[MrGompers]

I'm really confused and maybe you guys can help me out since I slept thru most of civics class.

Where is it written that the Governor can unilaterally implement laws ?

So the Governor of CT whether it be D or R can raise any tax they want ? They can implement any policy they want ? Are you guys sure this doesn;t need legislative approval ? So the Governor is a de facto king ?
Does this only apply to the Gov of CT ? What about the Gov of Arizona ?

Isn't stuff like this why the Puritans left England in the 1600's? Have we regressed 400 years ?

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by MrGompers

I'm really confused and maybe you guys can help me out since I slept thru most of civics class.

Where is it written that the Governor can unilaterally implement laws ?

So the Governor of CT whether it be D or R can raise any tax they want ? They can implement any policy they want ? Are you guys sure this doesn;t need legislative approval ? So the Governor is a de facto king ?
Does this only apply to the Gov of CT ? What about the Gov of Arizona ?

Isn't stuff like this why the Puritans left England in the 1600's? Have we regressed 400 years ?

People seem to forget that the legislature sets the budget. The Governor only proposes one and many changes are made to it during the long approval process. As I have said here MANY times, there is plenty of blame to go around to both our political parties. We had Republican Governors for 12 years prior to Malloy, 16 if you count Weicker who was a Republican before becoming an Independent to run for Governor. People have to stop saying the Democrats did this or the Republicans did that. They both are to blame and neither can claim they were not responsible. Jay

[JayCT]

Interesting question. Jay

Is CT gearing up for another fiscal bait and switch? | HartfordBusiness.com

[Mike 75]

Originally Posted by JayCT

People seem to forget that the legislature sets the budget. The Governor only proposes one and many changes are made to it during the long approval process. As I have said here MANY times, there is plenty of blame to go around to both our political parties. We had Republican Governors for 12 years prior to Malloy, 16 if you count Weicker who was a Republican before becoming an Independent to run for Governor. People have to stop saying the Democrats did this or the Republicans did that. They both are to blame and neither can claim they were not responsible. Jay

I seem to remember that the governor negotiates the state employee deals without the legislature (the legislature just rubber stamps it). And state employee benefits and comp make up a third of the budget. Those are fixed costs that the rest of the budget must work around. So yeah, the governor has a pretty outsized role in setting the budget.

[JayCT]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

I seem to remember that the governor negotiates the state employee deals without the legislature (the legislature just rubber stamps it). And state employee benefits and comp make up a third of the budget. Those are fixed costs that the rest of the budget must work around. So yeah, the governor has a pretty outsized role in setting the budget.

The Legislature does not just "rubber stamp" state employee contracts. They have to approve it just like any other major expenditure. Jay

[auggie22]

Originally Posted by JayCT

The Legislature does not just "rubber stamp" state employee contracts. They have to approve it just like any other major expenditure. Jay

Under Connecticut statute, collective bargaining contracts are approved if not put up for a vote within 30 days. 124 of 189 union contracts have been executed without a vote since 1991.

Undoing collective bargaining is an imperative to restoring fiscal order.

Nearly four decades of one party rule in the legislature have strapped CT over a barrell. Hard to argue otherwise.

[East of the River]

Originally Posted by auggie22

Under Connecticut statute, collective bargaining contracts are approved if not put up for a vote within 30 days. 124 of 189 union contracts have been executed without a vote since 1991.

Undoing collective bargaining is an imperative to restoring fiscal order.

Nearly four decades of one party rule in the legislature have strapped CT over a barrell. Hard to argue otherwise.

It could be argued that not voting is kind of failure of the legislature. Plus you know we have had Republican governors who actually if you dig into the budgets of the past made the problem worse.

[East of the River]

Originally Posted by El Scorcho

I didn't think that registered Independents could vote in the primaries in CT. I thought you had to register with one party or the other in order to vote in the primaries.

If you have fore thought you can change parties then go back to independent. I have done it before. But it would be easier if they let independents vote in primaries.

[East of the River]

Originally Posted by Mike 75

You basically summed up my stance. Voted for Boughton, he didn't get it, so be it. Not a huge fan of Stefanowski either, but he seems to be a better candidate than Foley (which granted, isn't that hard). He's certainly a better choice than Lamont. I'm not going to let perfect be the enemy of good.

I understand that the partisans on both sides will vote for their party's candidate regardless. But what I don't understand is how people who don't like Malloy and the direction of the state under him would then turn around and vote for Lamont. Makes no sense to me.

It's the same way Foley lost, they looked at both and they disliked him more.

Stefanowski has an issue with the fact that many right leaning independents in CT tend to be fiscally conservative but liberal in most other ways. Any connection to Trump is a killer for those people. The fact that Stefanowski is kind of silent on alot off issues is also concerning. That and the numbers on his financial plan aren't based in reality.

[auggie22]

Originally Posted by auggie22

Under Connecticut statute, collective bargaining contracts are approved if not put up for a vote within 30 days. 124 of 189 union contracts have been executed without a vote since 1991.

Undoing collective bargaining is an imperative to restoring fiscal order.

Nearly four decades of one party rule in the legislature have strapped CT over a barrell. Hard to argue otherwise.

The point I was trying to make is that collective bargaining plays out in a very predictable way - since votes are not required to ratify a contract, our government can quietly negotiate a sweetheart deal for unions and then claim little responsibility for the contract after the fact. If our elected officials were required to vote for a contract, they would need to have an answer for how it would be funded; and would be more accountable to the electorate.

Unions get whatever they want, dems get the organization and money of the unions to keep them in office ... and our tax payers get hosed. Rinse and repeat.

They know it, the unions know it - and that is why you probably won’t see collective bargaining in Ct go away in our lifetime.

Doesn’t that make people mad? This is a racquet that should be illegal and yet somehow we all pretend that it isn’t happening.