Why Voting Republican Strengthens Connecticut’s Fiscal Health
While the Democratic supermajority weakens the fiscal guardrails that finally stabilized Connecticut after years of deficits, our own Republican legislators Tina Courpas and Ryan Fazio voted no. They are fighting to keep volatile revenues from being spent on election-year giveaways and unsustainable state-employee raises that push Connecticut toward the highest public-sector pay in the country while the pension system remains only about 60 percent funded. With Jonathan Goldstein, Michael Mason and Joe Kelly running to replace the local Democrats who voted with the majority, this November is the chance to restore the balance that protects Greenwich taxpayers and stops the next round of statewide property taxes, capital-gains surcharges, and higher income-tax rates.
Connecticut’s fiscal guardrails — the 2017 bipartisan package of spending, volatility, revenue, and bonding caps — worked. As detailed in the 2025 article Connecticut Democrats’ Fiscal Guardrail Attack And Greenwich’s Budget Crossroads, the guardrails directed volatile revenues (especially capital gains) toward the Budget Reserve Fund and pension paydown rather than new operating spending, building reserves and reducing unfunded liabilities after years of chronic deficits. That progress is now at risk under one-party Democratic control in Hartford, which has targeted the volatility cap and other controls.
During the current term, the majority has repeatedly diverted funds that the guardrails intended for debt reduction into other programs, created off-budget accounts, and approved compensation packages that accelerate long-term liabilities. Greenwich and Stamford residents, who send substantial income-tax dollars to Hartford and receive comparatively little back in school aid, feel the consequences directly. Strengthening the Republican presence means supporting the full slate: Governor candidate Ryan Fazio, State Representative Tina Courpas in the 149th, Jonathan Goldstein in the 150th, and Michael Mason in the 151st.
State Representative Tina Courpas (R-149), a member of the Appropriations Committee, has consistently voted to defend the guardrails. She opposed the diversion of approximately $1.2 billion (and, across the session’s accounting moves, figures cited as high as $2.814 billion) that could have paid down pension debt. In committee and on the floor she pressed for compliance with the spending and volatility caps, transparent appropriations through the normal process, measurable outcomes before new programs are funded, and greater scrutiny of state-employee compensation and long-term pension costs. She voted against the latest rounds of state-employee pay increases that, if fully enacted, contribute to roughly 60 percent cumulative growth in state-employee pay from 2019 to 2029—pushing Connecticut toward the highest state-employee compensation in the country while the pension system remains only about 60 percent funded. She correctly identified that a major surplus-funded childcare endowment required a three-fifths constitutional vote and voted no when the majority proceeded.
State Senator Ryan Fazio, ranking member of the Finance, Revenue and Bonding Committee and the Energy and Technology Committee, has made the same case at the statewide level. He voted against the 2026 budget adjustment that included an $814 million raid on volatility-cap revenues—money intended for reserves and pensions—along with additional surplus spending outside the cap and the creation of a Federal Cuts Response Fund drawn from the Budget Reserve Fund. Senate Republicans offered alternatives that preserved the caps and directed resources toward middle-class relief; Fazio voted no on the version that broke them. He has introduced legislation for a property-tax cap (2 percent or inflation, whichever is greater), advanced middle-class income-tax rate reductions, and co-authored the energy measure that removed more than $100 million annually from public-benefits charges on electric bills. As the Republican nominee for governor, he has outlined a multi-year plan for roughly $2.5 billion in annual tax relief, financed by holding spending growth near inflation and reducing borrowing.
Local Democratic representatives voted with the majority on the budget measures that weakened the guardrails. Their presence in the majority has not produced leverage that protects Greenwich taxpayers from the resulting long-term costs. Every Republican on the relevant committees opposed advancing three additional tax proposals that the majority has signaled as 2027 priorities: a statewide property tax on homes over $3 million, a capital-gains surcharge, and an increase in the top marginal income-tax rate. Courpas submitted testimony against the property-tax measure; Fazio voted no. Candidates Joe Kelly, Jonathan Goldstein and Michael Mason have committed to the same standard of fiscal restraint and local priorities that Courpas and Fazio have already demonstrated in office.
Connecticut already ranks among the highest-taxed and highest-debt states per capita. Diverting volatility revenues from pension paydown increases the annual required contribution later, crowding out other priorities and raising pressure for further tax increases. Unsustainable public-sector compensation growth compounds the same problem. Restoring Republican votes in the House, Senate, and governor’s office is the practical way to re-enforce the guardrails, require ordinary budget processes, and keep new statewide taxes off the table. That is how Connecticut improves its long-term fiscal health — by returning to the controls that demonstrably worked and electing the legislators who have already voted to defend them.
Greenwich is worth fighting for. Vote Republican on November 3.
