Skip to main content

That Was Then: The State Of The State


At some point in the not too distant future, possibly in his budget message on February 18, Governor Dannel Malloy will repent of his campaign promise not to raise taxes. In the journalism business, we call this “eating crow.”

One reporter could not help but note in his story that Mr. Malloy had for four years assured “cities and towns they would be spared from the state budget axe.”

That was then.

Now, before a Connecticut Council of Small Towns (COST) gathering in Cromwell, Mr. Malloy hastened to add a codicil to his previous no tax increase pledge, iterated repeatedly on the stump during his successful re-election campaign: “We have to wrestle with the budget. I hope that we’ll have a budget that we can all live and prosper with.” However, Mr. Malloy added ominously, “I’m doing my best, but no promises.”


The promises had long since been made, and Mr. Malloy’s backtracking must have sounded alarmingly like a retraction to the COST representatives in Cromwell.

The towns have reason to be suspicious. Connecticut towns are the Atlases of state mandates, carrying on their backs worlds of expenses piled there by solicitous state politicians, none of whom wish to incur the expenses that attach to bills originating in the General Assembly. Every time the state issues a mandate to a town, it is ordering the town to dig into its own budget and spend money it ordinarily might use for some other purpose that would more directly benefit the town. A dollar spent in satisfying the state’s mandates is a dollar of municipal taxes that might be spent hiring a teacher or improving curricula or investing money in the town’s crumbling infrastructure or devoting tax dollars to projects that directly benefit the town. At some point, an additional mandate really does become the straw that breaks the municipal back. Some would argue the towns already have arrived at the breakpoint; though, of course, the members of the aptly named COST would have been too polite to mention such matters to Mr. Malloy at a public gathering.

Mr. Malloy’s pessimism has not yet overcome his optimism, but clouds clearly are drifting over his once sunny prospects. Mr. Malloy’s budget proposal will be presented to the General Assembly on February 18. He is now “grappling” as one news account puts it, “with projected shortfalls of $1.3 billion next fiscal year and $1.5 billion in 2016-17.”

But Mr. Malloy’s neck has been in this noose before. On first assuming office, Mr. Malloy, faced with a deficit left on his doorstep by his three irresponsible gubernatorial predecessors, discharged the deficit awaiting him by instituting the largest tax increase in state history. And here we are once again in low dive. This time Mr. Malloy has promised not to increase taxes or renegotiate union contracts with state employees, pretty much the same program offered by his Republican gubernatorial opponent, Tom Foley, who was laughed off the editorial pages in Connecticut newspapers as a non-serious candidate for governor. Then too, the long awaited Connecticut recovery is stumbling over predictable though unseen obstacles, including diminishing gas tax receipts, diminishing cigarette tax receipts and diminishing income taxes.

In its fervor for spending money the state does not have on Big Bling projects, Connecticut may have reached a point of diminishing returns. The more you tax and regulate – and remember, a regulation is a tax by other means – the less you receive, once you have passed a point of diminishing returns. High taxes lead to diminished returns because whatever you tax tends to disappear.  When heavy taxes on cigarettes drive smokers from the market, or when the taxable cigarette product is replaced by some newfangled non-taxed invention, the e-cigarette, tax receipts diminish. Fracking, which resulted in an excess supply of oil, drove down the price of gas. When the cost of a product is reduced, taxes squeezed from it suffer the same reduction. Spending wildly from overtaxed and absurdly over regulated products and services, politicians eventually find themselves hoisted on their own petards – and lose office. To put it in economic terms, it becomes cheaper to replace them with cheaper politicians.

Connecticut may not be there yet because it is not yet obvious to tribunes of the people that the beast’s back can bear no more tax or regulatory weight. But listen closely, and you will hear in the sunny prognoses of big spenders the cracking that occurs when the final straw is added to camel’s back. There is a hitch in the voice, a sudden swoop in the smile of the magician who promises and fails to pull the rabbit from his hat. 


Comments

peter brush said…
politicians eventually find themselves hoisted on their own petards – and lose office...
-----------
There's the rub. No matter the situation on the ground, no matter the unfunded liability, no matter the present deficit, and especially no matter how obviously failed are the progressive programs, the politicians don't lose elections. The electorate is increasingly incapable of seeing reality, and views itself as entitled to state largess. Those of a vindictive bent view the consequent destruction of (their own) society as justice, and the remaining ignorant and apathetic characterize it as social progress or they simply shrug. Connecticut society as a whole will increasingly resemble that of its "inner" cities, and become less and less capable of self-government.
I recently spoke with a neighbor, and suggested that public sector unions shouldn't be able to push us around;I've rarely seen such an angry person. A State Rep to whom I pointed out that Medicaid expansion was financially inappropriate only acknowledged that Connecticut faces challenges. I'm actually a bit curious, and looking forward a to seeing Dannel Malloy (try to) explain himself next month.
------------
More than 108,000 Connecticut residents have enrolled in health care through the state health exchange, Access Health CT, since the new season of open enrollment began Nov. 15. Of those, 83,749 people had enrolled in Medicaid and 24,287 enrolled in private insurance.
--------
The biggest deficiency on the spending side is in the Medicaid account.

“A net Medicaid shortfall of $120 million is projected due to increased enrollment, difficulties in achieving the full savings levels incorporated in the budget for the medication administration and step therapy initiatives, additional hospital cost settlements, and revisions to the federal cost share for a small percentage of Medicaid clients who will be reimbursed at 50 percent as opposed to the originally anticipated 100 percent level,” Barnes wrote.
http://www.ctnewsjunkie.com/archives/entry/second_round_of_2015_budget_cuts_on_the_way/
Don Pesci said…
PB, Good commentary, as always. Those who have connected the dots – far too few – and see a bleak future ahead have three choices: despair, run or join the revolution. Despair is sterile; running to greener pastures elsewhere is an option described in some detail in this column; and the revolution? I see some sort of revolt in the future, though I’m not sure what shape it will take. Progressivism is the deadest of dead letters. It will not solve any of our problems because it CANNOT work. Even some people in the Malloy administration are riven with doubts though, for political reasons, they do not want to shout them from the rooftops. Tell your neighbor – hang on.

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."

Obamagod!

My guess is that Barack Obama is a bit too modest to consider himself a Christ figure , but artist will be artists. And over at “ To Wit ,” a blog run by professional blogger, journalist, radio commentator and ex-Hartford Courant religious writer Colin McEnroe, chocolateers will be chocolateers. Nice to have all this attention paid to Christ so near to Easter.

Did Chris Murphy Engage in Private Diplomacy?

Murphy after Zarif blowup -- Getty Images Connecticut U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, up for reelection this year, had “a secret meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif during the Munich Security Conference” in February 2020, according to a posting written by Mollie Hemingway , the Editor-in-Chief of The Federalist. Was Murphy commissioned by proper authorities to participate in the meeting, or was he freelancing? If the former, there is no problem. If the latter, Murphy was courting political disaster. “Such a meeting,” Hemingway wrote at the time, “would mean Murphy had done the type of secret coordination with foreign leaders to potentially undermine the U.S. government that he accused Trump officials of doing as they prepared for Trump’s administration. In February 2017, Murphy demanded investigations of National Security Advisor Mike Flynn because he had a phone call with his counterpart-to-be in Russia. “’Any effort to undermine our nation’s foreign policy – e...