Friday, November 10, 2006

Amann: Car Tax Already Dead

From the Connecticut Post:
A day after speaking about cooperation between the majority Democrats and the Republican governor, Amann, D-Milford, called Rell's revived proposal "a dead horse."
[...]
"We've been there, done that," Amann said. "I think all of us believe that unless there is some way the governor can show us that it's being paid for out of some new revenue source, instead of what she's shown in the past, that it's basically robbing Peter to pay Paul; that's not going to play in the Legislature."

He said Democrats want to reform the entire state property tax system, which funds local municipal budgets and public school systems. (Dixon)

And yet, it may crop up at some point later on in the session. Given Rell's somewhat diminished status and the fact that Democratic legislative leaders now have more experience in dealing with her, however, she may find that she has even less leverage with the legislature than she used to.

Source
Dixon, Ken. "Rell plan to end car taxes 'dead horse'." Connecticut Post 10 November, 2006.

27 comments:

Anonymous said...

Democrats nicely have to show Rell who's boss. The car tax was all show and no substance. A super majority is a mandate from the people and Democrats can't be afraid to flex their muscle.

Anonymous said...

http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-bayer1110.artnov10,0,1452181.story?coll=hc-headlines-local

Rell's win was so inspiring, Bayer will shut down its WestHaven Research facilty over the next 18 months.

BrassBoy said...

Really? A super majority is a mandate? And what exactly is the absolute shellacking of one party's gubenatorial candidate by another party's?

cgg said...

I think a super majority may be a mandate, though I go back and forth as to what it actually means. There's no question that voters liked Rell, but maybe they weren't so thrilled about her stance on issues.

Genghis Conn said...

Rell's victory seems like the aberration, here (I'm mapping it now, by the way. It's overwhelming). People voted for her because they liked her despite her party.

The supermajority probably has more to do with the national elections than with Rell.

nonprocessive said...

I'm more concerned about the desire to "reform the entire state property tax system." Sounds ominous.

Anonymous said...

Nobody knew who DeStefano was so they voted for Rell. The voters do know who is running for state rep and the Republicans have no new ideas. And Amman won't use the veto override but he will keep stuff from ever getting to a vote.

http://www.journalinquirer.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17449318&BRD=985&PAG=461&dept_id=161556&rfi=6

GMR said...

There's no question that voters liked Rell, but maybe they weren't so thrilled about her stance on issues

I don't think that more than about 6 voters in the state could say what Jodi Rell's stance on the issues is. She didn't run on issues, and she didn't help the down ticket one iota. She was likeable, and John Destefano wasn't. And JDS had some pretty outlandish (yet detailed) proposals.

The Bayer move seems to be standard restructuring after the merger with Schering. Research work is being transferred to Germany and Berkeley, which are both probably higher cost places to do business in than Connecticut, so go figure that one out...

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in both houses, what exact power does Jodi Rell have?

Anonymous said...

Amman saying he won't use the veto override much is just his way of signalling the RC Bishops that he won't mess with their refusal to stock Plan B in their ER's for rape victims, even the OTC strength.

Anonymous said...

New Haven (Yale) and Connecticut prides itself in being some kind of bio-tech corridor. The Bayer exit shows that's all a bunch of bull.

Genghis Conn said...

Now that Democrats have supermajorities in both houses, what exact power does Jodi Rell have?

Finger-Wagger-in-Chief?

High Mistress of Stern Looks?

Actually, there are enough moderate and conservative Democrats in the House that I seriously doubt a single veto will be overridden.

GMR said...

I'm more concerned about the desire to "reform the entire state property tax system." Sounds ominous.

Ditto to that! If we aren't going to cut spending, then by reforming the state property system, who is going to win and who is going to lose? If reforming the property taxes means lower property taxes for some, does it mean higher property taxes for others, or does it mean higher income taxes?

Now that I'm starting a job in a building that is located 10 yards in New York state (literally, if the windows opened, I could throw a paper airplane out the window and it would land in CT), I'll be paying NY state tax, so I don't really care if Connecticut income taxes go up, since I am already paying the higher rate to NY state.

Genghis Conn said...

GMR,

You and I are in the same boat (I work in, and pay an outrageous amount in income tax to, Massachusetts)--one of the reasons why I wanted the car tax repeal. Would have helped commuters--of which this state has quite a few.

But what I believe they're planning is basically increasing education funding for towns--i.e., higher income taxes would replace high property taxes.

Anonymous said...

Reforming the state tax system will stop dumb deals like this where Preston could care less about what happens around them and what costs the state and other towns will need to incur as a result of what they do. Amman is too dumb to understand this though.

http://www.theday.com/re.aspx?re=e32b81e5-88d6-414b-bbe6-ba3ccb8d7828

AB said...

Exactly how is Bayer's closure Jodi Rell's fault. Decisions made by Bayer are made in Germany with no involvement of anyone in the state of CT. My wife is a former employee.......there is no decision at Bayer that doesnt coem froma strictly financial basis out of the folks in Germany. To blame Rell is just stupid...

Anonymous said...

Look, the Democrats, because of their veto-proof majority, now have to deliver on all of their promises. For years, Democrats made all kinds of promises to their base (unions in particular) about universal health care, property tax reform, corporate responsibility, contracting reform, etc. and then blames the failure to make good on those promises on the Republican Governor. Well, guess what? Now the Democrats have no excuses. Moderate Democrats (there are not that many) will be put in the position of either voting with their party to override or vote their constituents and risk being opposed in a primary. Remember, one big winner after Tuesday's election is Tom Swan. If moderate Ds step out of line, Swan & Co. will be there to scare them back into line.

BTW GC, perhaps we can do a thread on the "Winners & Losers" from Tuesday's results. Beyond the obvious - candidates who won and lost - their are others who won and lost. Tom Swan, for example, is a winner because of his role in beating Lieberman in the primary.

Anonymous said...

GC said: "But what I believe they're planning is basically increasing education funding for towns--i.e., higher income taxes would replace high property taxes."

GC, I concur; however, please know that in order for the Democrats to spend more on the ECS formula, they will have to exceed/ ignore the constitutional spending cap.

Anonymous said...

Anon. 10:41 - Aaron B. is right - your blaming Bayer's departure on Rell is just plain stupid. Using your "logic", are you saying that they would have stayed if DeStefano won? LMAO

Perhaps - again using your "logic" - Bayer saw the fact that the Democrats won a veto-proof majority and decided to leave.

Anonymous said...

We need to have a progressive tax and make the people earning over 250K pay more of the burden. The middleclass need tax relief and thats why the Democrats have been given a super majority.

Paul said...

If Rell real means business, she'll have to clean house. This is still John Rowland's administration and besides being a sociopath Rowland was a really bad governor. Rowland appointed people to carry out the most purely political agenda of any governor in recent history. The effect of his lack of interest and intelligence when it came to policy and governing remains today. One case in point is Abromaitis at Economic Development. He managed to skate through the scandals so I guess that's good enough for Rell but with the Franklin Mushroom Farm, Bayer, etc. leaving the state you have to wonder about his future. Most of the big human service agencies with big budgets (DSS, DMHAS, DMR) are still run by Rowland holdovers (although you’ve got to figure that Cathy Cook has her hand out for an appointment as DMR commissioner after committing to a lost cause in running for comptroller). While I don't think it's the only factor in her victory, I think the voters are still in a post-Rowland state of mind and took comfort in someone as inoffensive as Rell. Time will tell if she's truly a leader interested in reform and good government or an icon of mediocrity.

Janet said...

Moderate Democrats (there are not that many) will be put in the position of either voting with their party to override or vote their constituents and risk being opposed in a primary.

Are you kidding? There are a lot of moderate Democrats in the House. Shoot, there's a lot of conservative Democrats in the House.

Amann himself is a moderate Democrat.

I think it will be hard for the House Democrats to override a veto because there is such a large split of politics in their caucus. It would be a lot easier in the Senate, but that's probably only because they obviously have a lot fewer members.

Anonymous said...

Bayer makes the financial decisions in Germany and who didn't know that? Financial decsions are based on facts and the facts are CT is a bad place to do business and Rell has done little to make it better. Just ask the Bayer folks in Germany. Geeez, Aaron B..

Anonymous said...

Let's be clear: There is NO mandate for CT legislative Democrats.

They only reason they won is because of national trends. Chris Murphy can claim a mandate. Don Williams cannot.

Anonymous said...

63% of the vote is a mandate. Don Williams and Jim Amann should take warning from the Republicans in Congress. Arrogance breeds contempt.

Anonymous said...

"The middleclass need tax relief and thats why the Democrats have been given a super majority."

What a load of BS.

Anonymous said...

So people making over $250K should pay more of the burden?

I guess the millionaires tax has morphed into the 1/4 millionaires tax? Then next the 1/10 millionaires tax.

If all of us who own homes and put kids through college can learn to live within our means why can't this state?

Oh I forgot!!! We have all these 1/4 millionaires at the momnent to cover the bases.

brickbat said...

Let's be realistic - the legislative Democrats will have a tough time overriding most vetoes because they will have a tough time getting anything close to unanimity on issues.

Legislators like Deb Heinrich (Madison) and Tom Drew (Fairfield) have different constituencies to please then do the delegations from places like Hartford and New Britain. It's just the way it is.

It will strengthen the Democrats' hand in dealing with the Governor, though, and she has already shown a willingness to avoid scraps and be accomodating.

My guess is that the unions will get stuff...but not as much as you might think. It's one thing to vote for things you know won't become law, now they'll have to be more careful about what they send to Rell's desk -- there aren't any more "free" votes.

You'll likely see lots of votes in support of bills labor and the other constituent groups want...but many of them will pass the Senate and House in different versions so they won't become law.

It's the Connecticut way.