Reason #1 to support Rep. Sampson for State Senate over his opponent – He doesn’t lie on his campaign mailers.

Last week, it was a false statement in a campaign mailer about my record on prescription drugs and healthcare.

Today, another campaign mailer from my opponent showed up in mailboxes across the district.

Below, I will address ALL FIVE false statements from my opponent’s mailer one by one.

1 – “Voted NO to pay equity – one of 4 no votes”

The bill cited is this one:

My opponent is attempting to deceive voters into believing that I voted against equal pay for women. However, the bill has absolutely nothing to do with pay equity for women, or anyone else. The language simply adds even more regulation on businesses – preventing employers from inquiring of job applicants of any gender, about their pay history.

Here is the video of me asking questions about this bill and confirming with the Democratic legislator who brought it to the floor of the House that my statement above is entirely accurate.

YouTube player

I made a promise not to enact any more unnecessary burdens on our state’s businesses and I kept that promise here.

2 – “Voted NO to health benefits for women and children”

The bill cited is this one:

Here, my opponent is attempting to deceive voters into believing that I voted against health benefits for women and children. That is an absurd accusation on its face but let me address it. This bill included 2 basic parts. First, it was a Democratic initiative that places major parts of OBAMACARE into CT law out of fear that the Trump administration and congress may succeed in repealing it. This would preserve Obamacare in CT state law. Since this bad policy which has done extensive damage to both the access and affordability of healthcare is still federal law, the bill has no current effect.

Second, it would radically expand the state mandated coverages for contraception. As someone who believes women should have the right to make their own decisions about their own bodies – and that they should make the choices about their healthcare rather than bunch of politicians, I offered an amendment to require that all insurance companies must offer these products as an option to their customers, and let them decide if they want to pay the additional premium for these things or not. My amendment was defeated on a party line vote – with every Democrat legislator voting against a women’s choice to make her own healthcare decisions.

Again, there is video of me stating all of this on the record here –

YouTube player

3 – “Voted NO to protections for domestic violence victims”

The bill cited is this one:

Here, my opponent claims that I would eliminate protections for female victims of domestic violence. Yet another absurd claim. That is akin to saying someone is against clean water, or quality education, etc. Is there anyone out there foolish enough to believe that? This is a somewhat complex piece of legislation that had only one aim in mind, and it was not to protect women from domestic violence. It was to use identity politics to further a radical gun control agenda and to deny the constitutional protection of due process to gun owners. The sad part of this bill is that its passage has actually made women less safe. Now, a woman who is a legitimate victim of domestic violence can have her right to self-protection taken away based on the simple accusation of her abuser. Many women testified AGAINST this bill and rightfully so.

Here is the video of my remarks on this house floor during the debate on this bill.

YouTube player

4 – “Supports criminalizing a woman’s right to choose – even in cases of rape, incest, and serious risk to the mother”

She provided no citation here.

This is the most egregious lie on the piece. I have never proposed any legislation to curtail abortion rights in any way. I have also never advocated for overturning Roe v. Wade. When asked about this, I have always openly and honestly stated my position which is that I am personally pro-life, but I am also a libertarian who believes the government has no right in personal decisions.

My record is clear. I have fought for personal choice in healthcare since day one and I stand by my record.

I have only ever advocated for two policies concerning abortion – 1) parental notification – because it catches abusers and rapists, and 2) elimination of third trimester abortions – because I believe that is simply just going too far.

These are very mainstream policies that we should have. Those that oppose them are the ones out of touch.

5 – Supports eroding women’s reproductive rights”

The bill cited is this one:

Here, my opponent is attempting to deceive voters into believing that I want to restriction reproductive rights. That is false. The bill simply requires that parents of a minor girl who intends to have an abortion must be notified in advance of the procedure. It does not require the parent’s consent – only notification. The whole purpose of a parental notification law is to catch rapists and abusers, so they cannot hide their crimes. Imagine a 12-year-old girl being raped by a babysitter or an uncle and being forced by the perpetrator to go have an abortion. This can happen in Connecticut currently without the parents ever knowing their child had an abortion let alone was the victim of such a crime. I am extremely sympathetic to circumstances that might be uncomfortable when it comes to teen pregnancies and have made that clear each time I have proposed legislation. It must absolutely make exceptions and provide for a judicial bypass procedure.

With regard to rights and access, I personally find it difficult to juxtapose laws in our society that would allow a 14 year old young woman to terminate a pregnancy without her parent’s knowledge when we have other laws that prohibit minors from getting their ears pierced, or to get a tattoo, or to buy a pack of cigarettes, and so on.


I have chosen to focus on my own record in my campaign. Certainly, it is ok for candidates to point out differences from their opponents. However, it is NOT ok to distort their records.

My opponent has a record also. I promise that if I refer to it in my campaign materials, I will in no way attempt to distort her record or mislead voters.


Comments are closed

Latest Comments

No comments to show.