From the transcript of the Connecticut Senate - June 25, 2007 - debate on the budget:

"SEN. LOONEY:

Yes, thank you, Mr. President. I'm rising to speak in support of the bill. Would like to join my accommodations to those of others in talking about the extraordinary hard work and visionary work of Senator Harp and Representative Merrill and Senator Daily and Representative Staples in this process.

And also would like to mention the leadership of our President Pro Temp, Senator Williams, throughout this entire process, establishing a vision, finding ways to develop common ground, bringing people together when there was a severe difference of opinion that threatened to impede the process, but keeping an eye on the goal.

And one of the major important parts of that goal very early in the session was the way in which Senator Williams staked out a position on the need for a substantial healthcare initiative in this budget.

And we have seen that. As Senator McKinney and others have said, there is a substantial new initiative for healthcare. Some questioned earlier as to whether or not there was indeed an emergency.

And, obviously, the justification for exceeding the cap requires an emergency declaration. We do in fact have, and have had for a number of years, an emergency in healthcare.

The Medicaid reimbursement rates that we have paid to providers for so long have been so low that it has provided disincentives for people to participate, for providers to participate, meaning that we have had people under the HUSKY program and under Medicaid who theoretically had coverage but could not find a provider to give treatment. That is a crisis.

That has been, in many ways, a scandal in the State of Connecticut that we are finally, at long last, addressing in this budget so that those who have the, at least the fact of coverage on paper will in fact have coverage in reality.

And that is a crucial initiative in this budget, with the substantial increase in reimbursement rates both for physicians, for clinics, for dental, for vision, for hospitals. It is something long overdue but finally done here in a substantial way.

In addition, Mr. President, as others have mentioned, this budget contains a historic increase in levels of municipal aid, education cost-sharing aid in particular.

If you look back historically, over a number of years, any increase in ECS over $ 30 million or $ 40 million in the aggregate would have been considered quite large.

This budget contains a $ 181 million increase in ECS for Fiscal Year '08 and another $ 80 million beyond that in Fiscal year '09 for historic levels of municipal aid.

Total town aid increases by over $ 221 million in Fiscal Year '08 to a total of almost $ 2. 8 billion and then another $ 130 million beyond that in '09, bringing the total municipal aid almost to a total of $ 3 billion by the '09 fiscal year.

Again, this is a way of making sure we move toward what we have always said, a stronger state role in the partnership of funding municipal education in particular. So these are two of the major initiatives in this budget.

Mr. President, there are of course others. Two of the others that are important to us, the significant increase in funding for the CAPS program for public college student aid in Connecticut and for the CICSG program, for private college student aid in Connecticut.

As we all know, every investment that we make in education, from preschool through elementary and middle school, through high school, and through college, is to be seen as a way of providing a guarantor for our future.

We will only be competitive, we will only be healthy if we continue to have the best-education, most-productive, most-sophisticated workforce in the nation here in Connecticut because our competition now, growing all over the world, not only nationally but internationally.

So we need to do much more in education at all levels to make sure that our workforce is productive. As we know, the cost of higher education, even for public higher education, has gone up at alarming rates over the years.

This substantial increase will help lower- and middle-income families to help their children realize the reality of a college education. So those initiatives are crucial in this budget as well.

Mr. President, some have spoken earlier about some missed opportunities in the budget, mentioning the gas tax, the property tax credit.

Clearly, the Senate did pass a suspension of the gas tax credit earlier in this session. And the budget that we passed and was vetoed early on did contain an expansion of the property tax credit. And again, those are issues in discussions to be renewed in another day.

In terms of advocacy, as some said, one of the other unaddressed needs in this budget, and one we hope to move forward in this future, is an earned income tax credit for the working poor, as a piggyback on the federal credit, which is a substantial assistance to low-income families who are struggling with the cost of employment in low-wage jobs.

Others have spoken about the need, I know Republican Members have spoken about addressing the cliffs in the estate tax. Obviously, that is another issue for the next round of discussions in the next budget cycle.

So there is work to do, but this budget is something that I think, as we said, we can all be proud of because of the extraordinary level of attention paid in those key areas of education and healthcare.

The failure to address those would indeed be a failure to meet our constitutional obligations here in the State of Connecticut and, clearly, especially in healthcare, as we said, long overdue and a crisis that had not been substantially addressed until this year.

So it is something of great significance to go forward with. I think we can go back to our districts throughout the state with great pride, for the most part, in everything that we do here, in recognizing that this budget does indeed address the priority areas that are pressing, that do constitute in fact an emergency and, in many areas, a crisis.

I'd also like to mention, as we will be going on this afternoon, speaking about the budget implementation bills, other Members who have worked hard on those implementers.

Senator Gaffey, Senator Handley, Senator Harris have worked very hard with the leadership and with Senator Harp and Senator Daily on many of those other issues as well, as well as their counterparts in the House of Representatives.

One last note of thanks I'd like to mention is our legal staff, who have done such a great job throughout the session and also in the Special Session in vetting, proofreading, looking at the proposed language, led by Joe Quinn, who is just an extraordinary attorney and has been just a leading light in so many areas in our caucus, Joe Rudikoff, Bill Beccaro, Natalie Wagner, Dina Berlyn, Vinnie Mauro, on our side, all of whom have contributed so much, have been here late into the night during the period of budget talks and negotiations as well, along with other members of the staff.

So again, Mr. President, there is, I think, a great deal to celebrate in this budget. It was a difficult process going through the session and then, for more than two weeks, beyond the end of the session deadline, but I think the outcome is one that we should all take great pride in, in recognizing that we have done many things that are essential, necessary, and crucial.

And I think that we can tell the people of our districts that we have kept faith with them in this budget. Thank you, Mr. President."

_____________________________________________________________________________

From the transcript of the Connecticut Senate - May 31, 2007 - debate on the tax package:

"SEN. LOONEY:

Thank you, Mr. President. Speaking in support of the bill or speaking in support of the amendment, Mr. President, I would join in commending Senator Daily and Representative Staples for working in bringing this forward.

And this is, Mr. President, a progressive measure. It is tax reform. It is a progressive change. And despite the comments of opponents tonight in trying to obscure that fact, the fact is it raises additional revenue by increasing the marginal rate on a small number of people, and that is, as Senator Gaffey said, those who make joint returns over $ 250,000 a year.

And the fact that that change raises substantial amounts of additional revenue underscores the fact of how much wealth is held by a very small percentage of our citizens and what an extraordinary level of disparity there is in this State of Connecticut, where the per capita income in the City of Hartford is less than the amount of tax liability in some of the largest communities where an average income is many multiples of income in our central cities.

And we are a state where those contrasts are very stark because they exist in very close geographic proximity to each other, but this is a very progressive change.

One of the key elements, Mr. President, obviously is that for those who are in a moderate-income range, as we said for $ 20,000 to $ 100,000 of taxable income, there is a double benefit to this bill.

That is the overall rate of the income tax is reduced, and in addition to that, there is the extra benefit of the substantial increase in the property tax credit. So it is both rate reduction and an enhanced property tax credit, and that is a very, very substantial benefit that moderate-income people will enjoy under this proposal.

It was mentioned earlier that renters may be slighted in some way because they can't participate fully, but that ignores the fact that renters are more likely to be people of moderate income.

Therefore, they will be the ones who will primarily benefit in that category of people who were affected by the double benefit of the reduction in rate and also the enhanced doubling of the property tax credit.

That is something that is very, very needed and welcome tax relief for people generally in that level between $ 20,000 and $ 100,000 of income.

The earned income tax credit spoken about also, Mr. President, is another very progressive and very necessary measure that targets relief to those who need it most. And it was said, oh, well, it's a giveaway to those who didn't pay taxes.

That is really an unjust and an unfair comment because it ignores the fact that the recipients of the earned income credit at the federal level and those who will receive it at the state level under this amendment are, in fact, taxpayers who pay an extraordinarily high amount in sales tax payments and also in property tax, and even on their cars even if they're not homeowners.

The burden of taxation that people pay when they are low income working people is a very high burden indeed. And their labor should not be slighted by saying they are not taxpayers merely because they may not have state income tax liability.

So this is a substantial amount of relief targeted to those who need it most, those who now have the expenses connected with being employed, who may have come off public assistance, who now have to worry about transportation costs, clothing costs, uniform costs, childcare costs, all of the other costs ancillary to transportation costs related to employment.

So we have a way of addressing that in this bill through the earned income tax credit for low-income working people.

In addition, Mr. President, as we mentioned earlier, the property tax credit being doubled there is a benefit, where the credit is, not only is it doubled, but it's also extended to have a much longer arc so that wealthier people will receive a benefit of the property tax credit, because it now phases out at a much higher level of income up to $ 240,000 rather than the lower level of current law.

So that is a way also of reaching toward higher levels of income in providing some relief under this bill. So that is something that should not be ignored, and there's a substantial element of progressivity as well.

In addition, Mr. President, postponing the current rescheduled increases in the petroleum products gross receipts tax is indeed a genuine relief added to the relief that we passed here tonight earlier regarding the $ . 025 per gallon tax. So it is another way of addressing what is an important need in this state.

So there are so many components of this bill, Mr. President, that do in fact make our tax system far more progressive.

The rate of increase at the higher levels of income is a modest rate of increase. It still leaves us at a much lower top marginal rate than most of our neighboring states have who have state income taxes. Because not only do they have higher marginal rates, generally they begin to apply their top marginal rate at much lower levels of income than we would be doing under this proposal.

So it does not in any way make us uncompetitive with our neighbors or send a bad signal. And as Senator Gaffey points out, the very wealthiest of the wealthy people tend to be people who have the bulk of their income in unearned income through dividends and interest income.

And those people have received a substantial tax break under our income tax over the years based upon what the level was on taxes, on dividends and interest income prior to the more broad based income tax passed in 1991, because people did forget that we did indeed have an income tax prior to 1991.

It was just not a comprehensive income tax. It did not cover salaries and earned income, but did cover other categories of income at a rate that was more than twice as high as the state income tax more broadly based applies currently.

So all of those factors, Mr. President, point to the fact that this is a tax proposal that we are proud of and should be proud of. And it does reflect a budget that reflects a level of spending that would be paid for through this more progressive tax package, which is why we believe it is honest to come out with a revenue package that reflects what we need, the thoughtful work of the Appropriations Committee also reflected.

It sets a framework for that debate on spending. And it is something that addresses our needs in a way that provides genuine relief to the bulk of our people.

The fact is that although more revenue is raised through this proposal, it is raised in a way that still provides substantial tax relief to those who need it most in Connecticut, those who are low and moderate-income people, and they are the ones who will benefit from this proposal.

And it is something that we are all proud to support this evening, Mr. President, and urge support of the amendment."

SEN. LOONEY:

Mr. President, speaking in support of the amendment, certainly commend Senator Slossberg, Senator Meyer for bringing it forward. I think for reasons that Senator DeFronzo also mentioned, this is a good and significant proposal.

Now the fact is that the seven states who have same-day registration, have significantly higher participation rates than those who do not. And now clearly there is one of the arguments often made in opposition, offered by Senator Roraback, that there is something perhaps too casual about the process of people are not required to have at least some rigors in the registration process.

However, it is important, I think, to remember that if you look at the broad universe of western democracies, the fact of having a registration requirement at all is not universal of all of our fellow democratic nations of the world.

In many nations your status as a voter is secured by the fact that you are a citizen. There is not a separate registration requirement at all. So we are still maintaining the requirement.

It is now under this and this isolated, single-day experiment, we expect there will be a high level of interest on the day of the Presidential primary. It will be an opportunity for people to express that interest through registration and voting on the same day.

We have all heard over the years, and in the years I've been in the General Assembly, we have gradually advanced the date of registration closer to Election Day.

It used to be that it was a requirement of two weeks or a month before registration, and then we often found the situation that once peoples' interest in the election was peeked, they found out that it was already too late to register.

And we're finding out now, of course, that this experiment will finally close that gap and provide an experiment that we can all evaluate that we will have time in the 2008 session to look at the results of participation in that February primary and decide whether this pilot is worth expanding or not.

At least, we will then have a tangible demonstration of its impact, rather than just theoretical considerations. Thank you, Mr. President."

From the debate on a bill to allow children of immigrants who attend Connecticut high schools for four years and then graduate to pay in-state tuition at public colleges and universities - transcript of the Connecticut Senate - June 1, 2007:

SEN. LOONEY:

"Thank you, Mr. President. Speaking in support of the bill, commend Senator Harris for bringing it forward and for his highly effective and articulate presentation of this issue.

Mr. President, this bill addresses people who should not just be categorized as illegals or designated as criminal. It is young people who are Connecticut's children, who are our children. These are long time residents of Connecticut under the bill. They would have to be four-year graduates of our high schools.

They are not people who came into the state looking for a benefit or a windfall, but people who have been here for a significant period of time, gone to school here, and in many cases excelled here during their time in our Connecticut public schools.

They are the classmates and the friends of our own children and our own grandchildren. They are American young people, Mr. President. Many of them would not know the nation from which they came as infants in many cases. If they were to be returned there, they would have the sense of being in an alien culture.

They are thoroughly American in just about every sense except the legal sense. They listen to American music, they are entertained by American films, their friends are American children.

Many, as Senator Harp said in the example that she cited, are not even aware of their status until they make inquiries about assistance for higher education and when they are about to try to pursue the American dream.

There is one case recently that came to my attention, a young man from the neighborhood where I grew up. He is a parishioner of St. Rose of Lima Parish, which is my home parish in New Haven. And that is an area that was heavily Italian American and Irish American when I was growing up there, and it is now heavily Latino with a diversity of population from all over Central and South America.

This young man arrived in the United States when he was about 12 or 13 years old. He was brought here by older relatives. He came from Central America. He was the oldest of a fairly large family.

The family was very poor, struggling at home. He has now been in the United States for more than a decade. He is now almost in his mid-20s.

He worked at many hard and menial jobs, often holding two or three jobs at a time working 50 and 60 hours a week for most of the last decade. Almost all of the available money he has made except what he has needed for his own subsistence has been sent home to his family.

His younger siblings are now doing better, are older and independent on their own, and this young man now wants to find some opportunities for himself.

But during his time in the United States he has not been just working and under the table and hiding from authorities. He has been productive, has been sending money home, as we said.

But he has also been educating himself without any advantages or opportunities. He has spent his nights after his long days reading, teaching himself English so that now he speaks perfect English, highly articulate, and he reads history, he reads philosophy, he reads literature, he studies poetry.

He has a very complex intelligence and hopes to be able to advance to higher education. This is someone who has already made great sacrifices and has maturity beyond his years because of what he has done, what he has endured.

He truly has the American dream and wants to pursue it on his own behalf and for those others. This bill will help young men like him, young women like him, these are people who embodied the American spirit that we hope to [inaudible] in our own children, in our own families.

This is an investment in our future. This is a sign of the generosity that has always been at the heart of what it is to be American, and I urge support for the bill."

________________________________________________________________________________________________

"SEN. LOONEY:

Thank you, Mr. President. Speaking in support of the bill, I wanted to commend Senator Prague and the Labor and Public Employees' Committee for bringing this forward.

Connecticut, I think, should be proud, Mr. President, to take the lead in progressive legislation, as this is, recognizing that it is a burden, many times, for people dragging themselves to work when they are ill, as Senator Harp said, sometimes infecting the workplace and causing more harm than benefit by being there.

They are there, in some cases, just because of a general conscientiousness, and in some cases of being unable to afford the loss of a day's pay. In any case, there are many good reasons, as have been said in the debate, for bringing this issue forward.

The fact is that Connecticut has always been a national leader in progressive labor policy. It is something that we should be proud of, rather than say that we're worried that it would put us at a disadvantage and wait for 49 other states to do it before we do it first.

It is important to take the lead in something like this. I believe the Labor Committee has shown great leadership, and Senator Prague, as usual, has been a visionary in this regard, and I urge support for the bill."

________________________________________________________________________________________________

From the transcript of the Senate session of June 25, 2007:

"Sen Williams:

    . . . My colleague, Majority Leader, Marty Looney, who was there for the late nights, for all of the negotiation sessions, fighting for our principles and making his case.

I also want to congratulate Senator Looney on the Governor's signing the Lost and Stolen Firearm bill, which Senator Looney has worked so hard for to bring greater accountability for lost and stolen firearms.

And also, he's been a champion of the earned income tax credit. You know, we didn't finish everything here with this budget. We have more to do as we come back in the future.

And one of the things we have to do is to work on the issue of tax equity. Senator Looney has been a champion of that, and I know, Senator Looney, that working together, we will get that done."