Within days of President Donald Trump securing a second term, Connecticut leaders anticipated the challenge bearing down on them.

The president and his fellow Republicans, who controlled both chambers of Congress, had pledged big tax reductions, which likely would come at the expense of Medicaid and other human services programs.

That would mean huge problems for low- and middle-income families in all states.

But Connecticut, with its great wealth and recent savings programs, can afford to replace more of those vanishing federal dollars than most other states can.

The question is where to draw the line.

Lawmakers and Gov. Ned Lamont will resume trying to solve that riddle Wednesday when the 2026 General Assembly session convenes.

“We have a moral responsibility to ensure government supports the common good, educating our children, helping individuals and families when they need a helping hand, and keeping people healthy and safe,” said Lamont, who must submit his revised budget for the 2026-27 fiscal year on the session’s opening day. “We are going to do what we can, and I will work with legislators on ideas to carefully and meaningfully address affordability.”

Resisting Washington on two fronts

But Lamont and many of his fellow Democrats in the legislature’s majority have different ideas about Connecticut’s role.

The governor, a fiscal moderate, generally has been wary of Connecticut using its own funds to support programs traditionally paid for by Washington.

Legislators from both parties committed $30 million in state funds to offset rapidly shrinking federal heating assistance for low- and middle-income households in the winter of 2022-23. But even though there were 24% more eligible households, the Lamont administration capped grants so that none of Connecticut’s money was spent.

When partisan congressional gridlock led to a 43-day federal government shutdown last October and November, Lamont committed $3 million in aid to food pantries but initially hesitated to commit state funds to maintain food stamps, known as SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which would have cost $72 million per month.

He did eventually reverse himself on that, but only on Nov. 7, one week after all federal nutrition assistance benefits had gone away. The federal shutdown ended in mid-November, ending the nutrition assistance crisis and restoring benefits from Washington.

That’s not to say the governor hasn’t compromised at all.

Besides his delayed commitment to food stamps, Lamont also supported the legislature last November when it took $500 million — one-fifth of last fiscal year’s $2.5 billion state surplus — to offset federal cuts to human service programs.

The state has spent about $170 million so far, with about two-thirds partially offsetting huge cuts in federal aid to families that buy health insurance on the state exchange. Lamont also has used the fund to send more to food pantries and protected school programs and Planned Parenthood.

But most of the money Connecticut has spent has been focused either on short-term solutions, like temporary assistance to SNAP recipients during a budget shutdown.

The eliminated federal tax credits that help families buy health insurance represent an ongoing problem. But Lamont’s solution, so far, has been temporary. He’s agreed to replace those vanishing dollars in 2026 but hasn’t said what will happen in the long term. Democrats here hope their party will regain control of the U.S. House in the November 2026 elections and use that to restore health insurance assistance.

The bigger question Connecticut officials still must answer is: Should the state spend its money, year after year, to prop up a program Washington has cut or abandoned altogether?

Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, co-chairwoman of the Appropriations Committee, wants to create a new state-funded nutrition program to serve roughly 36,000 immigrants, young adults, veterans and people experiencing homelessness who are losing federal SNAP benefits because of new work requirements and other changes.

Many of these people struggle with mental illness and are unemployable, according to Osten, who represents several poor rural communities in New London County.

The at-risk individuals represent about one-tenth of Connecticut’s entire SNAP population, and Osten has said the annual cost is likely in the tens of millions of dollars. A cost of $50 million to $75 million would represent 2%-3% of last fiscal year’s surplus.

“I’m not willing to not try to figure out a way to [help] people eat,” Osten told the Connecticut Mirror last month.

Lamont said he prefers to help this population by increasing state aid to food pantries — even though nonprofit officials say their programs only can provide about one-eighth of the aid that SNAP gives.

Nutrition assistance isn’t the only program losing federal funding.

Connecticut expects to lose hundreds of millions annually in federal Medicaid assistance, though most of those losses don’t kick in until the 2027-28 fiscal year or later.

Democratic leaders expect to compromise with Lamont

Still, Democratic leaders were optimistic the General Assembly and Lamont can find middle ground on how much vanishing federal aid Connecticut can afford to replace.

House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, said he also thinks his party has a good chance to take control of the U.S. House and potentially reverse some of the federal cutbacks.

But Ritter also said Connecticut likely will have to make some investments year after year, because certain federal cuts are very painful.

The speaker predicted many Democrats will want to review nutrition assistance closely.

“I can understand that reason we have to look at that,” he said. “Thirty-five thousand people without access to food and relying on [pantries and] shelters?”

Similarly, Senate President Pro Tem Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, said many lawmakers will want the state keep helping Connecticut families to afford health insurance if the nearly $300 million in federal tax credits they used to receive never come back.

“The loss of those subsidies is going to be such a painful and appalling hit to the people,” he said.

GOP: State must try harder to tighten its spending

Republican legislative leaders didn’t rule out the possibility of Connecticut using its wealth to help low- and middle-income families afford health insurance.

But both Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding of Brookfield and his House counterpart, Vincent J. Candelora of North Branford, said Connecticut isn’t trying hard enough to live with some of the federal cuts or to tighten its own spending.

Part of the reason Connecticut faces such steep cuts in federal Medicaid assistance is because its fraud and error rates, when it comes to distributing benefits, is too high, Candelora said.

Democrats here “are just rushing to backfill spending,” he said, adding the state should try hard to reduce Medicaid spending by eliminating benefits for undocumented residents. “I think Connecticut really has been on a runaway freight train in terms of spending in the last couple of years,” he said.

The GOP leaders said it also would be easier to entertain more state spending on human services programs if Democratic leadership tried harder to control it in other areas.

Republicans charge public colleges and universities still spend too much, particularly on administration, and that Lamont has largely abandoned earlier efforts to reduce state agency staffing through increased use of technology.

They also noted most state employees have received annual raises close to 4.5% since 2021, a trend that outstrips compensation in the private sector.

Connecticut received billions in federal aid during the early years of the COVID pandemic that it could spend on a wide array of categories, Harding said. He added that too much went to expand programs that remain expensive, even now, while the pandemic aid is gone.

“We really haven’t tightened our belts,” he said. “Unfortunately, we’re paying for those consequences now. … If anything, [state government] has become more bureaucratic, more expensive.”