Gov. Rell Vetoes Seven Bills
by Christine Stuart | July 2, 2009 5:49 PM
Posted to State Capitol
Gov. M. Jodi Rell vetoed seven bills Thursday, including one that would have required chain restaurants to post calorie counts on their menus.
“Does it come as a surprise to anyone that a vegetable salad is healthier and more nutritious than a bacon cheeseburger?” Rell said regarding the menu labeling bill. “There has been a growing and troubling tendency by some to legislate nearly every aspect of our lives and society, including personal responsibility.”
“Rarely is the consumer’s choice as clear as a salad versus a bacon cheeseburger,” Sen. Jonathan Harris, the bill’s main proponent, said.
“More likely it’s between a donut and a muffin, or fried chicken and barbecued ribs, and then the answer to the question ‘what’s healthiest?’ is not so obvious,” Harris said. “For instance, the Southwestern Cobb salad at Chili’s has 1,080 calories, while the half-rack of honey barbecue ribs only has 600 calories. Many people think just because it’s a ‘salad’ that it’s healthier, but that’s not true.”
“This is hardly the economic climate in which to further burden our businesses and state agencies,” Rell said noting that the legislation would force restaurants to spend money on new menus.
Rell also noted that there is similar legislation pending on the federal level, which would impose uniform national standards. Rell said a national legislation would be preferable to a patchwork of state regulations.
“Given the new study showing rising obesity rates across the country, it is extremely disappointing and irresponsible that Governor Rell would veto such a critical bill that would have provided consumers with important nutrition information at restaurants,” U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro said in a press release Thursday. ”If we are to make any progress toward reducing obesity rates, we must allow consumers to make informed choices when they eat out.”
“This veto makes it more imperative that Congress address the menu labeling issue at the federal level,” DeLauro, who has championed this issue at the federal level, said.
Jerry Mande, a former FDA official and associate director for public policy at the Yale Cancer Center, said Rell’s logic in vetoing the bill is flawed.
“Contrary to the governor’s claims, we know that menu labeling works, it’s cost effective, and provides consumers freedom of choice not limits it as the governor falsely claims,” Mande said.
He said a study done earlier this year found 82 percent of New York City residents said the new highly visible nutrition information has affected their ordering. Of those people, 71 percent said they sought out lower-calorie options, and 51 percent said they no longer ordered certain items.
He said another recent study found that only six out of 4,311 customers look at nutritional information in pamphlets or online. “In other words, in trying to look out for state residents our governor favors the approach that works 0.1 percent of the time and rejected as ‘ineffectual’ the approach that works more than 82 percent of the time,” Mande said.
Opponents of the bill like the Connecticut Restaurant Association said even though it would only apply to chain restaurants, it would cost even small chain restaurants an enormous amount of money to implement.
“To have to seek new laboratory analysis with every minor fluctuation of ingredients and seasonality would be an incredible burden for all but the largest chains that operate thousands of restaurants and employ scientists alongside their chefs,” Richard Rosenthal, owner of Max Restaurant Group and chairman of the Connecticut Restaurant Association told the Public Health Committee back in March.
Rosenthal said even though the legislation applied to larger national chains that it would have put pressure on mom and pop restaurants to follow, which for a majority would have been impossible.
Other Vetoes
Rell vetoed a bill requiring health insurance companies to cover numerous medical treatments, including, prosthetic devices, hearing aids for children, wigs for cancer patients and ostomy supplies.
She also vetoed a bill which received wide bipartisan support in the House and the Senate. Hundreds of janitors that clean the Capitol and other state buildings will lose their health insurance due to a cap on benefit costs, which is being exceeded by the rising costs of health care.
“The Governor’s veto of the Standard Wage Law is as callous as it is short-sighted,” Kurt Westby, 32BJ Connecticut Director, said. “Her veto is not only putting the health hundreds of children and their parents at risk by forcing them off their health care; it will likely add more than a million dollars to the state’s bill for HUSKY, the health care program for low-income families.”
According to the Office of Fiscal Analysis, the cost of adding the children and spouses of state janitors to the publicly-funded HUSKY program could be upwards of $1.6 million a year.
“In vetoing the standard wage bill today, Governor Rell acted in a callous, misguided fashion, and in the process turned her back on thousands of working Connecticut residents and their families,” Stamford Mayor Dannel Malloy, who is exploring a run for governor in 2010, said. “Not only is it a morally irresponsible course of action, it’s also fiscally irresponsible since the State of Connecticut will have to pay more to insure these workers and their families if they end up having to access the HUSKY Program.”
Rell also vetoed legislation that would create a commission to review and consider environmental, ecological and energy issues involving Long Island Sound and one which would have created a new subcommittee to monitor inmate assaults on correction officers.
“These bills are good public policy,” Speaker of the House Chris Donovan said in a press release. “Our representatives heard from people across this state that these initiatives were important to their quality of life.”
Comments (20)
Posted by: Tessa Marquis | July 2, 2009 6:16 PM
M. Veto Rell
Scorched Earth Policy.
What did anyone expect?
PS Spoke to people from Subway and they are consistently supportive of menu labeling for fast food.
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | July 2, 2009 7:11 PM
Talk about being deaf to the public and stone deaf to compassion.
This Thursday evening, cravenly timed to avoid embarrassing public notice, the Governor of Connecticut actually vetoed a bill that would have required anything billed as "health issuance" to pay for hearing aids for children between ages 12 and 18.
You heard correctly.
Governor Rell told us that, with all our tax dollars, we cannot afford to let our own children hear the sounds of the world.
For shame.
Children.
For shame.
When the Connecticut's children in need came to her, Governor Rell turned her back.
And walked away.
No doubt, she turned to face the smiling faces and wadded wallets of CBIA - the health insurance giant that hears only the jingle of coins and has lead the fight in 2009 to abandon Connecticut's children.
How do they sleep at night?
How does she sleep at night?
In her dreams, does she hear children crying?
Posted by: jim | July 3, 2009 9:11 AM
Once again M.Jodi Rell has shown how mean of a witch she can be.
I guess with the calorie bill she's protecting Lisa Moody from knowing that eating 10 big macs are not good for you she also doesn't care about low wage workers and thier struggles as they try to support thier families.
Heaven for bid they have to buy store made crutons in stead of pepperage farms right Jodi?
And then to top it iff to veto a bill that names a beidge in honor of a man that was brutally killed in fairfield county why working for the state.
Don't worry Mean Jodi Rell, We will be letting the families know what you did. So when it comes a day and it will be it years from now that the Rell family would like to hear our prayers for thier family don't be surprised that all you will hear is silence.
Posted by: Craig Minor | July 3, 2009 10:56 AM
How ironic that the lead story in today's Hartford Courant was obesity. Well, the obesity epidemic in CT now has a face: Jodi Rell's.
Posted by: James D. | July 3, 2009 12:05 PM
Jim, my namesake, my pal,
We've been down this road, remember? Do you want to get kicked off yet ANOTHER blog for your,
"Look at me, I'm a liberal too, but I make insensitive remarks so that ALL liberals look bad!" shtick?" I told you before: If you've got a point to make in the debate, make it honestly and clearly. Otherwise, just turn off your PC and turn on your TV.
You CAN do it, Jimbo!
Posted by: christine | July 3, 2009 3:06 PM
Paul Hughes at the Waterbury Republican took a great angle in reporting this story. He did some homework and found out Rell broke the veto record.
Paul reports the following: Gov. M. Jodi Rell set a new high on Thursday for the most bills vetoed in a single year in the last 20 years
Through Thursday, the state's Republican governor has rejected 14 bills the Democrat-controlled legislature approved this year, and she may not be done yet.
http://www.rep-am.com/News/423310.txt
Posted by: MikeG | July 3, 2009 4:03 PM
She's ironic, Rell is. She's all for personal responsibility when it comes to the corporations she supports... but she's against it when it comes to things like marijuana decriminalization.
To tell you the truth, I just have no idea where she actually stands politically or if she actually cares to listen to people in this state.
Jodi "Do nothing" Rell.
or
Jodi "Change is bad" Rell.
or
Jodi "I've run out of ink" Rell
Posted by: Jim | July 3, 2009 5:48 PM
Hey Jimbo those remarks were not insensitive they are feelings that you neo-cons fail to have at birth.
my remarks may seem insensitive to you and Newt Gingrich but they pale in comparison when some poor janitor has to take thier child to an emergencyroom for a cold because of the standard wage bill.
Or the wife of the DOT worker whose husband was killed 5 years ago and was told that the state couldn't bring him back but could at least name the bridge he got killed on for him.
And is Jodi gonna call her and tell her I don't care???
Really???
So I am suppossed to get tossed for being a little truthful but the lying witch can continue as the poster child for corruption??
Posted by: iBlogWestHartford | July 3, 2009 8:21 PM
>>"Remember that woman who was governor after the crooked guy - the guy with the hot tub?"
**"No, can't say I do."
>>"Yeah, yeah, sure, there was that lady... Emily something... Was it Cosell? Serell? No, he was in that show with Mary Tyler Moore.... before Lou Grant . . . Something like that, anyway..."
**"Didn't even know we ever HAD a woman governor. She do anybody any good?"
>>"I don't think- wait. She had cancer. Yeah - cancer. And I think some people liked her...."
**"Why was that?"
>>"Beats hell out of me."
**"Mmmm.... Hot tub, you say?"
Posted by: Jim | July 3, 2009 8:34 PM
It is amazing how this woman who proclaims to be as nice as your grandma could be as cruel as a prison warden.
I believe what needs to happen now is for ALL the people that MAMA Rell has hurt express thier constitutional rights and protest her!
Lets bring it to Brookfield, Lets Bring it to Prospect Avenue heck lets bring it to Lisa Moodys HOUSE!!!
JAMES D is this OK???
LMAO
Posted by: Martha H. | July 3, 2009 10:24 PM
Christine,
Don't know all of your blog rules of etiquette, but "Jim" deserves attention. Thanx.
Posted by: Johnny | July 4, 2009 6:32 AM
Its nice to see that Rell has finally been outed!!
She can no longer say ooooo I am so nice and those mean democrats want to tax youuuuu!!
The people she was speaking to at the time were millionaires in Fairfield county. LOL
But seeing that she has now been exposed as Cruella DeVille maybe, just maybe she will take Moody and retire to Colorado.
Just think of all the anquish of a campaign it would save you,why you would be saved from having to go to that place such as New Britain and touch those little brown kids in the playground again. LOL That alone would save YOUR family a ton on Purell.
And we know how concerned YOU are about YOUR family.
Posted by: christine | July 4, 2009 9:50 AM
Thanks Martha. I know he's pushing the envelope and I've been monitoring his comments closely. And he has been edited already, but thank you for pointing it out.
Posted by: ACR | July 4, 2009 10:43 AM
>>Spoke to people from Subway and they are consistently supportive of menu labeling for fast food.
Virtually all the chains already have the data readily available - so codifying it would be superfluous.
You can bet some bozo from the state would use it to harass some small deli before the ink was even dry had she signed it.
I'm sure.
30 years ago I owned a convenience store with a small deli.
Along came some schlep from the state (there's more of them than you can keep track of) who asked to see the receipt from my supplier for my ham.
(Meanwhile cars are backed up over a half mile trying to buy gas from us as we had it and no one else seemed to. The guy's timing was inopportune to say the least.)
Upon inspection he hit me with a fine as my "Virgina Baked Ham" was purchased from a vendor from outside Danbury and thus wasn't from Virginia!
Seems I should have had it listed as "Virginia Style Baked Ham".
We don't need to open anymore doors for under-worked over-paid state flunkies to utilize in their daily rounds of small business harassment.
We had a total of 22 state and local licenses and permits for one 2000 square foot little store.
Don't pile on more nonsense.
Posted by: Tessa Marquis | July 5, 2009 7:16 PM
ACR
Time for you to read the bill in question. This one was to require acloric labeling on menus of restaurants that have more than 20 outlets. Chains. McDonalds, etc. Subway already does this, I believe.
Posted by: Jim | July 5, 2009 8:48 PM
Sorry about that Christine my emotions got the best of me.
It just always seems the little guy gets it all the time.
I will try to tone it down in the future.
(hopefully) LOL
Posted by: ACR | July 5, 2009 9:06 PM
>>ime for you to read the bill in question. This one was to require acloric labeling on menus of restaurants that have more than 20 outlets. Chains. McDonalds, etc. Subway already does this, I believe.
Thus, 32 years ago a Dairy Mart franchise, regardless of how independent, would have qualified.
So would anyone with branded (ie: Shell, Gulf, etc.) gasoline.
Posted by: Jim | July 5, 2009 9:45 PM
Christine,
Once again I am sorry my emotions got the best of me and don't wish ill on anyone it is as I said before a shame that it's always the little guys.
Sorry Martha and James D.
Posted by: Jim | July 5, 2009 9:48 PM
Also could you please remove my other posts they were tasteless.
Posted by: lou | July 6, 2009 6:04 PM
ACR - really read the bill and you will see that supermarkets are exempt - so Dairy Mart would not have been affected. It's amazing how the Governor is willing to protect big business in Connecticut but not her constituents...maybe the restaurants didn't oppose the legislation because she already made a deal with them? Was the plan to purposely waste legislator's time? Efficiency of government at its best. Wait, isn't that what she's doing with the budget?