|
|
"There was a good deal of frustration with Senator Dodd's appearance in Cornwall," said committee chairman Tod Jones. "Some committee members felt [Mr.] Dodd did not answer their questions at all. Only three or so questions were answered and people felt their concerns were not addressed."
Following last month's committee meeting, Senator Dodd was invited to attend any one of the Kent committee's meetings that he could make. He has yet to reply, but the director of his Hartford office, Edward Mann, came to Kent Monday to address the committee's concerns.
"He tried to persuade the committee that Senator Dodd is not taking our concerns lightly," reported Mr. Jones, "that he was not trying to write us off. He tried to answer some of the questions that came from the committee to him, but I'm afraid he didn't change anybody's mind [pro or con]."
The resolution was drafted by John Nonneman, with help from Dennis De Paul. "The more we dug, the more we found and it wasn't very encouraging," said Mr. De Paul after the meeting. "Senator Dodd has done a lot of good things for the state in the areas of environmental issues, maternal leave, worker considerations ... but when you look at other side, at how he has financed his entire political career, it raises lot of questions about his impartiality and judgment."
He noted that Senator Dodd has been a longtime member of the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee at the same time that he was taking donations from AIG and from banking interests.
"Dodd played a critical role in getting the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act passed (that allowed commercial and investment banks to consolidate), which is considered one of the primary reasons we're in the situation we're in now," Mr. De Paul said. "His defense is that he never let political contributions affect his decisions. He says, 'I have done nothing illegal and unethical according to our regulations.' But I make a distinction between legality and ethics. I'm looking for a higher level of responsibility. We can do better than this, folks. There is a lot of anger and a lot of frustration from a lot of folks out there who now have a very uncertain future."
The resolution that Mr. Nonneman and Mr. De Paul brought before the committee was vetted by the entire group before it was passed, with a couple of points being removed to make it more concise. "We really wanted to focus on things that deserved a vote of no confidence," said committee secretary Leslie Levy.
Even with the revisions, she said, there were committee members who were not in favor of the vote. "Some voted party line and are very grateful for the good things he has done-and he has done a lot of good things," Mrs. Levy said.
"I was one who voted against it," said Maggie Wells. "I don't believe in doing something negative without doing something positive. It was a lively exercise in democracy. [Senator] Dodd deserves the criticism, but if you are going to criticize, I think you have to have a solution, have a proposal."
"There are no sacred cows," Mr. De Paul countered. "[Senator] Dodd is emblematic of the system's flaws. This is a gesture, but it might give other people an idea. I'm a good Democrat, but that doesn't mean I left my brains at the door."
Mr. Dodd was sent a letter and a copy of the resolution by Mr. Jones, who was among the dissenting voices in the vote. He wrote, "After a long and spirited debate last night at its monthly meeting, the Kent Democratic Town Committee adopted the Resolution of No Confidence which you will find attached to this letter," adding that he is personally "sorry this resolution passed."
But at the same time he gave the senator some stiff advice. " ... I am especially sorry that a Senator with such a laudable and extensive record of public service has created a situation which makes thinkable the passage of such a resolution. ..."
The resolution states that its members "share with Americans of all political persuasions a serious concern regarding how our political representatives finance their election and reelection campaigns" and that addressing this problem must begin "through local efforts which focus on the behavior, integrity and performance of our own local, state and federal representatives."
The committee concluded: "WHEREAS Senator Christopher Dodd has held a powerful position of oversight of the financial industry during a period when that industry pursued policies which generated enormous profit for its practitioners while devising and carrying out fraudulent practices that have come close to bankrupting the nation, and,
"WHEREAS over the course of his 30-year senate career Senator Dodd has accepted more than 13 million dollars from the financial and real estate industries, both of which he was charged with regulating in his capacity as a member, and currently as the chairman of the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and,
"WHEREAS Senator Dodd, in order to transfer 1.7 million dollars from his senate campaign accounts and divert those monies toward his ill-considered presidential run, notified the Federal Election Commission that he did not intend to run for the senate in 2010, and,
"WHEREAS Senator Dodd has violated either in fact or in appearance or both, in the several ways herein elaborated, the trust placed in him by his constituents,
"THEREFORE We the members of the Kent Democratic Town Committee conclude that it is the legitimate responsibility of the people to intervene and to reject those political representatives who have become enamored with achieving and maintaining their own position and power at the expense of the citizens, WE RESOLVE that Senator Dodd does not deserve our support, and that through his pattern of behavior, he has become a symbol of what is wrong with our electoral system and deserves our vote of NO CONFIDENCE.
