67°
NORWALK, Conn. – The differences between a Norwalk Republican incumbent for a state House seat and his Democratic challenger were immediately obvious Wednesday night.
"Government spends too much money, and that is why we have the most incredible tax burden of any state in the United States of America," state Rep. Larry Cafero, House minority leader, said at the League of Women Voters candidates forum for the 141st District. "We need to control our spending."
But challenger Kate Tepper said, "I don't believe that Connecticut actually does have the highest tax burden in the country. Our business taxes are, in actuality, low, as are our personal taxes. The question I think we should be asking is how to raise revenue."
About 40 people watched the debate, held in Norwalk Community College's GenRe Forum and moderated by Charlotte Garrell of the League of Women Voters of Fairfield. Cafero and Tepper agreed on the need for jobs in these tough times but disagreed on other economic factors, such as the minimum wage, tolls for truck and high gas prices.
The state's unemployment rate is going in the opposite direction of the rest of the country "because we spend too much money," Cafero said.
The economic recovery is slow, Tepper countered, because unemployed people don't have money to spend. "In these tough economic times, my opponent wants to cut the very government spending that would increase demand," she said, referring to "the Bush disaster" as a prime example of the result of those ideas.
Raising the minimum wage would give people more money to spend, Tepper said, commenting that some people are exhausted by trying to earn a living. Cafero countered that although he had voted for raising the minimum wage in the past, now was not the time to do so. It would lead to layoffs, he said, adding that there are many regulations on small businesses already.
The tax structure is keeping businesses out of Connecticut, said Cafero, frustrated that the bipartisan jobs bill he helped to pass did not include more money for small businesses. He said he had gotten on board with the effort but was disappointed at the outcome.
Their philosophical differences were obvious, he said. "My opponent believes we have a revenue problem, that we don't have enough revenue," he said. "I believe we have a spending problem."
Tepper said: "We need to look for better ways to use the money that we have, but at the moment the government is already doing that."
That includes efforts to renegotiate leases, consolidate departments and use the government's buying power to get items cheaper, she said.
Comments (15)
Here's a radical idea. Why not enable an INCREASE to the education budget by using the money that would come from a proper balancing of the ECS formula? That's the way a state representative can help Norwalk's schools. The idea of freezing a budget in place is a cut, because the costs of things go up and unexpected things happen. Investing in our students now will pay dividends down the line as they grow up and become productive citizens with good jobs. Somewhere, long ago, other people helped fund your education. Why is it that you do not want to do the same for this generation?
If we don't improve the achievement gap in Norwalk schools, there won't be any "vibrancy" to our middle class and the way the distribution of wealth has been going for the last thirty years, soon there will be no middle class at all, and we will be like a banana republic, except most of us won't be able to afford bananas.
If you want to keep cutting school budgets, that's what you're going to produce.
As for the unions, their gradual marginalization over the last thirty years could help explain why the middle class is on the wane. When unions were strong, we boomed because people had money in their pockets. Union wages necessarily raised all wages, particularly white collar jobs. The opposite it true today, especially since most manufacturing jobs have been outsourced and manufacturing labor was mostly labor.
Most totalitarian governments left or right disband unions because they are antithetical to dictatorial aspirations. Show me a country with a weakening of organized labor, and I'll show you a country that is declining in real democracy.
Nobody said anything about cutting municipal budgets. Let's simply hold the municipal budgets steady on a year over year basis. In other words, let's pay city employees the same amount next year as they're being paid this year. This highly radical idea would allow the vast majority of Norwalkers who DON'T make their living from government to enjoy the same level of services without yet another tax increase.
Thanks for the clarification Ferd!
The Barron's article was not about taxes but about debt and unfunded insurance premiums, and went on to describe Connecticut as being the worst state in this regard. However, the article went on to conclude that this makes little difference.
"Yet its bonds are priced at the same level as the leading state, at 28 basis points above the 10-year AAA-rated benchmark, which yields around 1.8%. A basis point is one-hundredth of a percentage point."
"There is no immediate danger, either. While the pension problems should not be minimized, the vast majority of states are in a strong financial position, and their debt offers investors considerable safety -- even if yields are paltry in today's low-rate world."
Chiaramonte obviously didn't know what he was waving. I remember when Senator Joseph McCarthy used to wave lists which he said included hundreds of Communists in the State Department. In actuality, he never uncovered a single communist.
Chariamonte was apparently unaware that the article was a "tut-tut, Connecticut," not an alarm bell. Maybe he should take a course in reading retention. Or at least read the article in its entirety.
Who are we to believe ? Cafero says we are the highest taxed state in the country. The Barrons story Chiaramonte cited says that we are taxed less than NY and NJ. One of them is obviously wrong.
I haven't seen the Barron's article but they could both be right, there are many ways to measure taxation. One article could be speaking solely about income tax, another measure could include sales tax, property tax, etc.
Whether we're in first place or third place, we are either near the top or at the top when it comes to taxes. That's unacceptable.
"...use the government's buying power to get items cheaper," she said.
Does that include taking a hard line with state and municipal employee unions, rather than coddling them as Gov. Malloy and the Democrats in Hartford have done? Wages and benefits are state government's single largest cost so it seems obvious that if one were looking to save money, that would be the place to start. You're not going to make a significant dent by looking for cheaper paper clips.
This may be too obvious a question, but what do you think government's single largest cost be, if not employee wages and benefits ?
Not clear what you're asking here.
Sorry, didn't mean to confuse. What part of the question is not clear ?
My error, I left the word should out of a sentence.
It should read; what do you think government's single largest cost should be, if not employee wages and benefits ?
Confusion seems to abound. I never said or implied that government's single largest cost should not be employee wages and benefits. I merely pointed out that if you want to reduce spending, and the vast majority of spending is on wages and benefits, then the only way to have any significant impact on the budget is to control spending on wages and benefits. You're not going to make any significant dent in spending by looking for a cheaper paper clip supplier, as Ms. Tepper seems to want to do.
Norwalk's largest employer is the Public Schools and the largest chunk of their budget is....drum roll, please.....benefits and retirement. The school budget accounts for almost 60% of the total revenues for the City. The City administration has the remaining 40% of the revenue. Benefits and retirement also accounts for the largest portion for the City budget.
What I am seeing happen is that many businesses are laying off or cutting back the hours for their full time workers and replacing those hours with part time workers. It's cheaper for the employer since there are no benefits or union involvement.
This is yet another reason why Obama care is the best thing in many many years..thank you for pointing that out Pagieie. You know you may not be as lost as everyone says after all.
Good points Paige. Public education is important, as is a vibrant middle class, but there comes a point where the people making their living from public education need to give taxpayers a break.
Rising wage and benefit costs, along with out of control workers comp, are the reasons the City needed to outsource garbage. What makes me laugh are the politicians who fought outsourcing of garbage tooth and nail, in support of their Union buddies and against the interests of nearly all taxpayers. Then those same politicians bemoaned the cuts that needed to be made to schools, which likewise were due to rising wage and benefit costs for all city employees. Yet were it not for the savings that came from the outsourcing of garbage, the cuts would have been even MORE drastic. A classic example of trying to have it both ways... hypocrisy at its finest.