The CT Mirror’s Paul Stern reports “increasingly frayed nerves in all quarters as the stakes on legislative issues come into sharper focus.” What happens in Hartford directly impacts Bridgeport’s municipal budget now under review for the budget year starting July 1. Mayor Joe Ganim wants to hold the line on taxes with an eye toward a possible statewide run in 2018, after already amassing about $200K for his 2019 mayoral reelection year. Ganim has quite a juggling act on his hands.
In his story, Stern touches on several legislative issues that impact the city budget.
From Stern:
Also caught in the state’s growing need to reduce costs and/or raise revenue, however, Connecticut’s hospitals pushed back hard on Wednesday in an effort to stop hundreds of millions of dollars in tax increases recommended by Gov. Dannel Malloy.
… Money also figures heavily into the picture as legislators weigh the pros and cons of granting the Mohegan Sun and Foxwoods Resorts Casino permission to build an East Windsor casino–the first off tribal property. Friday, State Attorney General George Jepsen said he saw little new in the tribes’ promise to continue paying the state a share of their slot machine revenue even if their compact with the state is invalidated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Full story here.
Is anyone surprised? The multi-billionaires, the hedge-fund managers, and the suburbs in general have completely kidnapped policy-making in the State of Connecticut. The working poor and middle class in CT are taking the brunt of supporting the multi-billionaires, the hedge fund managers, the corporate welfare queens.
Hmmm, so this is the Democrat policy of allowing big money suppressing the poor and middle class, Frank? I ask because they have been the majority in the house and senate for years and years.
Jennifer, where is the Republicans policy for the poor and middle class? I know, reduce the capital gains tax and reduce benefits to the poor.
Jennifer, give me a break. Look at all the Governors of Connecticut since the post World War Two period and you will see both Democrats and Republicans. Both parties were equal opportunity do-nothings. I might sound like a broken record but I think the driving force in Connecticut Policy has not been Democrats vs. Republicans but suburb vs. urban. Big Money. Let’s remember Linda McMahon and Tom Foley AND Ned Lamont who tried to buy political office with their own personal fortunes. Looks like Linda McMahon is getting a return on her investment because she is head of the Small Business Administration for Trump.
Bridgeport has for decades taken the fast easy Federal funds to build public housing and non-taxable state and federal government buildings. Economic development post industrial boom was put on the back burner for quick funds to build, Bridgeport has done this to itself over the years, regardless of who was in office. It’s easy to point fingers at the affluent neighbors, the better course might be to study their ideas and plans and find solutions rather than place all the blame on others. Big money–how many millions of tax dollars did Malloy spend to keep hedge funds in CT? Was that total $67 Million in one year? Isn’t this an example of wanting it both ways? Blame big money and the wealthy suburbs, but remain silent as the government rewards big money to keep them in the state?
Is Bridgeport the only failing industrial city that has taken any funds? Only in Bridgeport is a complete misnomer. Jennifer, please go back and read about the history of the redevelopment of Stamford. The Stamford cash train was going on long before Malloy. It probably started when Malloy was born. Read about F.D. Rich. Read about the massive use of eminent domain in Stamford. The Malloy haters are out here in force but we have seen a complete failure of leadership in CT in the post World War II period. I am curious. Who would be your candidate for being the most proactive CT Governor and let’s look at the proactive history of the CT Legislature. YAWN!!!!!!!!!
Ron, if you’re referring to the red states and poverty, for starters, the list is dominated by rural areas. Generally speaking, rural areas have a lower cost of living, so the small income you make in a poor, rural Texas county is going to go further than it would if you lived in a poor, urban area like Detroit or Camden NJ. This raises questions about how comparatively disadvantaged poor Americans are in rural and urban areas.
Also, rural areas are areas where Republicans tend to do well electorally. By contrast, impoverished areas of big cities are big enough population-wise to be balanced by more affluent neighborhoods, and these poor urban areas are often (though not always) in blue states.
It’s also worth pointing out many of the counties on the list are located in Appalachia, particularly in such states as Kentucky, West Virginia, Mississippi and Georgia. That’s a region that has suffered economically for generation, long predating the time when Republicans took over from Democrats in most elected offices.
In Appalachia, “it’s clear there’s a regional problem, born of isolation, geographic and political; exploitation, of timber and coal; and poor education,” said Al Cross, director of the Institute for Rural Journalism and Community Issues at the University of Kentucky.
Finally, there’s an eccentricity that shaped both of the top-100 lists. Each is dominated by three states: Texas, Georgia and Kentucky. What ties together these three states? They have a lot of counties. In fact, these three states rank first, second and third on the list of states that have the most counties. Texas has 254, Georgia 159 and Kentucky 120.
This means these three states have lots of rural, small-population counties, so they take up a disproportionate share of the spots on these lists. On each list, these three states collectively account for more than 40 percent of the counties listed.
Importantly, each of these three states are red states. If some of the bigger blue states had been sliced into as many counties as Texas, Georgia and Kentucky were, some of those blue-state counties might have been poor and rural, and that could have changed the complexion of the list. As it is, blue states tend to have smaller numbers of counties. New York has 62, California has 57, Washington state has 39, Oregon has 36, New Jersey has 21 and Massachusetts has just 14.
Jennifer, those red states all have Republican governors and those states are totally governed by Republicans and just look at the results, things are getting worse.
Seriously, on paper it appears that way. Study the real demographics, cost of living vs poverty rate, rural vs city cost of living on the same dollars. Every report can be structured to support what you want the results to be, real budget numbers don’t lie. Example, Indiana schools spend about half of Bridgeport schools, however the majority of them perform at A+ government testing ratings. Do we spend better and educate better? Or is it because we have a more homogeneous student population? If one just looks at dollars and results, most people would conclude Bridgeport wastes taxpayer dollars with failing results.
Indiana was just a bunch of farms until World War II. The industrial cities centered around the automobile industries died just like Bridgeport died. All the money was funneled into Indianapolis and the state is still mostly farms. Indiana has had it easy.
Hahaha. Take your own advice and study the history of the state and their finances. It’s understandable as you have not lived in Indiana- and were possibly not interested until rebuttal was needed for your argument.