HARTFORD — Connecticut's House of Representatives passed a $40 billion, two-year state budget Wednesday morning after Democratic leaders worked through the night to secure enough votes.

The bill, which needed the support of 72 lawmakers, was approved 73-70 after about five hours of debate.

The Senate has not yet voted on the tax and spending package. By law the Senate must act on the package by midnight, when the General Assembly is scheduled to adjourn for the summer. If the budget is not passed, lawmakers would need to convene a special session before the July 1 start of the fiscal year. 

Of the 11 local members of the House of Representatives, seven voted against the budget and four voted in favor. Democrats Ernest Hewett, D- New London; Ed Jutila, D-East Lyme; Diana Urban, D-No. Stonington; and Kevin Ryan, D-Montville, voted yea.

Joined by one Democrat from the region, Rep. Emmett Riley, D-Norwich, Republicans in the delegation all voted nay: Reps. Aundre Bumgardner, R-Groton; Kathleen McCarty, R-Waterford; Devin Carney, R-Old Saybrook; John Scott, R-Groton; Mike France, R-Ledyard; and Doug Dubitsky, R-Chaplin.

Before walking into the House chambers for the last session of the 2015 legislative session, Rep. Kathleen McCarty, R-Waterford, explained why she voted no. 

"Because it had many, many tax increases, and we know that we just can't sustain any new taxes, and this really hurt the middle class," an admittedly tired McCarty said. "It hurt our business sector...the unitary tax (on Connecticut corporations) and the tax imposed on technology is really going to hurt some of our bigger corporations."

The unitary tax led three major corporations in the state — Aetna, General Electrics and Travelers — to issue statements against the initial budget plan that came out over the weekend.  

McCarty said she also found the additional taxes on the hospitals to be "particularly onerous." 

"So all around, when you looked at the package, there were parts that I appreciated, like helping the DDS waiting list, the mental health services, the youth services, so there's some good parts of it, but we had accomplished all of those areas without raising new taxes, so it was really the tax piece of it and what I believed was going to hurt our middle class," she added. 

As far as the session overall, McCarty, a member of the Appropriations, Education, and Public Health committees, said that "on the committee levels we got a lot accomplished, passed out a lot of bills together."

"In that regard, we worked well and in a bipartisan matter so I am pleased," she added. "All around it was a good learning experience. Try to rest up for a few days and get back to it again." 

Sen. Paul Formica, R-East Lyme, said early in the Senate's session Wednesday that he is not sure the budget passed earlier in the day by the House would "provide for the needs of everybody in the state."

"Republicans on both the House and Senate sides put out a balanced line item budget that was under the spending cap, didn't call for tax increases, that funded transportation, and yet those ideas weren't allowed to be brought to the negotiating table," Formica, a freshman senator, said. "I think what you're seeing is the result of not having as many minds with input (involved) to come out with a budget the best we can."

Formica said he likes the idea of PILOT and car tax reform, but is not sure the House budget funds them in a sustainable way.

"This building has a history of not keeping its promises and, on the surface, if those reforms are funded and balanced then perhaps they make sense," said Formica, the former first selectman of East Lyme. "But I think what we really want to do is make sure all of the towns get fair and equal treatment. The small towns are as much in need as the large cities each in their own respective ways."

As for his first session in Hartford, "I can tell you that tomorrow I'm going to miss it. I think it was one of the greatest opportunities of my life to work here in this historic building, to be involved in the history of the state of Connecticut, and to work with people on both sides of the aisle," he said. "I can't believe how fast it has already gone by." 

State Rep. Ed Jutila of Niantic, a Democrat, said of the budget, “It was a very tough call and a stressful 24 hours.

“It has some good elements. The transportation improvements, and the good things that could mean here in southeastern Connecticut, was a big plus for me. Transportation has long been one of my top priorities and I have backed the governor’s call for investment in transportation. The money coming out of the sales tax, devoted to those transportation improvements, was one of the big reasons I was willing to back the budget.”

He also said he liked the new revenues from the sales tax that will go back to towns for property tax relief.

“There was also some not-so-good stuff, with the taxes, that made it a tough call. It wasn’t the budget I would have put together, but you don’t get that option, you get to vote on what is presented.”

He also said he felt fiscally moderate Democrats, which is how he considers himself, were given a voice in helping control the spending side of the budget.

“We had some impact,” he said.

Rep. Jack Hennessy, D-Bridgeport, said the budget passed by the House would remove the 50 percent tax on military pensions, which would cost the state $4 million. If the budget survives in its current form, there will be no tax on military pensions. Hennessy said that should help to prevent military retirees from leaving the state.

Minutes before heading into session, Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, said she planned on supporting the budget as amended and passed by the House earlier. 

For the first time, Osten said outside of the Senate chambers, " (this) is a real talk about property tax reform, and that has always intrigued me since we started talking about this budget." 

The towns that are in Osten's 19th district "will now have the ability to lower their property taxes, which is one of the most regressive taxes around."  

"That's something I consider to provide real relief to the middle class residents in eastern Connecticut," she added.  

Additionally, she said, should the budget pass, car taxes for many people, particularly in the Norwich area, will be "dramatically decreased" in the second year of the two-year budget. In the Norwich area, car owners could a see a decrease in taxes by eight mills, according to Osten. 

"You know, it's got some difficult choices in it, and I recognize that. I made a commitment that we would look at property tax reform and this is property tax reform. In addition to that it starts to recognize real PILOT payments to cities and towns, and in my area there are a lot of towns that were not receiving their fair share of PILOT, and this starts addressing those issues, so I plan on supporting the budget today as amended," Osten said. "But any budget is a compromise." 

Plans to vote on the budget Monday and Tuesday were scuttled after Connecticut-based General Electric Co., Aetna Inc. and the Travelers Companies Inc. each released unusual public statements taking issue with about $700 million in business tax increases. GE and Aetna both questioned whether they would remain in Connecticut.

Rep. Chris Davis, R-Ellington, said the bill increases all taxes by $1 billion a year, marking the second largest tax increase in state history, four years after the biggest.

Ticking off the numerous proposed increases, he argued the two-year budget "does not set us on a brighter path," as the Democrats contend, but rather "it sets us backwards."

Democrats said the revenue increases are needed to close a projected deficit of about $2.5 billion over the next two fiscal years and replenish some of the deep cuts in social services and other programs that had been proposed by Democratic Gov. Dannel P. Malloy.

Rep. Jeff Berger, co-chairman of the Finance Revenue and Bonding Committee, said "the majority of that money goes back to everybody's communities." One proposal would shift a small portion of the sales tax to municipalities and other initiatives.

Malloy and legislative leaders reached an agreement on the budget over the weekend, but the letters from some of Connecticut's largest employers put the deal in jeopardy. Lawmakers said they also received numerous calls and emails from small businesses and other groups affected by the budget.

On Tuesday, Ridgefield pharmaceutical company Boehringer Ingelheim issued a statement that warned "the current proposal will undermine the financial feasibility of continued capital investments at our Ridgefield/Danbury site," adding that the tax proposals were "short-sighted" and would "stifle innovation, especially research and development of critical medicines."

The budget includes $19.8 billion in spending for the 2015-16 fiscal year and $20.5 billion in 2016-17. It increases spending by about 4.1 percent in the first year and 3.25 percent in the second year.

The newest version increases the state's cigarette tax in two steps. It climbs from $3.40 to $3.65 a pack on Oct. 1 and to $3.90 a pack on July 1, 2016.

The bill slightly scales back proposed taxes on data processing services and services to websites, but business interests remained dismayed by the overall package because it still includes many of the original business-related changes. For example, it still requires companies with a presence in Connecticut and other states to determine their tax liability based on the net income of the entire group.

"It doesn't even begin to address the underlying problems with the bill," said Joseph Brennan, CEO of the Connecticut Business and Industry Association. "We appreciate people at least taking a look at it, but it's so far removed from what needs to be done."

House Speaker Brendan Sharkey, D-Hamden, defended the package.

"This is a transformational budget that provides tax relief for middle income families, for working families in Connecticut, while also making a huge investment in our transportation system, which are two of the most important things that we're facing right now in the state," he said. "So, I know that those who are being asked to pay a little bit more don't like it, but they're also the same complaining about the system as it stands now."

Day reporters Julia Bergman and Colin A. Young contributed to this report.