Letter From State Rep. John W. Hetherington

Letter to constituents from John W. Hetherington, state representative, 125^th District

We will close this session of the General Assembly at midnight on May 6. From all indications, the majority Democrats will be happy to bolt for the campaign trail without addressing Connecticut's structural deficit. We may be able to get by 2011, beginning July 1, with some fund shuffling and borrowing. One of my concerns is that the shuffling may loot one or more of our energy conservation funds. But after 2011 the deficit surges to over $3 billion, even if revenues show some improvement. That result will not change unless we accept the challenge and reduce government to a size we can afford.

In addition to budget matters, there are important bills before the General Assembly. They include the following:

 HB 5534, concerning revenue accountability, establishes new commission to study the effectiveness of the state's revenue system. Originally it authorized the Department of Revenue Services to release your tax returns to the new commission. As amended in the House, your returns will go to the Office of Fiscal Analysis to be sanitized before being released to the commission. It is fair to ask why tax returns need to go outside DRS at all except to prosecute violations of law.

HB 5483 increases the hotel occupancy tax from 12% to 15% and redistributes 20% of the proceeds between host towns and regional planning authorities, with a loss of money for tourism development. The funds for regional authorities are for purposes only vaguely described. The bill passed the House with overwhelming Republican and some Democrat opposition.

HB 5315, HB 5497 and HB 5246 deal with the critical matter of domestic violence. I co-sponsored both of the first two which included the extensive recommendations of the Speaker's task force on domestic violence. But the third one (HB 5246) is problematical, Its primary feature allows a victim of any domestic violence (e.g. male-female, father-son, sister-sister) to terminate a lease upon the recommendation of any licensed professional (veterinarian? physical therapist? plumber?) While the bill is poorly drafted overall, my primary objection is based on a concern for young couples and retired couples who support their home by renting out an apartment. The effect of this bill is to add another victim of domestic violence in the person of a small landlord. A better choice would be for the state to cover the lease which could likely be settled for a modest amount. Another reasonable possibility would be to restrict application to buildings of more than a single rental unit. But, in any case, we are moving forward in this area of domestic violence. In an earlier session I succeeded in passing a bill that allowed pets to be included in protective orders so a pet would not become a pawn in a violent situation. The next goal is 24-hour coverage at shelters for domestic victims.

.

HOB 5473 removes the statute of limitations for an action to recover damages for the sexual abuse of a child if another plaintiff has brought a similar suit against the same defendant within the present statute of limitations. The present statute of limitations allows a suit based on such abuse to be brought within 30 years after a claimant reaches age 18. The bill primarily involves a narrow class of possible defendants, including St Francis Hospital and the Catholic Church. No one disagrees that victims of this horrendous abuse are entitled to justice. But many argue that allowing a law suit long after the actual predator and any witness are dead, and evidence lost, may effectively deny a defendant the ability to mount a defense.

There was promise in HB 5255 concerning municipal mandate relief, but an amendment rejected on party lines would have deferred in-school suspension. The amendment would also have required a two-thirds vote of each legislative chamber to impose additional municipal mandates that are unfunded by the state.

There are several bills with respect to the Citizens Election Fund, but no overall measure to address the points made by the Federal District Court in finding unconstitutional the state's program providing public financing for political campaigns. The appeal of the District Court's decision is pending before the Second Circuit of Appeals. If the appellate court affirms the lower court's decision, the program could collapse unless it is revised by the Legislature. The result of collapse would be to throw many 2010 races into confusion. I support legislation, passed in the House, to give the Legislature an expanded opportunity to respond to a decision of the Second Circuit.

A major bill yet to appear before the House makes major revisions in our energy law. I believe that the opportunity for choice in supplier is uniquely valuable, both for competitive pricing and for promoting green energy. I will oppose any measure that limits that choice.

I will report further on these and other bills at the close of session.        
 

,