Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

If Governor Dannel Malloy fails to obtain $2 billion in union concessions to balance his proposed budget, the Democrat has pledged to plug that hole through layoffs and additional cuts.

“We’re not going to raise taxes more than we’ve previously agreed,” he reiterated to reporters during a press conference this morning at the capitol.

Significant questions remain over the General Assembly’s role should Malloy’s labor talks fail in deciding where else to find that $2 billion in savings.

The budget deal struck last week between Malloy and Democratic leaders gives the administration extraordinary power to balance the budget without the legislature – something that greatly troubled Republicans but has also been questioned by Democrats.

Malloy subsequently pledged to work it out with the General Assembly, and today said those negotiations continue. But, as he has often stated, added he is happy to take full responsibility (and/or blame) if necessary.

According to Republican leaders, the plan being floated as of this afternoon would grant the legislature 30 days to reject Malloy’s back-up budget. If no action were taken, it would automatically pass without comment or debate, mirroring the process used for years by legislatures to approve labor contracts negotiated by  governors.

House Minority Leader Lawrence Cafero balked at the 30 day proposal, arguing the Democrats were not initially concerned about giving up authority to Malloy and it is too easy for the majority leaders to simply decide to do nothing going forward.

“The Democrats didn’t know they had a problem until we told them,” Cafero said.

He and Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, R-Fairfield want an up or down vote on any additional cuts.

McKinney noted Malloy should embrace that proposal because earlier this year the governor proposed a similar change to the process for approving union contracts.

“I just think there should be up or down votes,” Malloy told me when I wrote about his contract-approval bill back in February.

I asked Malloy spokesman Roy Occhiogrosso to respond to the Republicans and reconcile Malloy’s seemingly contradictory positions, but Occhiogrosso would not even confirm a 30 day plan is on the table.

“The governor understands and appreciates legislators wanting to maintain their role in the budgetary process,” Occhiogrosso responded in an e-mail.

Doug Whiting, spokesman for House Speaker Christopher Donovan, D-Meriden, said Donovan did not want to get into specifics but believes the General Assembly has a role in approving future changes to the budget.

“There are conversations still taking place over the language,” Whiting said. “The legislature is responsible for the budget and, going forward, if there are going to be changes the legislature needs to have the opportunity to vote and wants the responsibility to vote on those.”

I also approached Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, who was part of a curious effort earlier this year to grant Malloy greater powers to balance the budget.

Duff, a fiscal conservative, said he wants the legislature to have a role in the final product. But he acknowledged the cynic in him is worried the General Assembly will drag out the process and muck around with Malloy’s additional cuts to the detriment of taxpayers.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Sen. Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, has over the last few legislative sessions cast  votes against tax hikes sought by Democratic leaders on Fairfield County’s wealthier households.

Subsequently he and a few of his Senate colleagues have earned reputations as fiscal conservatives and potential swing votes on budgets.

That distinction meant more when Republican M. Jodi Rell occupied the governor’s office and legislative Democrats needed extra bodies to overturn her vetos of their budgets or other controversial bills.

Duff and a few other like-minded lawmakers have been targeted by a new conservative think tank. The Roger Sherman Liberty Center has been urging folks upset about looming tax hikes to pressure the General Assembly’s fiscal conservatives into voting against the budget deal between Democratic leaders and Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy.

Duff said he is still reviewing the package and expects there will be changes before he is asked to vote.

“We need to make sure obviously that discussions with labor are moving in the right direction,” Duff said, referring to Malloy’s ongoing effort to obtain $2 billion worth of concessions from state workers. “We need to make sure that we have made sufficient cuts and that whatever revenue we’re raising, it’s balanced.”

Duff said the Liberty Center has blanketed his district, which includes Darien, with automated phonecalls urging constituents phone him to complain about the budget.

I joked that’s what Duff gets for cultivating a reputation of being a maverick willing to oppose his party.

“It’s part of the job,” Duff said about fielding the calls. He joked he should print up a T-Shirt that reads, “I bucked the party and all I got was this lousy robocall.”

My Hearst colleague, Ken Dixon, and The Day of New London have written about two others being targeted by the Sherman Center – Sen. Joe Crisco, D-Woodbridge and Sen. Andrew Maynard, D-Stonington.

Comments(2)

|

E-mail

|

Print

Over the past few days legislators from both parties have said they’ve been getting an earful from constituents angry about the additional .03 the budget package Democratic leaders struck with the governor last week tacks onto Connecticut’s already high gas taxes.

A ill-timed column published in yesterday’s New York Times by Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy’s new environmental commissioner has only added fuel – no pun intended – to the controversy.

So as the Malloy/Democratic leaders’ budget heads to the full General Assembly, it’s looking likely there will be some additional tinkering to alter that gas tax proposal.

“We’re hopeful,” Sen. Eileen Daily, D-Westbrook, co-chairman of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Commission – one of the legislature’s two powerful budget writing committees – told me a few minutes ago. “It’s being looked at.”

Comments(4)

|

E-mail

|

Print

New Attorney General George Jepsen has pledged not to be in the public eye as much as his camera-chasing predecessor, fellow Democrat Richard Blumenthal, now a U.S. Senator.

But this is kind of funny…

Blumenthal over the past two days has been all over the data breach of Sony’s PlayStation Network while Jepsen’s office just a little while ago issued a statement.

Here’s some background on this national story.

Blumenthal’s office yesterday issued the kind of press release he used to send Connecticut reporters on almost a daily basis as attorney general ”demanding answers” from, in this case, Sony CEO Jack Tretton.

It really was just like old times. Here’s a snippet of the accompanying letter from Blumenthal to Tretton:

“A breach of such a widely used service immediately raises concerns of data privacy, identity theft, and other misuse of sensitive personal and financial data, such as names, email addresses, and credit and debit card information … I am concerned that PlayStation Network users’ personal and financial information may have been inappropriately accessed by a third party. Compounding this concern is the troubling lack of notification from Sony about the nature of the data breach.” 

Blumenthal’s people e-mailed another press release this afternoon that let us all know in the title that he “continues to push Sony over PlayStation data breach.”

Two hours later Jepsen finally sent out a tough-talking press release of his own, stating he too has written Sony asking for more details about the extent of the breach, steps the company is taking to protect users and questioning if Sony promptly detected and alerted customers about the breach.

Perhaps Jepsen just has more to do than our new junior Senator…

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

The SustiNet health care reform bill that is limping its way to the end of the legislative session doesn’t contain a state-run insurance program (a public option) or allow small businesses to join municipalities/non-profits in a state insurance pool.

Those were both important to House Speaker Chris Donovan, D-Meriden, but opposed by Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy, whom many health reformers thought was all in for SustiNet when he became governor in January.

And yet even though Donovan didn’t get what he wanted in the budget deal with Malloy announced last week, some are still calling the watered-down SustiNet proposal a compromise because it sets aside funds to essentially continue studying the initiative.

Die hard SustiNet supporters aren’t buying it, which is why a rally has been planned in Hartford for later today.

Barbara Edinberg of the Bridgeport Child Advocacy Coalition has organized a bus to transport SustiNet supporters from Fairfield County to the Hartford rally.

“We’re hoping to show the governor and the legislature and the state that we still want SustiNet,” she said.

A few weeks ago we wrote that Donovan’s and Malloy’s differences over SustiNet might cause some problems as the two negotiated a new state budget. But clearly whatever happened behind closed doors, it didn’t hold up last week’s deal.

So has Donovan thrown in the towel? Has one of the most vocal health care reformers quietly caved to the new governor?

Tom Swan, head of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group, plans to attend tonight’s rally. Swan told me he is optimistic Donovan will get more for SustiNet supporters before the full General Assembly votes on the budget. The legislative session wraps up June 8.

“I think people have made a career of underestimating and trying to marginalize Chris Donovan. I think there will be changes to that deal,” Swan said.

Donovan and Senate President Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, are both scheduled to appear at the SustiNet rally. I asked them last night if they had any hope to offer optimistic supporters like Swan that more will be accomplished this session.

Judging by their responses, it doesn’t look good…

But maybe Swan is right and Donovan has some cards up his sleeve he’s not yet prepared to show.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Think again.

This bill is before the legislature’s Planning and Development Committee tomorrow.

Comments(7)

|

E-mail

|

Print

As our newspapers reported in early March, Democratic Gov. Dannel Malloy’s administration initially resisted imposing a so-called Amazon tax on Internet sales, citing questions about its legality.

But the budget deal Malloy struck with legislative Democrats last week contained the Amazon tax.

So what’s up with the governor’s change of heart?

Malloy during a free-wheeling press conference this afternoon told reporters he hopes by joining other states, including New York and Rhode Island, in efforts to capture lost taxes on Internet sales, Connecticut will prompt the federal government to finally take up the issue.

“The Amazon tax is an important stake in the ground,” Malloy said.

But what about the legal questions? Doesn’t that pose a potential problem for Malloy’s budget? Some estimate Connecticut could bring in $9.3 million annually. That money may wind up uncollected if the matter winds up in court or if Amazon prevails in a pending case against New York.

Malloy said of course the revenue is important, but when he’s dealing with a $3.2 billion deficit, he’s got bigger worries.

“Big picture, it’s not a lot of money,” he said.

Comments

|

E-mail

|

Print

Alterations to Democratic Governor Dannel Malloy’s tax package appear to have won over a coalition of state House Democrats, even if the governor did not grant their wish and agree to further increase the top income tax rate on the wealthy.

As we reported 65 legislators last week submitted a letter to their leaders urging whatever budget deal they reach with Malloy increase the highest income tax rate to “at least” 7 percent.

Malloy in his budget proposal from February raised the current top 6.5 percent rate to 6.7 percent.

One of the folks behind the letter – Rep. Zeke Zalaski, D-Southington – voted for the budget deal Malloy and Democratic leaders announced on Wednesday, despite the fact it held the income tax hike steady at 6.7 percent. Zalaski is a member of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee, which, along with the Appropriations Committee, acted on the budget this afternoon at the capitol.

Malloy and Democratic heads of the House and Senate however did adjust the higher income tax rates downward so they kick in sooner for certain households.

Zalaski said he was also won over by announced changes in some of Malloy’s sales tax proposals constituents felt left them nickled-and-dimed.

“Them making those modifications have helped many of us be able to support the package,” Zalaski said, adding on the income tax, “I think (Malloy’s) gone as far as he would.”