.
Feedback

Bysiewicz Attacks Murphy In NL Debate

Wall Street contributions a point of contention between Senate candidates Susan Bysiewicz and Chris Murphy

Susan Bysiewicz stood by her criticisms of Rep. Chris Murphy’s campaign contributions at a Monday debate between the two Democratic candidates for Senate, while Murphy characterized her accusations as a “very tired attack.”

A Bysiewicz advertisement says Murphy has received over $700,000 in campaign contributions from Wall Street interests, “more hedge fund money than any other Democrat in Congress.” Bysiewicz has admitted that this claim is inaccurate, but says Murphy has still accepted significant Wall Street contributions and cannot claim to represent the middle class while doing so.

“I absolutely stand by that ad, the premise of which is that you’ve become Nancy Johnson,” said Bysiewicz, referencing Murphy's predecessor in the House of Representatives.

Murphy defeated Johnson in the 2006 election, and accused her of receiving major contributions from drug companies during his campaign. Bysiewicz repeatedly questioned Murphy's vote against a 2010 bill designed to close hedge fund tax loopholes. Murphy answered that the bill supported some worthwhile programs, but that he did not believe it would effectively solve the issue.

“I voted against it because it wasn’t strong enough in closing corporate tax loopholes and individual tax loopholes,” he said.

Murphy also said Bysiewicz’s list of Wall Street contributors contains a number of Connecticut businesses, including his father’s law firm and a Litchfield farm. He said he was surprised that Bysiewicz refused to pull the ad after admitting that it contained inaccuracies.

“I have never seen anything like this, a candidate who has been caught lying on the air standing in front of an audience who says she stands by the ad,” he said.

Bysiewicz said she considers Murphy to be “cozy” with Wall Street interests, and that he has voted against tax cuts and other benefits for the middle class. She suggested that such actions may have been influenced by the funding, and that this was what differentiated the funds donated to Murphy from similar contributions to her own campaign. 

“Yes, I’ve taken some money from folks who work on Wall Street,” she said. “But they took the money knowing that I’d like to go to Washington to close the hedge fund loophole.”

Bysiewicz and Murphy agreed on other issues, including the question of whether the Bush tax cuts should be extended. Both candidates said they would support extending the cuts for families making $250,000 or less a year, but would not support proposals to expand this level up to families making $1 million or less.

Each candidate pointed to President Bill Clinton’s administration as an example of a successful economic policy. Murphy said there should be a broader discussion on tax reform regarding issues such as small-business owners passing business taxes through to their personal finances. He said that despite higher taxes in the Clinton years, the economy was more successful. Bysiewicz said she would work to eliminate subsidies for industries such as petroleum and agribusiness.

Bysiewicz and Murphy also agreed that Congress can help college graduates manage student debt by extending the Federal Pell Grant Program and holding colleges receiving federal funds accountable for keeping tuition affordable.

Murphy launched some missives against Linda McMahon, a Republican candidate who recent polls show has a comfortable lead over fellow candidate Christopher Shays. Murphy said McMahon is beholden to corporate interests, predicting that she will work to privatize Medicare and Social Security to the benefit of the private market and detriment of seniors. He also accused her of standing to personally receive a $7 million tax cut under her tax proposals.

“We can’t raise taxes on middle class taxes, but if we’re going to get serious about controlling the deficit we can’t give another $7 million tax cut to people making her income,” he said

The candidates are seeking to succeed Sen. Joe Lieberman, who is retiring at the end of his current term after 24 years in Congress. The debate at the was sponsored by and WTNH, with the League of Women Voters of Southeastern Connecticut assisting with the proceedings.

Both the Democratic and Republican primaries will take place on Aug. 14.

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Waterford Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Ivy's Simply Homemade
nascarblue May 17, 2013 at 08:05 am
happy happy anniversary, i love your food, you can tell when a business takes pride in what they do.Read More wishing you many many more years, i will definatly be back, along with my friends, we love your food.
Naty Bush May 18, 2013 at 11:44 am
Where will the meeting take place? I might be able to go to say why it shouldn't be demolished.
Kate May 15, 2013 at 06:36 pm
There are two state agencies that are involved. Both of them are historical preservation societies,Read More and this is what they do, help communities find viable purposes for historic buildings. While the building has been treated as more or less an inconvenience for the town, it is important to remember it is an historic site. It matters. Every town, every city, must look carefully at it's historic buildings and sites with an eye toward preservation, or, you end up with a community full of houses and walmarts. Cohanzie is a unique building for it's architectural style, for it's historic quarry site, and it's importance as a community hub, not to mention the thousands of citizens that passed through. An old building like Cohanzie is built to last. We won't ever see buildings built like that again. We can always build another Walmart. You raise a good question. Maybe once we hear about what could be done with the building, we need a town referendum to find out how the people of Waterford want to proceed. Many historic buildings are saved at the last minute by people who decide history matters. Will Waterford do the same. I don't know the answer.
Maggie L. May 15, 2013 at 01:56 pm
Do you have any proposals for the use of the building? If the town were to keep the building it mostRead More likely will have to be staffed. Do you believe that most town residents would be willing to see an increase in the town budget to allow for additional staff? I'm just tossing out questions because I haven't heard any concrete proposals for the use of the building
Liz May 12, 2013 at 09:06 pm
Mr. Steiner wants to build 72 three story homes on 32 acres in addition to the 60 condos in the twoRead More large buildings. That is more than two individual units per acre or if you include the 60 condos - that is MORE than 4 units per acre! The area around the property for new building is zoned 3 acres per unit. The average of currently built housing abutting the property is about one acre per unit. That is not in keeping with the neighborhood character.
Daniella Ruiz May 12, 2013 at 05:36 pm
Mr Steiner may be the last hope for this decrepit place. The neighbors need to move along, or buyRead More the place themselves. Change might help the stonewalling attitude that has become evident in nearly the entire town, revolving around exclusive entitled old farts with nothing better to do than remember their glory days of Seaside. Its gone, & it's not going to revert back to a pasture either. (too many complaints about that cow smell and so forth). My advice is to listen carefully and try to work something out, get over your own selfish grandious dreams of Pelham Manor style estates and do SOMETHING before it simply falls apart like Norwich Hospital, the countless thread/manufacturing mills, and every other historic building that has been left to rot.
Daniella Ruiz May 14, 2013 at 08:53 am
mary m>> common sense? heee hee. in this day and age? lawyers have made every attempt toRead More eradicate that concept from our every life activity. write it into some law, that can be thence used as future gurantee of use of, by and for their own existence? it's like job security for that entire group, keep the general public at a disadvantage, unable to apply common sense (whats left of it they havent entombed in laws) and uneasy about acting on their own. John Y has the right attitude, heave the cra.pp on the peoples lawn, and hope it doesn't lay there for days as well!
John Yannacci, Sr. May 13, 2013 at 10:09 am
Mary May, I don't know the legality of posting signs on telephone poles. But, take a ride aroundRead More Waterford on Saturday mornings and you'll see signs on anything that is verticle. Take a ride around the same neighborhoods on Wednesday and half the signs will still be there. I wonder if the folks who have had the same yard sale sign at the corner of Great Neck and Rope Ferry Rds. for two and a half weeks wonder why cars are still stopping at their house every Saturday morning.
Mary May May 13, 2013 at 09:53 am
Um I believe it is ILLEGAl to post ANY sign on a telephone pole ANYWAY but free standing signsRead More should be removed after sale is over ! Really a state law just COMMON SENSE we have lost along the way !