RUTHFULLY YOURS

Once upon a time Connecticut had no income tax and attracted high earners from all over the Northeast. From 1976 to 1991, Connecticut led the country in GDP growth. But its fairy tale economy began to end in 1991 with its enactment of a flat 4.5% income tax. That soon became a “progressive” tax, and rates have since climbed while taxpayers have fled.

After the financial crisis, former GOP Gov. Jodi Rell raised the top rate on individuals earning more than $500,000 to 6.5% from 5%. Mr. Malloy pushed the top rate to 6.7% in 2011 and 6.99% in 2015, notwithstanding his re-election promise not to raise taxes. He also imposed a 10% surtax on corporate income over $100 million. Connecticut’s 8.25% top corporate rate exceeds that of all of its neighbors.

The result has been a lost decade of growth. Connecticut’s GDP has shrunk an incredible 9.3% since 2007 and declined by 0.5% on average annually during Mr. Malloy’s governorship. Revenue growth for the government has been sluggish as businesses and high-earners have decamped to lower-tax states. Over the last five years $8.8 billion in income has left the state, mostly to Florida.

Had Connecticut grown at the same rate as the U.S. over the last eight years, its economy would be nearly $50 billion larger and annual revenues would be $3.9 billion higher—equal to all of the state’s corporate tax revenues and nearly one third of income tax collections.

Meantime, spending on public worker benefits has grown without restraint. Mr. Malloy re-amortized state pension payments to reduce costs in the short-term while sticking taxpayers with a larger tab over the long haul. Yet pensions are still only 50% funded, and the state is looking at a $2 billion deficit next year. Mr. Malloy leaves office as the second most unpopular Governor in America after Oklahoma’s Mary Fallin.

Enter Democratic candidate Ned Lamont, a former telecom executive who professes to be different but is alas promising more of the same. Mr. Lamont blames inadequate transportation and corporate welfare for the recent exodus of businesses and taxpayers. His solution: a bonanza of government spending, er, “support.”

He wants to establish a state infrastructure bank to finance public works as well as provide more government “support for projects that improve livability” and the state’s venture capital fund. The Democrat also hopes to boost tourism by creating a fund that “supports construction projects at cultural facilities.”

It’s true that Connecticut roads are lousy, and Hartford doesn’t have the cultural milieu of New York or Boston. But that’s not why tens of thousands of taxpayers are leaving each year. The way to make Connecticut more livable for more people is to reduce its crushing tax burden and provide more jobs and opportunity.

***

Enter Republican candidate Bob Stefanowski, a former executive at UBS and GE, who is offering an economic rescue plan. He wants to eliminate the state estate tax so fewer retirees flee to Florida; repeal its corporate tax over two years to attract more businesses; and phase out the individual income tax over eight years to retain the young and successful.

Mr. Stefanowski’s plan is undeniably ambitious and it may not be entirely achievable. But there’s no doubt about the direction he wants to go, and at least he’s offering a clear choice of renewal compared to more decline. Mr. Lamont’s main response is to say that cutting taxes would mean sharp reductions in spending, and to claim that Mr. Stefanowski is another Donald Trump. Mr. Lamont knows better but shows no sign he will challenge Hartford’s union-dominated political machine.

This may be a Democratic year, but perhaps Connecticut will buck the trend. Mr. Stefanowski is trailing by 3.4 points in the latest Sacred Heart University poll. Maybe voters will give him credit for telling the truth that economic growth is the only cure for Connecticut’s tax, spending and debt addictions.