Lawmakers Begin Budget Negotiations
--------------------
By SUSAN HAIGH
Associated Press
June 7, 2003
After weeks apart, Democratic and Republican legislative leaders met Friday for the first round of bipartisan budget negotiations since the end of the 2003 legislative session two days earlier.
Both sides were positive about the closed-door meeting and voiced some optimism about reaching a deal that rank-and-file members could vote on during the week of June 16.
The new fiscal year begins July 1.
Marc Ryan, Gov. John G. Rowland's budget chief, was less enthusiastic and suggested the two sides were wasting time. Republicans and Democrats won't meet again until Tuesday to compare lists of suggested spending reductions needed to cover next fiscal year's projected $1 billion deficit.
"My problem is we have the list," Ryan said. "I don't see any reason why we're not in there right now going through the reductions in the governor's budget. Why are we going to reproduce lists?"
"I see no way right now of meeting a June 30 deadline, or a mid-June deadline, if we're going to play list games for the next week," he said.
Friday's meeting marked the first time in weeks that Democrats and Republicans have talked about the budget. The GOP refused to work with the Democrats on their most recent two-year, $27.7 billion package, accusing them of not wanting to reduce spending enough.
Rowland, a Republican, has said he will veto that proposal, claiming it includes too many tax increases, would violate the state cap on spending in the second year and would require him to negotiate specific concessions with state employee unions.
Rowland could veto the bill as soon as Monday.
The legislative session adjourned this past Wednesday at midnight without an agreed-upon budget. Lawmakers scheduled a special legislative session to deal only with the budget during the week of June 16.
Republican leaders said they want to participate in the budget talks this time and make sure both sides come up with a package that is affordable to Connecticut taxpayers.
"We're hopeful because, coming out of this meeting, we have the first indication since we started these discussions that the Democrats are interested in having a meeting that focuses exclusively on adjustments in spending," said Sen. William Aniskovich, R-Branford, the deputy Senate minority leader. "Everything is on the table."
One wrinkle already developed in the budget negotiations. Democrats said that if Rowland didn't agree with their proposal to seek a net savings of approximately $140 million in union concessions, then he should replenish a fund for future pay raises.
That fund, about $190 million over two years, provides money to pay for arbitrated pay raises.
Republicans said they would agree to begin budget talks under the assumption the account will be fully funded.
Both sides acknowledged they are still hundreds of millions of dollars apart. Senate President Pro Tem Kevin B. Sullivan, D-West Hartford, estimated a $300 million to $400 million gap between Democrats and Republicans. Ryan said the figure is probably $400 million to $600 million.
Copyright 2003 Associated Press http://www.ctnow.com/news/local/hc-apbudget0607.artjun07.story
A Partly Sunny Budget Forecast
--------------------
June 8, 2003
It was as if a cleansing wind swept through the state Capitol last Wednesday and blew the clouds away. Where there had been disagreement and partisan rancor for weeks, rays of sunny optimism about fashioning a biennial state budget and filling a projected $1 billion deficit poked through the haze.
There is still grumbling, but the forecast for passing a workable budget yet this month has improved.
First, of course, Gov. John G. Rowland declared hours earlier that he would veto the budget passed with only Democratic votes.
Then the fog dissipated.
In bidding lawmakers adieu when the regular session adjourned at midnight, Mr. Rowland seemed filled with hope about prospects of agreeing on a budget before the end of the fiscal year, June 30. "It is clear to me that the hard lines drawn early in this process are beginning to soften. The seeds of compromise are being sown on both sides," he said.
House Speaker Moira Lyons proclaimed that Democrats were ready to negotiate and understood the need to curb tax increases. She expressed confidence that "we can have the whole thing wrapped up by July 1."
And, wonder of wonders, Republican legislators said they would show up for the budget debate after sitting sullenly on the sidelines during the regular session. "There's a willingness for all of us to participate in this phase," said Senate Minority Leader Louis DeLuca.
Why not? If the prime ministers of Israel and Palestine can shake hands, as they did last week, and agree to try to put an end to decades of strife, surely the governor and legislative leaders of both parties can make quick work of a budget compromise. Connecticut residents demand it.
Indeed, negotiations on a compromise between Mr. Rowland and lawmakers resumed Friday.
The Democrats are right about one thing: It would be wrong to eliminate so-called general assistance payments to 36,000 unemployed, poor single adults, as proposed by the governor. The state took over that program from municipalities as part of welfare reform. That lifeline to the people most desperately in need should not be severed. Local social service agencies, police departments and hospitals will have to pick up the slack if it is.
But Mr. Rowland was on target in criticizing other elements of the latest Democratic budget.
Not enough spending has been cut. The Democrats still wanted to restore about $50 million in municipal aid cut by the governor, for example. That's excessive. Sacrifices must be made in a poor economy. Surely local officials can find fat in their budgets. Is every municipality operating at top efficiency?
Moreover, the Democratic budget required the rehiring of all 2,800 state employees laid off earlier this year. That's unaffordable and denies the governor the flexibility he needs to economize by reorganizing executive branch departments. Besides, many of the laid-off workers may be rehired to fill essential jobs left vacant by early retirements. Rehiring shouldn't be mandatory, however.
The latest Democratic proposal was still too burdened with tax increases, even though the revenue package was substantially scaled back from the first budget vetoed by Mr. Rowland. Every major tax and fee would have been increased. It's bad policy to try to tax our way out of the economic downturn.
If the legislature wanted to raise additional revenue, lawmakers should have taken seriously the proposal for Sunday alcohol sales - or it can raise the tax rate on alcoholic beverages.
Only an estimated $66 million in contract concessions in the first year of the biennium was tentatively won from state employees as a result of negotiations between union representatives and lawmakers. The one-year wage freeze and meager increases in employee co-pays for prescription drugs and office visits are insufficient. State employees have Cadillac health care benefits at used-car prices. Besides, modifications to labor agreements should be negotiated by the executive branch. Mr. Rowland should get busy on that score.
The Democrats' plan to help balance the budget by reducing contributions to the state employees' pension fund by $125 million each year of the biennium is irresponsible. It could cost taxpayers up to $1 billion over 30 years to restore the contributions. When Mr. Rowland proposed a similar raid on the state teacher retirement fund, state Treasurer Denise Nappier, a Democrat, rightly called it "the trifecta of bad fiscal management."
Significant differences between Mr. Rowland and the legislature remain, but they can be fixed, given the new spirit of cooperation.
Copyright 2003, Hartford Courant
Families United for Children's Mental Health
A Federation of Families Chapter in Connecticut
