Stewart has since thrown her support to state Sen. Ryan Fazio, a Greenwich Republican who is the party’s leading voice on electricity prices. Fazio will be running in this weekend’s party convention at the Mohegan Sun casino against former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey of Greenwich, who says Republicans cannot defeat Lamont with incremental proposals and instead must “go bold” with her plan to eliminate the state income tax within five to seven years.

McCaughey says she will receive support from at least 15% of the 1,106 Republican delegates, which would allow her to qualify for an August primary against Fazio. With Stewart saying she had more than 600 delegates, they will be making decisions on a new candidate by Saturday’s vote.

House Republican leader Vincent Candelora of North Branford told The Courant on Wednesday that Stewart “should get out” of the race and seek the advice of an attorney for the potentially serious charges against her. Only 24 hours later, he said Stewart made the correct move.

Erin Stewart drops out of governor’s race as new report blasts spending; State police investigating

“Erin has made the right decision for herself and for Connecticut,” Candelora said. “Public service demands the highest standards of integrity, and when a public official or candidate fails to meet them, there is really only one appropriate path forward.”

Looking ahead, Candelora said that Republicans must rally together at the convention on Friday and Saturday as they pick up the pieces after a stunning departure by the presumed frontrunner.

“Now it’s time to move forward,” Candelora said. “Senator Fazio is the most qualified person in this race, someone with the experience, the vision, and the integrity to lead Connecticut toward real growth, opportunity, and affordability. Republicans should unite behind him.”

Fazio, urging unity to combat the unaffordability that he attributes to Lamont’s leadership and promising “the largest middle class tax cut in state history,” called for a “coalition to create a positive change for our great state.”

“Erin Stewart ran a hard-fought campaign that engaged many great Republicans across Connecticut and brought more people into the process,” Fazio said in a statement. “We respect the decision she announced today and appreciate everyone who participated in this race in support of their vision for our state.”

But McCaughey says she remains in the contest and some of Stewart’s delegates are expected to switch to her.

“Republicans need to turn their attention from bashing each other and chart a bold course for Connecticut’s comeback,” McCaughey told The Courant in a text message. “I was confident all along of getting the 15% and appearing on the ballot. Many delegates who valued Erin’s retail politicking and likability will now favor the energy and bold ideas I bring to the race.”

At the same time, Lamont’s supporters say that now is the time to rally around the governor.

“The allegations of fraud detailed in the New Britain investigative report are incredibly serious, and it is clear that Mayor Stewart’s decision to suspend her campaign was the right one to ensure accountability,” said Rob Blanchard, Lamont’s chief campaign spokesman. “However, as we look now toward November, we see a Republican Party that is quickly uniting. We cannot afford, as Democrats, to be in disarray or warring with one another. We have made too much progress together to risk turning back toward Trump-era policies.”

Blanchard added, “Together, Governor Lamont and Democratic legislators have delivered historic results for Connecticut, including the largest income tax cut in state history, record-breaking new investments in our schools and local communities and reduced energy rates. Let’s build on that progress. Now is the time for us to stand united, focused on moving Connecticut forward. Now is the time to come together and support Governor Lamont.”

Lamont’s supporters have tried to fend off a challenge from the left by state Rep. Josh Elliott, a liberal Democrat from Hamden who has consistently criticized Lamont for failing to raise taxes on the richest residents who currently pay 6.99% on the state income tax.

Elliott told The Courant recently that he will reach the necessary level of 305 delegates out of 2,033 against Lamont. But the more important question is when Elliott might raise enough money to qualify for public financing to run a serious campaign against the well-funded Lamont, a Greenwich multimillionaire who spent more than $25 million of his own money on his last campaign. Elliott says he is “fully confident” that he will qualify for funding because he now needs to raise less than $60,000 to reach the threshold and has until July 17 to raise the money.

The potential primary against Lamont is unusual because the last time that a Connecticut incumbent governor lost in a re-election battle was in 1954 when Republican Gov. John Lodge was defeated by Democrat Abe Ribicoff in a tight race by less than one half of one percentage point.

Ackert staying in the race

Despite the departure of Stewart, her running mate, state Rep. Tim Ackert of Coventry, is remaining in the race against Matt Corey, a well-known restaurant owner and former window washer who has lost in three races against U.S. Rep. John B. Larson and twice against U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy. Ackert is giving up his state legislative seat to run for statewide office, and Stewart had said they made a great team in a “blue-collar ticket” against Lamont.

“The mission remains the same: offering Connecticut voters a credible, principled Republican vision for the future,” Ackert said Thursday. “Our party must continue moving forward with unity, seriousness, and a commitment to earning the trust of the people we hope to serve. I remain fully committed to this race for Lieutenant Governor and will continue fighting for a stronger future for Connecticut.”

Stewart had been viewed by some Republicans as the party’s best chance to provide a spirited challenge to Lamont. Lamont has had solid poll ratings in recent years as the state has generated large budget surpluses that have allowed officials to pay an additional $11 billion into the long-underfunded pension funds.

But political watchers are concerned about potential storm clouds, including the ongoing Iran War, high gasoline prices, and a volatile stock market that dipped after the war started before rebounding to all-time highs once again.

While Stewart had strong support among hardcore backers in her home city, others questioned whether the bare-knuckle politics of hard-hittin’ New Britain could translate statewide into the more genteel Republican enclaves where she would need support. While her supporters said she proved she could win in a Democratic city, her opponents viewed her as a lightweight who was not ready for prime time on the statewide stage.

When the heat turned up on her spending more than $200,000 on the city’s credit card, Stewart avoided reporters Tuesday night after a campaign rally at a Bristol hotel. Reporters chased after her in a scene reminiscent of the chases of then-Gov. John G. Rowland before he resigned in 2004 in a widespread scandal.

In recent days, some voters who learned about the credit card controversy immediately understood the seriousness of the situation for Stewart and said simply, “She’s done.”

The embattled Stewart had come under increasing scrutiny and pressure to get out of the race as Republicans said the controversies surrounding Stewart could hurt the party “down ballot” in other races in November.

In a sharp reversal from the defiant and dismissive tone that she struck with supporters as recently as Tuesday, Stewart on Thursday was suddenly humbled in talking about making restitution.

“I take the allegations that have been made against me very seriously,” Stewart said. “And for that reason, I am suspending my gubernatorial campaign effective immediately so that I can focus on addressing those claims. … I will take accountability for any mistakes, and I intend to make full and complete restitution to the City of New Britain — my home — for anything that I owe.”

Previously, Stewart had told The Courant that the allegations regarding the town’s now-fired tax collector were part of a “witch hunt” and a half-baked report. The report on the tax collector, which was sent to the New Britain corporation counsel’s office by the Hartford-based Crumbie Law Group, also stated that large amounts of cash were left “haphazardly” in the New Britain tax collector’s office, and the office did not follow the city’s policy that bank deposits should be made daily.

After a public records request, The Hartford Courant reported Sunday that New Britain city records showed that Stewart purchased diapers, baby formula, cosmetics, alcohol, jewelry, a yoga mat, clothing for men, women and children, a lighted vanity mirror, power tools, beach and pool toys, children’s toys, bed linens, table cloths and home decorations. Most of the items were classified as office supplies, and about half had receipts.

“It is extraordinarily difficult to make this decision because we have run an amazing campaign so far,” Stewart said. “We attracted more than 3,000 individual donors, gained commitments from over 600 delegates, assembled what I believe is the best political team in Connecticut, and I truly believe we were poised to win the convention, win the primary, and defeat Governor Lamont in November.”

Stewart continued, “I do not have enough words to express my heartfelt gratitude and love for everyone from across the state who joined our movement and believed in me personally. I know many of them are disappointed. I am too.”

State Democratic spokesman Ian Clarke said the party is preparing for its state convention Saturday in Hartford.

“Given the magnitude of the accusations against her, Erin Stewart’s decision to drop out of this race is the right one,” Clarke said. “But from the beginning we have known that no matter who the Republicans nominate this weekend, the real leader they answer to is Donald Trump. Connecticut Democrats have been and remain focused on entering our own convention ready to rally, campaign on the issues that matter most to Connecticut families, and to protect our state from the far-right agenda offered by either Republican candidate for governor.”

“The continued allegations from New Britain City Hall have understandably taken over this race and diverted attention away from the critical mission of saving our state from high taxes, high costs, the most expensive energy in America, and low opportunity for young people,” Stewart, a Republican, said in a statement. “I take the allegations that have been made against me very seriously. And for that reason, I am suspending my gubernatorial campaign effective immediately so that I can focus on addressing those claims.”

The new disclosures are detailed in a second report associated with a city-commissioned, private investigation of Stewart’s spending. Mayor Bobby Sanchez, the Democrat who replaced Stewart, said he ordered the investigation after hearing complaints about spending from city employees.

Sanchez referred the new report to both the Chief State’s Attorney’s Office and the United States Attorney’s Office. The state police, already examining alleged irregularities in city tax collections during Stewart’s administration, expanded the inquiry to include credit card use and the FBI also has opened an investigation, law enforcement sources said Thursday. The Chief State’s Attorney has assigned a prosecutor to the matter.

Even before its release, the anticipated report was adding to talk among some Republicans of blocking Stewart’s campaign for governor. The politically devastating analysis of credit card charges appeared a day before the state Republican convention, at which she was trying to secure enough delegate support to qualify for a $2.8 million taxpayer-financed campaign finance grant.

In addition to reproducing social media photos that Stewart posted of herself at family parties – parties that billing records suggest were decorated and catered at city expense – the report asserts that her office regularly exceeded its budget for office supplies and miscellaneous expenses and, at one point, ignored a fraud warning by city auditors that greater control was needed over credit card spending.

The report, by the Crumbie Law Group of Hartford, also suggests that Stewart billed the city – twice – for political expenses. If proven, such billing could amount to violations of state campaign finance laws, among others.

If 2017, while running for re-election, the Crumbie report says then-Mayor Stewart joined the pricey Hartford Club and billed the recurring expense to the city. Her campaign notified the State Elections Enforcement Commission that it was hosting a “cocktail event” fundraiser at the club’ on September 26, 2017. The city picked up the tab. The bill that month was $680.03, including a $163.03 for a Sept. 26 cocktail event.

Last spring, on April 2, 2025, Stewart’s city credit card was charged for round trip tickets to Washington, D.C. for her and John Healey, formerly the mayor’s chief of staff and now her campaign manager. Days later, the report says Stewart told the Republican State Central Committee she went to Washington in an attempt to obtain President Donald Trump’s endorsement.

Erin Stewart blasts media, Dems, GOP for ignoring meme depicting her burned at stake

The 18-page report, illustrated with photographs posted by Stewart to her Facebook page and supported by 74 pages of exhibits, is a withering critique of what it characterizes as reckless, irresponsible and possibly illegal spending. It “raises concerns” that the questionable purchases could constitute evidence of a half dozen state and federal fraud charges.

There is an image taken from a September 12, 2023 television news program in which Stewart appears wearing a powder blue maternity dress identical to the $40.40 “Sleeveless High Waisted Midi Dress Photoshoot Baby Shower Blue L” dress that city expense records show was purchased from Amazon and charged to her city credit card two months earlier.

The report contains another photo from one of Stewart’s social media posts, dated August 13, 2023, showing her in a red “Sleeveless Swing Casual Work Summer Party Dress with Pockets.” It appears to be identical to one purchased from Amazon and billed to her city credit card three months earlier.

Over June and July of 2022, the report cites city expense records showing that multiple purchases at Costco and Amazon were billed to Stewart’s city credit card as office expenses and delivered to her home. According to the report, those purchases consisted of food, gifts and decorations for “a tropical Peppa Pig-themed birthday party” that Stewart arranged at her home for her then 2-year-old daughter.

Among the photographs reproduced from Stewart’s Facebook page is one showing adults watching Stewart’s daughter, wearing a dress similar to one charged to the mayor’s city card, reaching toward a giant Peppa Pig character.
.
The report tracks the same sorts of city credit card purchases for two other events involving Stewart’s family – a party two years later to celebrate her daughter’s nursery school graduation and another for her husband’s 40th birthday.

Critics attack Erin Stewart’s spending as mayor. $200K charged to city card; items sent to her home

It also contains a chart correlating the birth of both of Stewart’s children with purchase of maternity and early childhood items, lists credit card jewelry purchases and asserts she is using audio equipment the city paid for in her campaign for governor.

Collectively, the report claims that a years-long pattern of questionable purchases raises the possibility of criminal or civil liability not only for whoever made the purchases, but for those who approved them.

“The misuse of taxpayer funds reflected in the evidence raises concerns that extend well beyond administrative misconduct and may expose the individuals involved to significant civil and criminal liability under both state and federal law,” the report says. “The apparent diversion of public funds and municipal assets for improper purposes not only constitutes a serious breach of the public trust, but may also implicate statutes governing Fraud, Larceny, Embezzlement, False Statements, Wire Fraud, and Misuse of Government Property.

“Where public officials knowingly authorize, conceal, or benefit from such conduct, the exposure is not limited to reimbursement or internal discipline; rather, it warrants a full criminal investigation by the appropriate state and federal authorities.”

The Courant reported earlier this week that nearly a decade of New Britain expense records show that $207,076.07 in purchase were charged to Stewart’s city credit card from 2016 to 2025. Of that total, about $47,000 involved purchases from Amazon, about $19,000 from Costco, $18,000 from The Hartford Club, more than $7,000 from Instacart and about $71,000 from a variety of other vendors.

The records show that more than half the purchase were not validated by receipts. The available receipts show that about $22,600 of what was bought was shipped to Stewart’s residence and $7,500 in items were shipped to the mayor’s office.

New Britain has rules concerning the city credit, or P-cards, it issues to dozens of employees, including requirements that the cards be used only for essential purchases and that the transactions be backed by receipts.

Card policy is supposed to be enforced by the city finance director and lapses are to be punished by cancelation of card access. There were two finance directors over Stewart’s dozen years in office and both have not responded to repeated inquiries. A former City Hall employee has said there was concern among Stewart’s staff over her credit card use as early as 2018 and at times it rose to loud arguments.

In an interview with the Courant earlier in the week, Stewart defended her credit card spending and claimed it was never questioned.

“There is a reason you have receipts and you have all that proof because there was nothing to hide,” she said. “There were receipts that were submitted and annually budgeted and don’t forget independently audited too. And for 12 years there was never a question or a doubt raised until now, until I decided to step away and run for higher office.”

The Crumbie report questions the claim, saying that as early as 2019, then city auditor BlumShapiro “urged the city to consider and implement a fraud-risk assessment program in light of ‘the city’s vulnerability to misappropriation of assets.’”

“With respect to the city’s P-Card Program, in its 2019 letter to Ms. Stewart, BlumShapiro reported that ‘six transactions out of twenty-five selected did not have proper supporting documentation, which spanned three different departments,’ noting that ‘[a]lthough the City has procedures in place to review these transactions monthly, that review usually takes place after the purchases were incurred and detail is limited,’” the report says.

The report says Stewart would not submit to an interview by the Crumbie investigators and instead asked for a list of written questions.

“When advised that this could not be done, she ignored an additional request for an interview.,” the report says.

The report released Thursday asserts that reimbursements to the city for personal charges were negligible. In 2018 and 2020, the report says Stewart personally reimbursed the city a total of $456.07 for Uber rides and other unspecified charges. In 2018, ’19 and ’20, Stewart’s charity, the Mayor’s Trophy Charitable Fund, and the New Britain Republican Town Committee, reimbursed the city a total of $1,472.92

In its conclusion, the report says, “The financial records, purchase histories, and supporting documentation presented here show that the great majority of the expenditures made with Ms. Stewart’s P-Card were wholly unrelated to official municipal business and instead appear to have benefited and enriched Ms. Stewart and her family.”

Stewart has been under fire since The Hartford Courant disclosed that city records show Stewart purchased diapers, cosmetics, a yoga mat, clothing for men, women and children, a lighted vanity mirror, power tools, beach and pool toys, children’s toys, bed linens, table cloths, home decorations, and baby formula as part of more than $200,000 in purchases. Most of the items were classified in city records as office supplies, and more than half lacked receipts.

Stewart’s future is timely because Connecticut Republicans will be nominating a candidate for governor at the state party’s convention at the Mohegan Sun casino on Saturday. Stewart is facing Sen. Ryan Fazio and former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey, two Greenwich Republicans whom Stewart has cited for contrasting backgrounds from her upbringing in hardscrabble New Britain.

House Republican leader Vincent Candelora of North Branford told The Courant that Stewart needs to seriously consider her future.

“On a personal level, I think she should get out,” Candelora said in an interview. “These allegations are not simply misuse of a card. These are potentially criminal allegations that are being raised that I think on a personal level she should consider getting out of the race and worry about her own future. That is why I say she should be seeking advice from an attorney.”

Candelora added, “On a personal level, I’m concerned that Mayor Stewart does not appreciate the ramifications of all of these allegations.”

A Fazio supporter, Candelora said that some delegates have already dropped their support of Stewart this week and switched to Fazio.

While Stewart has repeatedly said she has been the subject of a political witch hunt, Candelora countered, “Every candidate goes through this kind of scrutiny. There’s a witch hunt for every candidate when you run for office. Unfortunately, in this situation, they have found stuff that I think is a disqualifying event. The mayor is being treated no differently than any other candidate that enters a statewide race.”

Both Candelora and Senate Republican leader Stephen Harding of Brookfield said that keeping an embattled Stewart on the ballot could hurt Republicans in other races in November and would also prevent Republicans from raising ethical issues about various controversies in Gov. Ned Lamont’s administration.

Those include former deputy budget director Kosta Diamantis, who was found guilty by a federal jury of 21 felony counts of bribery, extortion, conspiracy and lying to federal investigators in a scandal involving the state’s school construction program that he oversaw for years. Republicans also cited the case of Terrence Cheng, the former Connecticut State Colleges and Universities chancellor whose lavish spending, high salary, and out-of-state home drew repeated attention from legislators before he left his position to serve as strategic advisor to the Connecticut Board of Regents for Higher Education until the end of his contract on June 30 at a salary of more than $400,000 per year. Stewart served on the regents board during Cheng’s tenure, but she stepped down in December 2025 to concentrate on her campaign for governor.

Since the credit card disclosures surfaced, Stewart and her delegates have doubled down and pledged to fight on. Stewart says that she will provide an explanation of the spending — but not until after the convention.

After a campaign rally Tuesday night in Bristol, Stewart refused to answer questions from reporters.

As 1,106 delegates are expected to attend the two-day convention, Harding said the delegates deserve a clear explanation from Stewart before they vote on Saturday.

“She owes it to the delegates — prior to the convention — to explain this,” Harding told The Courant following a forum in Hartford. “The voters and the delegates need to know what the story is behind this. … To say that I’m going to tell you after the convention is not fair. The delegates deserve answers on this.”

Regarding getting out of the race, Harding said, “I think she should consider it. The things that have come out are, at the very least, alarming.”

As a Republican, Harding said he believed that Stewart had done a good job during her 12 years of leading her hometown of New Britain, adding that he would support her if she is the eventual Republican nominee in November.

“I like Erin. I’ve always liked Erin,” Harding said. “I still believe she could potentially be a great alternative to Governor Lamont, but leaving it unexplained is not fair to the Republican delegate or the Republican voter in the primary. We deserve answers on this, and if she’s not willing to answer those questions, then she should reconsider her campaign.”

Harding added, “You’re asking the delegates of the state party to put the rubber stamp on your campaign and endorse your campaign for governor without telling them anything regarding what has been exposed here, which at the very, very least is extremely alarming. The delegates, before they make that endorsement, deserve an answer. If it’s all within the law and it’s all in compliance, then explain that. If she’s saying that she did nothing wrong, then there should be an explanation.”

But John Healey, a former Senate Republican chief of staff who is now Stewart’s senior adviser, cautioned against jumping to conclusions.

“I respect Senator Harding and Rep. Candelora, but as Ryan Fazio’s biggest supporters, their response is completely predictable,” Healey said Wednesday. “Mayor Stewart has pledged to obtain and review these documents and address any questions thereafter. What’s amazing is how fast some Republicans accept Democrat opposition research without taking a breath. Guess that’s what happens when Erin Stewart becomes a threat to both establishments at the same time.”

Stewart herself has vowed to carry on despite the criticism.

“I’m not afraid of a bare-knuckle political fight,” Stewart said earlier this week. “Republicans need a real warrior to win this election in November – and I am that warrior.”

Lamont response

Lamont, 72, is known for maintaining a relatively low-key campaign style and avoiding the overheated rhetoric that is common among some politicians in Washington, D.C. Despite being asked by reporters, he has generally refrained from bashing Stewart.

“Every time I see smoke in state government, we go after it,” Lamont said Wednesday when asked by The Courant following a forum hosted by The Hartford Business Journal. “We hire outside investigators, and I hold people accountable. My advice to [New Britain Mayor] Bobby [Sanchez] and what my advice to Erin would have been, leave no stone unturned. Get in front of this thing and make sure people have consequences.”

In a video, Stewart recently criticized Lamont for problems in his administration that included Diamantis, but Lamont notes that he fired Diamantis as the state’s deputy budget director eight days after the state received a subpoena from a federal grand jury as the FBI was investigating how contracts were awarded in the school construction program.

“Look, I got whiffs of something wrong going on over there, and look how we responded,” Lamont said, referring to Diamantis’s firing. “Either she had whiffs of something going on wrong in New Britain town hall, and how did she respond? That’s the contrast.”

On the campaign trail, Fazio moved quickly to spread the word on Stewart by running one-minute commercials Wednesday during the morning drive hours on the “Brian and Company” show on WTIC-AM 1080 — the largest news station in the Greater Hartford area.

“Taxpayers are outraged that Stewart raised taxes on struggling families, then misspent those tax dollars on luxury dinners and personal shopping,” a narrator states. “That’s the latest on Erin Stewart’s troubling record on taxes. … Conservatives trust Ryan Fazio to defeat Ned Lamont and cut taxes for families. Vote conservative Ryan Fazio for governor.”

Lamont’s chief spokesman, Rob Blanchard, said that voters need answers.

“To serve taxpayers, Mayor Stewart could start by explaining why hundreds of thousands of public dollars were spent on personal items,” Blanchard said. “True service requires accountability, yet she has refused to take responsibility for the clothing, shoes, and lavish dinners funded by her municipal budget. While she avoids these answers, the governor is actually focused on lowering the cost of living for families and small businesses by cutting energy rates, providing free childcare, and reducing middle-class taxes.”

Ian Clarke, a spokesman for the state Democratic Party, said Stewart has not specifically explained the city’s payment for her husband’s 40th birthday party or other items.

“Erin Stewart talked about accountability without taking any, promised transparency without offering any, and attacked everyone else in Connecticut politics without denying the accusations,” Clarke said. “She doesn’t need to review documents to remember whether she put an $18,000 club membership or $1,200 of bridal shower invitations on a taxpayer-funded purchasing card to have real answers. She has to come clean right now.”

She ushered a large group of labor leaders to one side of the podium. And on the other side, she gathered Gov. Ned Lamont and a host of Democratic lawmakers from the General Assembly.

“We’ve got union leaders over here and the fabulous legislators over here,” Bysiewicz said.

“She’s separating us,” one of the union leaders joked.

“We are all on the same page. Don’t worry,” Bysiewicz responded.

That was certainly true on Monday, as Lamont signed a new 124-page labor bill into law.

The bill, which was supported by nurses, teachers, construction workers and service employees in Connecticut, is one of the biggest victories for organized labor in the state in recent years.

The bill also provided Lamont with a ready-made platform to tout his support among the state’s labor unions ahead of the Democratic Convention, where the governor is seeking to lock in his party’s endorsement for a third term.

Unionized labor will play a significant role at that convention on Saturday and could help to decide whether Rep. Josh Elliott, D-Hamden, receives enough support to challenge Lamont in a Democratic primary later this summer.

Many of the labor leaders and their allies in the General Assembly credited Lamont for his support of the lengthy labor bill that passed in the final days of this year’s legislative session.

The bill, which Lamont signed into law on Monday, provides something for nearly every unionized workforce in the state.

Teachers and nurses are now eligible for enhanced workers’ compensation benefits if they are assaulted on the job. It ensures workers in the cannabis industry are paid at least the state minimum wage. It provides new job protections to janitors, housekeepers and other service workers. And it holds general contractors on construction projects liable if subcontractors on a project don’t pay their workers.

“This is a game changer for us. Absolutely,” Rochelle Palache, the state director of SEIU 32BJ, said of the omnibus labor bill.

“We are so glad to stand by our leaders like Gov. Lamont,” she added.

The celebratory mood at the bill signing on Monday was far different from the reaction that Lamont received last year after vetoing another labor-backed bill that would have made striking workers eligible for workers’ compensation payments during a labor dispute.

Neither Lamont or the union leaders brought up that recent history on Monday. Instead, the governor and the other speakers focused on all of the other legislation that he and the state’s labor leaders collaborated on during his first eight years in office.

Lamont and Bysiewicz cited Connecticut’s nearly $17 minimum wage. And they reminded everyone how they supported the creation of a statewide paid family medical leave program and expanded sick leave for employees throughout the state.

“That’s not the way I think about it,” Lamont said. “I’m standing with these folks right here. We are fighting every day on behalf of the working families in this state.”

Sen. Julie Kushner, the Democratic chairwoman of the legislature’s Labor and Public Employees Committee, also recognized Lamont’s role in ensuring labor-friendly law continue to be enacted in Connecticut.

Kushner said she would have liked to see the legislation providing pay for striking workers enacted into law last year. But she noted that Lamont has been an active partner on many other important bills that passed through her committee.

“We’ve gotten so much done in the last eight years for working people,” Kushner said.

Andrew Brown is a reporter for the Connecticut Mirror. Copyright 2026 @ CT Mirror (Ctmirror.org).

Bronin, 46, repeatedly said during his campaign that he would bring more energy than the 77-year-old Larson and would battle every day in the fight against President Donald Trump’s Republican administration. A former U.S. Navy Reserve intelligence officer in Afghanistan who grew up in Greenwich, Bronin is known for an intense work ethic and for outworking his opponents in previous elections.

He delivered a brief, rousing speech Monday night to the delegates at Goodwin University in East Hartford as Larson stood silently in the front row about 40 feet away. The announced tally was 51.2% for Bronin and 48.8% for Larson as Bronin captured 214 delegates to Larson’s 204.

“We just saw a political earthquake in this convention hall,” Bronin said as his supporters cheered. “Every Democrat in this room believes that we need to stop the damage that Donald Trump is doing to our country every single day, that we need to rebuild the guardrails to stop the brazen corruption and self-enrichment that he has taken to unimaginable heights.”

A skilled politician and coalition builder, Bronin worked closely with the delegates and captured the votes in multiple towns. A huge total of 50 delegates from his hometown of Hartford proved to be a major boost for Bronin.

“This is one stage in the process, but it’s an important one,” Bronin told reporters after his speech. “It sends a powerful signal to Democrats out there that they have a real choice. What we usually see at these conventions is a coronation of the incumbent. What we saw tonight was a sea change. What we saw tonight was the most active Democrats in the district sending a message that we want change. I think what that means for the voters is that, for the first time in 28 years, they realize that they have a choice.”

Asked by The Courant when he knew he had enough support, Bronin said, “I didn’t know I had it until they read the numbers. But look, coming into this convention, I knew we had a lot of strength. … It’s not easy to vote against an incumbent. It’s not easy to vote against an establishment. It’s not easy to vote for big change, but that’s what happened tonight.”

Gilchrest in primary

In a key development, state Rep. Jillian Gilchrest of West Hartford qualified for the three-way primary with the minimum of 63 votes, representing 15% of the delegates. She was congratulated by Larson after the announcement at Goodwin University in East Hartford. Neither Bronin nor Larson would explain exactly how Gilchrest went from having 8.8% of the votes on the first round and then seeing a sudden, large jump in her total to exactly 63 delegates, or 15%, after the delegate “switches” allowed them to change their votes.

In the first round, Larson scored big in Manchester, which is one of his political strongholds. But many of the Larson delegates then switched to Gilchrest, which allowed her to qualify for the primary with 15.04%, barely above the 15% minimum.

“In a democracy, the more, the merrier,” Larson said, adding that he had also hoped that Hartford attorney Ruth Fortune would qualify for the primary. Fortune received 1.9% and told The Courant after the convention that she fully intends to collect the necessary 3,734 signatures by June 9 to gain a spot on the primary ballot.

When asked by The Courant about the deal to ensure that Gilchrest qualified for the primary with 63 delegates, Larson said, “I didn’t have a conversation with her about that, so I can’t exactly tell you. Listen, it is what it is.”

Since neither Bronin nor Larson achieved 50% on the first round, the delegates were required to vote again in a second round.

Larson’s loss was stunning to his supporters, who thought he had 220 or more delegates that would have guaranteed a first-ballot victory with more than 50% of the delegates. But that did not happen.

Despite the setback, Larson vowed to deliver a spirited campaign for the Aug. 11 primary.

“This is democracy at work,” Larson told reporters. “But this is the first step.”

Mayberry vs. Greenwich

Larson is already framing the battle as a fighter with a background in public schools and public housing versus an Ivy League graduate and Rhodes Scholar who grew up in Rye, N.Y., and later in Greenwich, two of the richest towns in the nation. Larson grew up in a federal housing project known as Mayberry Village in East Hartford, calling himself “a project kid” as he spoke of his humble beginnings.

“Now I think it’s going to be very clear: it’s Mayberry versus Greenwich,” Larson said. “We’re in this fight on behalf of the working people that I have served for 28 years in the United States Congress. … My fight is going on now. It doesn’t wait until November. … Project kids don’t give up. Project kids just lean into a fight like this. I’m looking forward to it.”

Larson’s supporters had been confident for months, saying that Larson had the experience and a long history of winning elections, including 14 consecutive elections dating back to 1998 in his first run for Congress. He had a long series of wins for state Senate before running for governor and losing in a primary to liberal Democrat Bill Curry in 1994. He then made a political comeback and has served in Congress alongside the top leaders through the years, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and current Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of Brooklyn, N.Y.

“Now, it’s not up to a party,” Larson said of the coming three months. “It’s up to the people in this district to decide, and I’m confident, and I’ll be happy with their decision in August.”

Asked by The Courant, Larson said he would participate in multiple debates at various sites, such as “along the Connecticut River, at Coltsville, [and] in north Hartford.”

In other matters, the remaining four Congressional candidates who are running for re-election were all re-nominated, including Democrats Jim Himes of Greenwich, Jahana Hayes of Wolcott, Joe Courtney of Vernon, and Rosa DeLauro of New Haven.

DeLauro was in the closest race, capturing 86.73% of the delegates, compared to 13.27% for challenger Andrew Rice, a spokesman said. Rice fell short of the necessary 15% to automatically trigger a primary on Aug. 11.

State Sen. Ryan Fazio, a Greenwich Republican, made his comments at a second debate that Stewart missed last week in front of a live audience in Berlin.

“Debates are important,” Fazio told the crowd. “It’s not about beating up on each other. … Guess what? If you can’t debate against your Republican competitors, how are you going to stand on a debate stage against Ned Lamont with his millions of dollars, his eight years on the job and convince people that we need a change for the entire state? These debates are important.”

But John Healey, the senior adviser for Stewart, said she was following the advice of the state Republican Party since February to avoid any debates before the convention that will be held Saturday, May 16.

“Frankly, I don’t know of another Republican frontrunner who has been more accessible than Erin,” Healey said. “As you know, with 1,100 delegates as our focus, we can have far more productive Q&A in those intimate settings, on the phones, or one-on-one, than ever could happen in a debate with three candidates. Because of that, every conceivable minute between now and next Friday has been meticulously scheduled. No disrespect is intended to the hosts at all. We are just being consistent with the position we have long communicated.”

With less than one week remaining before the state party conventions, the five major candidates for governor are gearing up their campaigns and reaching out to delegates for important votes. Political insiders expect both Democratic and Republican primaries in August, but the candidates will be decided Saturday if they receive the minimum support of 15% of the delegates.

On the Democratic side, state Rep. Josh Elliott says he will reach the necessary level of 305 delegates out of 2,033 against Lamont. But the more important question is when Elliott might raise enough money to qualify for public financing to run a serious campaign against the well-funded Lamont, a Greenwich multimillionaire who spent more than $25 million of his own money on his last campaign. Elliott says he is “fully confident” that he will qualify for funding because he now needs to raise less than $80,000 to reach the threshold and has until July 17 to raise the money.

On the Republican side, Stewart and Fazio are expected to qualify for the primary, but the wild card is former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey, an energetic firebrand who says her two Republican opponents do not have plans that are bold enough to unseat a popular, two-term governor like Lamont. As such, McCaughey said she is a “red-meat Republican” who is calling for bold plans like eliminating the state income tax over the next five to seven years and filing a lawsuit against New York Gov. Kathy Hochul for blocking a natural gas pipeline that could lead to lower electric rates in Connecticut.

With her supporters viewing her as the frontrunner in the delegate count, Stewart has refused to debate her two Republican opponents before the convention at the Mohegan Sun casino. But Fazio and McCaughey went ahead anyway in a live, radio debate on WTIC-AM in Farmington on Thursday that covered a wide range of topics.

On Friday night, the two candidates debated for a second night without Stewart, which prompted the response by Fazio without mentioning Stewart’s name. A cardboard cut-out of Stewart was placed in between where Fazio and McCaughey were standing in front of a live audience in Berlin.

In the radio debate, McCaughey and Fazio tangled over three of the most controversial issues of the just-completed 2026 regular legislative session: homeschooling, vaccines, and gun control. In each case, Democrats who control both chambers of the legislature passed the bills, but Republicans and advocates spoke strongly against all three measures as an intrusion on fundamental rights.

“The last session of the legislature was an all-out assault on our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution,” McCaughey said, adding that she has written two books on the Constitution. “If you’re worried about government forcing you to vaccinate your children or about government taking away your firearms, or about government preventing you from homeschooling your children, I have your back … And I will litigate against those laws that were just passed. That vaccine law — I’m already shopping to decide which of the great litigation thinktanks on the conservative side … should take that case. That case is a slam-dunk victory for us in the United States Supreme Court.”

McCaughey added, “My children and grandchildren are vaccinated, but that does not mean I believe the government should force someone else to do that in violation of their First Amendment religious freedom.”

Fazio showed his conservative principles during the legislative session on key issues, including being one of only six Republican senators to vote against the $28.6 billion budget that was largely written by Lamont and Democrats who control both chambers.

“I have been willing to stand up and say ‘no’ to the overreaches and abuses at every turn of this governor and this supermajority in this state legislature,” Fazio said. “I spent hours and hours. I was there till 4 a.m. with the homeschool and private school families saying ‘no’ to the elimination of their parental rights. I was the very first or second one to testify against the medical mandate bill, taking away people’s medical freedoms in this state. … In my book, freedom is not a problem. Freedom is guaranteed by God, and it’s government’s job to defend it.”

Citing his political victories, Fazio said that Republicans can hold conservative principles and still win elections. He noted that Kamala Harris won his senatorial district in Greenwich, Stamford, and New Canaan in the 2024 presidential election by 17 percentage points, but Fazio still won his race. Harris won the state that year by 13 percentage points.

While the Greenwich-based 36th senatorial district was a hardcore Republican stronghold for decades, Fazio says it is now a blue district based on the presidential results.

“This is not about winning one election. This is about winning the future of our state,” Fazio said. “I’ve won the toughest races of any Republican in the state.”

Eliminating state income tax

While Republican candidates have been talking for decades about eliminating the state income tax, it has never happened. Some governors gave up trying and instead raised the income tax.

The tax started in 1991 with a maximum rate of 4.5%, and many workers paid far less because the lower rates were baked into the tax tables. Today, the highest rate is 6.99% for the wealthiest residents, and they pay that level on their entire income, rather than a blended rate that other taxpayers pay.

But McCaughey, who lives in Greenwich’s famed “backcountry” near some of the nation’s wealthiest residents, says the tax can be eliminated in five to seven years.

“It’s clearly very possible,” McCaughey said. “Eight states have no income tax.”

Besides the states that have eliminated the tax, such as Florida, she said that 18 other Republican states are heading in that direction. She wants to follow the lead of the Florida governor who ran unsuccessfully in 2024 for president.

“Those states are cleaning Lefty Lamont’s clock,” she said. “We must eliminate the income tax. … Connecticut can be Florida without the palm trees. I am running to be your Ron DeSantis.”

Fazio countered by promising to make the deepest cut in the state income tax in Connecticut history, which would be done by cutting $1 billion in spending on a variety of programs including Medicaid spending for illegal immigrants.

“We should reduce the rate of government spending across the board,” Fazio said. “I’ll get it done.”

But McCaughey dismissed Fazio’s current plan to cut taxes by $1,500 per family as small potatoes.

“To me, this is baby steps,” McCaughey said. “If we’re going to turn Connecticut around and create a comeback, a Connecticut comeback, we need to go bold. A $1,500 tax cut will not attract companies back to Connecticut. It may be nice to have the extra money in your pocket, but it will not produce higher wage jobs. It will not produce business startups. It will not produce a boom in Connecticut.”

Electricity prices

Electricity has been Fazio’s signature issue as he has led the Republican charge in the legislature to eliminate the unpopular public benefits charge on ratepayers’ bills.

Fazio said flatly that Republicans need a candidate like him who “knows these issues better than the governor does” and would be happy to debate Lamont on stage.

Recently, Democrats announced that customer bills could come down as much as $30 per month for Eversource customers who use the average of 700 kilowatt hours per month. The reason is the back-and-forth swing from contracts with the Millstone nuclear power plant in Waterford. Based on the price of natural gas, customers can get hit hard with the public benefits charge — as they have in the past — or they can receive a credit on their bills. The credit will allow the price cuts that ratepayers will be seeing in their bills, but Fazio says it did not represent a fundamental change in the issue.

“Fake news,” Fazio said. “Everybody knows it in their hearts.”

Connecticut, Fazio said, ranks near the highest electricity rates in the nation with “Hawaii, which is detached from the mainland, and California, which is detached from reality.”

But McCaughey did not surrender any ground to Fazio, who is seen at the Capitol as the leading Republican voice on electricity.

“I can cut the rates more. I have a bolder plan,” McCaughey said. “It takes the guts to go to court and be the plaintiff.”

That plan was unveiled when McCaughey filed her own lawsuit against New York state, saying that she has legal standing as a Greenwich resident who is paying for natural gas. The lawsuit, filed by McCaughey’s husband, states that New York’s “refusal to allow construction of the pipeline has inflicted economic injury and harm” on McCaughey, who “has been compelled to pay higher rates for the use of natural gas and the electricity generated by natural gas.”

Both Fazio and McCaughey note that New York regulators have approved pipeline plans for their own state but have blocked plans that would help Connecticut. Lamont, who is not a fan of lawsuits, says that he would rather seek negotiations instead of taking legal action against Hochul, a fellow Democrat.

Rather than filing a lawsuit, Lamont says the best move is to move forward with nuclear power and renewable energy like the windmills that have been constructed off the shores of Connecticut and Rhode Island to produce electricity.

Based on Lamont’s strong support for wind power, McCaughey derides him as “Windbag Lamont.”

New Britain tax collector

One of the key issues in the campaign is the ongoing investigation into the ousted tax collector of New Britain Cheryl Blogoslawski, who served for 12 years when Stewart was mayor. Blogoslawski was fired by the new Democratic mayor after accusations that she had allowed taxpayers to back-date their late payments in order to avoid the state-mandated, 18% annual interest on overdue taxes. New Britain Democrats released a scathing report by a law firm that charged a pattern of misconduct and favoritism by the tax collector in a case that has been referred to prosecutors.

Fazio has called for transparency and released a series of 11 questions related to the issue that included Stewart’s comments that she was offered bribes “all the time” during her tenure. Stewart later told The Courant and other news outlets that she was talking about low-income residents of New Britain who were hoping to somehow lower their taxes.

“We’re not talking about quid pro quo stuff,” Stewart told The Courant in an interview. “We’re not talking about these big developers who are coming in and offering me tens of thousands of dollars in exchange for something else. We’re talking about the tax collector situation and negotiating tax payments, which was part of this report.”

As they look ahead to an August primary, Democrats will be debating over the issues of the just-completed legislative session.

Lamont summoned reporters to his Capitol office after the session ended last week to talk about the highlights of the past three months. His campaign sent out a detailed, multi-page summary of the session’s accomplishments, including providing millions in additional education funding, $100 million in extra aid for cities and towns, $300 million for the early childhood endowment fund for day care, free breakfast for all school students across the state, regulating artificial intelligence, 4.5% pay raises for many state employees, and banning the sale of new pistols that can be converted to fire like machine guns.

While mayors, first selectmen, superintendents and teachers have consistently complained about funding, Lamont released statistics showing that the state will provide $2.63 billion in the 2027 fiscal year for the all-important educational cost-sharing funds for the public schools. That represents an increase of 31% since Lamont took office. The overall aid to municipalities, including education and all other categories, will be $5.1 billion in the 2027 fiscal year, up 47% since Lamont took office.

While Lamont and his supporters hailed the accomplishments, Elliott said they did not go far enough.

“The most important things we could do — sending significant money back to municipalities, investing in k-12 and higher education, creating a permanent and fully refundable child tax credit, making all school meals free, working on health insurance affordability — these were all things we couldn’t get past the governor,” Elliott said. “He is hands down the most significant player in the fight for an affordable Connecticut — and he consistently comes up woefully short. The legislature pushed as hard as we could to get our wins, but they are always hampered by a governor who is most concerned with protecting his class.”

With millions of dollars expected to be spent on the primaries, the voters will get the final word on Aug. 11.

Anyone who redeems more than 40,000 out-of-state bottles in a year will face up to five years in prison.

After the passage of an emergency certification bill in February, redemption centers, distributors and manufacturers convened to discuss additional solutions, said Sen. Rick Lopes, D-New Britain, co-chair of the Environment Committee.

“We would only do [additional measures] if there was consensus … [and that] narrowed the bill down considerably,” Lopes said during Senate discussion of SB 457 on Tuesday night.

The bill makes it a Class B misdemeanor for redeeming more than 5,000 out-of-state bottles, and the sentences grow more severe as the number grows. Previously, fraudulent redemption was punishable only by a fine until the third offense.

Earlier attempts to reform the bottle redemption system through creating a stewardship program, adding Connecticut-specific labels and reducing the redemption rate to 5¢, fell flat.

Rep. Mary Mushinsky, D-Wallingford, who first ran for her seat in 1980, oversaw the debate in the House late Wednesday night at the invitation of House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford. Mushinsky announced her retirement earlier in the session.

Ritter noted that the first public comment Mushinsky made in the House was on an early version of the bottle bill.

The attempts to fine-tune the bill continued Wednesday night.

“I think the easiest way to do it is just get rid of the bottle deposit we have on the bottles or bring it back down to 5¢ to solve the problem,” Rep. Gale Mastrofrancesco, R-Wolcott, said on Wednesday night.

The Finance Committee also introduced SB 516, which would reduce the deposit to 5¢ if the rate of bottles redeemed surpassed 100%. It was not called in either chamber.

“I do, unfortunately, have to say that this isn’t the last time we’re gonna be revisiting this bottle bill,” Lopes told the Senate on Tuesday. “This is just the latest iteration of a fix we need to make.”

Angela Eichhorst is a reporter for the Connecticut Mirror. Copyright 2026 @ CT Mirror (ctmirror.org).

Lamont summoned reporters to his state Capitol office to discuss the just-concluded 2026 legislative session in detail, focusing mainly on the accomplishments and less on the unfinished business.

As is his custom, Lamont avoided criticizing any of his opponents on the Democratic and Republican sides of the aisle. Asked by The Courant for his opinion about Republican Erin Stewart’s refusal to debate her gubernatorial opponents before the party convention, Lamont paused before saying, “I think I’m going to stick to the budget.”

But his campaign sent out a detailed, multi-page summary of the session’s accomplishments, including providing millions in additional education funding, $100 million in extra aid for cities and towns, $300 million for the early childhood endowment fund for day care, free breakfast for all school students across the state, regulating artificial intelligence, 4.5% pay raises for many state employees, and banning the sale of new pistols that can be converted to fire like machine guns.

Asked by a veteran reporter whether the nearly 40-minute news conference Thursday was political, Lamont responded, “This is substance, baby. This is substance.”

With the Democratic and Republican conventions both scheduled for Saturday, May 16, Lamont is facing state Rep. Josh Elliott, a Hamden Democrat who has attacked Lamont from the left for not raising taxes on the state’s richest residents. Many Democrats predict that Elliott will receive support from the necessary 15% of delegates to force a primary, but they note that he still has not raised enough money to qualify for public financing against the self-funded Lamont. Elliott has a fundraising deadline of July 17 for the Aug. 11 primary.

On the Republican side, Stewart is facing state Sen. Ryan Fazio and former New York Lt. Gov. Betsy McCaughey, two Greenwich Republicans who are battling against Stewart from hardscrabble New Britain.

While Lamont hailed the session generally as a success, the state’s largest business lobby, the Connecticut Business and Industry Association, said the state had taken steps backward.

“Unfortunately, our state lawmakers did not do nearly enough to address the rising costs challenging so many Connecticut families and employers,” said Chris DiPentima, CBIA’s CEO. “There were some positive policy wins, but there were too many decisions that will make Connecticut more expensive to live, work, and do business — jeopardizing the state’s long-term economic competitiveness. Time and again this session, it was a case of one step forward, three steps back.”

Although the new, $28.6 billion budget will provide $190 million in additional education aid and another $100 million through the Mashantucket Pequot and Mohegan grant, DiPentima said the fiscal plan weakens the bipartisan fiscal guardrails and relies too much on one-time revenue generators and transferring funding to off-budget accounts that would not be counted against the state’s spending cap.

“Rather than building on the stability created by the fiscal guardrails over the past eight years, policymakers leaned heavily on budget gimmicks and diversions,” DiPentima said.

But Lamont pushed back on that notion, saying that the legislature passed a crucially important research and development tax credit for pass-through entities, which are largely small businesses. Currently, the credits are only available for larger corporations under state law.

CBIA, which has been pushing the idea for years and earmarked it as a top priority this year, acknowledged the pass-through victory. The small businesses must have less than $70 million in sales, and they would need to apply to the state economic development commissioner to receive the credit. The savings would be an estimated $25 million for the small businesses.

Regarding the state budget for the next fiscal year, Lamont cited various accomplishments.

While mayors, first selectmen, superintendents and teachers have consistently complained about funding, Lamont released statistics showing that the state will provide $2.63 billion in the 2027 fiscal year for the all-important educational cost-sharing funds for the public schools. That represents an increase of 31% since Lamont took office. The overall aid to municipalities, including education and all other categories, will be $5.1 billion in the 2027 fiscal year,  up 47% since Lamont took office.

Concerning the 11-member Senate Republican caucus, Lamont said they largely spent time criticizing from the sidelines without offering a fully detailed budget in the same way that the House Republicans, spearheaded by budget guru Tammy Nuccio of Tolland, had offered.

But Senate Republican leader Stephen Harding of Brookfield noted that Republicans offered a floor amendment with details of their financial package.

“Our absentee governor obviously wasn’t paying attention: Senate Republicans did present a budget alternative, which was rejected by the Democratic supermajority,” Harding said Thursday. “It contained $2 billion in tax cuts for individuals, families and farmers starting in 2027. It abided by the spending cap. It cut wasteful earmark spending on unvetted groups. The governor says he’s ‘kept his promises’, but he has broken those promises just like he has broken the fiscal guardrails.”

Harding added, “And where’s that $200 rebate check he promised? Promises made, promises broken.”

Lamont said he liked the idea of the rebate that he proposed in February, but he compromised with the Democratic-controlled legislature to send more money to municipalities in the hope that mayors and first selectmen will hold down property tax increases. Much of the rebate money was initially designed to help pay for high electricity costs, but Lamont noted that expected price cuts of $30 per month in electricity prices for homeowners will “virtually eliminate the public benefits charge” for some ratepayers.

In the relaxed, post-session atmosphere, Lamont answered a question about watching the New York Knicks basketball team defeat the Philadelphia 76ers in the NBA playoffs on the final night of the legislative session.

“Jumping between that and CT-N because I don’t have much of a life,” Lamont deadpanned as he referred to the network that broadcasts the legislature’s debates.

That scramble kicked off Thursday morning as former Hartford mayor Luke Bronin announced the endorsement he secured from Pete Buttigieg, the former U.S. secretary of Transportation and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate.

The two are longtime friends with many similarities: Navy veterans, Rhodes Scholars and former mayors. It could give a boost to Bronin, 46, from a national figure in the Democratic Party who is widely viewed as a potential presidential candidate in 2028.

Buttigieg’s support comes days ahead of the nominating convention, where Larson and his three challengers — Bronin, state Rep. Jillian Gilchrest of West Hartford and Hartford school board member Ruth Fortune — are vying for a spot on the August primary ballot in the Hartford-based district.

By Thursday afternoon, three of the four candidates had rolled out fresh endorsements. Larson said he won the backing of almost a dozen labor unions, former Connecticut lawmakers Chris Dodd and Barbara Kennelly, and state Sen. Matt Lesser of Middletown. Meanwhile, Gilchrest touted support from the online group Progressive Victory.

Bronin and the other challengers, who are a few decades younger than Larson, are making the case for generational change as they take on the 77-year-old incumbent. In his endorsement, Buttigieg noted that Bronin “bring[s] the energy and focus.”

“The Democratic Party needs leaders like Luke Bronin in Congress,” Buttigieg said in a statement. “As a veteran and a mayor, he understands how decisions made in Washington hit people’s everyday lives. He’ll bring the energy and focus that this moment requires to fix a broken system and deliver a more affordable and fair future.”

Opinion: Don’t believe ‘Trump’s former puppet’ on CT congressman

Buttigieg, the 44-year-old former mayor of South Bend, Ind., became a rising star in the party nearly a decade ago when he made a long-shot bid to lead the Democratic National Committee following the 2016 presidential election.

His profile continued to rise as he ran in the crowded Democratic presidential primary in 2020. Bronin, who was the mayor of Hartford at the time, endorsed his presidential run and campaigned for him. After Joe Biden won the presidency that year, he tapped Buttigieg to serve as the head of the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Bronin and Buttigieg appear to have remained close since then, sharing a table at the 2024 Democratic National Convention when Buttigieg addressed delegates from Connecticut and other New England states. At the time, Bronin told the Connecticut Mirror he was confident a gay candidate could win the White House.

As Democrats search for a winning template and messenger to make gains since their devastating losses in 2024, Bronin on Thursday mentioned Buttigieg’s proclivity for appearing on shows such as Fox News.

“He has the courage to do what more Democrats need to do, which is go anywhere and everywhere — including the most unfriendly territory — and make a forceful case for why Democrats have better answers,” Bronin said. “Whatever role he serves in next, Pete is an important part of the future of the Democratic Party, and his support means a lot.”

Jillian Gilchrest: Your voice shouldn’t come with a price tag

The endorsement race has ramped up in recent weeks, especially ahead of next week’s nominating convention. Candidates can secure a spot on the Aug. 11 primary ballot by garnering 15% of delegates at the convention. If they don’t qualify that way, they can also get on the ballot by getting petition signatures from at least 2% of registered Democratic voters in the district.

Larson has touted recent support from the Working Families Party as well as U.S. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., who notably challenged a more senior member in 2024 to become ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee. U.S. Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., eventually dropped his bid. Nadler, 78, announced last year that he’d retire from Congress, saying, “It is the right time to pass the torch to a new generation.”

But in his support for Larson, Raskin said the 14-term congressman from East Hartford is “somebody we need in Washington, and there’s no reason for us to replace him right now in the middle of the biggest fight of our lives.”

While big, splashy endorsements generate headlines and can translate into campaign contributions, candidates will need the support from local leaders and Democrats in the 1st Congressional District at the nominating convention, where they’ll be jockeying for support to get to the 15% threshold.

Earlier this week, Bronin secured endorsements from Barkhamsted’s Democratic Town Committee as well as First Selectperson Meaghan Cook and Selectman Ray Pech.

Opinion: The kind of Democrat Connecticut needs

Larson announced more endorsements on Thursday, including from past and present Connecticut elected officials and 11 unions mainly in the building trades, like the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, the International Union of Operating Engineers, the International Union of Elevator Constructors, and the International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers.

Lesser is an influential progressive in the state Senate and serves as deputy majority leader. He serves as a co-chair of the Human Services Committee with Gilchrest. But he’s throwing his support behind Larson, whose record he called “unmatched” in supporting the same towns that Lesser represents in his Senate district.

“People are tired of politicians who talk the talk of progressive politics but in the dark of night do the bidding of Wall Street and billionaire financiers. John Larson is the antithesis. He has earned the trust of our district and has never wavered in standing up to special interests to protect the working families of Connecticut,” Lesser said in a statement.

“More than 20 years ago, John Larson was on the right side on the War in Iraq and he has consistently stood up to those in both parties who wanted to weaken or privatize Social Security,” he continued.

Larson also got support from his former colleagues in Congress. That includes Kennelly, who was succeeded by Larson in the U.S. House when she vacated the seat to run for governor in 1998, and Dodd, who served in the U.S. Senate from 1981 to 2011.

Larson’s team is seeking to highlight that the congressman’s “support is grounded in Connecticut, working families, and his colleagues in Congress,” Greg Gerratana, Larson’s campaign manager, said in a statement.

“Voters don’t want a centrist with a corporate, anti-worker agenda. Nothing Luke Bronin and his Wall Street benefactors can do will change that,” he added.

Throughout the campaign, Bronin and Larson have sparred over their labor records. Larson has sought to depict Bronin as hostile to labor during his time as Hartford mayor. Bronin has pushed back, saying that the accusation is false. The two have also repeatedly clashed over where some of their fundraising comes from: Larson getting donations from corporate political action committees and Bronin getting individual contributions from partners and executives for wealth and asset management firms.

Gilchrest has been endorsed by more than a dozen of her colleagues in the state legislature and also has support from some grassroots groups including Indivisible CT and Citizens’ Impeachment.

Her latest endorsement came Thursday from Progressive Victory, a group that says it’s “pushing the Democratic Party to the left.” The organization has so far made 11 endorsements of candidates running for federal office this year. Persephone Hoxha, the New England Lead for Progressive Victory, touted Gilchrest’s “steady guidance toward a more progressive future.”

“For too long, Congress has only worked for the people who can afford to make giant campaign donations or hire an army of lobbyists, while everyone else gets ignored. I’m running to change that,” Gilchrest said in a statement. “It’s not good enough to just say the right thing. The people need results. I’m proud of my record of passing progressive laws and proud to have the support of Progressive Victory and so many allies who share that vision.”

Lisa Hagen is a reporter for the Connecticut Mirror. Copyright 2026 @ CT Mirror (Ctmirror.org).

Prior to this year’s legislative session, Connecticut law capped the THC content in cannabis flower at 35%. A bill passed in April removed that cap.

At the time, Rep. Roland Lemar, D-New Haven, said cannabis plants have their own natural limits on THC concentration and that “watering down” the cannabis could actually be more dangerous because it would involve substances that have not been tested or regulated.

But Rep. David Rutigliano, R-Trumbull, argued that higher concentrations of THC would make it easier for people to become addicted. He noted that public health professionals who appeared at a public hearing on the bill also brought concerns about THC levels.

House Majority Leader Jason Rojas told the Connecticut Mirror Wednesday that the caps were replaced after members of the Senate expressed concern.

“I still think it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to have a cap. But if people felt strongly about it, we agreed to it,” Rojas said.

Lemar said that while the legislature overall appeared willing to loosen some regulations on the cannabis industry that created challenges for business owners, removing the THC cap on flower was a sticking point.

“ I think it puts [businesses] at a competitive disadvantage vis-à-vis some other states. But at the end of the day, the regulators and the legislators who were tasked with making the responsible choice didn’t feel comfortable in that space moving to an uncapped system,” he said.

Rojas said he didn’t believe restoring the cap on flower would cause problems for the industry, since the difference between natural THC limits in flower and the caps in the bill were minimal.

Sen. James Maroney, D-West Haven, said there were similar concerns in the Senate about the removal of the THC cap for flower. The original bill that removed the caps passed 18-17 with a promise that an imminent bill would restore those caps.

During a Senate debate on the bill removing the caps, several senators — Republican and Democrat — expressed concern about how increased THC potency could affect public health, particularly for children.

“This is not fun and games. This is life and death. This is life changing, family changing, family destroying when we eliminate these caps,” said Sen. Jason Perillo, R-Shelton.

Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, also expressed “strong reservations” with the THC potency levels and their impact on mental health.

Aside from the THC flower cap, the original bill eliminated caps on THC concentrates and increased the amount of THC allowed in infused drinks from 3 mg to 5 mg. Drinks sold in dispensaries or retailers may now have up to 10 mg of THC. The bill also expanded the cannabis marketplace to include topicals, tablets and capsules and allows patients who come from out-of-state to purchase cannabis for medical reasons.

Those changes are still in place.

Sen. Paul Cicarella, R-North Haven, said he hoped the legislature next year could consider setting limits to THC in other forms of cannabis, like edibles or tinctures.

“Marijuana is a concern. Increasing these levels is a concern of multiple people around this circle, regardless of party,” he said.

Emilia Otte is a reporter for the Connecticut Mirror. Copyright 2026 @ CT Mirror (ctmirror.org).