Weicker Defends Malloy; But Says It’s Too Soon To Judge His Budget Policies
by Elizabeth Bowling | Jun 14, 2012 5:30am
(8) Comments | Commenting has expired
Posted to: Local Politics, Media Matters, State Budget
They may not be from the same party, but former Republican-turned-Independent Gov. Lowell P. Weicker, Jr. showed sympathy for the situation Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy found himself in when he took office 18 months ago.
“I came into office, it was the same thing, there was a big deficit,” Weicker told the Connecticut Network’s Diane Smith during an hour long conversation at the Old State House Tuesday.
Weicker was famously quoted as a gubernatorial candidate saying that to impose an income tax would be “like pouring gasoline on the fires of recession.” Weeks after taking office back in 1991 that’s exactly what he had to do.
“When I made that statement the state was $50 million in the hole, by the time we got around to doing our work on the budget it was $1 billion in the hole. That sort of changed the circumstances,” Weicker said.
Malloy, on the other hand, took his chances and refused to rule out a tax increase if elected. He won by one of the smallest margins in recent history.
Weicker said he ran every possible budget scenarios he could think of and in order to balance the budget without an income tax he would have had to impose a 13 percent sales tax, which would have hurt low and middle income residents.
So what does Weicker say to those who still oppose his income tax? “They’ve had 20 years to repeal it; it has not been repealed. Instead the money has been spent.” He’s been making a similar argument for years.
Similarly, Malloy inherited a $3.6 billion budget deficit, which he has tried to close with the largest tax increase in state history and $1.6 billion in state employee concessions.
“He is in exactly the same position I was in,” Weicker said of the current governor. “For those critical of Dan Malloy right now I say hold it. Dan Malloy didn’t create the mess he came to solve.”
Lester Baun of Ellington said it would take decades for Malloy’s budget to reach a significant amount of savings. Baun said he was disappointed with Malloy’s budget plan because “there comes a point where we have to pay our bills. The state can’t do what the federal government does- borrow forever.”.
“I don’t think it’s fair for me to comment at this juncture. ..I want to see how it works out,” Weicker said. But he couldn’t help adding that Malloy “obviously under-raised revenue, there’s no question about that.”
Weicker’s solution though to the state’s budget woes and beyond has nothing to do with its fiscal policies, instead he said the state needs to change its “one-party rule.”
He said the state needs a stronger Republican Party and Republican State Chairman Jerry Labriola Jr. might be the man for the job.
“The cure for our ills in Connecticut is to get a strong Republican Party going,” Weicker said. “I’m encouraged by the fact that I like Jerry Labriola.”
Weicker called Labriola, whose failed congressional campaign in 2010 was boosted by his affiliation to the Tea Party, a “moderate Republican.”
As far as the current campaigns, Weicker said he hasn’t endorsed anyone running for retiring U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman’s seat. Lieberman beat Weicker for the seat back in 1988 after receiving support from Republicans who were upset with Weicker’s attempt to bring the Republican party closer to the center.
In closing, Weicker said he wants his legacy to be in his work for the environment, and his work for disabled people.
Smith’s full interview with Weicker will air 12:51 p.m. and 7:30 p.m. today on CT-N. It’s also up online here.
Tags: Lowell P. Weicker, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy, Diane Smith, CT-N, Connecticut Network, Republican, Elizabeth Bowling
(8) Comments
posted by: Noteworthy | June 14, 2012 8:07am
Weicker will never be remembered for anything other than the income tax. It was supposed to bring financial stability to the state. By any measure, that has failed and by extension, Weicker’s answer to the budget woes of his era was also a failure. The core problem then as now, is that those who lead this state annually fail to exert any control. In good times, they spend more and lock future budgets into higher programatic costs which in bad times, create structural deficits. Those same leaders then refuse to make significant cuts. Add in massive borrowing for pet projects and utterly stupid ideas like $1.2 billion to try to create a johnny come lately biotech industry and to pay the bills, you get a recipe for what we have today. It was entirely avoidable.
As for Weicker’s silly comment that Malloy underraised the income taxes, one has to wonder if that isn’t some level of senility setting in or just a lack of understanding of the smoke and mirrors Malloy used to balance the budget. The savings from the Magic Employee Savings Box and the union concessions never materialized even as Malloy increased spending by more than a billion dollars.
All in all, Weicker’s interview was disappointing and shows he is still trying to defend the indefensible - that his income tax has brought only misery and no solutions.
posted by: THREEFIFTHS | June 14, 2012 8:50am
Is it true that this guy Weicker is the reason you have a state income tax.A 90 year old women told me this.
posted by: Matt W. | June 14, 2012 10:34am
Sad comments by a sad old man. A bitter enabler who bought the alcoholics in Hartford a liquor store and justified it by claiming, “they just need one drink to get them through this tough time.” “Just one, I swear.”
posted by: redman | June 14, 2012 3:33pm
Both Weicker and Malloy took the easy way out, raising taxes. Scott Walker was courageous , took on the unions and reduced spending.
posted by: Cornelia | June 14, 2012 5:52pm
Weicker should be boiled in oil. He should be ashamed of himself. He sent many people into poverty with his glorious state income tax. Since that time all that the state has done is spend,spend and spend with a carte blanche attitude while the average person has never gained back what he has lost to this state income tax. The tax was supposed to be temporary but years later it is still there. Many, many people marched and protested at the capitol building and Weicker’s attitude was ‘let then eat cake.’ That’s what he will be remembered for as the leader of this endless income tax. At his age he should just hide in his wealthy mansion and never show his face in public. He is a disgrace as a former governor.
posted by: DrHunterSThompson | June 14, 2012 9:22pm
it’s easy to fire shots in a forum such as this. the truth of the matter is that Weicker had little choice when he proposed the income tax. Malloy on the other hand could have easily cut programs that the legislature put in place because we do have the income tax and there has been money to spend.
HST
posted by: Cornelia | June 15, 2012 3:53pm
DrHunter - I beg to differ with you on this matter. History does not fire shots. History is fact not fiction. I recommend that you visit the State Library and read up about Connecticut’s income tax. The state income tax was passed by the Legislature by the narrowest of margins. A decade and a half after it passed the legislature by the narrowest of
margins - and was quickly signed into law by then Governor Weicker who refused to consider any alternatives. This icome tax has stagnated Connecticut ever since.
When Weicker entered office, the state’s budget deficit was $963 million. During the campaign he had opposed an income tax but did not rule it out. Weicker and his budget director Cibes developed three budget proposals, two that relied on the sales tax and one that included an income tax. Cibes convinced Weicker that an income tax was the only fiscally responsible choice. On February 13, 1991 Weicker unveiled a budget that proposed a flat income tax of 6 percent and a drop in the sales tax from 8 to 4.25 percent. During the next six months the General Assembly passed three no-income-tax budgets that continued the state’s reliance on the sales tax. Weicker vetoed them all. For his part, Weicker proposed two other income-tax based budgets during that time. Stalemate resulted because the General Assembly did not have enough votes to override the vetoes or enough votes to pass an income tax. Both parties were split over the issue. Temporary spending authorizations kept the state running after the start of fiscal year 1992 except for a three day interruption starting on July 1. Finally on August 22, 1991 the General Assembly passed a budget that included a 4.5 percent flat income tax and a cut in the sales tax from 8 to 6 percent. Forty thousand people gathered at the state capitol in Hartford in protest on October 5, 1991. The income tax did take effect and the state ended fiscal year 1992 with a surplus of $110 million and continued in the black for the next two fiscal years.
The state has been on it’s ever ending spending spree.
http://www.cslib.org/gov/weickerl.htm
http://www.freedomworks.org/uploads/20060824.pdf