A couple of thoughts....
And a plug for this Sunday's editorial and my Hackett on Politics column in the paper.
There is one point that hasn't been discussed related to the legislature's and governor's agreement not to do anything with the upcoming fiscal year budget -- and that is the potential for an even larger budget deficit in Fiscal Year 2008-09 than what we're looking at now in 2007-08. If we're running a deficit now because evenues have fallen off, it would stand to reason that increasing state spending by 3.4 percent (what the second year of the two-year budget calls for) is going to call for an increase in revenues. And unless the economy is somehow magically going to turn itself around in the next 12 months, I'm not sure how anyone can believe that revenues will increase .
So what lawmakerrs and the governor did was avoid making any of the tough decisions that will be needed until after the election. Leadership? I think not.
On another matter, I'm looking forward to having legislators explain to me how they can justify doling out public money for campaigns to candidates running without an opponent. They aren't entitled to the full amount that one can get with an opponent -- but some might argtue, those who deal in common sense -- why should they get any if they have no opponent. Is there any doubt as to why it might be so hard to pass ethics reform?
Both issues are explored in more detail in Sunday's paper.
Have a good weekend.
There is one point that hasn't been discussed related to the legislature's and governor's agreement not to do anything with the upcoming fiscal year budget -- and that is the potential for an even larger budget deficit in Fiscal Year 2008-09 than what we're looking at now in 2007-08. If we're running a deficit now because evenues have fallen off, it would stand to reason that increasing state spending by 3.4 percent (what the second year of the two-year budget calls for) is going to call for an increase in revenues. And unless the economy is somehow magically going to turn itself around in the next 12 months, I'm not sure how anyone can believe that revenues will increase .
So what lawmakerrs and the governor did was avoid making any of the tough decisions that will be needed until after the election. Leadership? I think not.
On another matter, I'm looking forward to having legislators explain to me how they can justify doling out public money for campaigns to candidates running without an opponent. They aren't entitled to the full amount that one can get with an opponent -- but some might argtue, those who deal in common sense -- why should they get any if they have no opponent. Is there any doubt as to why it might be so hard to pass ethics reform?
Both issues are explored in more detail in Sunday's paper.
Have a good weekend.
posted by Ray Hackett at 1:42 PM
6 Comments:
I agree with you Ray, no unopposed candidates or candidates opposed by petitioning candidates who won't receive taxpayer funds SHOULD NOT receive ANY taxpayer's money to run campaigns against no one.
Maybe Edith will give the money back?
Of far greater concern is how this law treats minor party candidates and independents.
I think its a violation of the Equal Protection Clause to have harsher conditions for them qualifying for the free money from heaven.
Who says that member of the general assembly necessarily must be Democrat or Republican? I think the principal that the elections are wide open to anyone and for any party is one worth hanging on to. Political parties come -- and they go. Heard from the Whigs lately?
The Dems and Republicans will likely outlive us all but then again that does not make it right that their incumbency be formally and permanently institutionalised in the statutes.
Connecticut state statutes should treat all candidates equally. A minor party must be allowed to become a major party. Yes, this situation is a mess. I don't know how to fix it other than to abolish the public financing system all together.
I think we shall find that far from opening things up, doors have been slammed shut and locked.
John's right about the unfairness of Connecticuts taxpayer funding of campaigns which pretty much only give money to major party candidates and basically nothing to petitioning candidates.
So John, do you think Dan Lein will beat Frank Cronin in the Republican primary for the 49th State Rep. seat in Windham?
Hey Ray, how about a newspaper story on that race. Two Republicans so far and last I knew, there were at least two Democrats interested as well. This is the only interesting State Rep. race in all of eastern Connecticut with the possible exception of the 43rd.
Hey Bill
The Republican Town Committee meets tonight to endorse a candidate and wild horses could not keep me away. I will vote for Frank Cronin.
Mr. Cronin spoke at our last meeting and I am certain he will be our nominee. He has my vote mainly because he's not Dan Lein.
I was Lein's Killingly coordinator in 1993 when he ran in a special election to fill the 29th Senate seat. Lein evidently does not remember me at all. I backed Priscilla Root also of Windham who I knew through my time as a legislative intern. Well at the caucus Lein won and like a good Republican I climbed on board. I volunteered to be his Killingly coordinator.
Don Williams totally blew him out of the water, easily defeating Lein even his own hometown of Windham. He has run for the 49th before without success.
Since then I have heard a lot of negative things about him from other Republicans mostly having to do with his temper. I think he's to liberal to carry our banner. I will not consider voting for him unless he both win the primary and Tom White is the Democrat's nominee. As far as I know, Lein has not stolen public money, he has only wasted it.
In yesterday's Chronicle he could not withhold his bitterness. Lein baffleingly said that he will primary the Republican endorsed candidate and that if the RTC endorsed him (which we won't), he will not accept it. Now what is that supposed to mean? Lein will primary himself? Well he won't have to worry about that possibility in any event.
Lein says of the Windham Republicans "are self-serving, myopic and out of touch". Who does he think is going to vote for him then I wonder?
I defeated Dan Lein for the GOP nomination for Windham Selectman btw, though by then Lein had given up hope of re-nomination. My running mates and I stated as part of our platform we wanted, for example, the Spanish speaking students in Windham to be taught English as a FIRST language instead of a SECOND language.
Lein thinks its a crazy idea to teach kids English so they do better on the NCLB tests. We are just nutty that way.
Granted we have more than our fair share of characters, but no one is more out of touch than Dan Lein.
Dan Lein seems ashamed to be a Republican and I suppose the only reason why he doesn't switch to the Democrats is because they won't nominate him. Last year he bolted the party and joined forces with other liberal Republicans and avowed socialists {Greens} under the so-called "Bottom Line" party.
The Bottom Line petitioning candidates stole the minority spots on the Windham Board of Selectmen, BOE and Board of Finance. They promised to work with the Democrats and they certainly did that -- we just vetoed their swollen budget requests in referendum.
Lein helped shut out Republicans from all boards and its pretty cheeky of him to expect us to nominate him for higher office now.
The Democrats nominated Susan Johnson last night. I was happy about that. She defeated a Sherriff Sticky-Fingers and Barbara McGrath who strongly believes we are under taxed in Windham. She is currently Board of Finance Chair.
Johnson was the best the Democrats had.
-- Well you asked!
-- Oh and I might add Mrs Johnson is a very nice lady.
Yes,I agree,Susan Johnson is a very nice lady,and a dedicated hard worker.
I am so pleased that she won the democratic nomination last night.
Post a Comment
<< Home