I have some bad news. I’ve been watching what’s happening at the state Capitol and talking to people who work there and it appears no one is in charge. Worse yet, no one wants to be.
The budget crisis Connecticut is facing this year is most often compared to the crisis of 1991 that led to the imposition of the state income tax. It has been noted that this crisis is worse because, unlike 1991, there is no obvious solution to the problem. Back then the question really came down to: Do you want an income tax or not? All the other solutions were universally unpalatable from a political perspective which is why — in the end — Gov. Lowell Weicker won the debate.
There is another big difference though that is very obvious to anyone who watched 1991 unfold and is still watching today. During the year of the income tax, the governor, legislative leaders, and rank and file lawmakers with their own ideas, were all making an honest effort to solve the problem. They were worried not only about what the final solution might look like, they were genuinely worried about what would happen if the state began the new fiscal year without a budget and many felt it was their job to come up with an answer.
It was not unusual to have several different groups working on different approaches to the problem at the same time. Some ideas had a shelf life of a few hours, some were given names like Coalition One, Two and Three, the Nickerson plan, or the mods’ (moderate’s) plan. When each attempt to reach an agreement failed, there was collective exasperation, and a return to what became known as “square one.” The point being, despite the harsh differences of opinion, everyone was earnestly trying to reach an agreement. Legislators feared a revolt against the income tax, but they also feared a backlash if they did nothing at all.
Contrast that approach to what we see today: A governor who put an unpopular decision on the table for nine months worth of debate versus a governor who put a popular plan on the table designed to shift the burden of responsibility to the legislature. A Democratic legislative leadership that was split over the income tax back then versus one reluctant to use its power to control the agenda and lead.
Perhaps because it took until September 1991 to reach a deal and the world did not come to an end, governors and legislators have not worked with the same sense of urgency in the last two decades. All sides are willing to miss deadlines, like the end of the legislative session and the end of the fiscal year, as part of the bargaining process. The real negotiations don’t start until it at least looks as if things are about to collapse. Apparently the state’s political leadership has failed to recognize the $8 billion projected deficit as a crisis because no one is making the first move.
The rhetoric being used by both sides is schoolyard hot potato. The Democrats call the governor a liar and she calls them shameful. Will somebody please explain to them that they are actually in charge and have a responsibility to talk to each other?
When Lowell Weicker left the state Capitol on a cold January day in 1995, there was no shortage of people in line to wave him goodbye. Grudgingly, however, they admired his leadership. It is no surprise that some, who remember the battle of ’91, wish now that he would come out of retirement for a few months.
Dean Pagani is a former gubernatorial advisor. He is V.P. of Public Affairs for Cashman and Katz Integrated Communications in Glastonbury.
