations/statutes-and-regulations/codeofethicsstatutes#S1-84. One may wonder why the "Blue Hills Civic Association" was allowed to have Democrat State Senator Douglas McCrory oversee the grants to his "association" and where are the seven figures of combined missing funds discovered in the state's audit findings that McCrory had a place in directing or diverting? Has there been any cross checking of McCrory's personal financial statements to see either increases in income and or personal wealth? Also why has there never been a media or Republican demand to probe King Ned The Unaccountable for his self-designed 2019 sham “Ethics Plan” that my friend and colleague Tony De Angelo has sliced and diced to prove that it was directly constructed to exclude the tax-free and secret Cayman Island partnerships that were instrumental in shielding the self-dealing IPO profit from the Sema4 IPO propped up by state funding? https://x.com/TonyDeAngelo7/status/1960366270567645674 These are just several thoughts to help resolve this continued fraudulent use of Connecticut Taxpayers monies that we never see repaid.
However, let us return to our terms as defined above, especially “Connecticut Ethics” With that definition in mind, we need to examine and try to understand this code as we see more incredible and piggish acts by the Democrat Party controlled state legislature to help eliminate transparency in state government. In a unanimous vote on proposals from the semi-useless Connecticut Office Of State Ethics, legislators decided to drop a proposed addition to this state ethics code to prohibit nepotism. This nepotism would have applied to all state lawmakers also. As a side note, on April 27th, the State House of Representatives voted to eliminate a nepotism standard that forbids state public officials and state employees from the giving of jobs, promotions and or special advantages to relatives or friends from this same ethics bill. This prohibition would have also applied to all of the members of the state general assembly. Future Connecticut Attorney General US Senator, Democrat State Representative Matt Blumenthal, (Legacy of US Senator Dick Blumenthal) is the House co-chair of the Government Administration and Elections Committee and he bold-facedly stated: “This is the first time that these provisions have been put forward to the legislature," he said. "We had a public hearing on them, but I think there are still concerns about the scope and nuances of some of their applications, and I anticipate we will address them again in the future and potentially pass versions of them in the future, but they may require additional work” CT legislators remove nepotism ban that would have applied to them
Noted also in the same bill is a provision that allows state legislators two free sporting tickets per year. Both of these provisions passed unanimously and will probably become law.
But what on earth is going on here? Many are confused as the Democrat controlled state legislature has no issues whatsoever in ramming down bills and laws upon Connecticut Taxpayers without public hearings and listening to the concerns of the individuals who will be impacted the most by their brazen, careless and politically connected legislation that pass at any time day or night, regardless of public opinion. You should be astounded to realize especially after pouring through this state ethics code that there is no rule against the use of nepotism by the state legislators. So, if it is not illegal, to the victors go the spoils. Bring on the nepotism 24 hours a day, seven days a week and 365 days in the year! Blumenthal is well aware of that and must protect the political machine no matter what the costs are. Ethics be damned.
But more astounding is that no elected official or Republican political candidate to date has ever demanded an inquiry into the self-dealing litany of the Lamonts over eight years in a myriad of dealings nor have they been called to account on any of them. Again, I will remind our readers of my opinion that there will never be an investigation into Governor Lamont's financial streams and a full disclosure of his income tax statements even though he is in clear violation of the above state ethics code. To this, we still have no answers to dealings with “Thermo Fisher Scientific", "Sema 4", " Core Infomatics", “Centrellis”. "Ocrulus", "Urjanet", "1life Healthcare", "Galileo Health", "Castlight Health", "Paladina Health", and "VillageMD", the Lamont-related Cayman Island partnerships, large Cayman Islands deals such as the "Horsebarn Hill Investment Fund" hiding in the UCONN Foundation, and other deals working through “quasi-public” organizations such as Lamont-connected (and covert) “Connecticut Innovations”. Again, the lack of answers seems to be in violation of the above state ethics code. I challenge any reasonable person to find where in this code Lamont is exempt from it.
Again, there are two definitions of “ethics” in Connecticut. I submit unto you that the “Connecticut” definition of ethics should finally apply to its citizens. Why can’t Connecticut citizens keep secrets from government using private e-mail servers as the Lamonts’ do? Why can't Connecticut citizens rob tax-exempt organizations for their friends and cronies? Why can’t Connecticut Taxpayers disregard paying their state taxes as it seems to be supporting a very unethical and illegal non representative and non-transparent government? After all, why can’t citizens get away with what their government does? It is a government completely avoiding its own state constitution and state law especially with the recent anti-ICE Senate Bill 397 which was signed into law. It is a state government that has a complete disregard for the rule of law and its own legal taxpaying citizens who remain in this hellhole once known as "The Constitution State". And it is a government that will accept a couple of free sporting tickets at your expense because they are them and you are you, and you, be damned.
God Help Us All in protecting us from the government of the State of Connecticut.