An Act Concerning Legislators' Salaries And Timely Passage Of The State Budget.
Summary
HB 5656 would amend section 2-8 of the general statutes to tie legislators’ compensation to the timely enactment of the state budget. Under the bill, no legislator would receive a salary in any fiscal year unless a budget for that fiscal year is enacted. If the budget is enacted on or after the first day of the fiscal year, legislators’ salaries and benefits for that year would be reduced in proportion to the number of days the budget was late.
The stated purpose is to encourage debate and passage of the state budget in a timely manner. In practical terms, the bill creates a financial consequence for delayed budget adoption and would directly affect the compensation structure for members of the General Assembly. It does not alter the budget process itself, but it uses legislators’ pay and benefits as an enforcement mechanism to incentivize on-time budget action.
Impact
This bill would amend state law governing legislative compensation, specifically section 2-8 of the general statutes, by conditioning payment of legislators’ salaries and benefits on enactment of the annual state budget. It would affect members of the General Assembly by denying pay if no budget is passed for the fiscal year and by prorating compensation when the budget is enacted late. The measure would not directly change appropriations or budget authority, but it would create a statutory penalty linked to budget timing.
Sentiment
Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes available, there is no documented public debate or formal legislative sentiment in the provided materials. Based on the bill text alone, the proposal appears to reflect frustration with delayed budget adoption and a desire to pressure lawmakers toward timely action. The overall tone of the bill is reform-oriented and accountability-focused.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely to be whether it is appropriate or effective to penalize legislators financially for budget delays. Supporters would likely argue that tying pay to timely budget passage creates accountability and incentives for prompt action. Opponents may argue that the measure is punitive, could be unfair in cases where delays are caused by broader negotiations, and may not meaningfully improve the budget process. The bill’s impact on legislators’ own compensation also makes it politically sensitive.