CT Republicans’ proposal adds millions for education to state budget – Hartford Courant

With less than two weeks until the end of the legislative session, House Republicans introduced their own budget proposal that would add millions of dollars in education funding but cut a program that provides free health care to children without legal immigration status.

While Democrats in the House of Representatives are sticking to their plan to leave the state budget unchanged, Republicans on Thursday presented the package of adjustments that they say will balance the budget in fiscal year 2025.

Rep. Tammy Nuccio, a ranking member of the Appropriations Committee that authored the proposal, said the Republican budget would increase spending on education-related items by nearly $300 million in FY 25, including $80 million to fully fund additional costs for special education.

Among other budget initiatives, the proposal would eliminate the highway use tax, direct $42 million into the Teachers’ Retirement Fund and increase Medicaid reimbursement rates from $120 to $167 per hour.

It would also add $3.6 million to fund early voting for municipalities.

House Republican Leader Vincent Candelora said the state budget for fiscal year 2025 is “out of balance and $30 million over the spending limit.”

Candelora said the Republican’s proposal would put the state $43 million under the spending cap without using the state’s reserve of federal American Rescue Plan Act funds.

“We do not know if there will be a means to manage this budget, but we believe there is an obligation to adopt an appropriate budget,” Candelora said. “We must first convince the other side of the aisle that burying your head in the sand and doing nothing and spending the last tranche of federal money we have is not good fiscal policy and will only get us into trouble.”

In response to the Republican’s proposal, House Speaker Matt Ritter indicated Thursday that the state budget will remain closed and that Democrats will move forward with their plan this session to allocate ARPA funds in lieu of adjustments.

Candelora said the 2025 fiscal year requires cuts and that failure to act would “jeopardize the fiscal guardrails and jeopardize our budget.”

“We don’t want to leave it in the governor’s hands. We believe that as a legislature we have a duty to present a balanced budget,” Candelora said.

Chris Collibee, Gov. Ned Lamont’s budget spokesman, said the governor’s office appreciated Republican “efforts to propose fiscal year 2025 budget adjustments.”

“While we may not agree with all of the adjustments proposed by Republicans in the House of Representatives, the Legislature has indicated that it will maintain the approved fiscal year 2025 budget without revision. To that end, we are working with legislative leaders to direct resources to priorities in the coming year, while adhering to the Governor’s commitment to a fairly balanced budget,” Collibee said in a statement to the Courant.

The Republican proposal would cut spending on several items, including a $26 million reduction in hiring state employees and $10 million by requiring incarcerated individuals to partially pay for phone calls.

Specifically, it would save $45.7 million by eliminating access to Medicaid for state residents who do not have permanent legal immigration status in the US.

Currently, all eligible children aged 12 and under have access to HUSKY Health, regardless of immigration status. During the last legislative session, the legislature voted to extend the right to 15 years.

Nuccio said that when the Legislature initially approved the expansion, lawmakers thought the program would cost $7 million annually. In reality, Nuccio said the program is “closer to $50 million.”

“It’s a huge number that is much higher than anyone was told,” Nuccio said. “In investing in education and with the school health centers, with federally qualified health centers and everything else, we feel like we have to make that cut now.”

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas called the proposal a “misguided suggestion.”

“I think this works for them politically, I think ethically and as a human being that these are individuals who need health care and we’re all going to pay for it one way or another. So we can deal with them proactively, or if they show up in the emergency room, we pay for them through our premiums,” said Rojas.

Ritter said House leaders will review the Republican proposal, but he suggested adjustments are unlikely.

“We will look at this and talk to the governor’s office and the Senate, but I think our plan will remain the same,” Ritter said. “We passed a very good budget that everyone voted for. And it is not out of balance. We think we are in a good place.”

“Yes, there are some deficiencies in certain items, but there are also surpluses in others, and we think we can make it through the second year that way if we have to come in in the spring,” Ritter added.

Ritter said there is no deficit for the ’24 budget and he expects the state to end the year with $20 million to $100 million.

As for fiscal year 2025, Ritter said, “The problem is the revenue cap.” As a result, he said, “One person’s definition of deficiency is not a normal person’s definition of deficiency.”

After receiving the Republican’s proposal, Ritter said he was “flexible” to suggestions, but said it “might be difficult at this late hour” to open the state budget.

“Timing is a problem. And because we feel that we are certainly not jeopardizing the fiscal health of the state in any way by leaving the biennial budget as it is, we feel comfortable perhaps making the ARPA allocation,” Ritter said.

Candelora and other Republicans opposed the Democrat’s ARPA plan.

“If Democrats are just converting ARPA funds into bonds so they can spend more money while our budget is in deficit, that is a disastrous proposal,” Candelora said. “We need to find out what is really left of the ARPA money. Is it about $50 million, as the governor has determined, or is it $300 million?

Once the ARPA funds are identified, Candelora said the Legislature can “fill gaps” in areas such as higher education, nonprofits, the unemployment compensation fund, child care and higher energy costs.

“I don’t think our priorities are much different than the Democrats’,” Candelora said. “The big difference is that we don’t want to spend that money without an adjusted budget. So what we’re saying is, let’s adjust the budget first, which is the fiscally sensible thing to do, and then spend the ARPA money second.”

Ritter said the state’s remaining ARPA dollars should be spent by the end of the year.

“If you don’t do that this year, it’s not a good idea, you just give the money back to the FBI,” he said. “We think the ARPA plan is working best at this time.”