Today, I'll be joining Rep. Chris Murphy's press conference in which he'll answer questions regarding the Iraq Supplemental Appropriations Bill currently being debated in Congress.
As you know, the people want a change in the way things are done in the state and country. Last November's election was a wake-up call to the Republicans that the people outright rejected their political philosophy with the Democrats gaining majority status in Washington and gaining SUPER majority status in Connectiut. In the state, no other place was the outright rejection of a political party more evident than in Danbury.
On a national level, the pro-war, pro-illegal immigration enforcement Congresswoman Nancy Johnson suffered a massive defeat by Chris Murphy losing to the Democrat on EVERY voting machine in Danbury despite the GREAT DEAL of local support by Mayor Boughton. On the State level, outspoken local anti-immigrant critic and Republican Common Council member Pauline Basso negative immigration smear campaign against State Rep./Deputy Speaker Bob Godfrey failed to impress anyone and ultimatelty proved worthless, as she was unable to muster more than 1,000 votes on election night. The 107th110th 109th "journeyman," Common Council Republican Gregg Seabury's last ditch effort to run an anti-immigration smear campaign against Democrat Joe Taborsak also failed to impress anyone and also resulted in an embarrassing defeat that hopefully puts Seabury's quest of becoming a State Rep finally to rest. Finally, Jason Bartlett's hard fought victory over Republican Phil Gallagher ended a sweeping day for Democratic Party which was echoed in other races throughout the country.
From November, here's Danbury Democratic Town Committee chariman Joe DaSilva analyisis on the local and national races.
The Democrats know that the public expects a change in direction on several key issues, the biggest being the war in Iraq. The Iraq Supplemental Appropriations Bill is the Democrats latest attempt to bring change and accountability to the management of the war. The bill faces opposition from the Republicans who are united against it as well as several Democrats who are undecided in supporting the binding resolution that calls for a deadline for combat troops to leave Iraq.
Rep. Rahm Emanuel, chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, said they're at least one or two votes short of the 218 needed to pass binding legislation with a firm deadline -- August 31, 2008 -- for combat troops to leave Iraq.
The deadline is contained in a supplemental funding bill -- legislation that President Bush has promised to veto if it contains such a provision.
The biggest resistance isn't coming from the other side of the aisle -- although Republicans are mostly united in opposition -- but rather from a handful of undecided Democrats, including freshmen Reps. Keith Ellison of Minnesota, Brad Ellsworth of Indiana and Hank Johnson of Georgia.
The list has grown smaller. Rep. James McGovern, an anti-war Democrat from Massachusetts who had been on the fence, agreed to vote yes.
"I have come to the conclusion that defeating the supplemental bill before us today would send a message to George Bush and Dick Cheney that they will continue to have a free pass from this Congress to do whatever the hell they want to do," McGovern said during Thursday's floor debate on the measure.
McGovern's not the only one. Rep. Elijah Cummings, an anti-war Democrat from Maryland who sits on the House Armed Services Committee, said he's been getting mixed signals from constituents.
But Cummings said he's ready to vote yes, insisting that Democratic leaders have not twisted his arm.
"A vote against the supplemental would cause us to have a stripped-down bill, and there would be no voice saying, 'Mr. Bush, stop this war immediately.' "
If the Democrats have the votes, then the bill will be voted on later today. As a preview to Murphy's presser, from yesterday's House session on the proposed bill, here's Congressman John Larson (D-1st Dist) and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-3rd Dist) offering their remarks on this important bill.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.
Today, I'll be joining Rep. Chris Murphy's press conference in which he'll answer questions regarding the Iraq Supplemental Appropriations Bill currently being debated in Congress. 
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
