You win some; you lose some. That’s how it is. The trick, particularly in Connecticut politics, is knowing which is which.
And that’s the dilemma facing Governor Malloy as he assesses the early results of legislative sausage making at the Capitol.
On one hand, his pitch for Sunday liquor sales has gained traction. That would seem a victory. But the price was the gutting of key elements fostering retail competition that would benefit both consumers and the state treasury.
Is half a victory really a victory? Or is it really a defeat because the heart of the anti-competitive system still beats and the intensity of the battle makes it unlikely legislators will want to go another round next session. Malloy needs to get more reform here before he declares victory.
While everyone seems in accord that something needs to be done about Connecticut’s schools, the discussion of just what that fix might look like has turned nasty. Teachers are shouting down the governor at meetings and their union has bought television ads to malign his approach.
While the governor’s team downplayed a Quinnipiac Poll showing his overall approval rating is up, there must have been some satisfaction in seeing that 62 percent of the electorate was with him on making it easier to terminate weak teachers. Legislators seem like deer in the headlights on this one, not knowing which way to jump out of harm’s way. Nothing short of real tenure reform that involves meaningful, results-oriented evaluation and no-red-tape dismissals can be called a victory. Stay the course, governor.
Then there’s the matter of the governor’s labor-friendly but deeply misguided effort to unionize home-care assistants and daycare workers. The plan died a procedural death in committee. The legislature’s byzantine ways have saved the governor from his own worst instincts. This seems a case where a defeat should be celebrated. The governor missed shooting himself in the foot. He should savor that victory.
But the real test of the governor’s win/lose gyroscope lies ahead in the form of the proposal to raise the minimum wage. Shaving a quarter off Senator Donovan’s original plan doesn’t change the fundamental issue. This isn’t the time to be raising the minimum wage. And, ultimately, it will be up to Malloy to sign or veto the measure. Labor will see a veto as a defeat. Business will see it as a victory. So should Malloy, because sometimes the broader interest of the state’s economic climate is what matters … even in topsy-turvy Connecticut.
Get out of the way
At the end of 2011, there seemed a clear consensus that CL&P had mishandled two successive storms. It was time for the state to step in and mandate performance standards.
That’s not an easy job. There are lots of nuances to setting standards and penalties for nonperformance. But it seemed a doable task.
Yet, by the time the energy and technology committee started hearing on the proposals last week, the Connecticut Effect had set it.
Instead of setting performance standards, legislators were busy trying to micromanage CL&P’s business assuring that no innovation could take place, no creative solutions could be advanced. Next year’s problems would be met with last year’s solutions. Before the committee were an array of proposals that would mandate staffing levels and allocate expenses for a range of tasks. Predictably, the linemen’s union wants more linemen. The tree trimmers want more for their task.
Strangely, through it all, CL&P comes out sounding like the rational adults. All they are asking for is a clear set of expectations and the room to figure out how to reach that target. We owe them that professional courtesy.
Set the bar high; make the penalties for failure harsh; then get out of the way.
