[nep321]

I believe that the only solution to resolving the pension obligation crisis in CT is for the federal government to step in and help the state pay these obligations. You know, kind of like how the federal government steps in and helps pay for all those nice roads and highways in Texas and Florida, because those states have no income tax. Now it's CT's turn to get some federal help.

[BPt111]

Malloy And Lawmakers Brace For 'Austere, Painful' Budget - Hartford Courant

HARTFORD — Austere, painful and filled with hard choices.

Those are some of the words lawmakers and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy are using to describe the state budget and the upcoming legislative session.

Malloy won't reveal his spending plan until lawmakers formally convene next week but on Friday he provided a few hints of what his proposal will look like.

"It's an austere budget," Malloy told reporters just minutes after the State Bond Commission met to approve hundreds of millions of dollars in borrowing to pay for scores of program grants and capital projects around Connecticut.

At issue is an estimated shortfall of $552 million, or about 3 percent of the state budget, for the fiscal year that starts July 1.

Malloy reiterated a pledge not to raise taxes. He also suggested his proposal will not dip into the state's roughly $400 million emergency fund to help balance the budget. "I think a rainy-day fund should be used for rainy days," he said. "I don't think it should be an excuse not to make hard decisions. I don't believe it should be built into budget assumptions."


The Democratic governor reminded the public that his predecessor, Republican M. Jodi Rell, relied on the emergency fund to balance the state's budget during her term.

"You know what the amount in the rainy-day fund was when I became governor? Zero," Malloy said. "A prior administration used $1.5 billion in rainy-day funds to avoid having to make the tough decisions that my administration had to make."

And there will likely be more tough decisions in the months to come. Lawmakers are bracing for the grim task of repeatedly saying no as they struggle to balance the state's books without raising taxes in a legislative election year.

Even before tackling the shortfall for fiscal 2017, the General Assembly must close a smaller hole in the current year's budget, estimated at $72 million by the nonpartisan fiscal office of the legislature.

"Yeah, it's painful and it's going to get worse," said Sen. Scott Frantz, a Republican from Greenwich.

Sen. Steve Cassano, D-Manchester, agreed with Frantz's grim assessment. "I don't think there's going to be tax increases, which means there's going to be drastic cuts," he said.

Asked whether the emergency budget cuts he ordered in September might provide a hint of how he intends to handle the current shortfall, Malloy was curt. "It's a start," he said. Safety net programs, hospitals and public colleges and universities were the governor's top targets during that round of reductions.

Cassano bristled at the suggestion that human service providers might face additional reductions.

"The fact is … the most dependent people have already been cut to the bone, there's nothing left there to cut," he said. "In order for us to cut, it could be municipalities, boards of education … it's not going to be the people programs because there's nothing left to cut of the people programs."

Frantz and other Republicans say Connecticut must move beyond its current strategy of lurching from short-term crisis to patchwork solution. They have been pressing for a frank discussion about the state's long-term fiscal health. Malloy is also pushing for the development of a long-term plan for structural changes to the state's taxing policies and spending priorities.

But asked to assess the chances that lawmakers will begin to tackle those long-term issues this year, Frantz said he puts the odds at "slim to none.

"The pensions are a mess, we spend far too much money in the first place, our revenue projections are always far too rosy," Frantz said. "I think it's Band-aids this year to get through the election and come back and then worry about it then."

[BPt111]

Amid Malloy's No-Tax Promise, Budget Squeeze Comes Into Sharp Focus


TFORD — Ben Barnes had little to offer Connecticut Voices for Children Tuesday in his annual talk with the group, which advocates for state spending on social programs aimed at low-income families.

Barnes, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy's budget chief, knew there would be no tax increases to maintain spending — certainly not proposed by Malloy, who made that clear later Tuesday in an interview.

The setting at the Capitol highlighted this year's brutal budget reality for people who care about, and depend on, social services. Voices had just presented data showing the state's spending on anti-poverty programs is not keeping up — by one measure, at least — and that racial and economic disparities are widening.

Sen. Chris Murphy had just cited progress at the federal level, but with a warning about social ills in Connecticut's cities. "If this state doesn't get serious about sharing the burden … about regionalizing the costs … then there's almost no amount of money that will address the problems."

Few people, certainly not Barnes, question the effectiveness of such supports as enhanced early pre-kindergarten education and more earned-income tax payments for low-income workers.

But Barnes and Malloy are thinking about the state shortfall that resurfaced again late Monday — up by $67 million to $72 million — in the one month since the legislature supposedly closed the gap for this fiscal year, according to the nonpartisan legislative budget office.


Worse, they're looking at a $560 million shortfall in the amount of money the state can raise at current tax rates for 2016-17, compared with the $18.7 billion that was expected when the two-year budget was sealed last spring.

It's a squeeze that will dominate the legislative session set to open next week, starting with revised budget that Malloy is expected to present on Feb. 3.

Barnes fell short of promising there would be no tax increases, but Malloy, in comments to me at the Yale School of Management, said, "I'm not proposing a budget that increases taxes."

What, exactly, does that mean? Malloy made the same promise last year, only to push up state revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars, largely by postponing scheduled tax decreases such as a decline in the corporate earnings tax, and by limiting tax credits and deductions.


Worse, they're looking at a $560 million shortfall in the amount of money the state can raise at current tax rates for 2016-17, compared with the $18.7 billion that was expected when the two-year budget was sealed last spring.

It's a squeeze that will dominate the legislative session set to open next week, starting with revised budget that Malloy is expected to present on Feb. 3.

Barnes fell short of promising there would be no tax increases, but Malloy, in comments to me at the Yale School of Management, said, "I'm not proposing a budget that increases taxes."

What, exactly, does that mean? Malloy made the same promise last year, only to push up state revenues by hundreds of millions of dollars, largely by postponing scheduled tax decreases such as a decline in the corporate earnings tax, and by limiting tax credits and deductions.

"We can't do this in the middle of the night anymore," he said, referring to the annual, closed-door bingeing in the final days of the session, leaving lawmakers no time to understand the budget, let alone weigh in.

"We should give them all an opportunity to evaluate just how much they hate it before we vote on it," Barnes said.



http://www.courant.com/business/dan-...26-column.html

[beerbeer]

Connecticut is getting what it deserves. The voters will probably vote Malloy to a third term and scratch their heads when United Technologies moves out.

[BobNJ1960]

Malloy broke his last "no new taxes" pledge in record time, and the past is the best predictor of the future. Once a liar, always a liar. Will the next hike prompt more corps to leave-losing more state GDP? Again, what happened last month..best predictor of what happens when one of the worst ranked business climates raises taxes. (No matter the p/r spin on GE, the search began last June amidst their reaction to Malloy's last broken "no new taxes" pledge.)


If you want a better business climate, you need budgets Looney HATES with a passion.

[RunD1987]

oug Langley

Give the $500 Mil back to CT hospitals, increase funding to Transportation/DMHAS/VA/DPH/Disability/Social Services/Law Enforcement agencies in CT/Schools. Cut funding to the rest of the state services. Grandfather state employees with 10 year's or more to keep money in their pension, but every employee switch to a 401K. Cut pay and lower salaries. Revamp state benefits, cap tuition reimbursement at $5,000, and instead of 10 year's for college loan repayment make it 15 years with the state.

Cap property tax at 35% across the state.
Install tolls.
Raise gas taxes, raise cigarette taxes, raise tax on alcohol, and fix the income tax bracket in CT.

Create summer tax free weeks to boost tourism to the state during peak months. Also encourage local CT attractions to offer free admission days with funding by the state. Free state park weekends at least once a month in CT during the summer. Consider opening some parks all year we have cabins at some parks. Maybe even some heat put some on the shore area nothing better than winter and CT beaches.

Lower CT CC and State University cost.

Increase taxes on corporate businesses and lower taxes on local CY businesses.

[hartford_renter]

Originally Posted by RunD1987

Increase taxes on corporate businesses and lower taxes on local CY businesses.

Malloy already did this and GE left. He had to give pratt & whitney 200 million to stay.

A command style economy does not work. Also I'm not sure how you raise taxes on one group and lower on another, what is the point?

CT is going bankrupt

My advice elect Republicans that will cut spending there is no other way

[Henry10]

Originally Posted by nep321

I believe that the only solution to resolving the pension obligation crisis in CT is for the federal government to step in and help the state pay these obligations. You know, kind of like how the federal government steps in and helps pay for all those nice roads and highways in Texas and Florida, because those states have no income tax. Now it's CT's turn to get some federal help.

Yep. That's a genius thought. You run up the credit card, I pay. The "progressive" way.

[BobNJ1960]

Originally Posted by Henry10

Yep. That's a genius thought. You run up the credit card, I pay. The "progressive" way.

could not rep you again, but that was a great post.

Progressives love spending OTHER people's money recklessly. State pensions are a out of control spending, not a funding, problem. Reckless spending must be eliminated.

[BicoastalAnn]

Originally Posted by BobNJ1960

could not rep you again, but that was a great post.

Progressives love spending OTHER people's money recklessly. State pensions are a out of control spending, not a funding, problem. Reckless spending must be eliminated.

100% reckless spending must be eliminated - that is the real problem - but I agree with nep's post that CT should be able to reap some rewards from the feds, considering the benefits that are given to these other states. seems like CT pays towards others' welfare and gets little back. of course, i'd say no one should expect fed bail outs to begin with, across the board, but the system seems unfair currently.