They think they are so superior down there.
"Connecticut corruption draws on deep roots; Hartford mayor is latest accused" by David Filipov, Globe Staff | September 28, 2009
HARTFORD - They used to call Connecticut “The Land of Steady Habits,’’ but lately it has been more like the land of steady handouts. One mayor received expensive wines and Oriental rugs. A governor scored a free hot tub and cathedral ceilings; his aide landed a stack of gold coins. And a state treasurer finagled . . . well, money.
They are just a few of the prominent city and state officials collared in corruption probes in recent years. But their downfalls, and resulting efforts to reform ethics rules, apparently have not stemmed the tide of charges against public servants. The latest to be arrested - for the second time - is Mayor Eddie A.Perez, for alleged extortion.
The spate of scandals is a source of chagrin for the state, and the sting of each new nickname - “Corrupticut,’’ “Louisiana with foliage’’ - worsens with each new corruption arrest and indictment.
“You got these guys doing unbelievably crazy stuff. One would think the politicians would realize that they’re going to get caught,’’ said state Representative Michael P. Lawlor, a former prosecutor who heads the Judiciary Committee. “At the end of the day it’s embarrassing.’’
*********************
No one is suggesting that the number of corruption cases in tiny Connecticut rivals those of New Jersey or Louisiana, or that the sheer audacity competes with Illinois.
Don't forget about Bay State.
Why has the Nutmeg State been such fertile ground for malfeasance? One factor often mentioned is Connecticut’s unusual combination of wealth and poverty: It has the third highest mean household income in the country, according to 2008 census data, but the cities where the most prominent scandals have occurred have some of the poorer neighborhoods.
The poor stealing from themselves, huh?
Another reason is a standard of ethics.... The state has no law that requires lobbyists to disclose their financial dealings with municipal authorities, said Tom Swan, executive director of Connecticut Citizen Action Group, a nonprofit advocacy organization.
The lax ethics and ensuing scandals have left voters “too numb to be very outraged’’ by the latest allegations, said Scott L. McLean, a professor of political science at Quinnipiac University. “The high-profile corruption cases in the state over the past few years have only confirmed their low opinion of politicians.’’
They are not helping themselves (except to your tax loot) wherever they are.
Some politicians are getting the message. The state has prohibited lobbyists from contributing to election campaigns, Lawlor said. Strict new rules allow state employees on official travel - and their family members - reimbursement only for essential expenses, which they have to report. Similarly strict rules now apply to gifts worth more than $10. “If someone gives us a plaque, we have to pay them or give it back,’’ Lawlor said.
Lawlor and other legislators also want to beef up the state’s powers of investigation. Rowland, Silvester, Newton, Ganim, and other prominent officials were brought down by federal investigations - a trend officials in Connecticut attribute, in part, to the high standards state prosecutors must meet to convene a grand jury and subpoena witnesses.
Many states, including Massachusetts, have a continuously sitting grand jury, to which prosecutors may begin presenting evidence as soon as they believe they have a case.
In Connecticut, prosecutors must persuade a panel of judges that a grand jury is necessary before one is convened, an obstacle that Chief State’s Attorney Kevin T. Kane said sets a high bar for the state to make its case in corruption probes.
“It does tend to hamstring us, very much so,’’ Kane said.
Proposals to make it easier for the state to investigate graft have stalled in the Legislature....
You know why, right?
I'll spell it out for you: G-R-A-F-T!
--more--"
