“Destroying the status quo because the status is not quo. “

This evening, I will go hear Larry Lessig deliver “The 19th Annual Hugo L. Black Lecture on Freedom of Expression "Speech and Independence: The Wrongs of Corporate Speech”. I suspect I probably know much of what he’s going to say. I’ve heard him speak before and he has a recent speech up on his website.

Matt Singer heard Larry Lessig speak at Rebooting Democracy recently, and wrote up a response to Lawrence Lessig. In his speech, Lessig suggested that things in Washington are “much, much worse” than candidate Obama said on the campaign trail. Matt Singer goes even further. He suggests that Lessig’s call for public financing of campaigns is an “inadequate cure”, and I think Matt is partly right.

Based on the experiences of campaign finance reform here in Connecticut, I think Matt underestimates the impact that campaign finance reform can bring. He suggests a different path to change

The good news then is that there are other methods to win. The bad news is that they're really hard. For the most part, they mean working hard for a series of years, knocking a ton of doors, dialing for dollars, motivating volunteers, handling coalitions, etc., etc.

Actually, the campaign finance reform and hard campaign work are closely related. Candidates that decide to kick the big money addiction of the current special interest driven system find they need to work hard, be frugal and find creative new ways of getting their message out. They have more time to focus on this, because they don’t have to spend as much time dialing for dollars and can spend more time talking with volunteers and voters and finding new solutions to old problems. Of course, what we need in government right about now are creative and frugal hard working leaders.

Here in Connecticut, we are watching this unfold in what could be a very interesting Governor’s race. Ridgefield First Selectman Rudy Marconi, a Democratic Candidate for Governor, put up several creative advertisements on his YouTube channel, especially attacking the monied special interests, yet these videos didn’t go viral and Mr. Marconi is still a dark horse in the race.

Today, Former Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy sent out a press release announcing

The Dan Malloy for Governor Campaign today announced the launch of its first paid advertising effort. Beginning today, the campaign will be running ads on hundreds of Connecticut news and information websites including key political blogs.

Will these carefully targeted ads get enough extra bang for the buck to stand up to the advertising that other Gubernatorial candidates are buying on television? It will be interesting to watch and see.

Meanwhile, the Connecticut Attorney General’s race has gotten a new twist. I’ve written before about how the issue about Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz’s contacts database has seemed to me to be a red herring. I obtained the database, and showed it to anyone who wants it. Various people have read what I consider to be irresponsible articles about the database and have commented to me about how the database doesn’t have any Republicans in it, or that the ‘special notes’ are only about Democrats. It is a good example of concocted stories getting misrepresented and ultimately spreading false information. The copy of the database that I obtained contained approximately 37,000 people. 8,400 were Republicans. Around 7,200 of the records had ‘special notes’, and about a thousand of the special notes were about Republicans.

The bigger issue is whether or not she is qualified to run for Attorney General. On the one hand, there is the legal question that is being argued in the courts right now. I’ve argued before that I believe the statute that some are trying to use to exclude her from the ballot is unconstitutional. We will see what the courts decide. Yet the bigger question is not whether she is qualified in the courts view of the statute and constitution, but whether she is qualified in the public’s mind in terms of her experience as an attorney. As CTNewsJunkie reports, the transcripts of her deposition show Bysiewicz has little litigation experience. This is the real question that should be looked at.

Unfortunately, large media corporations, like other special interest groups, seem to have little interest in what is best for the voters or for the state and seem to go for juicy stories to boost readership, instead of informative stories that really help voters understand the issues and become more involved.

So, will Larry Lessig address the complicity of the large media organizations that profit from the current political system? Will he talk about the issues of how we elect or appoint judges and whether the judicial branch is in as desperate need of reform as the legislative branch? Will he comment on Singer’s concern about other paths to change?

Or, is Dr. Horrible right, that we're treating a symptom while the disease rages on, consuming the human race. The fish rots from the head, so they say. Is Dr. Horrible right about needing to cut off the head? What will your role be in all of this?

Note: For those who don’t recognize the references to Dr. Horrible, Captain Hammer and Penny, please check out Dr. Horrible’s Sing-Along Blog.