Alpert Goes On Offensive, Makes Most of First Debate
by Christine Stuart | Mar 2, 2010 12:09am
(7) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Election 2010
Longshot U.S. Senate candidate Merrick Alpert came out swinging Monday and at least appeared to have had frontrunner Attorney General Richard Blumenthal on the ropes during their first televised debate.
From healthcare to the war in Afghanistan, Alpert presented himself as a change agent and painted Blumenthal as an “incrementalist” who has contributed the state’s anti-business reputation with his lawsuits.
“For me, incrementalism is not necessarily a dirty word,” Blumenthal countered. And filing those lawsuits helps level the playing field for businesses in the state, he added.
“I think incrementalism is a dirty word … incrementalism is the darling of career politicians,” Alpert said.
The hour-long exchange between Democratic U.S. Senate candidates Alpert and Blumenthal took place Monday evening at a half-full theater on the University of Hartford campus.
Both candidates were given two minutes to answer questions on a everything from jobs to foreign policy. Then each was given a one-minute rebuttal.
On healthcare, Alpert said he supports a Medicare for all or a single-payer system. In a single-payer system, everyone is covered because everyone pays into the system, thus lowering costs. “The only way we’re going to get out of this mess is by something big and bold, and that’s why I’m offering something big and bold,” Alpert said after the debate.
During the debate, Blumenthal offered a plan to pool purchasing power and apply anti-trust laws to health insurance companies as a solution.
During his one-minute rebuttal, Alpert attacked Blumenthal on his record of service as attorney general. Alpert said that over the past 20 years Blumenthal has served as attorney general, insurance rates have skyrocketed. Then he asked Blumenthal a direct question—a tactic he used repeatedly at the end of his responses throughout the evening—about how the lawsuits he has filed as attorney general have kept insurance costs down.
“We have been straightjacketed by a system that’s too weak, impotent, and ineffective,” Blumenthal answered. If elected, Blumenthal said anti-trust laws applied to health insurance companies would ensure competition.
On the war in Afghanistan, Blumenthal said he wasn’t sure he’d be able to answer the question in two minutes because of the complexity of the issue. He said he supports President Barack Obama’s decision to increase the U.S. troop levels there, then draw them down again in 18 months. He then talked about how he’s attended every National Guard send-off and homecoming in the state.
Alpert came out strongly against the war, saying it’s not in “our national security interests.” He said he rather spend the estimated $4 billion a month in the United States, rather than spending it on a corrupt Afghani government.
“I rely on the judgment of our military commanders on the ground,” Blumenthal said. “I believe this surge is necessary.“
Pulling out now would leave the military that’s still there exposed, he said. Toward the end of the debate during a question about the Bush tax cuts, Blumenthal tried to paint his opponent as someone who doesn’t support the troops. Alpert, a former Air Force Officer took such exception to the remark that he interrupted Blumenthal briefly to deny it.
On U.S. policy with Cuba, Blumenthal said the U.S. should move to “normalize relations with Cuba,” and once the Castros are gone, help the Cubans establish a more Democratic form of government. He then said he listens to the people of Connecticut and would talk to the Cubans to find out what they want for their country.
Alpert responded by saying Cubans find it abhorrent that the U.S. continues to block aid to their country. He said the policy has been an abysmal failure. “It’s shameful we continue this silliness,” Alpert said.
“I believe strongly we will normalize relations to the benefit of both countries,” Blumenthal said. “The question is how to get there, working step-by-step.”
“Why wait,” Alpert asked. “Are you afraid they’ll like us?”
Post Debate
After the debate there was an expectation that both Alpert and Blumenthal would be available for questions. With more than a dozen reporters present, however, Blumenthal bolted with his wife to a fundraiser at a private home in Fairfield County.
State Comptroller Nancy Wyman offered to stand in for Blumenthal, who rarely turns down a chance to speak with members of the media
“Merrick is a very nice young man, but I have a hard time comparing Dick’s record to Merrick’s rhetoric,” Wyman said. “Where is he going to get the money for everything he talks about?”
Alpert admitted that expanding Medicare to everyone would cost billions of dollars, but added that his view is that “it’s costing us more right now.”
When asked about the tone of his rhetoric, which seemed to mirror the comments Republican candidates are making about Blumenthal, Alpert responded with this: “Don’t mistake this guy for the red team. I play for the blue team.”
Alpert said he will support the candidate that wins the Democratic primary.
It should be noted that no cameras were allowed in the auditorium during the debate, which is why there are no photos of Blumenthal. Blumenthal left immediately following the debate
(7) Comments
posted by: Martha H | March 2, 2010 11:11am
At the debate, and in the Courant, Alpert said that many of the Democratic Town Committees are refusing to meet with him.
To the DTC’s: Why??
posted by: Henry Berry | March 2, 2010 11:38am
It’s not surprising Blumenthal “bolted.” Here are questions I sent in which might have been asked of him:
(1) Is there any connection between Blumenthal’s senatorial candidacy in which he has left his position as state attorney general and the scandal at the Bridgeport Superior Court on Main Street involving credible accusations of crime and corruption of individuals in the Connecticut public and private legal systems leading not long ago to the transfer of the Madoff case to a Stamford courthouse?
(2) What assurances can Blumenthal give to the voters, citizens, and residents of Connecticut that he is not abandoning his position as attorney general out of his unwillingness and inability to deal with crime and corruption throughout the public and private sectors of the Connecticut legal system as exposed with abundant incontrovertible evidence by a citizen investigative journalist living in Bridgeport?
(3) Can Blumenthal give his opinion as to the truth or falsity of accusations of intertwined crime and corruption throughout the public and private sectors of the Connecticut legal system as he has been informed of these by the Connecticut citizen investigative journalist Henry Berry and as this journalist has publicized these in news releases, emails, and by other means?
posted by: thomas hooker | March 2, 2010 5:06pm
Not Greenwich. The Greenwich DTC, hometown to Dick Blumenthal, invited Alpert to come and speak to members, and he did in January.
posted by: gohuskies | March 2, 2010 5:45pm
Blumenthal has perfected the art of bolting. He often shows up late gives his speech and then is off to do something else more important. He shows up to talk at people, to tell them what he’s going to do. One of the fundamental requirements of Senator (or any elected office) is to listen to your constituents, the people. Blumenthal is too busy to hear what we have to say, he doesnt ask us what we think, he just tells us what he thinks. Why should we send someone to Washington on our behalf, who wont even listen to us now, never mind when he’s hundreds of miles away?
Quite the opposite would be his opponent, Merrick Alpert. He came to one of our events, and was one of the first one to show up and one of the last ones to leave. He stayed and talked with anyone who wished for his ear. He helped put chairs and tables away as well. He’s willing to listen and give his undivided attention to the people around him, instead of thinking about his next meeting or fundraiser.
posted by: FrancisLongfellow | March 2, 2010 6:20pm
I attended the debate Monday night and Merrick singlehandedly won my vote. As Merrick pointed out, Richard Blumenthal has held “20 years of press conferences” making sure his name was on everything instead of providing us with 20 years of results. He is attempting to ride into the Senate on name recognition. Merrick on the other hand is driven by refreshing ideologies and a passion that is almost tangible. I was amazed when he actually answered each question and provided a clear and concise opinion. Blumenthal appeared completely unprepared and would often shy away from questions and offer a familiar sounding and rambling response. While Blumenthal quickly left the debate, Merrick stayed and talked to the people right until they closed the doors of the theaters. I hope that Blumenthal does not ride into the Senate solely because of name recognition, if the policies of the two candidates are examined; Merrick’s is clearly more progressive and substantial as is his willingness and capability to listen and serve the people of Connecticut.
posted by: Matt W. | March 3, 2010 4:15pm
I wouldn’t vote for either of these guys but at least Alpert has the guts to come out and take a clear stand on every issue.
I disagree with him on nearly everything but at least he’s got some backbone and I can respect that.
posted by: Angela | March 3, 2010 8:17pm
Merrick Alpert did a great job at the debate against Blumenthal. He was clear about what he wants to accomplish as Senator, and I am sure he has attracted more people who want someone who will bring change to Washington. I believe he will serve the people of Connecticut the way a real senator should.