Letter to the Editor:
The most recent OpEd, published in the Greenwich Time, from Scott Frantz’s opponent, Alex Bergstein, could actually be considered refreshing. While attempting to malign him, she only pointed out his fastidious and thoughtful approach to writing legislative bills (as if that would be a bad thing.)
Alex actually got the whole concept of “strike” amendments wrong. The term is actually “strike all” and her reference has nothing to do with what happened. What Scott did was actually amend, or edit, the legislative bill to make it better.
Either, she really didn’t understand or she was trying to manipulate readers. Frankly, neither scenario speaks well of her.
Deeply disturbed by the untruths in Alex Bergstein’s OPEd, I asked Scott to explain the “strike all.” He reconfirmed what I already know because I follow the facts, especially on the issue of sensible gun laws for Connecticut. Scott was so deeply committed to getting good gun safety legislation passed that he actually worked with members of his own party to find out why they would not vote for it. He made changes to the legislation, making it better and ensuring that it would pass. His thoughtful, reasoned and detailed approach is actually one of the main reasons Connecticut actually passed the strictest gun safety legislation in the country without disenfranchising responsible gun owners, like retired police officers.
The fact that Scott has a pattern of writing and voting for amendments is a very good thing. It shows he is reading everything, he is paying attention, he is showing up, he is detailed oriented and he is working hard to make sure that legislative bills are not making reckless, unintended mistakes. This is true of the domestic violence bill that Alex refers to, which was written in a way that actually weakened previously passed, stronger legislation on the same topic. If the new legislation passed, it would have negated the previous (and stronger legislation). Scott didn’t let that happen because he was actually paying attention to the details.
What really irritates me about this is how Scott’s hard work on achieving the best possible gun safety legislation passed is so easily twisted around by people just to try to win. How horrible. I think it bears repeating: Scott worked hard to pass and voted for the strongest gun safety legislation in the country. The fact that he is a Republican does not change this fact.
Alex then goes on to say that Scott voted for the bill “under intense pressure.”
I know Scott and, without question, he would never, ever be “pressured” to vote for something that he did not believe in…not ever. To suggest otherwise, is an outright lie.
Nancy Murray Ozizmir, Riverside, CT
