Rell considers veto of criminal justice bill
The Courant reports that Governor Rell is considering a full or partial veto of the criminal justice bill based by the General Assembly last week due to the cost.
The bill, passed in response to home invasions in Cheshire and New Britain, toughens the penalties for repeat violent offenders. But what’s cause concern for Jodi Rell is the the $10 million included for more prosecutors, probation officers, state police and other criminal justice programs.
With economy being what it is (apologies to those folks on CTLP who still persist in insisting that everything is hunky dory - you’re a privileged few if you aren’t feeling the pain, my friends) Rell is of the opinion the state is facing fiscal troubles and therefore she does not think significant new spending is prudent.
According to the Courant:
The Republican governor said it’s “very likely” she will have to veto the bill or just the sections that call for new spending. Rell has the authority to veto portions of a bill, in addition to the entire legislation.
“I have said three words, over and over and over and over again: no new spending for next year,” she said. “We are facing financial hardships. We are looking at revenue declining each and every day.”
Her budget staff is looking at ways to reduce the $18.5 billion tax and spending plan already approved for the 2008-09 fiscal year, which begins July 1. Rell said that might be a way to cover some new spending, but warned that policymakers need to “tread lightly” and not count on too much.
The state’s surplus, as of last week, was down to $15 million. Rell said she guesses it will ultimately drop further, possibly into deficit territory.
In the same Courant article, it was mentioned that Rell is interested in finding ways to lower the state’s gas tax, although “she doesn’t support an early retirement incentive program, which was suggested by her fellow Republicans as a way to roll back the state gas tax during the summer months.”
I was listening to an interesting discussion on NPR this morning about Hillary Clinton’s new ad in Indiana about taxing windfall profits on oil companies to lower the gas tax over the summer:
“Hillary Clinton knows it’s time to act, take some of the windfall profits of big oil to pay to suspend the gas tax this summer, investigate the oil giants for price gouging and collusion,” the ad said. Interestingly, most of the callers-in to the show felt that it was pandering and short term thinking. The view of most of the people calling in was that it was better for people to feel the pain and learn to use less gas to have have a short term fix. One caller went as far as calling it “buying votes for $40 a piece”.
What do you think?