Exclusive: Interview with Daniel Reale, Independent Candidate for Congress in CT-2, on his Complaint Against Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz

Earlier this month Connecticut Secretary of the State Susan Bysiewicz began an aggressive propaganda campaign instructing voters to register with the Democratic and Republican parties ahead of the state's August 10th primary elections. Bysiewicz launched the effort at a press conference flanked by leaders of the Democratic and Republican parties and political establishment. In response to this partisan political push, Daniel Reale, an independent libertarian candidate for Congress in the state's 2nd CD, has now lodged a formal complaint against Byscewiz with the Office of State Ethics, the State Elections Enforcement Commission and the Federal Election Commission. See this post for background and details. Contacted via email, Mr. Reale says his ultimate goal is to "make sure the Secretary of State stops using public money and resources for political ends." What follows is the text of an interview with Mr. Reale conducted via email this past weekend.

First, when did you file the complaint?

Reale: Yesterday (7/23/10).

What prompted you to do so?

Reale: I'm opposed to the Secretary of State misusing her seal and public money in order to work on behalf of the Republicans and Democrats. Contrary to popular belief, the Secretary of State's office is not a political action committee. At the very least, the whole exercise is a political contribution to both major parties. It's one thing to advocate for voter registration, but it's another to use public money to prop up a private organization.

You may recall that Linda McMahon's campaign was under scrutiny because it wanted to pay people $5 for every registered voter they could sign up as a Republican. I'm no fan of Linda's, but at least she had the common sense to know the boundary on these things and back away. And you could imagine what sort of heat the Secretary of State would catch for using her office to promote the registration of Libertarians and Greens.

Otherwise, Bysiewicz has been crossing into a legal gray area for years, using her office in ethically questionable ways to say the least. While I found this to be morally objectionable, these were the sort of things you couldn't legally hang your hat on. But I didn't expect something this egregious in terms of ethics, elections, misapplication of public resources and political action committee violations - all in the same package.

I'd counted on running into illegal activity this time around with the determination to make sure those engaging in it were held to the fire. Unfortunately for Bysiewicz, we'd caught her first and all the evidence is out in the open. Given that third parties stuck to civil actions only to see this type of behavior continue, setting these cases up for prosecution is the way to go. Otherwise, they'll continue engaging in criminal acts in order to give both parties preferential treatment and paying us with our own money once we win the civil suit in court. My complaint is the first step in that process. The more elections officials we catch, the better. I'm tired of people complaining about how unfair the treatment of third parties has been - we all know that. It's time to do something about it.

Given the substance of the complaint, why do you think the Secretary of State finds it appropriate to propagandize the people of Connecticut in this way?

Reale: It could be that she means well but isn't the sharpest tool in the shed. It could also be that she knows both major parties are in trouble. I'm inclined to believe it's both. And career politicians have a weird, sociopathic way of justifying what they did after the fact. You may have noticed that in most states, there were efforts to unseat incumbents in both major parties by using the primary process, something that the Tea Party, paleoconservative groups and others had advocated.

The fact that this has failed in the vast majority of cases with a few high profile exceptions says that the electorate is rejecting this approach for the game of three card monte it is. Our Secretary of State may not be brightest (or come off that way), but she has the political savvy to see the writing on the wall.

As an independent candidate for Congress, how do the SoS's actions adversely affect you and your campaign?

Reale: The sort of two party registration drive she's pushing for will absolutely overwhelm town clerks. My petition drive is one of several planning to submit thousands of signatures. Last time, things were already complicated enough to a point where the Secretary of State's office misplaced several thousand petition pages. Even during years with low turnout and interest, it's bad enough. You also have to bear in mind that the Secretary of State's office currently overwhelms town clerks as it is, normally. Add this to a primary on August 10th and a petitioning deadline of August 4th. The Independent Party alone has submitted 11,000 signatures for the senate race. The Working Families Party is collecting around the same amount for the governor's race. My requirement is 3,300 signatures. These are only three examples out of many. And the clerks only have two weeks after that to check them all.

What kind of response are you expecting?

Reale: I'm expecting the state agencies to throw it away, in which case I use CT General Statutes 9-355, official fraud or neglect. That'll get you up to a year in jail. If I have to use 18 USC 13 to make it federal, so be it. However, I expect the Federal Election Commission to move forward, in which case, we also place the state in the highly unusual position of arguing the Tenth Amendment or owning up to what happened.

My goal is to make sure the Secretary of State stops using public money and resources for political ends. If I can't make that happen, my goal is that the Secretary will face substantial fines, jail time and/or punitive damages on the civil end. On the civil side, I'm pursuing her in her personal capacity, not in her capacity as a public official. Overall, I'm gathering additional evidence for a grand jury complaint. If we find more things to add, we'll add them - even if it includes driving a mile per hour over the speed limit.

How do you intend to follow up on it?

Reale: Considering that this was also set up as a tort letter, the Secretary of State has 60 days to respond or repair. This will inform me of what actions need to be taken on the civil end. On the prosecution side, there will be a criminal complaint filed. If the state or the feds do it, great. If not, that's where I come in.

Have you attempted to persuade others to lodge similar complaints?

Reale: Yes, and with some success for the 24 or so hours it's been sent. There were a few concerns about retaliation in terms of the petition drives, but to me, that only helps the case and gives us the opportunity to supplement the criminal complaint down the road.

Thanks for taking the time to answer these questions!