My plan to cut taxes and create jobs
Given the caliber of our people, most would expect Connecticut to be the economic envy of the United States. But, as everyone knows, our state economy has been among the worst in the country for many years.Connecticut was one of just two states that never recovered from the last recession before this year’s began. Home values, incomes, and jobs have stagnated or decreased, while they rose steadily across the country.
The blame lies not with our people, but with our state government, which Democrats have controlled completely for 12 years. Connecticut has the second-highest tax burden in the country after raising taxes by billions four of the last six legislative terms — including in 2019. This weight penalizes work, job creation, and investment.
That burden is also due to get worse, because we also face the highest unfunded liability for debt and state employee benefits.
On top of it all, Connecticut has the fourth-highest regulatory burden of any state, raising the cost of living and destroying jobs.
The good news is that with wholesale change to state policy, we can create hope for the future. That’s why I’m running for state Senate. I want to confront these barriers directly and encourage work, job creation, and investment in our community at long last.
My plan for change is threefold: 1.) Cut income taxes and simplify the tax code. 2.) Reduce excessive spending. 3.) Reform and rationalize regulations.
First, cut income taxes across the board. Reduce them around 2.5percent of income for households making up to $100,000. For households making between $100,000 and $200,000, cut it by around 2 percent of their incomes. For higher-income households, cut it around 1 percent. Low-income families should have their income tax burden eliminated.
Pay for most of the cut by simplifying the tax code by removing tax credits, deductions, and exemptions often enacted by politicians to benefit their preferred types of economic activity. The Office of Fiscal Analysis says the state could raise $5.3 billion if it repealed all “tax expenditures.” The state legislature will need to pick a less than half of all those exemptions to finance my cut. Three other ways to help pay for it include taxing legal, regulated marijuana, sports betting, and higher economic growth due to the reform.
By contrast, my opponent voted to raise taxes by more than $650 on the average family in our district. Our district cannot afford more of the same.
Second, reduce excessive spending by reforming state employee benefits and cutting wasteful projects. Connecticut’s debt and unfunded pension liability must be confronted and reformed directly by the state legislature in order to make our obligations sustainable. The problem cannot be outsourced to bureaucrats or arbitrators, ignored, imposed even more on taxpayers. The legislature can make the state’s obligations more sustainable by making marginal changes to state employee COLAs, overtime spiking, pension and insurance contributions, among others. This will stop massive haircuts for worker pensions in the future and mass layoffs.
The state must go on a “debt diet,” which Gov. Ned Lamont promised in his last campaign, but my opponent voted to break with a bonding purge earlier this year. By reducing debt issuance and prioritizing more important spending, the state can save hundreds of millions per year. And the state should also divest lossmaking assets, such as Dunkin’ Donuts Ballpark and the XL Center, and delegate delivery of some social services to our great nonprofits who can do the job cheaper and better than the state.
Third, Connecticut must slash red tape that is killing jobs and increasing cost of living. As a matter of course, the state should score all proposed regulations on a cost-benefit basis — as we do the price tag of fiscal bills — for how much they will cost consumers and workers. And straight away, the state should reduce or eliminated onerous health care, electricity, and labor regulations that are hurting the middle class. The state should eliminate Certificate of Need Laws, increase scope of practice for physicians’ assistants and pharmacists, and expand telemedicine. It should bring more affordable clean energy into the grid to reduce electricity prices. And it should reduce occupational licensing requirements where there is not a clear public safety need — like how hairdressers require more training than police officers.
Delivering good government and reducing the state’s burden on families is the most important issue in Connecticut. If we deliver change to Hartford, our district and state will again stand a chance at creating economic opportunity for all families.