Connecticut
CT leaders say they'll counter swiftly if Trump cuts more federal aid
Gov. Ned Lamont and the General Assembly’s highest-ranking leaders drew a political line in the sand late Friday.
If President Donald Trump continues to withhold huge blocks of federal aid for health care, education or other core programs, Connecticut’s done waiting to see if Congress or the courts will reverse the damage, leaders here wrote in a joint statement.
Connecticut’s piggy banks are large, and officials won’t hesitate to crack them immediately if vital programs are damaged, they indicated.
“Sound fiscal practices have positioned us better than most states in the nation,” Lamont wrote late Friday afternoon in a joint statement with House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, and Senate President Pro Tem Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven. “If this pattern of devastating cuts continues, we will be prepared to exercise emergency powers. Although we hope that Washington reverses course, we must plan for the inevitable or unpredictable.”
Officials here also had expected to see deep cuts in aid from Washington, but not until late summer or fall with the congressional adoption of the next federal budget. Since taking office in January, though, Trump has used executive orders on several occasions to suspend grants, reclaim unspent dollars from states, or attach controversial new conditions to federal assistance.
The comments came hours after state Senate Democrats completed a closed-door caucus during which members vented frustrations about Trump’s latest unilateral move, the cancellation of $12 billion in public health grants to states this week, including $155 million for infectious disease management, genetic screening of newborns and substance abuse prevention in Connecticut.
“What no one could anticipate was how severe these cuts would be and how quickly they would occur to vital programs, sometimes without warning,” Lamont and legislative leaders wrote, adding decisions on when to restore funding would be made in the coming weeks on a case-by-case basis.
Their statement didn’t say, though, whether the fiscally moderate-to-conservative governor and his fellow Democrats in legislative leadership see eye-to-eye on which piggy banks are OK to shatter, and which can’t be touched.
Connecticut holds a record-setting $4.1 billion budget reserve, commonly known as its rainy day fund, an amount equal to 18% of annual operating costs.
But an aggressive series of budget caps, labeled “fiscal guardrails” by Lamont and other supporters, have generated roughly triple that $4.1 billion mark since their enactment in 2017. And what wasn’t deposited into the reserve, another $8.5 billion, was used to whittle down the state’s massive pension debt.
One “guardrail” alone, a provision that restricts lawmakers’ ability to spend certain income and business tax receipts, has forced them to save an average of $1.4 billion annually since 2017. Analysts say it will capture another $1.4 billion before this fiscal year ends on June 30, and closer to $1.3 billion in each of the next three years.
Though the governor and legislative leaders all have cited the rainy day fund as one coffer Connecticut may need to tap to mitigate impending cuts in federal aid, scaling back the budget caps that helped fill this reserve is another matter.
Lamont has been reluctant to tamper with this system, though he did express a willingness in February to scale back this savings mandate modestly by about $300 million per year.
Ritter and Looney, though, have been more direct about the need to reform this “guardrails” system, save less, and pour more dollars into core programs like health care, education and social services.
And the House speaker said Friday he believes these saved income and business tax receipts should be the first line of defense against Trump cuts.
It’s been 14 years since Connecticut has failed to make the full contributions recommended by pension analysts for its retirement benefits for state employees and municipal teachers, and Ritter noted the full $3.2 billion owed this fiscal year already has been budgeted.
And any “guardrails” savings Connecticut doesn’t need to reverse cuts in federal funding still could be sent into the pensions as well, Ritter added.
But cracking this piggy bank first would leave the larger, $4.1 billion rainy day fund available for later this summer or fall, when potentially more damage could occur.
With Congress aiming to find more than $880 billion in cuts to Medicaid — a cooperative health care program that sends $6.1 billion to Connecticut this year alone — officials here fear revenues that support nursing homes, federally qualified health clinics, hospitals and insurance programs for poor adults and children, could be in grave jeopardy.
And with recent tariffs ordered by the president increasing many economists’ fears of a looming recession, Connecticut may need its rainy day fund later this year or next to mitigate the big drops in tax receipts that often accompany a sharp national economic downturn, legislative leaders say.
Looney echoed Ritter’s comments, calling the president’s latest health care funding cuts “irresponsible, reckless and possibly disastrous” and showing Connecticut must have all resources ready to offset damage to its most vital programs.
“We can’t draw a line anywhere,” Looney added.
The Lamont administration opted not to elaborate on Friday’s statement after its release.
But the governor has warned on several occasions that Connecticut must understand it ultimately can’t offset all losses in federal funding if the cuts go as deep as some fear they will.
Connecticut will receive more than $10 billion in federal funding this fiscal year, a total that equals roughly 40% of the entire state budget.
“No state can restore every cut that comes from Washington,” the joint statement from Connecticut leaders adds.
Rain early today and tapering to spotty drizzle through midmorning! Other than a spotty western CT shower late today it will try to dry out. Some sun, breezy and nicer Friday with some scattered showers at night and for early Saturday morning. On the chilly side this weekend with lots of 50s and another system going by just to our east Sunday that could clip eastern CT with a shower. We have been in a cycle of nice Mondays and that is the plan next week again!
Early this morning: Umbrella weather! Rain, heavy at times. Lows 45-50.
Today: Scattered showers during the morning. Drying out for much of the state with some late day partial clearing. A shower though for western areas. Cool with highs only in the 50s.
Tonight: More clearing with lows in the 40s.
Tomorrow (May 1st): Much nicer! Sun and clouds, warmer with highs in the lower to middle 60s. Scattered showers at night.
Saturday: Some morning showers moving out. Lots of clouds and cool with highs only in the middle to upper 50s.
Sunday: Lots of clouds, breezy and cool with highs in the upper 50s to about 60. Rain could clip eastern CT. during the morning!
Monday: Mostly sunny with highs in the 60s.
Tuesday: Sun to clouds with highs in the middle 60s.
Wednesday: More showers with highs in the middle 60s.
Thursday: Rain likely with highs in the middle 60s.
In April, two babies were relinquished at Connecticut hospitals under the state’s Safe Havens Act, according to the state Department of Children and Families. The babies were surrendered to Yale New Haven Hospital and Connecticut Children’s at the University of Connecticut Health Center, DCF said.
The Safe Havens Act, which was enacted 25 years ago, allows a parent to give up their infant to hospital emergency room staff anonymously and without the threat of prosecution. DCF then places the baby in a preapproved adoptive home.
At a Wednesday press conference, Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz said the Safe Havens Act has had “an incredible impact” and called it “life-saving.”
“Those women who find themselves in a situation where they deliver a baby and they cannot or they do not want to raise that baby, they may feel incredibly isolated and challenged and judged, and they may feel they have nowhere to turn,” Bysiewicz said.
Under the law, a baby may be surrendered at a designated location by a parent, relative or advocate for the child, and the parent has 30 days to change their mind and begin working with DCF to see if reunification is possible. There are 37 medical centers in Connecticut — 25 of them hospitals — that allow babies to be surrendered 24 hours a day.
Pam Sawyer, a former state representative who spearheaded the law’s passage, said she intended it to be “so simple it could be shared in the school bus.”
But two babies relinquished in the same month — though these are the only two babies relinquished so far this year — marks a spike from the usual trend. Since the law went into effect, a total of 60 babies have been relinquished. And in 2025, just one baby was surrendered the whole year.
Co-chair of the General Assembly’s Committee on Children, Sen. Ceci Maher, D-Wilton, outlined a number of issues that could lead a parent to give up their baby, such as inadequate housing or financial instability.
The Committee on Children advanced a bill this session that would establish a task force to study the voluntary surrender of infants — including considerations for the best way to provide such a program without perpetuating “racial, ethnic, health, economic and socioeconomic disparities” among parents looking to surrender.
The bill passed the state Senate on April 15 and awaits a vote in the House.
Some lawmakers and advocates have suggested adding another option for parents considering giving up a baby — temperature-controlled chambers known as “baby boxes” that are installed within the exterior walls of a surrender location to allow parents to relinquish the infant anonymously.
Once a baby is left in the box device, alerts are sent to staff and to 911 dispatch centers. The boxes are designed with bassinets, and equipped with electricity, air conditioning and heating, but they’re not federally regulated. Lori Bruce, a researcher and bioethicist at Yale University, pointed this out during her testimony at a public hearing on the legislation Feb. 17.
“Even our hairdryers, even tongue depressors, all sorts of much more basic tools require regulation,” Bruce said.
The boxes are intended to be anonymous, but that’s not always possible when they are installed at places like firehouses, which have cameras all around the building.
Bruce said the boxes also remove the opportunity for any face-to-face interaction between the parent and a public service worker who might offer access to resources like crisis counseling — or simply ask if they are okay.
Baby boxes have been installed in 20 states so far, according to Safe Haven Baby Boxes.
Sawyer said she is in favor of the baby boxes, but only after more research.
“I love the idea, but I don’t know that they’re quite there yet,” she said. “My view still is that it’s advocacy and teaching” that will help those who need the Safe Havens Act the most.
Many Connecticut families are struggling to find housing or living in cramped, run-down apartments that get more expensive each year. Take for example “Sam,” a mother of two in her mid-30s. After fleeing from an abusive relationship, Sam stayed in a shelter for a period of time, but found it difficult to find a safe apartment for her and her children.
In an interview with Dr. Tricia Lewis, Sam said, “When I was first looking for an apartment, it was hard to find one because… the rents are so high [and] because a lot of landlords want cash on the spot. And if you don’t have the cash on the spot, they don’t want to deal with you.”
Sam looked for several months to find a suitable apartment, being turned away multiple times due to her source of payment, a housing voucher. This search caused a great deal of stress and worry for Sam, as it does for many other Connecticut residents who are priced out or discriminated against in their housing search.
We can do better for our people – Connecticut families need more quality, affordable housing options.
Connecticut faces a housing shortage of up to 380,000 units, and the average renter makes only $22.69 per hour, which is significantly less than the $35.42 required for a modest, two-bedroom apartment.
Under the House Bill 5396 known as “YIGBY” (Yes in Gods Backyard), Connecticut now has an opportunity to address this situation. This bill would make it easier for religious organizations like churches and synagogues to build affordable housing on their own land which often goes untouched. Religious organizations are already in a position to support this being that they look for ways to benefit and support the community around them.
This approach is not only practical, but also essential. The supply and demand for housing in Connecticut are significantly out of balance. Zillow data shows that rents and property prices have been rising gradually in recent years, putting pressure on individuals with middle-class and lower-class incomes. Renting families will continue to become more unstable as a result of this tendency if nothing is done. YIGBY provides a cost-effective and efficient means of expanding the housing supply without needing additional land for development.
This bill is particularly important because of the link between housing and health. The affordability crisis is a public health issue, not just a housing problem. Health can deteriorate when a family’s housing costs exceed half of their income. Families in “cost-burdened” situations are more likely to experience chronic stress, which is directly linked to heart disease and hypertension, and they are less likely to seek preventative care.
Children who experience this degree of housing uncertainty are exposed to toxic stress, which has an impact on their long-term academic success and brain development. Stable housing allows individuals to maintain employment, access healthcare, and build supportive social networks. It improves mental health, lowers ER visits, and makes children’s surroundings safer. In this way, investing in housing is also an investment in public health infrastructure.
YIGBY guidelines, according to their opponents, might give religious organizations unique rights to override local zoning laws. It is important to note that zoning regulations have frequently been utilized to keep affordable homes out of high opportunity neighborhoods, perpetuating racial and economic segregation.
The YIGBY strategy lowers needless obstacles that impede prompt solutions; it does not entirely eliminate oversight. “Restrictive zoning is one of the biggest constraints on housing supply in high-cost areas,” according to housing expert Jenny Schuetz. If Connecticut wants to increase housing access and health outcomes, these limitations must be addressed.
Connecticut lawmakers should move quickly by passing YIGBY legislation. By doing this, religious organizations could re-purpose their property, more affordable housing options would be available for Connecticut families, and one of the primary causes of health disparities in the state would be addressed. More importantly, it would show a commitment to innovative, community-based solutions that prioritize human well-being and dignity.
Isabela Lizano is a junior at Sacred Heart University, majoring in Health Sciences with a concentration in Public Health.
-
New York46 minutes agoHomes for Sale in the Bronx and Manhattan
-
Detroit, MI1 hour agoMailbag: Did Detroit Lions’ draft hint at defensive scheme changes?
-
San Francisco, CA1 hour agoSan Francisco bar hosts immersive
-
Dallas, TX2 hours agoDallas Captain Jamie Benn Fined By NHL For Cross-Checking
-
Miami, FL2 hours agoNonstop flights from U.S. to Venezuela resume Thursday at Miami International Airport for first time in seven years
-
Boston, MA2 hours agoBello's continued struggles compound Boston's thin rotation
-
Denver, CO2 hours agoTroubled apartments: Breaking down Denver’s distressed multifamily properties
-
Seattle, WA2 hours agoStatus of Seattle Mariners’ Brendan Donovan, Bryce Miller – Seattle Sports