Reactions to Gov's Budget Proposal Mixed

From Sal Luciano of Council 4 AFSCME (h/t Capitol Watch):

Our members stepped up this year and agreed to significant givebacks to help balance the budget. It’s too bad the governor is still sheltering billionaires by cutting their inheritance taxes.

From House Republican Leader Larry Cafero:

I cannot speculate on the response this proposal will receive from the entire House Republican caucus until we have the opportunity to discuss and digest it. We maintain that this is the absolute worst time to raise taxes and believe that Connecticut can have a budget solution without tax increases. But we continue to stand ready to work toward a bipartisan budget agreement.

From House Speaker Chris Donovan (h/t CTNJ):

“We’re happy to see that she’s recognized the need to ask those who have a bit more to contribute to our deficit by including the millionaires tax,”

From CTGOP Chair Chris Healy:

The proposed increases in personal income tax and the surcharge of certain business are disappointing. The budget proposal offered by the House and Senate Republicans recently, does accomplish similar goals without the burdens of more taxes on those who already bear most of the burden for the state. No Republican Legislator should feel compelled to support any budget with tax increases – especially when the Democratic Super-Majority insists that spending is not the problem, but revenue is.

Advertisements

8 responses to “Reactions to Gov's Budget Proposal Mixed

  1. “Our members stepped up this year and agreed to significant givebacks to help balance the budget. It’s too bad the governor is still sheltering billionaires by cutting their inheritance taxes.”

    What an ass. I didn’t realize the estate tax only applied to ‘billionaires’.

    Just like the Democrats. Their millionaires tax started at $250,000.

    Oh, and Sal? The state employees are still suckling the teat of the people of the State of Connecticut. Let’s not even go there… I don’t consider going from $3 co-pay to $5 co-pay “significant givebacks.” Take a look at what is happening in the real world, buddy.

    No wonder why we are in deep shit.

  2. So, here is a really important Reality Check about the present budget debate…

    Before weighing in, it is vital to understand the Governor’s plan…

    Rell proposes $260 million in “new taxes”
    That is an increase in the income tax for people making over $500,000
    The elimination of the estate tax
    A reduction of the sales tax

    Rell also proposes $260 million in NEW BORROWING via the securitization of more future revenue. This means that the state borrows money by agreeing to give future revenue to a lender. You’ve seen the ads on TV – “You deserve your money now”. What the ad doesn’t tell you is that they will give you a fraction of the money you are owed — and in return you give them all that future money. This bizarre borrowing trick has two very negative effects. First you have to pay a very high premium. Rell claims that she can get 70 cents on the dollar —- but the truth is we’ll be lucky to get 50 cents on the dollar when you actually calculate how much you get today for what you give away over the next few years. Second – and even worse – that “future” revenue then isn’t available in those future years when you need it which means it leads to higher taxes… but interestingly the hit doesn’t come until after the next election in 2010.

    Finally, Rell “proposes” $520 million in unspecified cuts….Here we go again. Governor “proposes” to cut the budget BUT THEN FAILS TO IDENTIFY A SINGLE PROGRAM, SERVICE OR ACTIVITY TO CUT. Why – because she doesn’t want to be the barer of bad news. How is it possible that the Chief Executive Officer can get away with announcing that we should “find” $520 million more in cuts — and then not say where those cuts should come from….human services?, education? Town aid?

    It is hard to imagine it possible – but Governor Rell has proposed a significant tax increase while proposing a budget that is even more fiscally irresponsible….

  3. Jon Pelto criticizing the Governor for her budget? Please!! This is coming from a past member of the legislature that voted for the state income tax. Remember supporters claims – this will increase revenue so we will not have any more budget shortfalls and it will fix the problem our towns have with properity taxes.
    I might also add that state spending has doubled since its inception, which had led to all of the problems we now have in CT.
    I would also add that Governor Rell has proposed a number of cuts, while the Democrats have not. The Democrats have a supermajority – if the leadership budget is so fantastic – why don’t they have the votes?

    Talk about irresponsible….

  4. Jon — go back into retirement.

    Shoved aside from his leadership role in the state House of Representatives, fired from his job as political director of the Democratic Party, and lastly a failed nomination for a state Senate seat.

    Now, we are supposed to sit up and take notice?

    In case you don’t know, the Governor doesn’t have a vote on the budget. She has veto power.

    Yesterday, she suggested a package that she could support. Since the Dems have only insisted on tax increases (surprise surprise) and not agreed to any spending cuts, she left it up to them to identify them. It is, after all, THEIR responsibility to pass a budget — and duty they have been abdicating even though they have a so-called super majority.

    This may not be over. By all looks of it, her agreeing to higher income tax rates for some is hinged on elimination of the estate tax. I bet there is some kicking and screaming.

    The borrowing sucks, to say the least. But your party isn’t lily white in that department, by any stretch of the imagination.

    But Jon, thanks for giving use your two cents.

  5. JC & CT Dude, hey thanks for the love….

    JC, to the extent that I’ve weighed in here or on other blogs, I’ve been as critical if not more critical of some of the Democratic actions to date.

    As to your reference to the failure of the income tax – in fact – if you put aside the rhetoric for a moment and check the facts, the revenue stream has been much more stable as a result of having a more income based revenue stream (rather then simply the old – primarily consumption – based system that we used to have).

    And a comment for both of you who are quick to blame the Democrats. Under Connecticut’s system of government it is the Governor who proposes. Go back and look through each budget cycle. To my knowledge the legislature has never made more than a 2% change to the governor’s budget plan.

    There are lots of factors, good and bad that have led to the increase in the level of spending you reference, but the primary player for setting out the budget each and every year has been the Governor – and for the last 19 years – that person has been a republican. Would things have been different with a republican legislature – maybe – but for two decades the captain of the ship has been is still is a Repubican.

    Finally, CT Dude, I’ll keep your kind words for posterity. But I’m confused. You said “Shoved aside from his leadership role in the state House of Representatives, fired from his job as political director of the Democratic Party, and lastly a failed nomination for a state Senate seat”. Actually the first two items might be true depending on whom you talk to, but I don’t recall ever seeking a state senate seat.

    Are you confusing me someone else?

    Some other liberal perhaps?

  6. It’s true!
    Pelto is an authentic true-believer Liberal with a capital “L” and has the uncanny ability to send those to his political right over the edge.

    However – he is also genuine intelligentsia, not some pseudo intellect sophistry expert, with their usual aversion to real work.

    Pelto was moving his party towards the 21st century and doing so with some amount of haste when those within his party that found him intellectually intimidating threw him under the bus.

    The net result?
    The Connecticut Democratic State Party exists solely to raise money so the Connecticut Democratic State Party can exist.

    Their state central meetings resemble the same “dinner club” atmosphere ours did at the GOP sometime ago.

    I rarely find myself in agreement with Pelto; but I would never underestimate him nor would I question his veracity.

  7. I am a longtime Rell supporter, and I feel every Republican in the caucus should vote against tax increases. Period. It is a matter of product differentiation. Let’s not give the Dems cover, folks.

  8. wow… ACR – I’m telling you – lets start a new party… (ah, after they get this campaign finance mess cleaned up…. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s