Malloy Says He’ll Make The Cuts, Takes Legislature Off the Hook
by Christine Stuart | Jun 24, 2011 1:05pm
(20) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Labor, State Budget
With two of the 15 state employee unions rejecting the $1.6 billion savings and concession package, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy made it clear Friday that he wants the legislature to give him the authority to cut $1.6 billion from the two-year, $40.11 billion state budget.
Malloy called a special session of the legislature Thursday to give him the rescission authority he initially requested in February, and said he will take it upon himself to make the $1.6 billion in cuts necessary to balance the budget before July 1.
Those cuts may include municipal aid, but Malloy said he will do what he can to avoid that.
“I will do everything in my ability to avoid and/or minimize adjustments in the first year of the biennium,” Malloy told the mayors of five big cities Friday.
Currently, the governor has the authority to cut 5 percent of any appropriation and 3 percent of any fund in a financial crisis without legislative approval. Malloy asked the legislature to increase the threshold to 10 percent of any appropriation and five percent of any fund. Further, Malloy asked the legislature to allow him to cut municipal aid without legislative approval.
Democratic leaders denied him the increased rescission authority during the legislative session.
“I’m hopeful,“ said Malloy. “I think the best way to reassure the marketplace about Connecticut’s earnest drive to balance its budget would be to give me that authority.”
Sen. President Donald Williams, D-Brooklyn, continued to refuse to comment on Malloy’s request for more recessionary authority.
“We support the governor’s call to action and will work with him to ensure that Connecticut has a balanced budget,” Williams said Friday in a statement.
In 2009, when former Gov. M. Jodi Rell has asked for expanded rescission authority as part of a budget mitigation package, Williams said “We should not be giving away our power as a co-equal branch of government.”
House Speaker Chris Donovan, D-Meriden, said Friday that he has a “broad caucus” and he still needs to talk to people before opining on the governor’s request for expanded rescission authority. He said his caucus is certainly worried about funding for cities and towns.
New Haven Mayor John DeStefano said the mayors asked for the meeting with the governor Friday to ask him to preserve municipal aid. Malloy has promised to do that to the best of his ability, at least in the first year of the budget.
“At this moment the governor has been pretty supportive of cities and towns,” DeStefano said. “Even his comments today about protecting people that live in cities, in the first year, I find good.”
Since the tax bills in New Haven and other cities and towns have already been mailed, DeStefano said municipal aid cuts would leaves cities and towns with a number of bad choices for other public employee unions in the state.
What DeStefano and others can’t believe is that a “majority of workers can vote for something and it gets defeated.”
“We also don’t understand the system where a majority of workers vote for an outcome … and a majority is held up by minority rule. I think that’s something union leadership needs to think about,” DeStefano said.
The two spokesmen for the State Employees Bargaining Agent Coalition said Friday that 60 percent of its overall membership approved the deal as of Friday afternoon, even though that wasn’t enough to pass it under the coalition’s rules. They were unable to comment on whether union leaders will be looking at their bylaws when they meet Monday to take the final vote on the agreement.
Connecticut has not acted as New Jersey and New York have in balancing their budgets on our backs, DeStefano said.
But without the union agreement in hand, everything is on the table, Malloy said.
Layoffs will be swift and could be as high as 7,500 right away, but no layoff notices had been sent out Friday. He said he did everything in his power to avoid layoffs and understands it will be bad for the economy, but his hands are tied by a union deal that was extended through 2017 by former Gov. John G. Rowland. He did not refer to Rowland by name.
Asked if he was surprised the unions would reject this deal with four years of job security, Malloy said “remember that I asked for the initial rescissionary authority back in February.”
Tags: union, Malloy, concession, rescission, DeStefano, layoffs
(20) Comments
posted by: Noteworthy | June 24, 2011 1:42pm
The responsibility of the legislature is to pass a balanced budget. the budget they passed was not balanced regardless of how the union voted. There are fake numbers and mythical assumptions. Any governor worth their salt would never lay all these taxes on poeple and businesses. The legislature should absolutely cede any more of their authority to the gov. He can’t be trusted. He doesn’t tell the truth and his explainations and ability to add even a short list of numbers is poor. Just say no.
posted by: Mr.Kruger | June 24, 2011 2:24pm
Surprised!!! Understatement of the year, although the surprise is ours, we supported this Gov and he comes at us with a hatchet and then he wonders why we shot down this terrible deal with a gun at our head. Gimme a break. I’ll take Rowland back at this point. That’s how bad this has gotten.
posted by: SJAY | June 24, 2011 2:46pm
That’s too bad, Mr. Kruger. I got a better idea…why don’t you trade up from Mr. Rowland to Mr. Christie, if that’s how smart you think you are. Don’t be so proud that “we shot down this deal”, Mr. Kruger. The MAJORITY…READ MAJORITY of state workers approved this deal because they made smart, informed decisions;not that which was fed to the selfish, small minded minority by right-wing Republican zealots who are hell bent on trying to disrupt the agenda of a smart, progressive and courageous leader who has our state’s best interests at heart.
posted by: redman | June 24, 2011 3:05pm
It’s nice that Malloy is supporting his buddy mayors while taking a hatchet to state employees.
posted by: timelord | June 24, 2011 3:06pm
King Danny wants the power to make whatever cuts he sees fit unilaterally? I hope the legislature doesn’t shirk their responsibilty. The cuts that need to be made need to be made with proper representation of the public by their elected officials. No additional power should be given to Malloy.
posted by: Husky2012 | June 24, 2011 3:07pm
THANK YOU to my brother & sister union members who voted “No” recently. Despite propaganda from union leaders and Nancy Wyman, etc. you kept the benefits many worked decades to build.
I am sorry for those who may be laid off but I made my decision on what is best for my family. My mortgage lender and other creditors were a factor in my decision. The SEBAC list will offer benefit many of you soon hopefully.
I understood enough of what I voted on. It would be an insult to state employees to even consider a revote. The desperate union leaders did what they could to calculate the order of voting to build momentum for the yes voters. They were fast and proud to report yes votes to their biased inthistogether.com website. They were slow or did not report the NO vote results because I believe they did not want to influence voters. They tried to put the pressure on the members who voted 6/22 - 6/24. Despite this there may be four or more unions who voted NO. The unions have spoken! AFSCME voted this down by more than 1,200 votes. I am sure many now wish they could re-vote on the last Connecticut gubernatorial vote.
Many unions have contracts already. The $750 million dollar concession is not even over before this package came up We all had a medical contract that expires in 2017.Contracts should be are honored.
I hear and often read that members have no confidence especially in AFSCME president Sal Luciano and Dan Livingston. Many say that Larry Dorman sounded pretty foolish when he was interviewed about evidence they had on a Yankee Institute employee. Can’t employees get “No-vote” opinions from others?
Some jobs were saved in Connecticut by keeping prescriptions filled by your local pharmacists. These pharmacies often sponsor local organizations and have a relationship with their customers.
Thank you to http://votenotoconcessions.com/ and your contribution & those who posted on various articles under the “comments” sections.
It is time for Plan “B” and its pain. There is no time or need for a re-vote.
posted by: ctperson13 | June 24, 2011 3:09pm
Asked if he was surprised the unions would reject this deal with four years of job security, Malloy said “remember that I asked for the initial rescissionary authority back in February.”
What? Is this reported accurately? That is not an answer to the question asked of Malloy. What is he trying to do? Do NOT give him rescission authority! The decisions this governor has made thus far—are you kidding me? Allow him to make budget cuts willy-nilly without voting approval? Not on your life! DON’T DO IT!
posted by: jonpelto | June 24, 2011 5:11pm
Malloy’s request is not only a bad one – it is a horrific proposal – and every single legislator (Democrat or Republican) should remember their solemn oath to the Constitution and their constituents.
Legislators have a job to do and now is the time they must do it.
posted by: oliviahuxtable | June 24, 2011 6:05pm
Jon Pelto- Thank you for being a calm voice at this time of crisis. You are correct….we elected our representatives to represent our districts and when decisions are being made that affect our districts we want them advocating for us. Now is the time for courage, for maturity…it is essential to do one’s job, legislators.
posted by: Always the Truth | June 24, 2011 6:49pm
I urge the legislature to NOT give this egotistical tyrant these powers. He will only cause further damage and harm to our state. He is not a KING and we are NOT his subjects. Dan Malloy is NOTa man to be trusted as he has quickly proven.
posted by: ko4478 | June 24, 2011 7:49pm
What part of “super majority vote” Don’t these people understand? It is perfectly appropriate to require a super majority vote (80 %) to change something as critical to workers lives as pensions and healthcare.
These items are not piggy-banks to be plundered by elected officials on a whim.
Done deal, move on.
posted by: Davefrom NewsTalk2niteOTH | June 24, 2011 7:49pm
This Legislature, and this Governor have come the closest to a balanced budget in over 40 years with what they proposed and voted on a few weeks ago. Were SOME numbers a bit fuzzy? It apears that such is possible. Was it compliant with GAAP? An argument could be made for that as well. BUT, nonetheless, it was a sufficient blue-print to pull us out of the budgetary morass we’ve been in since the Weicker years. Now a minority of union members have shot down the best deal they could expect from a cash-strapped state. How fair is that? I can understand the qualms (like Mr. Pelto’s) about giving the Governor more budgetary power, but these are the financial times that try folks’ souls. SOMETHNG has to be done. And for those who say the Governor is a liar, shame on you. The facts don’t support such a contention. Also, shame on those that lied to the “no” voters about the concession package! Thanks to the voting results, it will be a long time before the Legislature will be willing to work with the unions in a favorable way. That’s JUST what the folks at the Yankee Institute were hoping for. They divided and conquored. What a shame. The Governor should be given the authority to cut 10% of the budget, with the Legislature to review and approve. That way, there can be no constitutional challenge, as it would give the Governor the ability to make the necessary cuts, but the Legislature would not cede it’s ultimate authority. I warned folks of dire consequences shold the concession package fail, and I hate to say I was right. This is a true shame, for the unions and for the state.
posted by: Davefrom NewsTalk2niteOTH | June 24, 2011 7:55pm
Oh yeah, and for those misguided souls who say that a Governor Foley scenario would have been better, all you have to do is look at Ohio, New Jersey, and Wisconsin, and then ask yourselves if Foley would have followed their footsteps. An honest person would have to say that Foley would NOT have dealt with the unions, he would have started with the layoffs, and done his best (like the other Republican Governors) to kill collective bargaining and kill the unions.
posted by: Mr.Kruger | June 24, 2011 8:37pm
@Dave - cash strapped??? Are you kidding!!! Malloy’s spending to the limit and where’s the cash coming from…the tax payers and state employees backs.
@SJAY - take the tinfoil off your head…the aliens are not coming back for you again. Read the SEBAC bylaws as a supermajority is required, NOT a simple majority. If you don’t know what you’re talking about then don’t comment about it.
posted by: ... | June 24, 2011 9:33pm
Here here Dave! That is the most sound analysis I’ve heard for some time. It saddens me the one group to shoot down Malloy is the one that helped him get elected and the group he worked with throughout the campaign.
I think so many people got quickly drummed up by the massive number they were going to vote no even if they ended up saving money for themselves in the long run.
posted by: Bill$Ratepayer | June 24, 2011 11:20pm
Here is the harsh reality: The “NO’ voting minority could have been the nail in the coffin for ending collective bargaining of post 2017 benefits. Pensions, healthcare, retiree health will get hammered in 2017. Post 2017 State employees won’t recognize what happened to their benefits.
posted by: ohmygoodness | June 25, 2011 9:01am
So..Gov. Malloy wants the power himself to make the major decisions in this crisis? Hope the Legislators say NO !!! Don’t hand over that power to the Gov. He is nothing but a spoiled little rich boy!!! Leglislators work FOR the taxpayers of CT and we should have them representing us - not turn the power over to Malloy !
posted by: ohmygoodness | June 25, 2011 9:05am
So…Don Williams refuses to comment on Malloy’s request for ‘recessionary authority’... come on..stand up and speak up what your feelings really are… you afraid of losing your job and/or benefits?????
posted by: ohmygoodness | June 25, 2011 9:07am
Time to put a stop to all those high paid ‘double dippers’... time to get rid of the ‘temporary State employees’ that CT is paying medical insurance for, too ! And, don’t forget all those high paid Managers that don’t actually perform the work that keep the offices running.
posted by: hawkeye | June 26, 2011 9:45pm
Davefrom NewsTalkNiteOTH:
You don’t have to knock the Republican governors! Your Democratic Governor Dannel Patrick Malloy—didn’t befriend the Connecticut state unions—himself. You don’t have to look out of state, Dave! Instead of political partisanship, you should start worrying about the state taxes you will be paying—and they won’t be coming from a Republican governor!