The Courant reports that our state legiscritters and the Governor have reached a budget deal:
The agreement includes “historic increases in health care spending” and “historic increases” in educational cost-sharing funds that are sent to cities and towns, according to the person familiar with the negotiations.
The increases involve millions of dollars, but precise totals were not available Monday night.
One setback for taxpayers would be a 33 percent increase in the state’s cigarette tax to $2 per pack, up from the current $1.51 per pack.
So, we’re going to massively increase spending without increasing revenues at a time when the state is seeing a surplus ahead of an economic slowdown.
Are they nuts?!!
I think that the stated goals for the additional spending are admirable, although I suspect they will fail to require that the towns at least partially offset the cost-sharing with property tax reductions.
However, I can’t help but wonder if the state isn’t digging itself into fiscal disaster for the future.
Also, while I’m ranting, I take issue with the cigarette tax increase. While I can accept the notion of using taxes to discourage behavior detrimental to society, I don’t think that’s the case here.
Cigarette smoking is unpopular, so additional revenue can be obtained on the backs of cigarette smokers without angering the majority of voters.
However, smoking is an addiction. The state is going to make additional money on the backs of addicts, presumably without providing additional support to help break the addiction of the behavior that the state is theoretically trying to discourage.
That’s just wrong, I think.
