As Governor Dannel
Malloy sets off into the sunset, The Wall Street Journal reviews, in as economical a manner
as possible, the real state of the state of Connecticut, once the diamond in
the crown of New England.
“The federal Bureau
of Economic Analysis recently rolled out its annual report on personal income
growth in the 50 states, and for 2017 the Nutmeg State came in a miserable
44th.” That’s the good news.
The paper refers to
Governor Dannel Malloy as the “progressive paragon” and notes his “performance
is even worse when you look at the details. The nearby chart shows that the
state’s personal income grew at the slowest pace among all New England states,
and not by a little. Governor Dannel Malloy’s eight-year experiment in
public-union governance saw income grow by a meager 1.5% for the year, well
below Vermont (2.1%). The state even trailed Maine (2.7%) and Rhode Island
(2.4%), which are usually the New England laggards.”
In personal income
growth, Connecticut is the poor-boy of states. “Connecticut was 49th out of 50
states in 2012, 37th in 2013, 39th in 2014 and 2015, and 33rd in 2016. The
consistently poor performance, especially relative to its regional neighbors,
suggests that the causes are bad economic policies, not the business cycle or a
downturn in a specific industry.”
And finally, the
most progressive state in the northeast has now become the most regressive
state in the northeast. “The fact that Connecticut, which is next to America’s
financial capital, has grown so poorly amid an expansion that was especially
good for financial assets is a damning indictment of its political leadership.
It is a particular tragedy for the state’s poorest citizens who may not be able
to flee to other states that aren’t run by and for government employees. Maybe
we should call it the Regressive State.”
Among the 446
comments the editorial provoked, is one that suggests the more progressives
learn, the less they know. “Dan, Dannel, Daniel just announced a bill from the
still Democrat controlled legislature is making its way to the governor’s desk
and he plans to sign it. That bill will grant tuition help to
undocumented persons at Connecticut's state universities.”
These are not the
kind of recommendations politicians generally want on their resumes;
though, of course, there will always be a feather bed somewhere – perhaps in
progressive academia – for failed heroic progressive politicians. Malloy eventually
may land on a soft surface, but it will take heroic efforts to effect changes
in Connecticut that will return the state to its former glory.
More than a quarter
century has passed since the father of Connecticut’s income tax, former
Governor Lowell Weicker, warned in his gubernatorial campaign that instituting
and income tax in the midst of a recession would be like “pouring gas on a
fire,” after which, once ensconced as governor, Weicker proceeded to pour gas
on the fire. We have been living in the flames of an almost seamless unending
recession ever since. As everyone who has not fled Connecticut for less
punishing states elsewhere knows, Malloy called Weicker and raised him two tax
increases, the first the largest and the second the second largest in state
history. With the right policies in place, it would not have taken the state
more than three decades to recover from its progressive governors and its
progressive Democrat majority leaders in Connecticut’s General Assembly.
Since the Weicker
bonfire, Republican gains in both the state House and Senate seem to suggest
that a slim majority of Connecticut voters has come to appreciate Albert
Einstein’s definition of insanity: doing
the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. In the coming
election, Republicans, now even in the Senate and seven seats away from
Democrats in the House, will be running
against Malloy’s ruinous policies. State Democrats will be running against
President Donald Trump, or rather a highly exaggerated cartoon of Trump.
The progressive
policies of Malloy and his co-conspirators in the General Assembly cannot
rationally be defended, because any defense is answered by the realities mentioned
in the editorial staring murderously at
all Connecticut citizens.
Malloy’s response to
Connecticut’s rapid downfall, directly related to the state’s hegemonic
Democrat leadership and its lofty, feeling infused but reckless progressive
policies, can best be illustrated by Mike Lawlor’s latest proposal.
Connecticut’s Under Secretary for Criminal Justice Policy and Planning --who as
co-chair, along with Supreme Court Justice Andrew McDonald, agitated
effectively for the abolition of the death penalty and who set loose Frankie“The Razor” Resto on Meriden – has proposed the state should
increase spending on prisoners’ meals, while the state slips sleepily into yet
another multi-million dollar budget deficit.
Republican member of
the House Appropriations Committee Rep. Melissa Ziobron said of the latest Malloy-Lawlor venture into populist progressive politics, "Not
only did he [Malloy] prioritize this money for criminals, he also eliminated
money for seniors who are having meals for wheels deliveries.”
Lawlor has a
ravenous appetite for wrong reforms. Connecticut’s new governor, Democrat or Republican,
should eliminate his position, which is menacingly unnecessary. In fact, any
prospective governor who promises -- "first thing I do when elected is to make
Lawlor redundant" -- may pile up quite a few votes.
Comments