Editorial: “Voters’ Valid Concerns”

At a recent Town Hall event in my hometown of Prospect, I was proud to see so many passionate and interested constituents engage in state government issues. Our discussion addressed issues from rising utility costs to Gov. Ned Lamont’s proposed budget, but there was one underlying concern: the legislative agenda of the majority party.

Each year, proposed bills can define a legislative agenda. So, what bills motivated my neighbors to pack the house on a weeknight to express their concerns? Marketed as ideas to simply address issues such as voting rights and drivers’ safety, the reality is these bills disregard election integrity, restrict bodily autonomy, endanger our children, and create unnecessary financial burdens for hardworking Connecticut residents.

When it comes to voting and elections, everyone deserves transparency and fairness. Unfortunately, many proposals this year threaten these values such as H.B. 5702 and H.J. 12, which would extend the right to vote to illegal immigrants and imprisoned individuals. This would devalue voting, which is a privilege we maintain as law-abiding citizens. Similarly, H.B. 5704 would not only implement mandatory voting – it would force voters to pay a fine if they fail to declare a valid reason for not voting. I am all for increasing voter participation, but to hold voters hostage with fines? This only infringes upon our freedoms; it doesn’t uphold them.

Next, my constituents referenced bills that are disguised as safe-driving initiatives but would directly invade our personal rights. First, S.B. 39 seeks to define all drivers as organ donors, unless they join an official registry to opt-out. Second, S.B. 96 goes even further to consider taking the organs of motorcyclists without their consent. Unfortunately, the same folks who pride themselves on fighting for bodily autonomy were also responsible for proposing these bills.

We also see how the government can restrict our rights in H.B. 5480, which would allow children over the age of 12 to receive vaccinations without parental consent. Entertaining this idea divides our families, and I am proud to say that I strongly stood against this bill in the Public Health Committee.

Finally, residents in my district also criticized parts of H.B. 6593, which allows municipal housing authorities to build dense housing in neighboring towns without the permission or public input from these neighboring towns. This means larger cities could use the current affordable-housing policy, known as 8-30g, to override the interests of smaller towns to build low-income housing. This should be going through local planning and zoning commissions, not dictated by the state of Connecticut.

My constituents were right: these are bad bills. However, the good news is that most of these bills will likely never make it out of committees to the House floor. The takeaway: these bills still serve to define the legislative agenda for the majority party.

Although bad bills exist, our legislature has also seen many good bills, too. Some of these serve to reduce unnecessary taxes and fees, return control to our local governments on affordable housing, unite the American family, respect our law enforcement, and provide more transparency across state government. I encourage you to view my list of the good and bad bills of 2023 at RepZupkus.com.

There are ways to circumvent this legislative agenda, such as when I joined House Republicans in demanding a public hearing on eliminating the highway-use tax, but there is still more work to be done. Sharing your voice by contacting your representatives and attending their district events will expose them to the same sincere concerns I heard from my own friends and neighbors in Prospect.