Blumenthal Says Rell Can’t Exercise Line-Item Veto Without Signing Budget
STATE BUDGET
By CHRISTOPHER
KEATING,
The Hartford Courant
September 9, 2009
In a high-profile reversal, Gov. M.
Jodi Rell will now allow the state
budget to take effect without line-
item vetoes that would have cut
$8.3 million in spending.
Rell’s decision came Tuesday
after hearing from Attorney
General Richard Blumenthal, who
said that the state Constitution
prohibits what Rell was trying
to do — issue a line-item veto
without signing the budget bill.
Even though she said she
disagreed with Blumenthal, Rell
reversed her position from last
week when she sharply criticized
Democrats for what she called
pork-barrel spending that she said
she was going to eliminate with
her veto pen.
“I acted in the best interests of
Connecticut taxpayers who can
ill afford this runaway spending,
and I remain convinced that my
use of the line-item veto authority
was in keeping with the state
Constitution,” Rell said. “The
items I eliminated, however
well-intentioned, were new
expenses, added at the last minute
by lawmakers who are simply
unwilling — or unable — to say
‘no’ when it comes to spending
taxpayer money.”
Rell added, “I respectfully
disagree with the Attorney
General’s advice. However, a
costly and protracted court fight
will only result in more of a
financial burden for taxpayers.
As I have said, we must have a
budget. For that reason, I will
allow the budget in its entirety
to become law without my
signature.”
In an interview Tuesday,
Blumenthal said, “The state
Constitution very clearly and
unambiguously says, in effect, the
only way to impose a line-item
veto is to sign the entire bill.”
Under the Constitution, a
governor has only four options
regarding the budget, as outlined
by Blumenthal. First, she could
sign the bill. Second, she could
veto the measure.
Third, she could sign the bill and
then veto particular line items.
Fourth, she could take no action
and thus allow the bill to become
law within five days.
The five-day period ended at
midnight Tuesday — hours after
Rell reversed her original position.
“Very simply, you may impose
a line-item veto on individual
items in a bill only if you sign
it,” Blumenthal said in a six-
page letter to Rell that was
dated Friday. “If you decline to
sign it, the bill as passed by the
legislature becomes law in its
entirety, and any attempted veto
of selected sections is null and
void.”
Blumenthal, who offered to speak
with Rell about the issue over the
Labor Day weekend, added, “If
you do nothing and leave the bill
unsigned, the entire bill would
become law and the attempted
partial veto would be null and
void and without effect.”
Senate President Pro Tem Donald
Williams, who has clashed
repeatedly with Rell this year over
the budget, said, “It is obviously
an embarrassing moment for the
administration. In the governor’s
attempt to publicly disown the
budget that she helped craft, she
valued public relations more than
sound policy. As a result, the
governor is ending the budget
process the same way she began
it — with confusion that misleads
the public.”
Among the funding restored
Tuesday was $150,000 over two
years for a food pantry that is
operated by the Manchester Area
Conference of Churches Charities
and $1 million for a controversial
state program that teaches
senior citizens how to avoid falls
involving various hazards.
At this point, some insiders
wondered why Rell would not
sign the bill and then veto the
particular line items that reached
$8.3 million — if it was so
important to reduce the $8.3
million in spending. In fact, they
said, Rell could have signed the
bill and line-item vetoed $200
million in spending.
A Rell aide said the governor
maintained her position from last
week that she could not put her
signature on a $37.6 billion budget
simply to veto items that were
worth $8 million.
House Republican leader
Larry Cafero of Norwalk was
particularly disturbed by Rell’s
reversal on Tuesday because he
had fought hard on the House
floor last week against the
Democratic spending.
Cafero was railing against
$50,000 for the Valley-Shore
YMCA in Westbrook and other
spending items during a late-night
speech.
“There wasn’t much good in
regard to this budget, and the
only good thing I could say is the
governor stood against pork-barrel
spending,” Cafero said Tuesday
night. “I don’t understand why she
would have given up on that fight.
It’s a fight worth having. It’s a
fight worth having.”
In tough economic times, Cafero
said, the state should be watching
the taxpayers’ dollars.
“Is it well-intentioned to give
$50,000 to a YMCA? Of course,
it is,” Cafero said. “But there’s
169 YMCAs. As I said on the management-level positions in
floor that night, how did they get several departments that were
so lucky? ... I have a YMCA in placed into the bill late at night,
Norwalk that’s hanging on by a he said.
thread.”
When asked if he had been given
an explanation of Rell’s decision
by the governor’s office, Cafero
responded, “Explanation? I read
the press release when you did. I
didn’t know this was an issue.”
After battling for seven months
over the budget — dating to Rell’s
budget speech in early February
— the battle over spending is now
complete.
“Game over. Fight done,” Cafero
said. “Lay down your arms. It’s
over. They won. The Democrats
won. The people of the state of
Connecticut lost, unless you’re
the Westbrook YMCA or the
Manchester food pantry. This is
the equivalent of [professional
boxer] Roberto Duran — ‘no mas’
— against Sugar Ray Leonard.”
Cafero was referring to a famous
boxing match in New Orleans in
1980 between the two bitter rivals.
Although Duran denied making
the statement, which means “no
more” in Spanish, the remark has
been widely repeated for nearly
three decades.
Doug Whiting, a spokesman
for House Speaker Christopher
Donovan, said that Rell’s
administration — not the
Democrats — placed about $25
million back into the budget as
part of “add backs” that ended
up in the final version that will
become law.
Much of the money was for