Search
Back

Lawmakers Can Avoid Spending Cap Litigation

Yankee Institute Study Explains Legal Limits Imposed By Spending Cap

Connecticut lawmakers regularly find themselves tiptoeing at the edge of the law while writing the state’s budget. To clarify exactly where that edge lies, the Yankee Institute released a policy brief on Monday, Connecticut’s Spending Cap: A Legal Overview.

Read the complete brief at the bottom of this page.

Although an overwhelming majority of voters approved the constitutional spending cap in 1992, lawmakers frequently push the cap to its limits. Actually breaking the cap could expose the state to serious litigation that, even if unsuccessful, would create an environment of uncertainty about the legality of millions – or even billions – of dollars in state spending.

Peter Bowman, a senior trial attorney with Pavano Dombrowski, LLC, and president of the Connecticut Chapter of the Federalist Society, wrote the brief for the Yankee Institute.

“If the General Assembly raises income taxes while spending more than allowed under the spending cap, taxpayers would have the right to challenge their increased tax bills in court because the increases are meant to fund illegal spending,” Bowman writes.

Bowman examines the history of taxpayer challenges in Connecticut alongside the complex history of the spending cap, narrowing down the types of legal challenges that are most likely to hold up in court.

“The people of Connecticut overwhelmingly supported the spending cap at the polls two decades ago,” said Carol Platt Liebau, president of the Yankee Institute. “This well-reasoned legal overview should help lawmakers understand why it’s vital that they remain within the limits of that popular law as they make difficult decisions about Connecticut’s next budget.”

Read more:

Connecticut’s Spending Cap: A Legal Overview

The Fitch Files: Five more lawsuits filed against restaurants as legislature moves toward special session

A partial judgement was handed down by Connecticut Superior Court Judge Thomas Moukawsher against two restaurants named in a class action lawsuit filed in 2017 by two former employees.  Chicago Sam’s and Penny Corner Pub, both with locations in Enfield and Cromwell, lost part of their two-year old court battle, ...

Read More

Temporary income tax “myth” has roots in Weicker’s pitch to lawmakers, public

A CT Mirror article published on Nov. 21 pointed out that Connecticut’s income tax was never meant to be temporary, refuting a common talking point employed by lawmakers and political candidates, the public, No Tolls CT and, in one instance, the Yankee Institute. The “myth” of the temporary income tax ...

Read More

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SIGN UP TO RECEIVE OUR NEWSLETTER