Rep. Chris Murphy (D-5th District) will be introducing legislation tomorrow that will reform some pieces of federal juvenile justice policies. Here’s what the law will do, according to a release from Murphy’s office:
In the coming months, Congress will consider the reauthorization of the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevent Act (JJDPA). Working with advocacy groups to craft the bill, Murphy’s legislation will:
- Begin to remove youth from adult jails and support states in their efforts to keep kids out of adult prisons;
- Improve safety of juveniles in custody, by requiring states to develop procedures that eliminate dangerous practices, increase the use of effective behavior management systems, provide training for staff on effective techniques, and encourage state’s to develop safe staffing levels;
- Disallow locking up status offenders – youth who have not been charged with any offense – and provides supports for these youth in the community. The bill provides that when youth may need secure confinement, that they are placed in safe conditions and rehabilitative environments;
- Provide incentives for states to use “best practices” such as effective community-based alternatives to incarceration.
Murphy also worked on juvenile justice legislation while a state senator in Hartford.
Cheshire RTC Endorses Cappiello
State Sen. David Cappiello (R-Danbury) announced today that the Cheshire Republican Town Committee is endorsing him for the 5th District congressional nomination. From the release:
“Everywhere he goes, David’s love for family and community are apparent and
sincere,” said [Cheshire Republican Town Chairman Stephen] Carroll. “At a time when too many representatives in Washington have forgotten where they came from and who they’re supposed to be serving, we need to elect more people who will serve their constituents’ interests, not the special interests. David Cappiello will be a Congressman Cheshire can count on and be proud of.”
This could be significant as former State Rep. Tony Nania gauges support for a potential primary challenge to Cappiello.
40 responses so far ↓
1 ACR // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:00 pm ·
--3
>>This could be significant as former State Rep. Tony Nania gauges support for a potential primary challenge to Cappiello.
Not really.
The Nania’s camp plan has been, and remains, to force a primary.
He can afford it, it’ll keep interest in the district, and get his name recognition up.
There’s little sense in doing “retail politics” at this stage - that’ll come when it’s time.
2 Mr. Reality // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:12 pm ·
+3
But if Nania is not getting broad support…how is he going to win the primary? I mean getting 15% is one thing…turning around and getting the majority of Republicans is to vote for you after the delegates overwhelmingly go against you is nearly impossible. If Cappiello keeps getting towns to endorse him I just don’t see how Nania can win a primary.
3 Joshua // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:25 pm ·
+4
The Cheshire endorsement is no doubt an impressive one for David Cappiello.
Where has Nania been hiding???
4 gerardw // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:30 pm ·
--3
I guess he’s not into
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people., huh?
5 ACR // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:32 pm ·
+1
>>But if Nania is not getting broad support…how is he going to win the primary?
That part should be fairly easy.
It will be Republican primary - CT hasn’t allowed unaffiliated voters to vote in GOP primaries in years now.
Nania is a traditional Republican; Cappiello isn’t.
The gun issue alone is more than enough for a large number of Republican voters that will quickly reject any member of the GOP that fails to tow the line on that issue - and Cappiello is hardly an improvement over Murphy as it regards the 2nd.
Otherwise - the GOP is a pretty big tent; but in a primary traditional issues will weigh a lot more than in the general election.
The Cheshire TC never met him - and in fact that is MY fault and no one elses.
One TC reversed themselves and has gone with Nania after meeting him AFTER originally endorsing Cappiello.
Further - the Cappiello campaign has other problems that have so far gone unreported and I swore I wouldn’t be the one that did.
But there are problems.
Meanwhile, Nania is slowly staffing up; has a fund raising event in NYC for high rollers coming up and soon will be out with a fairly major national figure endorsement.
I’m not the press guy - it’s not my job to undermine the guy who’s job it it to release stuff when Tony wants it released.
I did however spend 3 or 4 hours with him and several others this past weekend - when I walked into the room the IQ average probably dropped by 20 points…… never saw so many egghead politicos at one table in my life.
6 El Kabong // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:38 pm ·
+5
Nania=a bad joke.
If you’ve ever heard him talk in person, you know what I’m talking about.
7 Genghis Conn // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:46 pm ·
+5
He’s your Ned Lamont, then? Interesting.
8 ACR // Mar 3, 2008 at 9:59 pm ·
--5
>>If you’ve ever heard him talk in person, you know what I’m talking about.
“One of the most eloquent speakers I have ever heard.”
Chris Healy (last Tuesday evening)
CT GOP Chair
9 ACR // Mar 3, 2008 at 10:00 pm ·
--4
>>He’s your Ned Lamont, then
That would be Benedict Cappiello.
10 Genghis Conn // Mar 3, 2008 at 10:02 pm ·
+4
ACR said:
How do you figure? Dems said Lieberman was the traitor, and that Lamont reflected their core values on important issues like the war. Seriously, I think there’s something to that comparison.
11 ACR // Mar 3, 2008 at 10:32 pm ·
--5
I don’t think so Genghis.
David Cappiello has never missed a chance to toss a fellow Republican under the bus; and he lines up on issues more with Murphy than not.
12 Genghis Conn // Mar 3, 2008 at 10:33 pm ·
+1
ACR said:
How is this disproving what I said?
13 ACR // Mar 3, 2008 at 10:58 pm ·
--2
Lamont took on a sitting US Senator with an 87% rating of towing his party’s line over the *one* issue where he didn’t.
David Cappiello doesn’t now hold the seat he seeks in the US Congress, nor is he any more of an “official” candidate than Nania at this juncture.
On the contrary - while he came out early; his history of squabbling with party norms is the stuff of legend - it is in fact his norm.
Republicans support each other, or we remain silent and let the loyal opposition take care of any problem Republicans. (As we did in 1988.)
Cappiello has not behaved in that fashion, in fact he has repeatedly done otherwise all while accepting stacks of cash from the mob which he (incredibly) acted surprised about when caught.
Republicans support an individual right to bear arms.
Cappiello’s rating there is dismal - many Democrats in fact have superior records as it regards the 2nd.
While some of his stances might please the other side - he offers no reason for those voters to support him instead of their own guy in the general election.
For the same reasons - he offers Republicans no reason to support him in a primary at all.
He has enough baggage that Delta would charge him extra to fly anywhere.
14 ACR // Mar 3, 2008 at 11:03 pm ·
--5
…..or….are you saying Cappiello is our Lamont?
Your post is unclear.
If so, yes.
There’s nothing wrong with Nania.
15 ebpie // Mar 3, 2008 at 11:05 pm ·
+4
Quite frankly I am getting tired about all of this Nania non-news. A few individuals keep plugging him, but there has been almost no buzz about him independent of this site.
If Nania is going to make a move he better do it soon. Its already March.
16 MikeCT // Mar 3, 2008 at 11:26 pm ·
--1
ebpie,
There is a super-secret plan for a stunning come-from-behind victory by Nania. You’ve just got to be wearing the right hat to understand it.
17 Genghis Conn // Mar 3, 2008 at 11:48 pm ·
--1
ebpie said:
Ebpie is right. Not much is happening here–and even less seems to be happening as the months wear on. Even if Nania does run, which seems less likely the more time passes (unless he’s some sort of political ninja, invisibly waiting for the right moment to strike), he probably won’t make much headway. I probably shouldn’t give the guy any more space here until we know something concrete.
Eh, ACR, sounds like you’re on a crusade. Lamont wasn’t about a single issue, he was about a deep, deep discontent with a senator who Democrats felt had hurt and abandoned their party on the issues closest to their hearts. It really sounds like the same thing to me–except that Lamont actually went for it instead of running some sort of stealth campaign.
18 matt w // Mar 4, 2008 at 12:39 am ·
--3
Better state legislators than Nania have failed to make the successful jump from the lege to higher office — after a few cycles, their instinct is to start their campaigns up in June or July. Sadly for Nania, a Congressional District is 30X the size of an assembly district… so as much as I’d love to see an intra-GOP war waged between the deficient and corrupt wings of the party, I don’t think there’s any chance he can do Cappiello any damage at this late stage.
19 JohninCT // Mar 4, 2008 at 1:48 am ·
+0
he’s just saying that nunia is potentially playing the same role in the R primary that lamont played in the D primary. he’s not saying they have similar politics.
lamont was the “More Democratic Democrat”
nunia is the “More Republican Republican”
20 ACR // Mar 4, 2008 at 4:30 am ·
--1
>>Lamont wasn’t about a single issue, he was about a deep, deep discontent with a senator who Democrats felt had hurt and abandoned their party on the issues closest to their hearts
Sorry - considering Lieberman’s voting record, that just doesn’t wash.
One issue - period.
Further - Lamont went retail way too early boring some voters nearly to death, terrifying the rest.
The general election results spoke for themselves.
And it was you Genghis that brought Nania up in your original post, as almost an afterthought; and for no reason other than to take a rather gratuitous cheap shot.
21 gerardw // Mar 4, 2008 at 5:40 am ·
+2
What were the Lamont issues other than Iraq?
22 Jack Dobb // Mar 4, 2008 at 6:09 am ·
+3
matt w said:
This is precisely why I’m enjoying watching the Obama-Clinton tilt.
23 Genghis Conn // Mar 4, 2008 at 7:07 am ·
--1
No, you wish. See here, but the anger with Lieberman built up over years.
24 ACR // Mar 4, 2008 at 9:01 am ·
--1
I *had* forgotten that he gave Clinton a good swift kick over the Monica thing.
I’ll concede that he would have been better off keeping his mouth shut on that. I was decidely a Weicker-like stunt.
Considering he replaced Weicker himself in part due to crossover votes from people like myself because we had had enough of Lowell stabbing the party in the back - he should have known better.
Showing some manners during a debate doesn’t strike me as an indictable political crime however.
Running for two offices at once and getting away with it was, I thought, pretty clever.
I guess that one’s in the eye of the beholder.
25 ACR // Mar 4, 2008 at 9:09 am ·
--1
>>This is precisely why I’m enjoying watching the Obama-Clinton tilt
Works for me too.
Considering what will probably happen in the general election to either of them against the darling of the independents and conservative Dems; (he’s not one of *those* Republicans) John McCain - It almost looks as if they’re fighting to be the next human sacrifice.
I wonder….did the Incas or Aztecs act like that?
I don’t know.
What’s motivating them?
Did Mondale make a lot of dough after 1984 or something?
What am I missing?
26 UnionThug // Mar 4, 2008 at 9:09 am ·
+0
Which town committee is supporting nania?
27 ACR // Mar 4, 2008 at 9:16 am ·
--3
>>Which town committee is supporting nania?
Uh…I’m not the press guy.
But I can tell you absolutely that Southington is 100% behind Nania and there will be a fund raiser here put on by the same woman that raised over 10K for John Rowland in 1990 here while her husband served on state central.
I’m sure of it - she wasn’t my wife then, but she is now.
(hmmmm….I’d better send some flowers this morning to start getting her in the mood to give me a hand…..otherwise I’ll have to spring for a new car or something…..)
28 UnionThug // Mar 4, 2008 at 9:30 am ·
+4
So the Southington Town Committee has officially endorsed Nania?
29 Mr. Reality // Mar 4, 2008 at 9:35 am ·
+1
Southington is 100% behind Nania? That’s great why does he need the support of a town that is in the 1st CD? Maybe he can get the Greenwich and Norwich and New Haven Town Committees to geive their endorsement as well.
Are you for real? If this is thwe way NAnis is running his campaign then he’ll be lucky to get 15%!!!
30 Chris // Mar 4, 2008 at 10:05 am ·
+1
I agree with Ghengis on this. I’ve heard nothing about Nania other than repeated posts from ACR. It’s becoming increasingly obvious that this is “campaign” is being led by those upset that Cappiello asked DeLuca to resign. I’m not sure who is more delusional - those on here that think Nania actually could go to Congress or those or believe that Ned Lamont is still a relevant political figure.
31 ACR // Mar 4, 2008 at 10:06 am ·
--3
>>Southington is 100% behind Nania?
Yup - as well as two towns in Ohio.
Are you for real?
You can’t spot a gag?
Geeesh.
As far as getting the required delegates to primary; I suspect it won’t be a problem.
At least 20% will vote for anyone *but* Cappiello.
The primary itself should be a fairly easy.
In politics friends come and go - you collect enemies.
Cappiello’s traditional Republican negatives are high enough that victory there is all but guaranteed.
It’s a Republican primary - remember that key fact; therefore:
Gun people will vote for anyone else.
(That tends to be a big issue and getting outside help is likely; further those voters show up religiously.)
Pro-life voters will vote for anyone else.
Gay marriage opponents will vote for anyone else.
Friends and supporters of Lou DeLuca’s will vote for anyone else.
Bush supporters will vote for anyone else.
People stuck with bad ARM mortgages, will vote for anyone else.
McCain supporters will vote for anyone else.
Those disinclined to trust lobbyists, will vote for anyone else.
Friends of John Rowland’s (this is the 5th district) will vote for anyone else.
Those that are appalled by the hypocrisy as it regards the dumpster business in Danbury, will vote for anyone else.
32 Mr. Reality // Mar 4, 2008 at 10:13 am ·
--1
I think your entire assertion that Nania is a viable candidate is the gag. Good one! You got me!!!
33 UnionThug // Mar 4, 2008 at 10:14 am ·
+2
ACR said:
So, is this a gag or a lie?
34 CtRoadrunner // Mar 4, 2008 at 10:21 am ·
+1
who cares! unfortuately neither cappiello or the chronicles of nania have a prayer.
murphy will smoke them both
the GOP’s only hope is a sam caligiuri run if not this year hopefully in the future
35 ACR // Mar 4, 2008 at 10:36 am ·
--3
>>So, is this a gag or a lie?
That’s true - but I don’t know that they’ve contacted Cappiello; nor do I have authority to release the name of the town.
Former UN Ambassador John Bolton is appearing at a fund raiser this month for Tony, and there’s a pretty good list of other national figures as well.
Nania’s well connected.
Considering he has yet to “officially” announce at all; he’s in the midst this week of acquiring office space etc. I really think anyone that doesn’t take him seriously does so at their own peril.
The man’s life history is abundant with success, some beyond belief.
He’s saved a lot of jobs, and made a lot of people prosperous.
A very methodical thinker, and he’s driving someone like myself (about a gallon of coffee a day) who wants to go NOW DAMIT!!, crazy.
However, he has enjoyed far greater personal and business success than most; and I do know some others in his league and of his caliber; and they too seem to set things up too slowly for my taste.
On the other hand - their plans usually come to fruition.
36 UnionThug // Mar 4, 2008 at 11:31 am ·
+0
You’re saying a Town Committee has withdrawn their support of DC, and thrown it to TN, but they haven’t told anyone yet?
Did this happen at a meeting? Did a vote occur?
Sounds like you are talking out of your ass.
37 Don Pesci // Mar 4, 2008 at 3:51 pm ·
+2
Genghis,
You’re probably right in insisting there were issues other than opposition to the war in Iraq propelling Lamont’s challenge to Lieberman. However, not all issues are equal, and the question ACR probably should have asked you is this: If Lieberman had taken a position roughly equivalent to Obama on the war, would Lamont have been successful in his primary? My own answer is “No.”
38 CtRoadrunner // Mar 4, 2008 at 4:05 pm ·
+3
GC~ would lamont had run if lieberman had been anti-war from the beginning. no
so lamont was a one issue candidate
39 gerardw // Mar 4, 2008 at 4:28 pm ·
+1
Interesting that the link you posted references the Clarence Thomas vote, for it was that exact moment my dislike for Lieberman solidified. For example, although I’m Republican (Libertarian not Bushian wing) and don’t agree with much of Chris Dodd’s politics, I’ve always respected Dodd because he struck me as honorable and consistent.
Not so Joe.
Liberman’s “ooh, it’s too hard, I can’t decide how to vote” copout on the Thomas nomination — waiting until the last second, after Thomas had enough votes to be seated to cast his “no” vote — is the act of a coward. I could respect a “yes” vote, I could respect a “no” vote, I can’t respect ‘well the conservatives won’t hate me cause he passed and the liberals won’t hate me because I voted no’ fence sitter.
40 mtown // Mar 4, 2008 at 8:21 pm ·
+1
Chris said:
I wouldn’t go so far….Nania is making big inroads in NW CT, where Cappiello has zero name recognition. Keep in mind, while there aren’t many people there, there are huge campaign donors, and with D-Capp’s money problems, that’s something Nania can leverage heavily. Nania can afford to keep a super-low public profile if he makes significant dollar inroads in the 5th against Cappiello’s money operation.
You must log in to post a comment.