Skip to main content

Enabling Spending: Rell’s Budget and the Decline of the Connecticut GOP

It was fairly obvious soon after Governor Jodi Rell delivered her budget address that Democrats, who now enjoy a veto proof majority in the legislature, were less than pleased with it. Their appreciation of the governor’s ideological drift in a progressive direction – she surprised members of her own party by proposing a tax hike to pay for new education proposals – was voluble and sustained. Following the address, it was difficult to find a Democrat who was not effusive in his compliments.

Republicans, on the other hand, were stunned into an uneasy silence.

Into the bi-partisan Garden of Eden created by Rell’s surprising capitulation, now slither several snakes. The Democrats are having second and even third thoughts about the Rell budget plan.

It was not viewed as a propitious sign when Speaker of the House Jim Amann tossed Rell’s budget plan in the wastebasket, suppressing a sigh as he did so. The speaker several times has suggested that, in matters of the budget, the light bulb in the governor’s attic is sputtering.

After Republicans recovered from the shock and awe of Rell’s mini war on GOP orthodoxy, they listened politely to Chris Healy, the new Republican Party Chairman, who sought in several venues to sooth their fears, and Rell dispatched her new business advocate, former U.S. Congressman Rob Simmons, to chat up the Rell budget plan to Connecticut’s shrinking business sector.

Simmons now faces the unenviable task of persuading business people that a plan considered reckless by fiscal conservatives such as Amann and several unblinkered Republican legislators will be good for business.

Healy, appearing at a gathering of conservatives in West Hartford, told the group that he had worked on Bill Buckley’s campaign against liberal Republican Mayor John Lindsey of New York in the mid sixties. Buckley lost that campaign but went on to found the modern conservative movement. Drawing on his campaign experiences, Buckley a decade later wrote the book “Four Reforms", the fourth chapter of which, “Education: Towards Non-Coerced Education,” begins with the line, “Of all the dreams of American liberalism, the dream that featured education – as the solvent of universal equality, harmony and prosperity – was the most rudely shattered in the postwar decades,” not a Rellian sentiment.

Simmons – responsible in his new position, according to one news report, for “informing businesses about various public and private assistance programs, technical help, job training, state services and financial assistance that are available in the state” -- has not yet arranged to deliver a talk on the precise relationship between tax and spending increases to the Yankee Institute, a libertarian/conservative watchdog group. Good thing too, because the Institute has just released “Fiscal Flapdoodle”, a devastating analysis of Rell’s budget plan that punctures several governmental “myths” and probes the real time consequences of the spending mania that seized Connecticut government after former Governor Lowell Weicker favored the state with an income tax.

Among the myths exploded in the study are two that Healy did not mention to the West Hartford Conservative Congress:

“Myth One: Higher spending will improve the quality of education in Connecticut.

“Reality Check: There is no evidence to support this claim, and the Rell administration is ignoring education-choice alternatives that promise better schools at a lower cost to taxpayers.

“Myth Two: Hiking Connecticut's income tax will enable the governor and legislators to provide property-tax relief.

“Reality Check: Since the adoption of the income tax in 1991 did not provide relief, raising its rate in the hope of providing a break for overburdened local taxpayers is naïve.”

On a much different track, Democrats are dissatisfied with the Rell plan not because it appropriates unnecessary money for a metastasizing unionized education empire but because it lacks the precision and progressivity offered by Rell’s Democrat gubernatorial opponent, New Haven Mayor John DeStefano.

Democrats are still hopeful they can overspend and force millionaires to pick up the tab. Rell’s thoughtless acceptance of the need for increased spending will spur them on.

Comments

Anonymous said…
You should put air quotes around "millionaires". More likely, it will be "hundred thousand-aires".
Don Pesci said…
Anon

You're right. Elsewhere I refered to it as the "half-millionarie" tax.

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."

PCBs, GOOD FOR YOUR HEALTH

By Gerald and Natalie Sirkin c2007 A front-page story on PCBs in the March 9 News-Times is just wrong. The first thing to know about PCBs is that they never killed a single person nor did they ever cause cancer. The second is that although they are invariably called “cancer-causing,” that designation comes chiefly from a single rat study. The third thing is that the subject rats were exposed daily for 21 months to 100 parts per million (ppm) of PCBs containing 60% chlorine. (The 100 ppm was about 5,000 times the tolerable daily intake of PCBs set by FDA in 1973.) When rats were exposed to PCBs containing less chlorine, they developed no cancers. The fourth, that when the exposed rats were allowed to live out their lives, they had fewer cancers and lived longer than the unexposed rats. PCBs is a family of chemicals known as polychlorinated biphenyls. PCBs contain chlorine ranging from 12% to 70%. They were used in two General Electric plants that manufactured electrical equipmen...

Taking The Fifth, After Esty

Whether or not U.S. Representative Elizabeth Esty will serve the remainder of her term or resign immediately is very much an open question. But, in any case, the battle for Connecticut’s 5 th U.S. Congressional District has begun with a show of unexpected fireworks. For many years, the 5 th District was a toss-up proposition; both Republicans and Democrats have held and surrendered the seat. Geographically the 5 th District touches the border of New York from Connecticut’s northern-most point to Danbury in the southern quadrant and includes much of Litchfield county and parts of Fairfield, Hartford and New Haven counties. Party affiliation is competitive, in round figures, 30 percent Democrat, 25 percent Republican and 45 percent unaffiliated. Over the years, the Democrat Party in Connecticut has moved from the center to the left, but the 5 th District has been a moderate preserve. During the Obama presidential election, Republican moderates within Connecticut's U.S. ...