Skip to main content

A Glass Half Full Is Still A Glass Half Empty


After all the palavering in the state legislature, last year’s budget is still in the red.

It appears that the wall-eyed legislature and outgoing Gov. Jodi Rell, after much political posturing and acrimony, underestimated the preceding year’s budget deficit by about a half billion dollars, according to figures supplied by State Comptroller Nancy Wyman shortly after last year's budget was put to bed.

At the same time, the legislature, led by President Pro Tem of the Senate Don Williams and House Speaker Chris Donovan, persistently showing their pique at the governor’s unwillingness to further beggar the state by increasing more taxes, took off for the hills every time the governor threatened to reduce spending.

That’s the good news.

The bad news is that in three years, the state could be facing a budget deficit upward of $5.9 billion, a figure that sould convince the remaining optimimists among us that a glass half full is still a glass half empty.

Aware of the economic anvil about to fall on Connecticut’s head, a Hartford paper in a Sunday editorial pointed a crooked finger at legislative leaders Williams and Donovan.

Chief economist for the Connecticut Business and Industry Association Peter Gioia, the paper said, had offered the governor – and through her, the legislature – three money saving ideas: 1) switch from a nursing home centered health care model to a far less expensive home care model; 2) privatize state operated group homes for the disabled; 3) close prisons.

Let us adopt these measures, the paper advised, and begin the painful but necessary process of reducing the state’s insupportable spending plan. Almost as an aside, the paper noted, “There will be, to be sure, some complications with state labor contracts and federal funding rules. Nonetheless, millions of dollars can be saved. This can be done.”

"Some complications" -- really?

What is the evidence that state unions will not use their influence with Williams and Donovan, once a union leader himself, to un-facilitate the money saving measures suggested by the paper?

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