Skip to main content

Angels Among Us: Salvational Politics Comes to Connecticut

With the promise of heavenly manna about to shower upon the great state of Connecticut from Washington DC, angels among us – Gov. Jodi Rell, US Senators Chris Dodd and Joe Lieberman, and US Reps. John Larson, Rosa DeLauro, and the state's littlest angels Joe Courtney and Chris Murphy -- gathered together to make themselves ready to receive these benefits.

We don’t know yet how much federal money -- that would be money taxed from Connecticut citizens and partially returned to the state by the administration of soon to be President Barack Obama -- will be approved for “shovel ready” infrastructure projects, but no matter; Connecticut’s US congressional delegation met at the governor’s residence in war torn Hartford recently to celebrate the occasion.

The press was on hand.

The embattled Sen. Joe Lieberman, a prodigal Democrat recently received back into the fold, said he expects the new Democrat dominated Congress for Change to have the stimulus package on president-elect Barack Obama’s desk before the end of his first week in office.

The embattled Dodd, who has yet to release information concerning a sweetheart deal consummated with the assistance of Angelo Mozilo, formerly of Countrywide, looked almost presidential, concern lying like a soft veil over his tanned features, white hair shinning like a lit bonfire, a good Democrat, always ready to lend a hand.

When Governor Rell met with Obama at the last governor’s conference, a bit unusual for the politically shy Rell, she said the governors told Obama they sure could use some help with Medicaid reimbursements. The President for Change assured the governors that there might be some money in the pipeline for this. According to one report, Larson said his office “has been has been working with Obama’s transition team on this and strongly suspects ‘Medicaid reimbursement’ will be uppermost in the recovery package.”

"I could not ask for more support," Rell said. "Partisanship never entered into our discussion."

Rell commanded local officials to send her a list of “shovel ready” projects. Every politician in the United States, it would appear, is making a list and checking it twice. The deadline for submittals, Rell said, was 4 p.m. on December 30.

Like Bangledesh, Connecticut has now become a beggar state, dependent on the kindness of strangers.

Not all states have been reduced by their profligate spending to beggary. South Carolina’s enterprising governor is still trying to devise ways to eliminate – that’s right, eliminate – the state’s property taxes. Mark Sanford is a big believer in use taxes. Connnecticut used to rely heavily on use taxes, but that was in the long ago before Lowell Weicker and his agents in the state legislature foisted an income tax on the semi-resistant legislature. Many of the same angels who now want to save the state from penury, still plying their wares in the legislature, argued at the time that the state’s principle use tax, the sales tax, was notoriously unreliable as a revenue producer. The income tax, they said, would provide a more stable revenue stream. The $6 billion of red ink in Connecticut’s upcoming budget is unimpeachable evidence that they were wrong.

In fact, Connecticut’s mind set has been wrong for decades. According to the prevailing mindset, the state never had a spending problem – ever. It always had, in the pithy verbiage of Michele Jacklin, commentator in chief for the Hartford Courant before she left the paper and hitched up with the gubernatorial campaign of Stamford Mayor Dan Malloy, “a revenue problem.”

That mindset is still very much with us, so locked into the very genes of state legislators that the tax hikers now seem prepared to partially settle Connecticut’s revenue problem by imposing a tax on IPods. In the meantime, citizens of Connecticut are suffering their own revenue problems, and they cannot tax their neighbors to settle them. The angels who plan to save them might possibly eliminate the suggested revenue enhancer as politically suicidal; who knows, miracles do sometimes happen.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Blumenthal Burisma Connection

Steve Hilton , a Fox News commentator who over the weekend had connected some Burisma corruption dots, had this to say about Connecticut U.S. Senator Dick Blumenthal’s association with the tangled knot of corruption in Ukraine: “We cross-referenced the Senate co-sponsors of Ed Markey's Ukraine gas bill with the list of Democrats whom Burisma lobbyist, David Leiter, routinely gave money to and found another one -- one of the most sanctimonious of them all, actually -- Sen. Richard Blumenthal."

Powell, the JI, And Economic literacy

Powell, Pesci Substack The Journal Inquirer (JI), one of the last independent newspapers in Connecticut, is now a part of the Hearst Media chain. Hearst has been growing by leaps and bounds in the state during the last decade. At the same time, many newspapers in Connecticut have shrunk in size, the result, some people seem to think, of ad revenue smaller newspapers have lost to internet sites and a declining newspaper reading public. Surviving papers are now seeking to recover the lost revenue by erecting “pay walls.” Like most besieged businesses, newspapers also are attempting to recoup lost revenue through staff reductions, reductions in the size of the product – both candy bars and newspapers are much smaller than they had been in the past – and sell-offs to larger chains that operate according to the social Darwinian principles of monopolistic “red in tooth and claw” giant corporations. The first principle of the successful mega-firm is: Buy out your predator before he swallows

Down The Rabbit Hole, A Book Review

Down the Rabbit Hole How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime by Brent McCall & Michael Liebowitz Available at Amazon Price: $12.95/softcover, 337 pages   “ Down the Rabbit Hole: How the Culture of Corrections Encourages Crime ,” a penological eye-opener, is written by two Connecticut prisoners, Brent McCall and Michael Liebowitz. Their book is an analytical work, not merely a page-turner prison drama, and it provides serious answers to the question: Why is reoffending a more likely outcome than rehabilitation in the wake of a prison sentence? The multiple answers to this central question are not at all obvious. Before picking up the book, the reader would be well advised to shed his preconceptions and also slough off the highly misleading claims of prison officials concerning the efficacy of programs developed by dusty old experts who have never had an honest discussion with a real convict. Some of the experts are more convincing cons than the cons, p