Skip to main content

Who’s Afraid Of The Big Bad Wolf?


Wee, sleeket, cowran, tim’rous beastie, 
O, what a panic’s in thy breastie! – “To A Mouse,” Robert Burns

Democrats, it should be obvious from the numbers, have been losing their grip for a while. The State Senate is now split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, 18-18; in the State House, Republicans now are four seats away from a tie. It was the lack of an edge in the Senate that provided a crack through which Republicans were able to pass their budget through the chamber, three moderate Democrats – Paul Doyle of Wethersfield, Gayle Slossberg of Milford and Joan Hartley of Waterbury – voting with Republicans against a status quo Democratic getting and spending plan. The Democrats, in their own plan, got too much, spent too much, as always, and were inattentive to the signs of the times.


When Republican Leader in the House Themis Klarides said that the Republican budget would pass if it had a fair hearing in the General Assembly, she was right. Of course, Democrat temple guards – Speaker of the House Joe Aresimowicz, and President Pro Tem of the Senate Martin Looney – were determined to let the Republican budget die in a General Assembly hallway without a fair hearing.

By mid-September, months after Democrats were supposed to have presented a budget to their fellow Democrats in the Democrat dominated General Assembly, the state employee union controlled Speaker of the House, Joe Aresimowicz, was found huffing and puffing in an op-ed, trying, as best he could, to sell a much taxed, overpriced clunker to his  caucus.

Instead of leading with rational solutions to recurring deficit problems, Democrats led with their fists. Aresimowicz was positively pugilistic in his op-ed column. Speaking mostly to a wavering Democratic caucus, Aresimowicz told the troops they could either “vote ‘yes’ on a budget,” wholly a Democrat Party product, or they could vote ‘no’ and support the October 1 executive order that will financially crush our cities, towns and local schools.” That executive order was a collaborative backroom product worked out between a highly unpopular lame-duck governor and the Democrat leaders in the House and Senate, Aresimowicz and Looney. Life under Malloy’s executive order, Aresimowicz wrote “will have a chilling impact on our local schools and could leave permanent scars … on children, parents, business owners and the elderly…”

On September 16th, the Senate voted for the Republican budget package; hours later, the House followed suit.

Asked whether his vote in favor of the Republican budget plan might cost him his seat in the State Senate, Doyle responded that the vote was the most difficult of his career: “Yes, I may be risking my political career. My party may not be happy with me. But to be honest, I don’t care. I’ve been up here for many years. I believe I’ve always been a man of my word. … I have to vote what my conscience tells me. … I’m prepared to risk it all.’’ In the east atrium of the Capitol building, state hero Nathan Hale, who regretted he had but one life to give for his country, breathed a quiet assent.

When the House at 3:00 in the morning also voted 77-73 in favor of the Republican budget, an eerie silence descended on the chamber, General Assembly members no doubt listening for the whisper in the whirlwind. A Facebook wag wrote – here was proof God was a Republican. Lobbyists were gob smacked. Malloy promised a veto. Among other reasons, Malloy vowed he would veto the General Assembly vote because the Republican plan required UConn employees earning more than $100,000 to pay more for fringe benefits, required full time professors to teach an additional course, and eliminated tuition waivers for UConn employees. Malloy’s far more onerous executive order would have zeroed out state education funding for dozens of municipalities, but then the executive order was always intended to be, as it appeared in the Aresimowicz op-ed, a police baton with which to beat backsliding Democrats in the General Assembly.

Democratic moderates in the House and Senate simply tied their courage to the hitching post and did the right thing, infuriating Dannel “The Hammer” Malloy who, Samson-like, is now prepared to use his veto power to pull the roof down upon the heads of the Philistines, i.e. anyone who disagrees with the best laid plans of Democratic Party leaders.


Whether the roof will or will not rain down on Democrats during the upcoming elections may depend on whether a contingent of moderate Democrats can summon the courage to overcome the veto of a governor about to pass into history.


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."

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. ...

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...