Having observed Ned Lamont’s behavior as Connecticut’s governor since 2019, I believe it is time we ask him a question, perhaps using the parlance of our state’s youngest residents: “bruh, you good?”

More formally, I am concerned that Lamont has lost all sense of reason, particularly when it comes to our state’s finances.

I’d felt this way for a good while, but my concern attenuated when reading the governor’s response to our legislators’ recent decision to invest $40 million in required services for special education students. The Lamont administration’s extreme, frantic and over-the-top denunciation of the legislation seemed to lack all sense of proportion or reasonableness.

To put this in context, $40 million is not even 1% of our state’s annual budget. In fact, it isn’t even 50% of 1%. It is 15% of 1%. In other words, it is basically rounding error in our state’s finances. Now, I know $40 million is a lot of money. But, for every child in need of special education, the services they are entitled to are worth far, far more than this. Receiving these services can make a huge difference for the rest of their lives.

Ned Lamont described this special education funding as “irresponsible.” Huh? So, by inference, ignoring the special education services our children are entitled to is responsible behavior? I find this deeply offensive, particularly as someone who has family members who have relied upon special education services.

I’ve come to conclude that there are no defensible principles or morals underlying Lamont’s take on state spending. For example, he is perfectly happy to dump $50 million on one man who helps people bounce a rubber ball up and down a court (I’m referring to basketball coach Dan Hurley’s reported salary, which Lamont eagerly embraced last summer.

Lamont offered the following basis for his sports largesse: “I pay for success.” Apparently he only wants to pay for the success of college athletes, not for the educational success of special needs children. Moreover, for those keeping score at home, UConn basketball started this season ranked third in AP standings. They’ve subsequently fallen more than 22 spots and they no longer place in the top 25 this season.

I’m not really sure Ned bought a whole lot of success on the court with taxpayer money, at least not this season. It is pretty clear that his budget proposal, replete with slashes to public higher education funding of all sorts, will not buy success for Connecticut’s young people either.

Increasingly, it seems clear that reasonably-minded elected legislators in our general assembly will simply need to chuckle to themselves and shake their heads at the governor as they pass measures which truly look out for the future of Connecticut.

Are there provisions, like the spending cap, which might seem inconsistent with what our state really needs? Sure. But I just read the law defining the spending cap. It is my professional opinion as a practicing economist of more than 20 years that the statute outlining the spending cap is so poorly written that it is rendered meaningless as a constraint on our legislators’ options.

Thinking back to all those things I learned about civics in my public school elementary education, I’ve become more and more convinced that a lot of our social ills will be cured when a co-equal branch of government asserts itself to check irrationality in an executive branch.

This has never been clearer on the national stage and it is becoming truer within Connecticut with each passing week.

Brendan Cunningham is a Professor at Eastern Connecticut State University.