As the Legislature Closes
Underage Drinking Parties
There's quite a bit of activity going on in Hartford lately. With the new law criminalizing the act of parents serving alcohol to minors, some in the blogosphere have spoken out, particularly on the constitutionality of searching homes without warrants. I think this blog on CT Local Politics is a good discussion. I even jumped into this one as people started parsing the various scenarios. What really irks me about the underage drinking parties is when one parent feels he/she can act as a surrogate parent (of sorts) and take on the role of parent for someone else's child... say a 13-yr old. That makes no sense to me. (Btw, locally, I think the Human Services Committee may get its wish granted and have the Council officially proclaim graduation week (June 18 - 24) "alcohol abuse awareness week." Escalating public awareness of the dangers of alcohol abuse is a very worthy goal. And it's not only Cheshire doing this. Here is what Amity School District is doing.)
Cleaning House
Although she's been working hard at it, Governor Rell still hasn't, apparently, been able to get rid of all the problems from recent years, but from what I understand, no one knew about this until this week. At least Ragaglia is no longer in charge of Fraud Prevention.
Campaign Finance Reform
What I expect will be one of my biggest disappointments of this session will be a lack of progress on Campaign Finance Reform. Back in February, when the Council met with Cheshire's state delegation, I said "thanks for what you've done with CFR, but there's still more work to do." If nothing more happens, it may be an opportunity lost for a long time. Too bad really.
State Budget Completed
The budget is done. And it was passed almost unanimously. Area towns got increased funding. But I also understand that "HB 5845 LCO 5217" failed. Too bad for the 89th District as it would have redistributed money around the state, including increases in funding for Bethany ($91,648), Cheshire ($139,420) and Prospect ($80,513).
Soda Ban
I think the soda ban is just another example of the State going too far. As well, the soda companies themselves have now agreed to a significant self-imposed ban. Although, that may have been partly a result of the new CT law. Nonetheless, it's just another example of the State having the wrong priorities. There's time to talk about banning soda in schools (something Cheshire's BOE did), but not enough time to discuss Campaign Finance Reform or Eminent Domain... reminds me of how we may have money for turf, but not for ECS funding.
Any other concerns as the legislature closes the 2006 session?
Tim White
Town Council, 4th District
TimWhite98@yahoo.com
4 comments:
Blue... thanks for the head's up on that link. I only read 2005, but it was an interesting read. I certainly feel that you (the State) need to look at the numbers and have a plan before you make a decision. And that's something I've been working on in Cheshire.
One example is trying to get the town to move from a "lowest first cost" concept to a "lowest life cycle cost" concept. There's been significant resistance. But I think things are changing.... perhaps I can do the same in Hartford.
To me, you just can't give up. Persistence is absolutely necessary if you want to change government.
Blue... Yankee... yes. I agree that they (Lew & crew) have some good ideas. I know them a bit. I have some libertarian ideals myself... don't we all? But compromise in the middle is where governing generally happens.
I really don't know about the relationships within the legislature.
oh... and Blue... Tim is fine... I prefer it. Mr. White is a bit formal for me.
Blue... I agree CT needs to (and can) do better.
About governing from the middle, I guess my philosophy is this... have a vision (a CT that we can all afford, elections in which anyone can compete, affordable & available energy) then make it happen...
reform binding arbitration (probably the single biggest driver of costs at the municipal level), campaign finance reform and find alternative forms of energy (such as fuel cells or microturbines... or hybrid cars or biodiesel schoolbuses).
But compromise is often required... I don't see anyway that any sort of CFR would have ever passed without a compromise.
Post a Comment