With the 2011 General Assembly session now completed, there is only one issue hanging fire: the ratification of a concession and savings deal with the state employee unions.
The agreement covers $1.6 billion of the $40 billion, two-year budget -- a large chunk of the state budget that would be filled with cuts and layoffs if the agreement is not ratified by the unions.
Gov. Dannel P. Malloy reiterated his point Thursday that thousands of state employees would be laid off to cover the shortfall.
"I'm not bullying anybody. Talking in real terms and telling people the truth is not bullying," Malloy told reporters at an end-of-session news conference. "I just want people to understand the reality."
Malloy worked closely with the labor unions during his election campaign, and they helped prove to be the difference as he won the race over Republican Tom Foley by one half of 1 percent. He now says that labor should not be blamed for the state's problems, adding that some bad decisions had clearly been made in the past.
"I'm here to rectify that," he said.
Both Republicans and Democrats say it would make little sense for the unions to turn down the deal. Some union members, however, have spoken against the deal in union meetings and on blogs around the state.
House Republican leader Larry Cafero said the following message should be sent to the unions: "Look what we're offering you here. Grab it and run. It's the best deal going.''
Rep. Steven Mikutel, a conservative Democrat from Griswold, said he was surprised about the concerns raised by some union members.
"You would think it would be a slam dunk,'' Mikutel said. "All hell's going to break loose if they turn down that agreement. I think they'd be crazy to turn it down. They get four years of no layoffs. Then they get three percent in each of the next three years. That's a pretty good deal.''
Mikutel added, "If you ask the person on the street, who is not a state employee, they would tell you that's a sweet deal. Maybe that tells you how disconnected they are from the private sector. People I talk to on the outside say Malloy was not tough enough on the concessions. The union leadership is with Malloy, but there's a lot of grumbling with the rank and file.''
"I'm hearing that the corrections people don't want to give in. They feel they've got a tough, stressful job and they're not appreciated.''
Despite widespread reports that many prison guards are dissatisfied with the deal, Steve Curran, a corrections officer who is a board member of Local 1565 of the Connecticut Corrections Employees, declined to make a prediction on the chances of rejecting the deal.
"I'll have to wait for the vote,'' Curran said. "This vote has to be a personal vote.''
Curran, 47, works at the Garner Correctional Institution in Newtown, conceded that some union members are skeptical of the wellness program that is being pushed by the state. Union members would be required to pay an additional $100 per month if they refused to join the state's program that will require age-appropriate tests, such as colonoscopies for those over the age of 50.
"The idea of being told to go to the doctor once a year is something we have to warm up to,'' said Curran, who also sits on the board of AFSCME.
The rejection of the deal would prompt additional work by the legislature and consternation about changes in the now-settled budget.
"There would be some rather serious cutting, and they would have to come back in special session,'' said former state Rep. Michael Lawlor, a high-ranking undersecretary in Malloy's budget office.
Matt O'Connor, a spokesman for the union coalition, said much of the voting will take place during the week of June 20 with the goal of completing the voting by Friday, June 24.