NH-Sen: Mark Connolly Considers a Run

Doesnt make much sense to me either. (4.00 / 6)

People I respect a lot say nice things about Mr. Connally, but other than the problem of too much time on his hands, it is hard to see the point of such a quixotic effort at this point and in this context.

There also doesn't seem to be much of a nexus between his 'narrative' and the office of federal Senator. It would seem that he would have more to offer in helping us address state issues such as the failure of the state agencies to adequately protect the people from financial fraud in the last eight years, which I continue to believe has its roots not so much in personal failures of various state employees, but rather in the failure to allocate sufficient resources (actually, any resources) to the prosecution of such matters.

That is why I look forward to the testimony of Kelly Ayotte and hope that she will be asked why she made the choices she made-- to spend millions on death penalty cases and a fruitless appeal to the US Supreme Court; and to maintain a three lawyer drug unit that seems to simply duplicate what is available in the county attorneys and US Attorney offices, while stripping the Public Integrity Unit of its only lawyer for financial fraud prosecutions.It may be that she has a good explanation that escapes me or it may be that we just disagree on priorities in resource allocation, but if we are going to continue to make such choices in how we allocate our scarce public resources, we should do so with our eyes wide open.

This by the way is not a revelation occasioned by the FRM matter, it was apparent to anyone who paid attention to a blatant epidemic of fraud and an utter lack of response from the Attorney General and the US Attorney. On Sept 8, 2009, I was asked by the Concord Monitor what changes I hoped to see from our new attorney general. Long before I or the public had heard anything about FRM, I said,

In the past, some say, the attorney general's office has not focused specifically on financial crimes. "The last eight years, there's been almost no systemic prosecution of economic crimes - people committing mortgage fraud after mortgage fraud," said attorney Paul Twomey,

Delaney himself said that one of his first efforts would be to redirect resources to this area.

"It's a time in the state where the state really needs to commit its resources to combating any financial exploitation and fraud, particularly in the housing and mortgage (industries) and in the refinance markets," Delaney said.

In his first weeks in office, again before FRM imploded, Mike Delaney created a new full-time attorney position as a fraud protection unit within the Consumer Protection Bureau and staffed it with a very experienced criminal prosecutor.

He did so without seeking a penny more from the legislature-- how?

He simply made a better allocation of existing resources than Kelly Ayotte had made in her long tenure.

I think Mr Connolly has some valuable information about what happened and how we make sure it doesnt happen again, but I really dont see how his experience fits into a Federal Senate race, especially since we have a wonderfully progressive candidate already in Paul Hodes.

 

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 12:37:17 PM UTC

Poor choices about the use of scarce resources (4.00 / 4)

I am so glad to see your discussion of this aspect of Kelly Ayotte's tenure.  Given that she professes to be a fiscal conservative, I think her choices as to how to allocate resources within the AG's office should be one of Paul Hodes' major talking points.

Here is a fact that should help you to fight a little longer.
Things that don't actually kill you outright make you stronger.

Piet Hein, Grooks

---

by: Lucy Weber @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 16:35:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't get it either (4.00 / 7)

But beginning last weekend he began to get more "frustrated" about "the close relationship between industry and regulators" he believes led to the BP oil spill and he has been closely following securities reform legislation now underway in the Senate.

Mr. Connolly, I share your concerns.  But Congressman Paul Hodes has been at the forefront of efforts reduce the influence of corporate special interests in Washington.  He has fought to de-link earmarks and campaign contributions, and has taken on the leadership of both parties in demanding action against ethically challenged public officials.  In addition, Congressman Hodes has been a consistent advocate for tough Wall Street reform on the House Financial Services Committee.

The best way for you to achieve your objectives is not to challenge Paul Hodes.  It is to work for him, and support his passionate and consistent leadership on issues that matter.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 13:10:02 PM UTC

well said (4.00 / 3)

We need to air this sentiment every day until every engaged Democrat commits to helping Paul Hodes with a number of hours a week from now till November. Then he will be the next Democratic Senator from New Hampshire. It's like you said DD, "...work for him, and support his passionate and consistent leadership..."

Never argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. ~ Mark Twain

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 00:08:58 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Where does he live? (4.00 / 1)

If he lives in Senate District 17, how about being our state senator?  We can never get a candidate with resources and name recognition, etc., to run against Jack Barnes.

We believe in prosperity & opportunity, strong communities, healthy families, great schools, investing in our future and leading the world by example. We are Democrats; we are the change you're looking for.

---

by: bloomingpol @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 18:33:02 PM UTC

He has ties that delete him from my list for state senator. (4.00 / 1)

http://www.concordmonitor.com/...
*Republican state senator
*Gregg's transition team
*Charlie Bass donor

---

by: Caroline French @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 19:08:16 PM UTC

state rep not state senator. (4.00 / 1)

---

by: Caroline French @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 19:09:22 PM UTC

Oh, New Castle, definitely not my district! (0.00 / 0)

but the article says New Castle Democrat?

We believe in prosperity & opportunity, strong communities, healthy families, great schools, investing in our future and leading the world by example. We are Democrats; we are the change you're looking for.

---

by: bloomingpol @ Sat Jun 05, 2010 at 19:46:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

i'm not against primaries in general, and the election cycle is way too long. (4.00 / 1)

But in my mind, as an ethical and not a legal issue, it's too late for new entries that high up the ticket.

--
Twitter: @DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 03:00:56 AM UTC

There's also a practical problem with "to be or not to be" at this point. (4.00 / 3)

Running a campaign for the United States Senator is a lot more serious a commitment than choosing whether to wear brown socks or black socks. It requires an intense commitment if success is the goal.

Hamlet makes great theater, but politics, not so much.  

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 14:02:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Paul Hodes is the de facto Democratic nominee (4.00 / 2)

If anybody had a problem with that, they've had more than a year to speak up. Now it's time to hold their peace.

--
Twitter: @DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Jun 07, 2010 at 01:27:20 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mark Connolly--why considering (4.00 / 4)

I am writing to express some of the reasons why I have recently thought about seeking elective office this year. First, as I told James Pindell when he called last Thursday eve, it is not likley that I will do so, if only because it is too late in the season to be doing so. Having said that, I do think the public discourse thus far has not been far-reaching enough given the enormity of the issues facing this country at this time. I am writing this morning to tell you why I am considering elective office, why the USS, and ask anyone to comment and/or contact me directly if you would like to talk.

Special Interest Control--Plain and simple, it is time for real change in how we elect candidates--at all levels of governemnt. There is too much PAC-influence and special interest money in our camapaigns today. Lobbysits have a choke-hold on the political process, both at the state and national levels. Consider this, it has been estimated that over $1 million/day is now being spent by the financial lobby in Washongton just to influence the debate on how to fix what should never have become broken--and it will break again if we don't just move incrementally to fix the problem.  

How do we do that: it's time to enact what Granny D stood for. Public financing of camapigns will actually be cheaper for all of us in the long run because we will finally diminish the pernicious and insidious influence of special interest money on public policy--witness the earmarks, witness the farm bills, the highway bills, the money for defense contractors. People run for office, get elected, and then want to stay there and the temptation to seek special interest money begins...Goldman Sachs, private equity/venture moeny, the oil/gas industry, etc. are now helping fund the debate or lack thereof in our state's USS election. This is wrong. This needs to change.

Financial Service Reform--this is before our nation right now. If we don't get this right, we will be back at it again in 8-10 years and the next time could be worse. The debate how to fix the system has become too incremental. Yes, the lobbysits have been at work. We need to reign in the size and reach of the mega banks. The deposits of the five major domestic banks are too concentrated and the trend continues--they now have a license to trade and destroy wealth because of an implied federal safety net. The activities of commercial banks and investmemt banks need to be further separted. Real and meaningful capital levels need to be imposed. All derivative trading needs transparency. No more bail-outs. People are angry because they see those who have brought on this mess were "bailed out," received bonuses and yet they are unemployed, they are further behind economically. And what they need is confidence that the system really works and is fair. Wall Street is a corrupt culture, and it truly has become a rigged game--people sense that. Let's start by saying anyone who offers financial services has a fiduciary responsibility to his/her clients. That is not the case now. And look beyoond the Goldman Sachs debacle. Look at the towns and municipal treasurers who bought interest rate swaps or auction rate securities--or older people who bought such toxic financial instruments by commission-driven salesmen. I have met with these victimized people, seen first hand their lives ruined by econoimc violence. And the cycle will go on and on--if we don't change how we define what is right and wrong in our financial system.

Afghanistan. Our approach in this war is wrong. I know saying this is an unpoular notion. Shea-Porter, who I have never met, deserves a lot of credit for standing up at the Democratic Convention last month and saying we need to change "our footprint there." Iraq-Afghanistan: we know it has been mis-handled. Our "mission" was wrong. Now, thousands of people have been harmed--many innocents maimed and wounded--and the U.S. body count continues, and the per capita suicide rate and psychological impact on our veterans is the highest it has ever been (my brother was a Vietnam-Camodian territory veteran, and I have witnessed its affect on him and others). The similarity to Vietnam is all too evident. Drone attacks, the modern equivalent of napalm, kills innocents and we have power-point led (McNamara-type-Whiz Kids) military planners defining success. But how does one measure success when foriegn policy becomes one of
"whack-a-mole" response, allied with a corrupt governemnt (South Vietnam anaolgy).

We need to change the dialogue. Let's go after the route causes of terrorism: extreme povery, lack of opportuity and illiteracy. Let's re-define our mission in Afghanstan, Somalia, Yemen, etc. Yes, we need a strong and ready military, but not one that secures a territory, engages an elusive enemy in its own land and then flies out to another territory in a foreign land that has been attempted to be occupied for decades....and nothing really changes.      

Jobs. Tax credit incdentives to re-start a fledgling economy is a right approach but one that is short-term. The US needs longer term public policies beyond the next election in scope, like actually seeding emerging industries, like alternative energy--industries that will create the next economy. China and India are now doing it. The complexity of industrial change needs leadership. We are a strong, vital nation and have the ability to set up the next frontier of jobs and manufacture--like solar cells--but
we are in a race with coutries, like China, who understand that the cost structure is high up front but comes down with volume and those countries that move quickly will create the kind of jobs that result in a strong economy and meaningful employment.

Environment. Global warming is real and not a hoax. And the answer isn't to fund a legacy technology like nuclear power. Yes, it can be considered on some level but not a meaningful
and lasting one. Changing our dependence on oil  is the challenge of our lifetime. If we don't fix the carbon problem, then life as we know it will not be as hopeful and promising as it could be. The tragedy of the BP fiasco is mind-numbing and represents a huge wake up call that the direction we are now on is non-sustainable.

Budget and taxes. The looming problem is medicare and social security. Demographically, we have an aging population, one that deserves security and one who actually paid their social security/medi- care and is now fearful it won't be there. The taxes for the lower and middle class should not be increased. In real economic terms, during the last twenty years, the disparity between the wealthy and less well off has incressed, with the non-welathy falling further behind in earning power. Hedge fund and private equity fund managers should not be paying a percenatge of  taxes that in real terms is lower than that of a construction worker or janitor. This is wrong. And we do need to curb the private use of government, whether it be accounting tricks in foreign subsidiaries, or funding corporate farms not to grow crops, or building bridges to nowhere.
And who really speaks up for the poor? Why aren't they part of the dialogue now?

That represnets some of my views. I am a relaistic progressive. I spent twenty years in the financial industry, and the last eight years as a regulator. Yes, I am upset to have witnessed the last six moths concerning how the Financial Resources Mortgage debacle unfolded. Yes, I am upset that an award-winning record of the New Hampshire Bureau of Securities regulation has been (atempted) to be tarnished. Yes, I like Peter Hildreth as a person but not as a regulaor. Yes, I think Governor Lynch, who I think has done a good job in general, has not handled this matter correctly. Yes, I am upset by the personal behind the scenes attacks against me.

No, I did not and am not using a Ponzi scheme to advance my own interests. I would be a fool to even try to do so. But...it's not about me. I am not asking anyone to stand with me--but to stand for them: those who do not have a voice.  I have think my record as a regulator is one of a strong but reasonable and fair person, and for ther past several years I have worked with other state regulators on the national scene to get meaningul financial reform passed in Washington. I understand the issues; I know the challenges. And I have seen first hand how government can help those who have no where to turn, and I can and want to stay engaged and if not now another time. This whole concept of running just happened. First, a conversation or two and then a call from a reporter...

Lastly, yes, I am a former Republican. But consider this: when I chose a party some 35 years ago the political system was different. There was Jacob Javits, Ed Brooke, Mark Hatfield and some Democrats, including some in our state, where not progressive. But the Republican Party has become one dominated by voices that I do not recognize and moderation and cooperation has become subsumed by a dilaogue that is not working. We can do better. Thanks Ray Buckley for waving at a former Republican at the convention in Nashua last month. It was a great day, and I really enjoyed seeing a hall full of entusiastic people of diiferent faces, colors, and backgrounds--all cheering. If I do not run, I will cheer on all the Democratic candidates.

I can be reached at 603-303-3093 or Puddledock@comcast.com if you would like to talk with me directly. Thank you for considering my thoughts this Sunday morning. Mark

 

---

by: Puddledock @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 14:35:03 PM UTC

Please help us discern (4.00 / 1)

At a glance, it seems there is little to no difference between you and the candidate that is now moving with the full head of steam, he has been building since 2009.

Simply, why you and not Paul? Hodes is a proven progressive that has performed well to date. He has a strong record that matches your "to do list."

Sure, we could have this conversation over the course of the primary season. But let's cut to the chase, if we could.

"Ill writers are usually the sharpest censors." - John Dryden

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 15:35:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You are in good company... (4.00 / 6)

Lot's of NH Republican leaders from 1970s and 80s have become NH Democrats...Lou D'Allesandro, Dave Nixon, Leslie Nixon, Ralph Hough, the late Susan and Malcolm McLane, Sally Townsend, Mark Fernald, the late Rob Trowbridge, Hillary Cleveland, Frank Davis and on and on...

in exchange we gave them Jeb Bradley, Sean Mahoney, Johnny Stephen....

Have you told a stranger today about Bill O'Brien and his Tea Party agenda? The people of NH deserve to hear about O'Brien  and his majority committed to destroying New Hampshire and remaking it into a armed survivalist preserve.  

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 16:34:04 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

and Judge Bud Martin too... (4.00 / 1)

Have you told a stranger today about Bill O'Brien and his Tea Party agenda? The people of NH deserve to hear about O'Brien  and his majority committed to destroying New Hampshire and remaking it into a armed survivalist preserve.  

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 21:23:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Babe Ruth for No No Nanette (0.00 / 0)

 Some great Granite Staters for a trio of No-No's to the Party of No.

http://www.sptimes.com/News/12...

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 21:32:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I know we're going back aways, but. . . . (0.00 / 0)

Congressman Chet Merrow

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 23:38:51 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

LOL, I decided not to go back that far but since you did,,, (4.00 / 1)

Eugene Daniell, Dudley Dudley and more recently Gail Morrison and Dana Hilliard

Have you told a stranger today about Bill O'Brien and his Tea Party agenda? The people of NH deserve to hear about O'Brien  and his majority committed to destroying New Hampshire and remaking it into a armed survivalist preserve.  

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Mon Jun 07, 2010 at 08:54:06 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I would encourage you to run for (4.00 / 4)

State Senate, if you live in a district that does not currently have an incumbent Democrat who shares your values, as Paul Hodes does.

---

by: Unagiboy @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 20:39:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was very interested and respectfully read Mr. Connolly's positions. (4.00 / 2)

Please take each paragraph above and compare it with what Paul Hodes stands for and has already accomplished.  All of the reasons that Mr. Connolly gives for considering running are the reasons that he and all Democrats should strongly support Paul Hodes. Paul is a champion for progressive ideals and I hope that Mark Connolly and all those reading this commit to working for Paul Hodes senate campaign and the campaigns of other Democrats running for office up and down the ballot in NH.  

---

by: Caroline French @ Sun Jun 06, 2010 at 15:40:35 PM UTC