Why does everything cost so much?
That may be the most important economic question Connecticut families are asking this election season.
It is not just groceries. It is the electric bill, property taxes, insurance, housing, childcare and the cost of running a business. One expense goes up, then another. Families work harder, yet feel as though they have less left at the end of the month.
So, what should a state representative actually do about it?
For the past four years, Hartford has approached affordability one problem at a time. My opponent points to tax cuts, education and childcare funding, funds secured for Greenwich and efforts to address electric bill costs. Those are attempts to address individual pressures facing Connecticut families.
But they leave a larger question unanswered:
Why does government keep adding costs faster than individual programs can offset them?
That is where I will take a different approach.
Before creating another program or spending another dollar, we should examine what Connecticut already spends and what taxpayers are getting in return. Programs should have a clear purpose, a measurable objective and demonstrated results. Those that are not working should be consolidated, redesigned or ended.
Every taxpayer dollar should have to earn its place.
We need to apply the same scrutiny on state mandates. A mandate can be passed in Hartford, but its cost often arrives in our local property-tax bills. I will push the state to identify the actual cost of the mandates it imposes and give communities greater flexibility to meet required objectives. If Hartford creates the requirement, Hartford should be honest about what it costs.
Electricity provides another example. My opponent has supported efforts to address charges on electric bills, including legislation involving the Combined Public Benefits Charge. Those efforts recognize a real problem. But I will ask the next question: Why does the charge exist in the first place, and can the underlying cost be reduced?
Moving a cost from one line of a bill to another, or shifting it from ratepayers to another source of government revenue, does not necessarily make Connecticut more affordable. The goal should be to reduce the underlying cost. Energy policies should be judged by their impact on reliability, supply and, ultimately, the bills families and businesses pay.
Affordability also depends on a strong economy. Connecticut needs to be a place where businesses want to invest, grow and hire. That means predictable regulations, reliable infrastructure and a competitive tax environment. We cannot continually increase the cost of doing business and then try to offset those costs with another government program.
My approach is straightforward:
- Before adding another program, ask what we already have
- Before raising another dollar, ask how existing dollars are being used
- Before imposing another mandate, calculate what it will cost
- Before declaring a policy successful, ask whether families can actually feel the difference.
No state representative can control the price of every carton of eggs or gallon of gasoline. But a state representative can help determine whether government makes those costs harder, or easier, for families to bear.
Connecticut residents are asking: Why does everything cost so much?
Hartford needs to stop asking what else it can fund and start asking what it can eliminate, streamline and do better.
Because the most meaningful tax relief is not always another credit or deduction.
Sometimes it is simply not making the bill bigger in the first place.
Michael Mason is a candidate in the November 3rd election who is running to represent Greenwich from the 151st District as your next state representative. Learn more about Mike by visiting his website at votemichaelmason.com