Ever since it became clear that Gov. Malloy wants a vote on the state budget plan even before any agreement with state employee unions on major concessions is reached, Republicans and conservatives have been calling the vote “illegal” and “unconstitutional.” If that’s the case, why hasn’t any one of them filed suit to stop the vote? The answer is because it’s not unconstitutional. The General Assembly has been voting on budget based on assumed savings for decades. Granted, this case of “assumed savings” is larger than any other, but they’re assumed savings nonetheless. The critics crying foul should either file suit or stuff a sock in it.
State Republican Party Chairman Chris Healy, state Senate Minority Leader John McKinney, political has-beens Tom Scott and Jonathan Pelto, convicted governor turned radio talk host John Rowland and other various state and national conservatives have either implied or outright stated that a vote on a budget with a $2 billion hole that is supposed to be filled with labor give-backs is against the law (which it clearly is not—there’s nothing in the criminal or civil code regarding a budget vote) or unconstitutional (which is open to interpretation).