To the Editor:
In a recent opinion piece, lawmakers were blamed for the deep budget cuts impacting transportation and increasing Metro-North fares. (Talking Transportation: Don’t Blame Malloy for the Fare Hikes, WestportNow, Aug. 1, 2016)
That blame is half misplaced.
You see, the op-ed wrongly grouped Democrat and Republican lawmakers together, and failed to recognize the stark differences in our approaches to improving transportation in Connecticut.
The Democrats sat back and decimated our state’s Special Transportation Fund for years by taking transportation money to balance their ill-conceived budgets. The Republicans want to make transportation a priority.
Republicans in Connecticut have proposed real plans to improve transportation by prioritizing the way we spend current funds, without the need for new revenue sources.
While the Democrat governor proposed an unrealistic pie-in-the-sky transportation plan without any idea of how he would actually pay for it, Republicans proposed a serious plan that would dedicate over $70 billion to transportation over the next 30 years without new taxes or tolls.
The Republican plan is not political rhetoric, but rather is a plan of action. Our “Prioritize Progress” transportation funding plan rethinks how our state bonds for development and invests in our infrastructure. You can see it for yourself here: http://ctsenaterepublicans.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/2016PrioritizeProgress.pdf.
The blame for Connecticut’s significant transportation problems falls squarely on the Democrats who have had complete unfettered control of the legislature for years. They are the ones who passed budgets that bled the Special Transportation Fund and allowed transportation to fall to the wayside.
Even as they passed a legislative lockbox to supposedly protect transportation dollars, they simultaneously voted for a budget that swiped transportation money right out from under us! The Democrats continue with their lip service, but their inaction and lack of a structured vision has compounded Connecticut’s transit problems.
So the question is: “How can we improve transportation in our state?” We as Republicans have focused on achievable ideas that can solve our state’s problems without looking for new ways to tax people.
But as the minority party in the state legislature, we have not had the opportunity to bring our ideas to fruition. To make transportation a priority and really make a difference, we need serious change in the legislature to allow Republicans to advance our plan.
And that must begin with a change in leadership by making Republicans the majority in the House and Senate – that is the real answer.
State Sen. Toni Boucher (R-26)
Wilton
This is just one of MANY reasons Westporters should elect Cathy Walsh. We cannot allow the democrats to control the House or Senate in CT if we want things to change in CT. Lets remember that Jonathan Steinberg voted TWICE to raise state income taxes, which were the largest tax increases in CT’s history. His votes also helped approve budgets that raided the transportation funds. And Governor Malloy just agreed to spend our tax dollars on a trial that will lead to taxing each CT driver by the mileage they drive.
We will have nobody else to blame but ourselves if we continue to vote for Steinberg. He cannot do anything to make change while his party is in control. We must vote to change the political party in Hartford. And Jonathan has proven to everyone that he has no problem RAISING taxes.
Elect Cathy and lets get real change in Hartford.
Jonathan you are a liar. That is strong language but you know you voted for the tax increases.
No budget in CT is approved without the final vote for something called The Implementer. Afer all the work is done on the budget, the legislature MUST vote on The Implementer that is the final approval of all the details of the budget. If the Implementer is not approved, then the budget is not approved. Period. AS YOU KNOW—YOU VOTED TWICE TO APPROVE THE IMPLEMENTER THAT APPROVED TWO MASSIVE TAX INCREASES.
The budget in CT goes thru twA o phase process. The LAST and most important phase is the approval of The Implementer. This vote iby the legislature is the final process of approving the CT budget. Most people in CT and Westport do not know that the real approval of the budget is something called the Implementer.
Jonathan—you are a liar—as you voted twice to approve the Implementer. This, as you know, is the true approval for the budget that included massive tax increases. You, if you truly did not want to approved tax increases could have voted against the Implementer. That could have prevented the tax increases. Instead, as you know, you voted yes for the Implementer. You voted to increase taxes on the resident of Westport.
Jonathan-you are a liar. It is truly sad that you can not stand up and defend your reason for voting for the Implementer. You cannot be honest and tell the residents of Westport why you approved the Implementer. You had your choice of votes and you voted yes. It is truly sad you cannot be truthful. You do not desreve to represent Westporters.
Jonathan—at any time you want to have a public discussion on The Implementer, please lets do it. I will be there anytime, any place.
Jonathan-both of us should get in front of the residents in Westport and discuss what the Implementer is and then why you voted for it, You can have all the time to discuss the Implementer and your vote. And you can stand up and be honest and tell Westport residents why you voted for the Implementer that was the final approval to increase income taxes on Westporters.
Jonathan—you are a liar. I do not make up facts and you know it. Jonathan—set he time and place and lets have the dialogue so the facts truly come out.
Until then, you are just hiding from the truth.
Mr. Shuldman, I think you need to be careful about whom you call a liar.
I am in the Legislature; you are not. Your statement about the purpose of the Implementer is simply not true and you intentionally mislead the reader by saying so.
You’re daring the reader to actually read the bills, which run to hundreds of pages in these cases. If the reader were to read both the Budget bills and the Implementers, they would clearly discover that the income tax increases were in the Budgets, not the Implementers. What you say is not true, no matter how many times you say it.
So you simply have to stop making this stuff up, Mr. Shuldman. The people of Westport are getting tired or your blatant, extreme partisanship. It doesn’t become a successful businessman, such as yourself.
Facts matter, sir. Be very careful about accusing others of what you yourself are guilty of, particularly when the facts don’t support you.
Jonathan—lets start with a simple yes or no. It is easy—all you have to do is respond yes or no.
Did you vote for 2 Budget Implementers? Its just a simple yes or no.
This should be easy for you—so I await you response.
Just in case people are reading this—here is some information to help you understand more about the Implementer:
‘The end of every legislative session features a voluminous bill (or set of bills) known as the
Mr. Shuldman, now that you’re focused on the Implementer bills, which did not contain the income tax increases, I take it that you now admit I voted against the increases!
I accept your concession, after these many months of dissembling on your part.
Jonathan—-you did not answer the question. Why is that?
Did you vote for the 2 Budget Implementers? Yes or No?
Jonathan—it is a simple answer. Yes—you voted for the Implementer or No you did not. So please—did you vote for the 2 Budget Implementers? Yes or No?
Avoiding the answer, as you just did, clealry leads everyone to believe you DID vote for the Implementer.
Once again—did you vote for the Implementer? Yes or No?
Mr. Shulman has been repeating the same calumny for some time now, and he knows better. I voted AGAINST both income tax increases, in 2011 and 2015. Check it out for yourself at these state government links.
2011: SB1239, Public Act 6, Roll Call Vote 72
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2011/VOTE/H/2011HV-00072-R00SB01239-HV.htm
2015: HB7061, Public Act 244, RCV 357
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2015/VOTE/H/2015HV-00357-R00HB07061-HV.htm
I’m sure Mr. Shulman will reply with more made up “facts.” I advise that you simply ignore him. He lacks any credibility on the subject.
No concession on my part. You are avoiding answering what is an easy question——Jonathan- just answer the question regarding your vote for the 2 Implementers. Yes or No. Did you vote for The Implementer bills which ‘According to the General Assembly
Jonathan—from an commentary in CT Viewpoints in 2015—and to set the record staright—YOU ARE NOT one of the 2 democratic representatives that voted agsinst the Implementer:
“When the budget implementer bill was presented to the House chamber during the special session on June 29, we had mere hours to read it over and realize that despite some changes made for the better, this budget didn
Jonathan—did you vote for the Implementers?
From another news source reagrding an Implementer bill in 2015 that raised income and other taxes-including the death tax (Hartford Courant):
Hartford
Jonathan I stand by my statement that you are a liar. You voted for the Implementer in 2011 and 2015 that not only raised income taxes on the resideents of Westport, but also caused seniors a problem with raising the death tax and caused our town to lose millions from the state.
You cannot avoId your votes regarding the Implementer Bills in 2011 and 2015—if you are going to say this in your ad:
‘and also the Implementer bill which enable the diversion”
Your own ad says the Implementer is the way the budget gets implemented and needs to be voted on for approval. YOU VOTED FOR THE IMPLEMENTER IN 2011 AND 2015. YOU ARE NOT TELLING THE TRUTH WHEN YOU SAY YOU VOTED AGAINST THE BUDGET WHEN YOU VOTED TO IMPLEMENT THE BUDGET.
Why lie Jonathan? Tell everyone in Westport WHY you voted for the IMPLEMENTER BILL in 2001 and 2015?
Jonathan—simple question—did you vote (YES OR NO) for the Implementer bill in 2011 and 2015? Yes or no?
This comment thread is closed. Those who violate the comment policy of no personal attacks will have their posting privileges suspended.