Fatigue appears to be the ultimate winner in this year’s debate over the Connecticut state budget. In the end, it was the dread of further pain that led Gov. M Jodi Rell to definitively end her long stalemate with legislative Democrats.
On one level she can’t be criticized for that. I’ve been talking about and writing about the state budget situation since 2007, when the current crisis began. I’m tired of doing both, but as the late journalist David Brinkley once said, “If you’re covering a football game and a fight breaks out on the 50-yard line, you don’t turn your cameras to the end zone.”
In the context of the state budget, Brinkley’s observation means you don’t turn away from the most important issue facing the future of Connecticut, just because it’s boring or tiresome.
It’s not so much the budget itself that is so important. It’s all the issues that are tied directly to it. As we witnessed for ourselves in early September, you can get a budget — which is really nothing more than a plan — in less than 24 hours, if you are willing to set everything aside in favor of making a deal. And perhaps that decision was made in the best interest of the state as the governor argued.
A budget is a dry, technical reflection of what we feel is important. The cold numbers shaded by the political process it takes to produce them. In the case of the 2009 budget however, the evidence suggests we have not decided what is important because all we did was find a way to put off the homework assignment.
This is the time of year legislators, the administration, special interests and the press begin looking ahead to the start of the next legislative session. It doesn’t require any heavy thinking this year because 2010 will really be no more than a special session called to finish a job left undone.
By relying on one-time sources of revenue, including federal stimulus dollars and the Rainy Day Fund, we have built a structural deficit into the current spending plan of at least $2 to $3 billion. Some believe the problem is much deeper. Rell has predicted declining state tax revenues will probably force her to cut spending on her own, before the legislature returns and some legislative staffers are predicting the need for a special session by December. That’s how bad it is from the pure logistical view of how a budget is agreed to and implemented.
The real world consequences are less noticeable. As state government refuses to address systemic problems, there is no progress on policies that would make Connecticut more business friendly and create jobs. Little progress is made on basic redefinitions of the role of government in providing aid to those who rely on social programs to provide a quality of life that meets minimum standards.
For many, it is not surprising that Connecticut state government leaders lacked the resolve to tackle the fiscal crisis they were faced with in 2009. The stunning distance by which they fell short, however, is frightening; because of the political predicament it creates for them and ultimately us.
Traditionally, tough political decisions — like raising taxes and cutting spending — are dealt with in non-election years. 2010 is a major election year in Connecticut including a statewide race for governor. It is hard to imagine that the current crop of incumbents will suddenly rise to the occasion as they face an even greater fiscal crisis next year.
Dean Pagani is a former gubernatorial advisor. He is vice president of public affairs for Cashman and Katz Integrated Communications in Glastonbury.
