Is There Hope for “the Constitution State?”

“TO ENJOY A FREE GOVERNMENT”

by Sharon Rondeau

(Apr. 19, 2014) — On April 11, 2014, the Connecticut General Assembly’s House of Representatives Revenue, Finance and Bonding Committee voted against a proposal sponsored by 19 Democrats which would have required employers to pay a quarterly penalty for each employee working at below 130% of the state’s minimum wage.

On January 1, Connecticut’s minimum wage became $8.70/hour and will increase to $9.00/hour on January 1, 2015 as set forth in CGS 31-57f. By January 1, 2017, the minimum wage will increase to $10.10/hour.

Connecticut levies on its residents a special gasoline tax, a personal property tax, high residential property taxes, new higher “sin” taxes and restaurant meal taxes.  In 2011, the largest tax increase in the state’s history was passed which increased the sales tax; added a tax on previously untaxed clothing; increased the cost of diesel fuel, airport valet parking, and filing costs with town clerks, among other services.

Connecticut is nicknamed “the Constitution State” because in 1638, colonists from three towns drafted the first constitution based on the premise that “the foundation of authority is laid in the free consent of the people.”  Even then, taxes were mentioned in the last item, which reads:

11. It is Ordered, sentenced, and decreed, that when any General Court upon the occasions of the Commonwealth have agreed upon any sum, or sums of money to be levied upon the several Towns within this Jurisdiction, that a committee be chosen to set out and appoint what shall be the proportion of every Town to pay of the said levy, provided the committee be made up of an equal number out of each Town.

According to data provided by United Van Lines, in 2012, Connecticut ranked seventh in states out of which people moved, perhaps to go somewhere “warmer.”

Prior to the vote which killed HB 5069 in committee, an article appeared in “The Reminder,” a local paper published in various parts of the state, titled, “Are We Ground Zero for Income Inequality?” by Denise Coffey.

In her article, Coffey reported that on April 8, protests held in 26 towns centered on income differences between “the ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots'” in the Constitution State.  The “vigils” were reportedly sponsored by the Connecticut Working Families Party, MoveOn.org, the Connecticut Citizens Action Group (CCAG), and “union and community organizations.”

Those living in poverty in Connecticut reportedly comprised 10% of the total population in 2012, as compared to 7.5% in 2008.  The CEO of a family health center present at one of the “vigils” reportedly said that it “was more than a call for legislative action.  It was a call for a change in values and behavior.  It was an opportunity to talk about fundamental questions about fairness.”

The CCAG applauded the increases in minimum wage passed by the Connecticut General Assembly on March 27 as “excellent economic policy” but did not believe that the effort was “enough.”

According to the Working Families Party, “Large, profitable corporations often systematically pay their workers such low wages, and offer them such poor benefits, that workers then must rely on government aid programs to survive. These companies are dodging their responsibility to their workers and receiving a taxpayer subsidy for doing it. HB 5069 would charge large companies a fee for each worker they pay poverty level wages. This would either encourage companies to pay a fair, livable wage, or would help the state offset the cost of aid programs.”

The Connecticut constitution’s preamble begins with “The People of Connecticut acknowledging with gratitude, the good providence of God, in having permitted them to enjoy a free government; do, in order more effectually to define, secure, and perpetuate the liberties, rights and privileges which they have derived from their ancestors; hereby, after a careful consideration and revision, ordain and establish the following constitution and form of civil government.”

Article First, Section 1 states, “All men when they form a social compact, are equal in rights; and no man or set of men are entitled to exclusive public emoluments or privileges from the community.”