Let’s try to restart the conversation around some fundamental principles. First, Connecticut has had, has, and will have for the foreseeable future, among the highest electric costs in the United States. There are a lot of reasons for this but suffice it to say here that it is not the fault of regulators, past or current, nor the fault of utility companies.

Second, while acknowledging the first principle, customers are entitled to the lowest possible rates consistent with efficient and adequate service.

Third, investment dollars flow to where those dollars can earn the highest risk adjusted return. That is, the greater the risk, the greater the required return to attract those dollars.

Fourth, predictability and stability, long and short term. are essential for both investors and  customers.

Fifth and finally, transparency should guide almost every decision regarding utility rates and  investment. By this, I mean real transparency. If, for example, there is a determination, after full and open discussion, that it makes sense for Connecticut to ensure that the Millstone nuclear plant be kept open, then the costs, benefits, and risks of doing so should  be fully explained to the public and if necessary, repeatedly so. Similarly, the current transition to a smart grid and new energy sources will be neither quick nor cheap but is inevitable. Full discussion and disclosure are paramount.

Because applying these principles can be complicated and hard, that application is not aided by dueling newspaper interviews, sound bites, lawsuits and the rest of the rhetoric which Connecticut has been subjected to over the last several years.

While a bit of a cliché, a little less heat and more light would be welcomed.

David Silverstone of West Hartford served as Connecticut’s first consumer counsel and over the last 50 years has represented consumers, power generators, and utility companies. He currently serves as the consumer advocate at the Connecticut Municipal Electric Energy Cooperative. These views are his own.

This last election showed that many Americans are now deserting the Democratic party in America. The reason for many leaving the Democrats is the poor leadership qualities of many Democratic politicians and the very bad messaging in the last election. The Democrats had tremendous legislative successes during the Biden presidency but were poorly communicated.

CT Congressional delegation introduces bills to block Trump agenda

We sometimes forget that it takes true humility in a leader to know when a leader is not the person going forward in the future, and it is time to relinquish his leadership role to another person. In this last election, Joe Biden should have known that it was his time to quit. The problem was not that Kamala Harris would have done any better, even with more time, because she lost in the worst defeat in recent history, losing both the popular vote and the Electoral College.

Kamala Harris ran a terrible campaign thinking that the likes of Oprah, Cardi B, Beyonce, sports stars, and Barack Obama would be an automatic ticket to the White House. These entertainers, sports athletes, and our ex-president did more to make Kamala Harris lose than help her because they galvanized the other group of voters, and they came out to the polls.

Barack Obama did not deliver a convincing message on why black men should vote for Kamala Harris, and the entertainers Oprah, Cardi B, Beyonce, and many other entertainers were not good role models but only wanted to project their own brand in the media by campaigning and many voters seen through their foolish act. The Black Community must now demand committed, moral, intellectual, and spiritual leaders like in the past and stop relying on these deceitful entertainers and athletes who just want to be on social media, or the Democratic Party will be in very big trouble in future elections.

Melvin Douglas Wilson, Manchester

No legislative leader is seriously advocating removing the guardrails entirely, and no-one is nostalgic (as Kevin Rennie asserts in his Jan. 12 column) for “the grim years of deficits and tax increases.”

Mr. Fasano’s insight into the careful process of constructing the guardrails is helpful. However, if Keith Phaneuf’s ongoing coverage in CT Mirror is correct, one decision was less carefully made, the threshold for the volatility cap.  The concept is that income from certain sources fluctuates from year to year, so only a portion of it should be considered reliable and available for budgeting.  That portion was somewhat hastily set at the amount received from those sources in the previous year.  Any additional income from those sources could be used only to build up the Rainy Day Fund or to pay down debt. The threshold number was so low that it has turned out to exclude a large amount of income that actually appears to be reliable. If the threshold were changed to a 5-year or 10-year average of income received from those sources, it would free up an impressive amount of funds each year.

In Dec. 2024, CT Voices for Children (ctvoices.org) released a report detailing this and other small but significant changes that could be made to the fiscal guardrails, preserving their important function while freeing up hundreds of millions of dollars to be spent on urgent needs.  Even that would not be enough to meet every need and fund every worthy program, which is why the expense-reducing strategies that Mr. Fasano suggests would also be needed.  Neither approach on its own is likely to be sufficient.

If you had run up a large credit card bill and wanted to pay it down as quickly as possible, would you make payments that were so large that you couldn’t provide your family with adequate food, clothing, and shelter?  Or would you try to find the best balance between providing what your family needs now and paying down that debt?  That is the real choice we must make concerning the fiscal guardrails.

Linda Bronstein, West Hartford

The latest news articles giving all the accolades to President Jimmy Carter struck a nerve.

In honor of my brothers in arms, all 58,479 of them who gave their lives during the Vietnam conflict so we can live the freedoms that we have today, I must bring up this fact.

On January 21, 1977 our President Jimmy Carter pardoned those draft dodgers, aka cowards, who ran to Canada so they wouldn’t have to serve in the military. Truly a slap in the face to those who were called upon who gave their best to serve and protect our country.

Those who served did so unselfishly for our freedoms, our safety, and our country’s heritage and gave their all. We remember the hardships they faced, the sacrifices they made and for their many different contributions to America’s victories over tyranny and oppression.

Shouldn’t those who had committed that crime of avoiding their duty pay for their disgraceful actions? They got away scot free. They definitely could have faced the courts of our fine nation and paid a term like any other criminal who has to do the time for the crime. It was bad enough that we were yelled at, spit upon, and called “baby killers” that we had to learn that those that ran away got away with it.

States go after ‘claim sharks’ that charge vets for help with disability claims

What do you think the families feel that have lost their husbands, sons, fathers, brothers and loved ones. The remembrances and feelings never go away.

To those who went and served, they earned every benefit that they are receiving today.

Those that ran can live with guilt each and every minute with shame for what they did.

They never should have been pardoned.

Gerald Augustine is chaplain, Disabled American Veterans, Chapter #7 Middletown

Yes, there may arcane principles of constitutional law and cases cited as precedent that are not known to the general public. But belief in the integrity of the court is vital to our Democratic processes. I was a law student in the 1970s and read many opinions of the Warren Court. My favorite justices, William Brennan and Thurgood Marshall, must be rolling over in their graves at the recent decisions of the court. Whether by increasing the number of justices, or imposing term limits, we need to restore balance on the court and reverse the unhealthy ideological trend of the past decade.

John Montalbano, of Middletown is a former judicial law clerk for the trial and the appellate sessions of the Superior Court, and has practiced trial law for the past 45 years.

In reality, EWA serves as a responsible financial tool that enables employees to access a portion of wages they have already earned without waiting for an arbitrary pay period. These services are popular among Connecticut workers and retirees precisely because they are not loans: EWA is non-recourse—meaning providers cannot collect money that is not repaid—and providers do not charge interest, check credit, or impact your credit score. Responsible EWA providers offer a no cost option, making these services either entirely free or far less costly than alternatives. This makes EWA an essential tool for those who need greater financial flexibility to navigate the challenges of living paycheck to paycheck, dealing with unexpected expenses, or simply wanting to get paid on their own schedule.

Further, EWA is an important resource for the older Americans AARP serves, who value the service as a tool to weather financial emergencies without drawing down retirement savings or resorting to alternatives like overdraft fees, late payments, or payday loans. By opposing this service, AARP is effectively endorsing a status quo that has long left consumers in worse financial shape.

We invite AARP CT to join us in pushing for real solutions for people who need low or no-cost options to quickly meet a financial obligation. If AARP truly wants to advocate for affordability and consumer protections, we urge them to reevaluate their stance on EWA and recognize it as an innovative tool that provides workers with the financial flexibility they need to manage their daily lives.

Phil Goldfeder, CEO, American Fintech Council

Catching a transfer in downtown Hartford can be at least challenging, especially when it’s raining, snowing, windy and/or cold. It can be downright nasty.

It is great news that the state is considering a grant to solve this age old problem in downtown Hartford. It’s unfortunate that Union Place doesn’t have enough room, however the Capital Community College area is a great alternative. Also, I hope the historic G. Fox bridge can be saved. This hub would without a doubt have a major positive impact on business development in Hartford. I just hope it happens, and soon, like starting this summer. Remember, that’s when baseball season gets rolling, and Dunkin’ Park turned out to be a good deal also.

Go for it, state of Connecticut.

Curtis Roessler, West Hartford

Matt Ritter claims he felt perturbed by lack of “plaudits” expressed by Connecticut constituents to the General Assembly for passing the state income property tax credit.

Connecticut is the fourth highest taxed state in the country with the among highest property tax in the nation, Hartford’s average income tax payment of over $5,000 adds up to the among highest cost of living of any city in the country.

Consider that the maximum property tax credit allowed is $300 for any filer, and looking for adulation and applause Mr. Ritter? Here is my one clap.

Mitchell Milone, Middletown 

If they were used, millions would die and everything people depend on would break down in  the affected area. Rolling fires would create a living inferno. Even a limited nuclear war would result in nuclear winter, decimating agriculture around the world, resulting in global famine, as pointed out by a study led by Lili Xia and Alan Robock of Rutgers University.

In the 1980s the Nuclear Freeze movement may well have prevented nuclear war between the US and the Soviet Union, as the rhetoric and actions got more and more dangerous. Our hope today lies with House Resolution 77, cosponsored by 45 US House Representatives, including our own Connecticut U.S. Rep. John Larson.

Putin calls for resuming production of intermediate missiles after scrapping of treaty with US

This resolution seeks to facilitate conversation and negotiations between the nuclear weapons states, aimed at reducing the threat of the unthinkable, in the same way that Reagan and Gorbachev met and moved the world away from the brink.

You can be part of the solution, go to the Back from the Brink website at www.preventnuclearwar.org to support the important work of advocating for this resolution.

Joseph Wasserman, West Hartford

The oil trucks were equipped with heavy rubber hoses that were 150 feet long. I knew the location of the fill pipe for this home meant I had to use the entire 150 feet of hose. Once I started to pull the hose I did not stop until I reached the fill pipe regardless of how far the fill pipe was from the truck.

I wanted to keep my momentum strong. I got out of the truck and put the customer’s ticket in the meter. I began to pull the hose. About halfway to the fill pipe I wondered why it was so much more difficult this time pulling the heavy hose than usual.

I thought the hose might be tangled on the wheel in the truck used to roll up the hose after deliveries. However, I kept pulling until I reached the fill pipe. When I turned around and looked toward the truck I was very surprised.

Three little kids were riding the hose. The children were laughing and having a grand adventure. I laughed heartily at the sight.

Kevin Synnott is a lecturer of Management and Marketing at Eastern Connecticut State University