Gambling news from http://www.courant.com/
New Jerseyites just experienced a state government shutdown that rings familiar to Connecticut residents, at least those who remember the summer of 1991.
During that season of discontent, Gov. Lowell P. Weicker Jr. faced a $942 million budget deficit, which was proportionally larger than the red ink in any other state. Democrats, who controlled the General Assembly repeatedly sent him budgets heavily reliant on an expanded 8 percent sales tax, substantial increases in user taxes and some cuts in spending.
Mr. Weicker thought the packages were unfair and unworkable. He doubted that the sales tax could be counted on to balance the budget. So he used his veto pen. Reluctantly, he proposed a solution based on cuts and, perish the thought, a state income tax. The lawmakers went into a tizzy, having vowed to keep Connecticut free from an income tax.
Consequently, the state entered the new fiscal year on July 1 budgetless and with a gubernatorial order furloughing 20,000 state employees. Public safety operations were largely spared, but other state services were frozen or disrupted.
The chaos continued until Aug. 8, when Mr. Weicker and lawmakers started to sign off on stopgap "mini-budgets" pending a permanent agreement.
On Aug. 23, such an agreement emerged. It was based on an income tax, spending cuts, still-to-be- negotiated union concessions and a supposed constitutional limit on budgetary growth.
After a standoff of 71/2 weeks, the fussing, fuming, ranting and screaming politicians shook hands. But the crisis wasn't over. Negotiations with state worker unions proved extremely tough. Mr. Weicker announced plans to lay off 3,750 employees and to institute a partial shutdown of government. A final agreement with the unions didn't come until December.
This year, unlike 1991, most states (including Connecticut) are enjoying surpluses. But not New Jersey, where Gov. Jon S. Corzine pushed an increase in the sales tax to 7 percent from 6 percent to close the projected deficit. He addressed the legislature daily and finally struck an agreement with lawmakers last week after six days in which all nonessential services, including the state-regulated casinos in Atlantic City, ceased regular operations.
There are some differences between Connecticut in 1991 and New Jersey in 2006. For one, Mr. Weicker had no natural allies in the legislature. He was neither a Democrat nor a Republican, having formed his own political party to run for governor.
Mr. Corzine is a Democrat and members of his party dominate the legislature. New Jersey leaders also weren't fighting over a radical change in the tax system. It's about the size of the old workhorse levy on sales. They have tentatively agreed to commit half of the new sales-tax revenue to deficit reduction and the rest to property-tax relief.
Yet there are similarities. Mr. Weicker faced an angry public. When he dared to come near a huge anti-income tax rally, he was spat upon, cursed and hanged in effigy. In New Jersey, an anti-Corzine tide began to swell before the crisis was resolved.
Mr. Weicker paid a high price for standing his ground. Facing flagging public support, he chose not to run for re-election. His legacy benefited his successor, John G. Rowland, who basked under an improved economy and a more balanced and fairer tax system. Mr. Rowland had more money to spend and cut taxes as well.
Today, let us dare say that most people have learned to live with the income tax. Imagine the fiscal mess we would be in without this tax. In recent years, no responsible Connecticut politician has called for repeal.
|
|
World Casino Directory 
Gambling Forums 
