Connecticut House Bill HB07343

Connecticut 2019 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/8/19
• Refer: 3/8/19
• Report Pass: 4/8/19
• Refer: 4/18/19
• Report Pass: 4/25/19
• Engrossed: 5/8/19
• Report Pass: 5/10/19
• Chaptered: 6/25/19
• Enrolled: 6/28/19
• Passed: 7/9/19

Caption

An Act Concerning The Office Of The Claims Commissioner.

Impact

The changes proposed under HB 7343 would adjust how claims against the state are processed, particularly those involving decisions made by the Claims Commissioner. By altering the threshold for legislative involvement, the bill seeks to balance the interests of claimants seeking redress while also managing the backlog and workload faced by the General Assembly. These alterations could also affect how citizens perceive the responsiveness of the state to legitimate claims, as more claims could potentially be expedited without extensive legislative debate.

Summary

House Bill 7343 proposes significant changes to the responsibilities and authority of the Office of the Claims Commissioner in Connecticut. The bill raises the monetary threshold for when claims must be reported to the General Assembly and outlines new procedures for the review of claims. Notably, it increases the amount from twenty to thirty-five thousand dollars, suggesting a shift towards a more streamlined process for addressing claims. This adjustment aims to improve efficiency in handling relatively minor claims, reducing the legislative burden while ensuring transparent reporting to the state assembly.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 7343 is mixed among stakeholders. Proponents view the modifications as a necessary update that reflects contemporary fiscal realities and the administrative capabilities of the Claims Commissioner. They argue that these changes will ultimately facilitate a more equitable and swift compensation process for claimants. Conversely, opponents may argue that increasing the threshold for legislative review could deprive individuals of appropriate oversight and remedy in potentially legitimate claims against the state.

Contention

A notable point of contention in the discussions around HB 7343 centers on the potential impact on individuals with claims exceeding the new threshold. Critics fear that by shifting the review process away from the legislature for these claims, the bill may undermine the ability for individuals to seek a fair hearing and compensation. Additionally, the implications surrounding claims of malpractice against the state, as well as the waiver of sovereign immunity in certain cases, remain contentious topics, raising questions about accountability and the right of individuals to mount legal challenges against the state.