What conclusions can be reached as a result of this year’s string of vetoes from Gov. M. Jodi Rell?
If the governor and legislature are working well together, there should be little need for a governor to resort to a veto. If all sides are talking, the House and Senate waste little time on bills they know will never become law and there should be few surprises for the governor as the final flood of legislation crosses her desk in the early weeks of summer.
The first conclusion that can be reached about 2009 is that the relationship is more confrontational than normal. Beginning with the budget, there’s been a general lack of communication. For weeks, Rell taunted Democrats to send her a budget, but refused — except in the most general terms — to explain what kind of budget she might be likely to sign. Once that dance was over — the communication began.
Similarly, on health care, Democrats seemed set on using their super majority power to see how far they could get regardless of the governor’s opposition. Although Democrats technically have the votes to over-ride a veto in both chambers, as a practical matter, the Senate is a different story. At least five to six Democrats cannot be counted to vote with their caucus. If just one sides with Republicans, the ability to over-ride is lost.
With that knowledge, Democratic leaders were reluctant to press hard on their own agenda. There were no Nancy Pelosi-type calls for a Democratic revolution as the session got underway. Still, the higher than normal number veto count suggests Democrats were eager to push a bit more than usual.
We also learned a lot about Rell’s style of governing. She is a strict constructionist as it turns out. She believes in the legislative process and the literal description of how a bill becomes law. The governor proposes and the legislature disposes. Particularly on the budget, Rell’s behavior suggests she believed her job was done after she presented her proposal during the first week of February. After that, it was in the legislature’s hands. She made no special effort to reach a compromise solution, despite the fact that Democrats readily admitted the spending plan produced by the usual legislative committee process had no chance of winning her approval.
No, she wanted the legislature to vote because the rules say that’s how it works. At one point in late February, the governor actually said — with exasperation in her voice — “I presented a budget — now it’s the legislature’s turn.” It takes deep faith in the process to adhere strictly to procedure in the face of the financial crisis the state finds itself in.
The approach of House Speaker Chris Donovan and Senate leader Don Williams is similar. When the state entered the new fiscal year without a budget, they did not protest at all when the governor issued an executive order to keep things running on her terms. Finally, Rell’s vetoes say something about her vision of government as a force for change. Her reasons for vetoing legislation fell into two general categories; we don’t have the money, or if it’s not broken, don’t fix it. If you assume those concepts reflect her management principles, it means she views her job only as maintaining the status quo. She intends to leave Connecticut government no different than she found it — after adjusting for inflation.
Dean Pagani is a former gubernatorial advisor. He is vice president of public affairs for Cashman and Katz Integrated Communications in Glastonbury.
