Well-run states and organizations govern objectives and goals. However, Connecticut continually governs by crisis. There just has to be one. There is always a crisis in Connecticut. No matter which party controls Washington, the continual omnipotent Democrat iron-fist one party rule in Hartford always makes sure that there is some self-perpetuated failure, somewhere, where a Democrat can stand on as a soap box to remind us as to how badly we need Democrats. Take any time, place, or date and just change the crisis, and there is always one present. The pathetic state government could have an infinite amount of cash flow and would still need more money and never touch the $100-$150 billion dollars in short- and long-term debt along with unfunded liabilities looming over the state like a tarpaulin. For a crisis must be created. It never ends.
As the 47th President of the United States Donald J. Trump is causing a whirlwind of national opportunity and enthusiasm in word, action, thought and vision, you can set your watch to Connecticut Democrats manufacturing yet another crisis in response to that . A new and continuing crisis is the supposed lack of "affordable" food in the state. Due to the cratered Connecticut economy and the lack of industry and leadership, many families with school aged children can't afford food, thus the state and town must provide free/low-cost breakfasts/snacks/lunches. The food in theory should be "nutritional" and be healthy. Apparently Connecticut has been receiving federal funds through a Biden-era program; the “Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program” and the “Local Food for Schools Program” which paid schools and food banks to buy "healthier" food options from local farmers (https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food-to-usda/lfs). This program apparently has its roots from Covid-19 funding and is being cut by the Trump Administration since the pandemic is over and the economy should be able to function without it given normal circumstances. This is normal thinking. But when you are a beggarly, welfare-dependent state like Connecticut, you depend on government assistance as a way of life. You know nothing different and you do not care to learn anything different.
Connecticut is typically the lead participant of free money programs and its never-ending giving/redistribution of Taxpayers monies. Connecticut's Covid-19 crisis was intentionally prolonged in order to receive more "free" money to get and spend. But what happens when that money gets cut off as in this case? It is the usual rhetoric and disgust as far as the cuts are concerned. Senator Chris Murphy stated: "most people who depend on food assistance in Connecticut work, adding that stagnant wages are not high enough to help them pay the bills...By ending these two programs, all you’re doing is hurting farmers and jeopardizing the food security of our families,” Murphy said. “These programs don’t save big amounts of money for the federal government; they don’t balance the budget.” (https://ctmirror.org/2025/03/17/ct-schools-food-banks-local-farms/) It is inarguable that any savings would help balance the budget and lower the country’s $36 Trillion-dollar National Debt. Not to be outdone in crying the poor mouth, Senator Richard Blumenthal chimed in: "And while the pandemic exacerbated food insecurity across the U.S., (multi-millionaire Vietnam Combat Veteran) Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., argued that the White House is “taking the food off the table from working families so that the ultra-wealthy can have tax cuts.” (https://ctmirror.org/2025/03/17/ct-schools-food-banks-local-farms/) Can Senator Blumenthal directly trace the cuts in this program's funding with "Wealthy...tax cuts"? I find it hard to draw this correlation between the two, especially with a $36 Trillion-dollar National Debt. And wouldn’t job creation be the result of lowered taxes providing more free cash for spending? But again, these two fiscally incoherent Senators have been huffing and puffing for years and offer no solutions to our $36 Trillion-dollar National Debt and or the massive problems of the people they supposedly represent with affording food in Connecticut, other than to continually begging Washington.
Perhaps we can find some hope and perspective from the nonprofit and agency heads across the state! Like Jason Jakubowski, President and CEO of Connecticut Foodshare, whose last known salary was $291,114, other compensation of $54,529 and total compensation is $345,643 (https://givefreely.com/charity-directory/nonprofit/ein-061063025/)."Connecticut Foodshare was one of the largest participants in the program that had received about $3 million over the past few years. The group was set to receive another $1 million before the (pandemic) initiative was terminated." (https://ctmirror.org/2025/03/17/ct-schools-food-banks-local-farms/). One may wonder why Jakubowski is paid so much to "run" this nonprofit? Comparable private-sector executives with much greater responsibility and managerial accountability can look forward to half of his salary. His salary and those of his administrative staff if decreased, could be used to help feed people. But why do so many people in Connecticut need food assistance? Is it the excessively inflated cost of living due to high state and local taxes, high housing costs, high transportation costs, high insurance costs due to high crime rates and high electric costs? Does the bloated and politically connected state-run government contribute to the nanny state that distorts and destroys Connecticut's free market economy along with the state's affordability to live? Wasn't the above equilibrium minimum wage and state paid health/family leave insurance passed by Democrat legislative geniuses going to solve most of the state's affordability issues? And wasn’t taxing/taxing more the "rich" through the Utopian state income tax going to resolve once and for all the state's affordability issues so people could buy food on their own? Why is this not happening? And why has the economic gap between the Connecticut state government, its state employees, and its programs fail year-in and year-out to resolve these pressing economic and social problems over the past 35 years? Just look at the costs of Connecticut's state government for salaries, benefits and pensions compared to the rest of the population that is not connected to government.
But to be fair, Connecticut does have a vision for economic growth and job development! There is a Connecticut Department of Economic Development! (“DECD”). The DECD serves officially as the state's primary agency for fostering economic growth and community development and is supposedly tasked with a broad mandate that includes economic development, housing, community development, transportation, education, and arts and culture. Its mission is supposedly to strengthen Connecticut’s economy by supporting businesses, promoting tourism, and fostering vibrant communities. The DECD employs approximately 100 full-time staff members. Daniel H. O'Keefe has been the commissioner of DECD since November 2023, earns more than his predecessor's $215,000 annual salary. However regardless of the bulbous spending of the DECD, Connecticut continually ranks last or near last in any reputable state poll comparing economic viability between states. A real economic development agency would be creating a business-favorable and job creating environment as opposed to consuming and wasting taxpayer dollars with little to no aggregate results. In fact, it is certainly a safe statement to say that the economic ranking of Connecticut would not be changed by one percentage point should the entire failed DECD model be dissolved and the funding expended be used to feed the hungry. This of course would not be the right answer. But neither is the continued wasting of tax dollars by crisis-driven leaders for little reason along with no vision or plan for real economic incentive and job growth.
No comments:
Post a Comment