By Tina Courpas
Balance is on the ballot in CT this year.
From the beginning, my campaign has stood for an end to extreme politics in favor of balanced bipartisan leadership. I have spoken to thousands of voters, and more than anything else, they want reasonable balance. Regardless of where you are on the political spectrum, people are tired of the extremes.
In CT in particular this year, Balance is very much on the ballot. Our state is at a crossroads. We are facing the very real prospect of becoming a ONE-PARTY STATE, where balance becomes a thing of the past.
Supermajority Will be The End of Checks and Balances in CT State Government – I do not support that.
The State Legislature is 3 seats away from a Democrat supermajority – with the Democrat party at 70% of the General Assembly. A supermajority negates the Governor’s veto. No Checks. No Balances. No diversity of opinion. This is what exists in New York, California and Illinois. CT will become a ONE-PARTY state.
The legislative priorities of the majority party include: 1) statewide property tax (in addition to what you pay to Greenwich or Stamford), 2) capital gains surcharge statewide. 3) “Mansion” tax on homes $1 million and over, and 4) “Fair Share,” “Work, Live Ride,” and other anti-local control bills which expand 8-30g well beyond its current reach.
The overwhelming majority of voters of the 149th do not support these priorities. I have met very few who do. And yet we will become subject to each of them if these bills pass.
As it stands, I respectfully feel that the current representative (my opponent) is not representing the needs of the 149th District, but instead bowing the political pressure of the controlling party. She votes with her party 98% of the time, yet the149th District is made up of 40% unaffiliated voters, 30% Republicans and 30% Democrats. The district needs more balanced representation than it currently has. With a Democrat supermajority, the imbalance will get appreciably worse.
Connecticut needs checks and balances, diversity of opinion, and incentive for lawmakers to collaborate and compromise. Diversity of opinion yields the strongest results.
I will provide that balanced leadership.
Controlling spending to Lower Our Taxes – a Balance between Spending and Saving
CT has the second highest state/local tax burden, third highest electric bills, and second highest debt in the entire US. Why? Largely because of out-of-control government spending and poor leadership.
Balance was achieved in 2017 when CT’s fiscal guardrails were enacted. The spending cap, volatility cap, and revenue cap acted as three legs of a stool which controlled overspending and balanced our budgets. It worked. As a result, seven years later, we all got a tax cut (January 2024). Unfortunately, the Legislature lost its resolve in May 2024 and voted to overspend in our budget using one-time Federal COVID relief money to plug operating holes. In short, the hard tradeoffs that the Guardrails require were simply ignored in 2024. My opponent voted for that overspending Bill. Because that balanced policy went out the window in May 2024, we are now set up for a $1 billion shortfall for the 2025 budget year.
If elected, I will adhere to the fiscal guardrails to keep our taxes low.
I am a Pro-Choice Candidate
I am a pro-choice candidate and have never deviated from this position. I believe abortion in CT should be legal, safe and rare. Connecticut recently decided to expand the categories of persons who can perform aspiration abortions to include APRNs and nurse midwives. There was insufficient testimony then (2022) from the medical community confirming that this was safe. There is lack of consensus now in the medical community that this is safe. With that lack of medical consensus, if someone I cared about sought my advice, I would not recommend they seek the care of a nurse midwife for an abortion. I also support efforts to expand birth control access, so that the incidence of unwanted pregnancies can be reduced significantly.
I strongly support Local Control of Zoning
We need more affordable housing in CT – both for low-income and middle-class families. But, CT seeks to accomplish this through state level mandates such as 8-30g, “Fair Share” and “Work, Live, Ride” (for which my opponent voted yes.) These laws sacrifice reasonable planning and zoning considerations (e.g., infrastructure, roads, sewers, the environment, etc.) at the altar of more affordable housing – now, at any cost, and without any local input. Where’s the reasonableness in that approach? Where’s the balance?
Local towns and municipalities have more information, more at stake, and greater accountability in planning affordable housing. If elected, I will aim to be part of the solution of adding to affordable housing stock in a balanced manner which considers the interests of CT’s towns and the voices of my constituents in determining their own future.
Balance is most certainly on the ballot in CT this year. If you want leaders in the state who will bring a fair and thoughtful approach to problem solving, then this is the election to vote for them. If you care about balance in state government overall and don’t want CT to become a one-party state, then this is the election to vote for that balance.
I am that candidate. I am a moderate, committed from the beginning to a balanced approach to this job – for our state, this district and for you.
I respectfully ask for your vote and thank you sincerely for your support.
