Preview of Campaign 2022?


You never know where guests on Face the State will end up, but two of this week’s guests seem to have bright political futures. State Representative Sean Williams is widely regarded by members of his Republican party and State Representative Matt Ritter is popular among Connecticut Democrats.

These young up-and-comers were in for a taping of Face the State, and I teased them about potentially being candidates for governor in 2022. Ritter and Williams are friends and said if the two did run against each other it would be the “nicest” race ever.


The two were here to talk about Governor Malloy’s budget and as you might expect, they have different views of the governor’s spending plan. Williams, of Watertown, called the governor’s budget full of gimmicks, and Ritter defended the plan.


A big issue that resonates with voters is the car tax. The governor called for it to be eliminated, and that puts Ritter in a difficult position. His constituents in Hartford pay some of the highest car taxes in Connecticut, so naturally they want the tax to go bye-bye. Yet Hartford Mayor Pedro Segarra has complained that the governor’s plan will cost the city millions in revenue.
On Sunday, you’ll see Rep. Ritter explain this.

Rep. Williams also talked about the car tax, which was slated for elimination under Republican Jodi Rell, but failed. So will Williams support Governor Malloy’s plan?


Tune in Sunday at 11 AM for Face the State on Channel 3 for the entire discussion, in which we also talked about gun control and right to work. We’ll also talk with Mike Freimuth, the new director of the Capital Region Development Authority and our flashback looks at a key figure in black history in Connecticut, Gary Franks. In addition, we will remember the career of our late colleague, Brian Garnett.

UPDATE: Watch the Williams/Ritter segment here: http://www.wfsb.com/video?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=8418996

About the author: http://dennishouse.wordpress.com/2012/05/22/marking-20-years-at-wfsb/

8 replies »

  1. Gov. Malloy seems to have it half right, it’s unfair to tax equal vehicles at different rates just due to location. Either apply the tax based on value to registrations (not really a good thing) or a flat tax mill rate across the state, such as a motor vehicle mill rate, with each community being the recipient of said tax amount, the way it is collected today.

    i.e. a 2005 vehicle assessed at $15,000 is taxed at a mill rate of 20.00, for a taxable amount of $300.00. That method would seem fairer across the state… the state already tells the community what the assesed values of automobiles is, so it stands to reason they can tell the community what the tax rate shall be. This will also eliminate a portion of the state constituents from the fraudulent garaging a car (on paper) in say Essex where their vacation home is and the mill rate is lower but really parking the car in Waterbury or Hartford, where the mill rate is higher, because that is their primary residence.

    I’m all for equalizing taxes, but to exempt motor vehicles under a certain value will only promte a higher tax burden on the real estate property owner’s in a given community.

    Eliminating a tax liability for some, not all, is not the answer.


  2. We have to pay enough taxes, some of us are not rich so when we get behind on car taxes we cannot register our cars.


  3. He should eliminate it. The cities use it to screw over the taxpayers and there is no recourse. I live in Waterbury. In 2008 I moved out of state and i had a car that was repoed. I moved back in 2012 and found that Waterbury insists that I owe $2600 (plus collection costs) for back taxes. They claim I didn’t pay 2007 (I did but in the move I lost the receipt for the $900 i paid) they say I owe 2008 (I do) and 2009 which I don’t because I didn’t have the car. My daughter went through this as well. You only have 180 days to appeal the tax due otherwise it is considered valid. I refuse to pay it and hope they bring me to court so I can tell the judge what they are trying to do. In Waterbury if you do not keep your recepts they conviently lose the computer copy that you paid it already. My daughter had the receipts to back her up. I don’t so the court is my only option. Appealing to the tax commissioner will do no good.


  4. If the car tax is eliminated, what is going to replace the lost revenue? Another fee or the towns/cities will have raise the mill rate and homeowners will have to pay more taxes on their homes? So I will have to pay more tax on my home to cover the people that own cars but don’t own a home. How is that fair?? It is not going to save people anything, renters will have to pay more rent to cover the additional tax on the property they rent.. Wish someone would explain how this is going to save anybody money—especially the middle/low income people who really need it.


    • This state and the state of Rhode Island are the only two states in the United States to collect car tax. Converse with the other 48 governors and ask how they do it I assume they make it up with gas tax. There is no need to charge a car tax. How does it help the poor if we force this tax on them? It would allow more people to afford cars which ultimately could lead to better jobs.


  5. The entire subject of tax reform is a very sensitive one…those of us who live and own property in high mill rate communities say we are taxed to the hilt and cannot abide any additional taxes, hope for a break somewhere, While those who live and own property in low mill rate communities feel that they will be penalized with any tax increase fight against any tax equality progress.

    THIS is the reason why the nation is in such a broken state, everyone is concerned ONLY for themselves, and fails to see what real reform would involve…yes some will benefit with more disposable income and some will pick up additional burden, but something has got to change.

    We cannot continue to have our cake and eat it too, the services provided by town, state and federal agencies come solely from tax dollars, not some benevolent old man or corporate support. The sooner we all recognize that taxation is inevitable, and we the people must pay into the pot fairly and equally, the better we will all be. If anybody expects a free handout, without helping in some way to fund the benefit, then soon we will all be taking, and nobody will be giving.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s