Here we go again.

My opponent is claiming I was given an opportunity to “significantly slash taxes” and rejected it.

That is false.

SB 1 was not a simple three-item tax-relief bill. On the final night of session, the majority replaced it with a 717-page aircraft carrier containing hundreds of controversial sections on spending, taxes, borrowing, labor, housing, hospitals, education, human services and more.

https://cga.ct.gov/2026/cbs/S/pdf/SB-0001.pdf

And here is what my opponent leaves out: I supported an alternative that provided dramatically MORE tax relief.

According to the legislature’s Office of Fiscal Analysis, our Republican amendment would have:

• Reduced state appropriations by $89.6 million

• Left the budget $90.5 million under the spending cap

• Cut income taxes by $750 MILLION in FY27

• Cut income taxes by approximately $1.6 BILLION EVERY YEAR thereafter

THAT IS REAL TAX RELIEF!

Those are OFA’s numbers, not campaign talking points.

https://www.cga.ct.gov/…/2026SB-00001-R00LCO05764-FNA.PDF

So, the truth is: I didn’t vote against tax relief. I fought for vastly more of it.

Short version: We put our much more fiscally responsible alternative on the Senate floor. We debated it. We voted on it. It was defeated on party lines by the Democratic majority.

The official amendment record identifies me as one of the sponsors of that alternative.

https://cga.ct.gov/2026/amd/S/pdf/2026SB-00001-R00SB-AMD.pdf

Before I cast my vote, I stood on the Senate floor and explained exactly what was wrong with this bill and exactly what I supported instead.

Watch my remarks in the video link below. Then compare them with the graphic my opponent is circulating.

If he believes I should have voted yes on SB 1, I have one simple question:

Would he have voted for the entire 717-page package?

I’m happy to have that debate.

I’ll bring the receipts.

Watch: https://youtu.be/QIXhFDRqg-g?si=jm0fiFbsTvcEATiy