Senate extends $330M emergency fund amid federal uncertainty

Connecticut Senate extends $330.8M emergency fund amid federal uncertainty as 2026 legislative session opens. Republicans opposed extension of fund created for social services.

· · 2 min read
Image related to senate extends $330m emergency fund government

The Connecticut Senate passed a resolution Wednesday extending a $330.8 million emergency contingency fund through the end of the next fiscal year, as the 2026 legislative session opened at the Capitol in Hartford.

The fund was created in November with $500 million to cover potential federal cuts to social services programs. Of that original appropriation, $169.2 million has been spent, leaving the remainder that was scheduled to expire on opening day.

Senate Republicans opposed the extension, with Minority Leader Stephen Harding of Brookfield arguing the fund should expire as originally planned.

“This is not about offsetting federal cuts,” Harding said. “I was in this chamber here back in the fall when we established this fund, and when this fund was established, it was established to expire.”

Senate President Pro Tempore Martin Looney, a New Haven Democrat, said shifting federal priorities under the Trump administration created uncertainty that justified keeping the emergency funds available.

“All of this volatile churning that we have seen has left us in a position of real instability and lack of confidence in being able to predict what we might be facing,” Looney said.

Looney cited examples of federal funding proposals that were announced and then rescinded, including mental health grants and housing vouchers.

The legislative session runs 13 weeks and will consider only bills proposed by Gov. Ned Lamont’s administration or legislative committees. House Speaker Matthew Ritter welcomed Lamont to the podium for his opening remarks, with Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz looking on.

Lawmakers and staff spent weeks preparing for the short session, which follows the typical even-year schedule that limits the scope of legislation compared to the longer odd-year sessions.

Written by

Elizabeth Hartley

Editor-in-Chief