Advocates To Malloy: Raise Taxes on the Rich Instead of Cutting Programs for the Poor

by Categorized: Uncategorized Date:

Advocates for Connecticut’s poor are raising concerns about Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s plan to reduce a tax credit for low-income wage-earners, change the way health care is delivered to some Medicaid recipients and eliminate an education and outreach program for lead poisoning, among other proposals.

Instead of cutting programs, the advocates say the governor should close loopholes and raise taxes on the wealthiest citizens.

“The tax code is full of special breaks and loopholes for corporations and the wealthy that our residents can’t afford,\’\’ Tom Swan of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group said. \”The average taxpayers make up the difference, enduring property tax hikes, attacks on their services and more.” 

Swan and other members of the Better Choices for Connecticut coalition say raising income taxes on the top 1 percent of the state\’s residents would generate $400 million in new revenue. The group also calls for the closing of corporate loopholes and increasing the sales tax on luxury purchases.

Malloy’s budget calls for reducing the earned-income tax credit, which gave the working poor an average of $600 in their pockets, a recent study found.

“Now is not the time to be raising taxes on our lowest-income working families, and that’s what a reduction in the EITC means,’’ said Jim Horan, executive director of the Connecticut Association for Human Services. “The number of working families and children in poverty is growing faster in CT than most other states. We realize that the state’s budget is tight, but we need to invest in policies and programs that work to keep children on the right track and prevent future costs.”

Anti-poverty advocates praised some aspects of the governor’s budget, including plans to give private human service providers a 1 percent cost of living increase.

Malloy’s plan to allocate $136 million in new capital funding for affordable housing also won kudos. “From homeless veterans to families at risk to young workers to the elderly, his proposals will lift up those who most need a hand,’’ said Howard G. Rifkin, executive director of the Partnership for Strong Communities.

And health and human services providers hailed Malloy’s plan to establish a pool of bond money to fund capital projects, so non-profit agencies can use their limited funds to serve people in need.

But other parts of the budget proposal drew sharp criticism. Malloy’s plan to shift thousands of adults from the HUSKY insurance program to the new insurance exchange system established as part of the federal health care overhaul could prove burdensome, said Jane McNichol, executive director of the Legal Assistance Resource Center.

\”It’s time to raise critically-needed revenues by ensuring the wealthy pay their fair share and closing the large loopholes Connecticut has given to corporations,” McNichol said. “Instead of addressing these revenue issues, the budget proposes to eliminate health care coverage for low-income parents. To meet our challenges, we must   fundamentally and fairly changethe way we tax people and corporations, not limit health care coverage for families.”

Advocates also criticized Malloy for cutting or eliminating funding for a number of smaller projects, including a $72,000 grant for education and outreach about the dangers of lead poisoning in children and money for various job-training programs through the state Department of Labor.

 

The Courant is using Facebook comments on stories. To comment on courant.com articles, sign into Facebook and enter your comment in the field below. Comments will appear in your Facebook News Feed unless you choose otherwise. To report spam or abuse, click the X next to the comment. For guidelines on commenting, click here.

23 thoughts on “Advocates To Malloy: Raise Taxes on the Rich Instead of Cutting Programs for the Poor

  1. Richard

    I’d prefer Dan Malloy show some management skills. In the first session Dan tried to lower costs by closing a prison or two, minimizing overtime budgets, and by sending institutionalized adults to private care at half the price.

    At this point Dan seems completely beholden to the state unions as when he appointed former AFT head Sharon Palmer as Labor Commissioner last year.

    1. Patrick_Henry

      Richard: ALL of the democrats in CT are beholden to the unions whether they admit to it or not. They are also beholden to anyone receiving something for nothing (welfare, food stamps, housing, etc).

      If my memory serves me, at least one poster on these blogs calls the combined group ‘reipients’ and refers to them as the largest ‘special interest group’ in CT with enough votes to keep the liberals and Democrats in power. I’ve yet to read anything to make me disagree with that position.

      1. Kim

        Patrick: That would be me who favors the term ‘recipient’. Thanks for your approval and support of this particular issue

  2. Palin Smith

    Although every other governor in America has managed his state’s finances far better than Malloy, Dannel 88 insists on keeping to the “road less traveled”. And in doing so he has forced many good citzens to take that more and more traveled road to Texas, Florida or South Carolina. What a poor excuse for a governor! Hideous! Yet the uneducated, illiterate and other elites love him.

  3. BillboyBaggins

    What a bunch of whining! People on welfare, especially generational welfare, shut up and take care of yourself! Stop being lazy and good for nothing. Educate yourself and your children. Stop having children you have no intention in caring for. Dependence on government is a form of slavery. It is like selling your soul for “free” stuff.

    You are being kept comfortable in you poverty, in exchange for votes. Votes make your masters rich and powerful, and assures you and your family never rise out of poverty.

    We are being deceived.

    1. johngaltwhereru

      Billyboy,

      Most of the people you are addressing can’t read. Many of those who can read would never use the internet to read news.

      1. Rally for gun control at the State Capital Feb 14 bill

        Quiet down, Johngalt or I will buy you a one-wayticket to Costa Rica and all you would need to do is to turn over you passport.

  4. M.Urbonas

    States that are growing jobs are the states with low taxes and right to work laws. These are fact and Connecticut fails on both accounts and Malloy’s plan addresses neither and as such will not accomplish the desired result.

    1. Patrick_Henry

      M.Urbonas: whether or not it accomplishes ‘the desired result’ is entirely dependent on what the desired result is.

      If the ‘desired result’ is more dependency on government, hence more votes for the Democrats who hand out the goodies, then it will indeed accomplish the ‘desired result’.

      If the ‘desired result’ is to grow the public sector and increase their percs/salaries/benefits, hence more votes for the Democrats who hand out the goodies, then it will indeed accomplish the ‘desired result’.

      If the ‘desired result’ is to create an environment that encourages job growth and attract businesses to CT then no, it won’t accomplish that.

      If the ‘desired result’ is to gave a break to the hardworking taxpayers who provide the funding for all the handouts then no, it won’t accomplish the ‘desired result’.

    2. Rally for gun control at the State Capital Feb 14 bill

      I think that we are in the process of growing jobs but the kind that will be made available you might not be qualified to apply.

  5. Mike Robinson

    You could argue that the middleclass is in the sweet spot. Not poor enough to suffer from benefit cuts. Not rich enough to get hit by higher taxes. For example, for a married couple making less than $100,000 the state income tax is still just 5.0% same as it was before Governor Malloy.

    For a married couple making $50,000 the state income tax is only $850 and can be reduced to 550 if they use the $300 property tax credit. Makes no sense for such a couple to flee Connecticut because they are paying almost no state income tax.

    If you make more than $100,000 then you can begin to make a case for leaving the state.

  6. Sharpshooter

    The tax code is full of special breaks and loopholes for corporations and the wealthy that our residents can’t afford,” Tom Swan of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group said. “The average taxpayers make up the difference, enduring property tax hikes, attacks on their services and more.”

    What a terrific, progressive idea Tom….drive out the producers to other states and continue the class warfare rhetoric while making sure that marginal programs stay alive

  7. sam

    Here is a idea for our Mismanaging Governor and his party, why not make it a crime to try to prosper here in Ct, everytime a citizen gets another $1000 in their bank account make it a misdemeanor with a fine, a hefty fine. This would be another good way to generate state funds for our spendocrats to waste. Of course we would exempt all politicians from this so that they can still keep filling their bank accounts. This way when they can retire to state with lower taxes. The people who run this state are CLUELESS! The well has just about gone dry.

  8. jobs not austerity

    Ok, all you McCarthys – the Cold War’s over! But the recession isn’t. And our economy won’t be getting back on track any time soon if policymakers listen to the vocal minority of pro-Auesterity, anti-tax advocates such as many commenters on this site. We’re not going to slash and burn our way out of this crisis of lingering high unemployment, municipal and state budget shortfalls, unmet retirement obligations, skyrocketing health care costs, and crumbling infrastructure. Now is the time to invest in our future not abandon it. Without strong infrastructure and a broad middle class with strong purchasing power Connecticut and America will not grow and prosper.

    Austerity and low taxes are not the answer. We’ve seen the havoc austerity wreaks in Europe. What will get us out of this mess is more stimulus and more investment in infrastructure -which will, in turn, create jobs. But we need to fund it sanely. And that means more revenue. I’m sorry but those who have benefitted the most from our system can afford to pay a little more. They aren’t the ones who are going to feel it anyway. But the working middle class surely will. And poor people who are already unable to make ends meet -even if they can find several low-wage or part time jobs to piece together- certainly will. And if the bulk of our families aren’t earning enough to take care of their basic needs let alone spend into our economy, well, even rich people are impacted by that. The whole system suffers.

    As a Christian and rational human being it sickens me to see my fellow citizens take such a “live and let die” attitude. It sickens me that our elected leaders (who supposedly represent all of us not just the wealthy and powerful) are so willing to inflict more pain and suffering on those who have already suffered the most in this crisis -which, lest we forget, was caused not by “bloated government” but by wall street and big banks gambling with our economy and our lives.

    1. Patrick_Henry

      JOBS: Your post nearly defines the term ‘doublespeak’.

      –You don’t want to cut taxes or government spending, but expect a “broad middle class with strong purchasing power”? Personally, my purchasing power would be just fine if the government weren’t taking 50% of my earnings. At the very least, it would be greatly improved, as I’m sure would be the case with all taxpayers.
      –We have two choices: continue to escalate government spending, or CUT spending and relieve the taxpayers. You choose to accept CONTINUING AS IS on the spending escalation path. Please explain how that would help given the indisputable economic facts of the last several years.
      –finally, when all is said and done, you resort to the class envy solution of taxing ‘the rich’ even though they already pay the greatest amount of taxes in proportion to all taxes collected.

      I fail to see how you can call this ‘rational’

    2. johngaltwhereru

      What a ridiculous, ill-informed, blind to reality, MSNBC talking point riddled string of incorrect words.

      Tell us, jobs not austerity, what percentage of GDP being consumed by servicing our debt would be required for you to acknowledge spending needs to be cut?

      Is there a level of debt that you feel can no longer be solved through tax increases?

      How long must the slowest recovery since WWII go on at it’s sluggish pace before you acknowledge the current means being used to stimulate growth are not working?

      If stimulus and infrastructure spending is so successful, why is the unemployment rate essentially the same as it was 4 years ago when the nearly $1 Trillion Stimulus Bill was passed.

      Now as far as your mind numbing statement that austerity is what is causing Europe’s problems; are you actually serious? What do you think led to austerity measures being necessary? Did some evil Conservatives just decide that since everything is going so great in Portugal, Greece, Italy and Spain that spending and services should be cut for the fun of it? Are you blind to the fact that there debt was 120% and rising of their GDP? Are you blind to the fact that people were retiring at 50 and living off the government for 40 years? I am actually confused as to if it is possible that you could be serious about your statement.

      Finally, while Christianity has nothing to do with strong arm government redistribution, I have yet to see anyone here post that advocates “live and let die”. You would need to believe that able bodied lazy thugs would choose to die rather than get a job they don’t like and earn a living. I don’t think you could give an example of the most fiscally Conservative poster on these pages advocating those who legitimately cannot care for themselves being left to die.

  9. james pelkey

    malloy has been taking care of the millioners and billioners for the past two years and plans on doing so for the next two years. malloy believes thier money and {what ever else malloy believes they poses] will get him elected to washing d.c. malloy wants to go to D.C. in the most desperate way. malloy will never be elected to D.C. malloy on your way out turn out the lights lock the door and leave the key under the welcome matt for GOVERNOR CAFERO

Comments are closed.