For General Assembly Democrats determined to frustrate Governor Dannel Malloy’s education reform plan, the most recent projected budget deficits came just in time. Ben Barnes, Mr. Malloy’s money cruncher at the Office of Policy Management (OPM), and Comptroller Kevin Lembo, after dickering over the red figures, have agreed that the budget is in deficit by about $200 million; the real deficit is probably closer top $300 million.
Mr. Malloy’s education reform plan includes features that
have not earned him many friends among teachers, union officials and Jonathan
Pelto.
The Malloy plan calls for additional spending on high
performing charter schools, financing that in a shrinking economy progressive
Democrats in the General Assembly yoked at the knees to union interests insist
might better be spent padding the salaries of unionized public school workers.
The governor’s reform initiative also seeks to connect hiring and firing to pedagogical
performance; and, in the process attempting to facilitate improvement in low
performing schools, the governor has touched and been jolted by the usual
electrically charged third rail of Connecticut politics – teacher tenure. Mr.
Malloy’s ambition to tie tenure to job performance has made hairs stand up on
the necks of union vote-dependent Democrats in the General Assembly.
Legislation gate keepers within the relevant committees were
determined to ditch the Malloy education reforms as untimely and expensive.
During the unlamented administrations of former Republican
Governors Jodi Rell and John Rowland, Democratic committee chairmen in the
General Assembly successfully resisted efforts on the part of “firewall”
governors to limit spending. With the ascendancy of Mr. Malloy, the first
Democratic governor in more than 20 years, chronic spenders in the legislature
hoped that taxes would be increased, thus removing from progressive Democrats
in the General Assembly a bothersome pressure to reduce spending. They were not
disappointed: Mr. Malloy astonished even former Maverick Governor Lowell
Weicker, father of state income tax, by levying on recession ravaged nutmeggers
the largest tax increase in state history.
“Mine’s bigger than yours,” Mr. Malloy easily could have
boasted to Mr. Weicker. Where in heaven’s name, Mr. Weicker wondered a couple
of years passed, did all the surpluses generated by his income tax go?
As it happened, neither Mr. Weicker nor Mr. Rowland nor Mrs.
Rell were fully functioning firewalls. Had the gubernatorial firewalls
prevented spending, the bottom line of Connecticut’s budget would not have
increased threefold since the last pre-income tax budget of former Governor
William O’Neill. It became the fashion during the post-O’Neill period for left
of center political commentators and politicians in the state to lament that
Connecticut was not suffering from a spending addiction; the state, it was
agreed by all, had a “revenue problem.” That fashion has not gone out of style
in the Malloy administration which, to put the matter plainly, is not
interested in spending cuts that bleed.
Waiting-for-Godot progressive Democrats still believe the
tide they have lowered by means of punishing regulations and high taxes will
lift their boats – at some magical moment in the future. Mr. Barns attributes
the current deficit to lower than usual tax receipts, most certainly the result
of the diminishing returns all the governor’s men should attribute to high
taxes, burdensome regulations and improvident spending. Mr. Malloy, with a bow
to previous sleight of hand governors he has vigorously spanked in the past,
proposed this year to patch the most recent deficit by shifting funds. Asked
to defend the administration’s latest budget shifting gimmickry, the governor –
Wait for it! – described the state’s plunge into economic idiocy as “basically
a revenue problem” certain to disappear when the state's economic fortunes
improve, sometime after the governor is out-rigged with a magic wand.
Mr. Malloy has been no more successful than his predecessors
in controlling spending. But he may well be the first Democratic governor in
living memory to have been rebuked by a spending addicted Democratic General
Assembly for having proposed educational spending increases that are untimely
and expensive.
Not to dash any utopian dreams, but it would be rash to
suppose that this objection by tax devouring progressives in the General
Assembly signals a disposition among dominant Democrats to cut spending. It is
merely a convenient cloaking device utilized by committee leaders to abort
educational reforms that impact union interests leading Democrats in the
General Assembly have sworn to defend with their political lives, their sacred
honor and our money – for votes.
Comments
CT:
Highest Electricity Rates in NE (new tax on generators)
Highest Gas Prices in NE (new or progressive taxes)
Very High if not highest Personal Income Taxes
Highest License fees for Professionals...
When I first moved to CT from the Midwest in 1979 I heard that moving an employee from NYS to CT resulted in a 10% increase in takehome pay. Perhaps we've forgotten that.