Skip to main content

The Good, The Bad and The Ugly: Reaction to Rell’s Budget Address

The day after Governor Jodi Rell delivered her budget address to the legislature and the state, the reviews began drifting in.

Quasi-socialist mayor of New Haven John DeStefano thought, "It was very powerful. It touched a lot of the right bases."

Other Democrats said the plan was under funded by some $3 billion. Majority Leader Martin Looney of New Haven said, "It's another partial deficit-mitigation plan, rather than a comprehensive budget, and John Geragosian of New Britain said, “It punts to the legislature the politically hard work. It is a partial effort, but it is not a serious effort."

Don Williams, President Pro Tem of the senate, sniffed at the plan and cautioned that it may not meet the fairness test. "As we go forward in the coming days and hours and hold the budget up to the light, it's got to pass the fairness test”said Williams, a canned response. Among Democrats, “fairness” is unrelated to equity; it is simply a command barked at the dogs to bite the leg of a millionaire.

Republicans were in an ebullient mood. Republican Party Chairman Chris Healy gushed, “"I'm thrilled with this, to be honest. I can sell this. I can defend this any day. And there is no tax increase across the board, which is also a home run."

Even fiscally conservative Republicans who previously had locked horns with Rell on matters of principle and strategy dusted off their compliments. House Minority Leader Lawrence F. Cafero of Norwalk said, "She is a regular, down-to-earth person. That's always been her strength." And Senate Minority Leader John McKinney of Fairfield managed to squeeze in a reference to President Barack Obama, now playing FDR in the Washington beltway.

Not an ideologue, Rell’s aversion to tax increases, McKinney said was based on economics -- not politics: "I don't think that is a Republican idea any longer. President Obama stands before the nation and says, 'We should not be raising taxes at this time.' So it doesn't make sense that it's good for President Obama and not good for Gov. Rell."

There were some rumblings on the conservative-libertarian Right as well. Lew Andrews, the Executive Director of the Yankee Institute, thought Rell had missed a golden opportunity to readjust the political playing field and make significant reforms adopted in other states that “could produce dramatic savings -- paying high school students to graduate early, identifying waste in Medicaid, using work-release programs to produce prison reform -- which she completely neglects. Instead, she [intends] to spend millions on a Connecticut version of Roosevelt's discredited WPA make-work program. This is a plan that puts already comfortable public employees ahead of distressed taxpayers.”

Recognizing rightly that every state mandate is a tax on municipalities, municipal officers were pleased that Rell’s plan eliminated some costly mandates, a quick and sure way to provide relief to over stressed town governments.

Cost saving measures within the executive department outlined in the governor’s plan include a more than cosmetic remake of departments.

All in all, not bad for a governor who does not have hanging about her the ivy that caresses the walls of Yale or Harvard. It will take the Brights some time to put the plan under a microscope and explode it.

And there is an unanswered question: In the past, under the direction of the governor’s chief aide Lisa Moody, Rell has been content to use her proposals as bargaining chips in huddles behind closed doors with Democrat leaders, and she had emerged from these claustrophobic mini-conferences with the gold fillings missing from her teeth.

It is not enough to propose measures; the governor must be willing to publicly campaign for her program. Abigail Adams, who once called Thomas Jefferson on the carpet for allowing others to defame her husband, would understand. The way ahead is full of battles, and there are some who believe Rell hasn’t the stomach to press her budget on the legislature by using her bully pulpit to rally support for her ideas.

Comments

Anonymous said…
She sounded good, and the mandate reduction is a good thing. However the reflexive "Green Jobs" mantra is distressing, however well it plays (or played) to the suburban voters. CT relied too much on finance for jobs and revenue and let industry whither from high costs. The risk in Green talk is that eventually it affects real projects.

Popular posts from this blog

Casey Chadwick’s Uneasy Life after Death

Casey and her mother Wendy "I just started grief counseling. I'm always sad. I'm sad and in pain and I miss her." Wendy Hartling   Hartling is the mother of Casey Chadwick, murdered in 2015 by Jean Jacques , an illegal Haitian immigrant. Jacques was convicted of the murder of Chadwick in a New London Superior Court jury trial and sentenced by Judge Barbara Bailey Jongbloed to a 60 year term in prison. Since Jacques is 44 years of age, the sentence was, in effect, a life sentence. Connecticut Commentary coverage of the Chadwick murder may be found here , and here   and here . Jacques could not have been sentenced to death because Connecticut’s Democrat dominated General Assembly, under pressure from the state Supreme Court, had abolished Connecticut’s death penalty law in 2012 . The slaughter of Chadwick was particularly brutal. Her body had been found by a friend who, opening a door to a closet, discovered Chadwick stuffed in a dark corner drenched in blo...

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."

Lamont Surprised at Suit Brought Against PURA

Marissa P. Gillett, the state's chief utility regulator, watches Gov. Ned Lamont field questions about a new approach to regulation in April 2023. Credit: MARK PAZNIOKAS / CTMIRROR.ORG Concerning a suit brought by Eversource and Avangrid, Connecticut’s energy delivery agents, against Connecticut’s Public Utility Regulatory Agency (PURA), Governor Ned Lamont surprised most of the state’s political watchers by affecting surprise.   “Look,” Lamont told a Hartford Courant reporter shortly after the suit was filed, “I think it is incredibly unhelpful,” Lamont said. “Everyone is getting mad at the umpires.   Eversource is not getting everything they want and they are bringing suit. It was a surprise to me. Nobody notified me. I think we have to do a better job of working together.”   Lamont’s claim is far less plausible than the legal claim made by Eversource and Avangrid. The contretemps between Connecticut’s energy distributors and Marissa Gillett , Gov. Ned Lamont’s ...