The State Of The State
The State Of The State
M. Jodi Rellâs inspiring appearance before state Legislature this week gave extra encouragement to the always-optimistic opening of a new legislative session. Stepping up to the podium a little over a week after her mastectomy, the governor was herself emblematic of Hartfordâs new determination to rise above its past problems with integrity and a cooperative spirit. Almost everyone is optimistic that state has a firm grip on the throat of its ethical problems with Gov Rell in charge and her disgraced predecessor, John Rowland, awaiting sentencing. Almost no one is optimistic that the state is even close to getting a grip on its growing fiscal problems.
The biggest challenge of the coming legislative session will be for the Democrat-controlled legislature to agree with the Republican governor on a two-year budget in the face of a projected $1.3 billion deficit for the fiscal year that begins in July. The stateâs Office of Fiscal Analysis notes that the stateâs structural deficit (the portion of the deficit that would remain even if the economy were at full employment) is a direct result the budgetary decisions of previous legislative sessions, including but not limited to: the use of one-time revenue sources to balance the FY 2005 budget; the increase in the maximum property tax credit in FY 2006 and subsequent fiscal years; and expenditures that are growing faster than revenues.
Against this backdrop, House Republicans are heading into the new session calling for no new or increased taxes and the elimination of the state income tax on pensions. The Democrats, on the other hand, have expressed their intention to spend more money on improving the stateâs transportation and alleviating traffic congestion and improving health care for the poor. In a nutshell, Hartford wants no new, or fewer, taxes and increased spending. This is the formula the federal government has used in recent years to run up a $7.6 trillion national debt. Connecticut, fortunately, has to balance its budgets.
Somewhere along the line, government has convinced citizens that it is possible to spend money on innumerable voter-pleasing programs without raising taxes to pay for them â representation without taxation â or at least taxing some other guys, like the millionaires or the cigarette smokers. This illusion may be useful for electing incumbents, but in the long run it erodes our system of government for and by the people, which is supposed to stand on a foundation of truth.
There is much in this state that needs to be done. Connecticutâs road system is choked with traffic, putting a drag on the stateâs economy. The income gap between the stateâs wealthiest citizens and its poorest grew more than in any other state in the 1990s. Education costs are driving municipal property taxes through the roof as a result of retrenchment in state funding of public education. Tuitions are surging at the stateâs public colleges and universities. The stateâs prisons are overcrowded.
It is the job of the state Legislature to decide which of these problems we can afford to address and then to pay for them. Paying for them means levying taxes, or assessing fees, or collecting tolls, or otherwise raising the money needed in a fair and equitable way. Taxing the public means taking the political heat for those taxes in order to get the political credit for the improvements and programs. It should be a fairly straightforward and honest process. It has not always been.
We Connecticut taxpayers know how it works. We understand that taxes are what we pay for civilization; yet we are unwilling to pay taxes for someone elseâs pet project, cozy deal, or personal enrichment. We resent the dissemblers who tell us we can have more and more spending programs and fewer and fewer taxes. We wish both Gov Rell and legislative leaders well in their quest to solve Connecticutâs budget problems and hope they remember what they have learned in coming to grips with the stateâs ethical problems. Do it with integrity and a cooperative spirit.