Journal Inquirer
Did Rell receive undisclosed campaign boost?
Probes launched into budget focus group
By Keith M. Phaneuf
October 12, 2009
Journal Inquirer
HARTFORD — As investigations
began Friday into whether state funds
were misused to provide political
research for Gov. M. Jodi Rell,
new questions arose as to whether
the governor’s campaign received
valuable free consulting services
from the director of this publicly-
funded project.
And if the State Elections
Enforcement Commission
ultimately determines the governor’s
exploratory committee did receive
in-kind aid worth more than $375,
it could block her ability to receive
public campaign funding — should
she seek to run again next year.
Rell, a Republican who is not
expected to announce until after next
month’s municipal elections whether
she will seek re-election in 2010, said
Friday her exploratory committee
would ask elections officials
to review with the committee’s
communications with University of
Connecticut professor and public
opinion expert Kenneth Dautrich.
The controversy stems in part from
the governor’s decision to approve
a $223,000 contract with UConn to
retain Dautrich in 2008 to conduct
a detailed review of commissioners
and other top agency heads in 2008
to find ways to make state operations
leaner and more cost efficient.
But about $2,000 of those funds
reportedly covered the cost of focus
group research into public opinion on
budget-related issues.
A panel of nine residents was asked
their opinions not only about how the
state budget crisis should be resolved
in terms of spending cuts and tax
hikes, but also how they would rate
the leadership abilities of Rell and of
the state legislature.
The focus group report to Rell also
included participants’ comments
about the leadership potential
of Attorney General Richard
Blumenthal. A popular Democrat
from Greenwich, Blumenthal was
viewed by many as a strong, potential
gubernatorial candidate until he
announced in February that he would
seek re-election as attorney general.
Leaders of the Democrat-controlled
legislature attacked the focus group
effort Thursday, arguing that voters’
perception of potential gubernatorial
challengers to Rell aren’t necessary
to help the governor prepare a budget
proposal.
But new questions arose Friday, not
about focus group research funded
with state dollars, but with an actual
poll commissioned by the governor’s
exploratory committee this past
spring.
The committee hired Braun Research
of Princeton, N.J. to conduct a poll
at a cost of $6,000 — a bargain price
compared with similar polls.
For example, Rell’s 2006 re-election
campaign paid $29,000 to Public
Opinion Strategies of Alexandria,
Va., to conduct one poll in August of
that year.
Rell’s opponent in that contest, New
Haven Mayor John DeStefano, spent
$32,000 and $26,000 to commission
polls in March and July of 2006,
respectively, from Peter D. Hart
Research Associates of Washington,
D.C.
And a review of seven polls
commissioned in 2008 by the state
Senate Democratic Caucus — each
surveying only a multi-town Senate
district rather than the entire state —
disclosed costs ranging from $12,000
to $16,500.
So how was the Rell committee able
to obtain a price of $6,000?
Polling fees typically cover three
expenses: preparing the questions;
contacting the respondents and
compiling the results; and providing
professional analysis of those results.
Many times, pollsters hired to
conduct a survey will subcontract
with another firm to perform the
actual telephone work and statistical
compilation, providing the question
preparation and concluding analysis
themselves.
A review of the Braun Research Web
site shows it specializes in survey
interviewing, but does not highlight
the drafting poll questions or
providing political analysis. “We can
provide accurate sampling to assure
you of productive dialing for your
study,” the site reads.
A review of e-mails between
Dautrich and Rell’s chief of staff,
M. Lisa Moody, first disclosed
earlier this week by The Day of New
London, showed Dautrich repeatedly
provided advice on the survey results
compiled by Braun Research.
Dautrich told the Journal Inquirer on
Friday that this advice was neither
unusual, nor related to the focus
group research.
“I was careful to distinguish any kind
of advice I was giving relevant to
the UConn project for the state from
any kind of volunteer advice” given
regarding the committee poll.
Dautrich, who led UConn’s Center
for Survey Research and Analysis
from 1997 through 2004, is touted
by the university as a public opinion
expert and routinely made available
to the media and others to speak on
survey research issues.
“I talk to lots of people about polls all
the time,” he said.
E-mail records showed Dautrich has
submitted a series of potential poll
questions regarding not only state
finances but also the popularity of
Rell and other top state officials to
Moody in June 2008 — 11 months
before the committee ordered the
Braun Research poll.
Dautrich said these were suggested to
help with the budget research project,
but Moody responded by e-mail
that it couldn’t be backed with state
funds. The polling idea was dropped
from the budget research project, and
a focus group component was put in
its place.
The committee treasurer, Thomas
J. Filomeno, could not be reached
Friday to respond to inquires about
who prepared the questions asked in
the Braun Research poll.
Dautrich added he has legal advice
that holds the analysis he provided
regarding the committee poll does
not represent the type of free service
contributions that normally must be
disclosed by a political committee.
Rell said Friday she does not believe
Dautrich’s involvement would
constitute as an in-kind contribution
under Connecticut’s campaign
finance laws, but said she would
ask her committee treasurer to ask
the state’s Elections Enforcement
Commission.
“If there is any fine, we will pay that
fine,” Rell said.
But if Rell plans to run in 2010, and
hopes to qualify for public funding
again as she did in 2006, there could
be bigger problem than failing to
report an in-kind contribution.
Gubernatorial candidates can receive
up to $1.25 million in public funds
to wage a primary, and another $3
million for the general election,
provided they meet an array of
requirements. This includes limits
on how much private funding they
accept beforehand, even while
running exploratory rather than
candidate committees.
And the limit on contributions from
any individual is $375. If Dautrich’s
political advice is ruled an in-kind
contribution, its monetary value
could far exceed that limit.
Rell defended her hiring of Dautrich
for the budget research project,
saying Friday that she is proud of the
work.
“I believe the state more than got its
money’s worth,” the governor said,
adding it helped to find millions of
dollars in savings, offering ideas
such as reducing the state’s fleet of
vehicles.
“I did not request a focus group, but,
you know, they did it,” she said. “I
think it was worthwhile.”
Rell, who referred to the strong
criticism from Democrats about the
project as “politics at its worst,” said
she welcomed the investigations.
The State Auditors of Public
Accounts, Kevin P. Johnston and
Robert G. Jaekle, began their own
probe Friday in cooperation with
Blumenthal. The auditors’ and
attorney general’s offices both
have confirmed receiving state
employee complaints regarding the
Dautrich project filed under the
“whistleblower” statute.
“Obviously we were going to review
this” in response to the whistleblower
complaints, Johnston said Friday,
adding that a cooperative effort could
expedite matters. “I think we felt the
best way for us to go about this is to
work jointly.”
“We are making every effort
to expedite it because there are
important public interests involved,”
Blumenthal said. “We received a
number of whistleblower complaints
concerning these issues of state tax
dollars use or misuse.”
Also Friday, UConn spokesman
Michael Kirk announced the
university’s office of audit,
compliance and ethics “is examining
the research associated with this
project to determine if it may have
violated any aspect UConn’s code of
ethics.”
That code bars employees from
engaging in political activity while
on state time, or while using state
materials or equipment.
This story includes Associated Press
reporting.