In order to gain an insider’s view of the process, The Voice endorsed a non-affiliated candidate on a reform ticket in the recent special election in the 3.5-town 21st District Senate seat, in Fairfield county.
Reporting shows that the current election system is riddled with flaws and built to serve those in power, who manipulate the process to their advantage. While both political parties are guilty of exploiting the syst
em, the Democrats bear greater responsibility, holding a 2:1 supermajority in Connecticut and controlling the legislative levers in Hartford. They wrote the rules and continue to maintain and strengthen a framework designed to block competition and stifle outside voices. It is against the principles of democracy and a republic that we ostensibly live in and from where they get their names. And it unjustly casts a shadow on the countless honest public servants working on our behalf.
The parties have the right to nominate their preferred candidates, but the system denies equal opportunity to be that chosen one and sets up roadblocks to even appear on the ballot at all. For instance, during a special election with a compressed timeline, the outsider was compelled to ask for signatures from hundreds of strangers in harsh winter conditions using a pen-and-paper process that required petitioners to share highly personal information, such as their home addresses and dates of birth.
It’s an outdated, burdensome process that discourages new candidates from entering the race. The state could easily adopt a system to accept online signatures, which would be more secure, but harder to control. Meanwhile, the major parties rely on a streamlined, online system like
with Zoom meetings that’s far easier—but only for their benefit.
This election is a microcosm of larger systemic issues. Consider the GOP nomination process, for example. The starter is the GOP form, which they’ve altered to be a Party Convention. More importantly, it’s hosted at Testo’s Restaurant in Monroe. The owner Mario Testa was the face and his now-demolished taurant was the place of questionable Bridgeport politics for years. Now it appears that he switched teams with a new place in Monroe. The very fact that this doesn’t raise alarm bells at the state level speaks volumes. Who was present at Testo’s that night? Was there a quorum? Isn’t it odd that the event was 1/2 hour away on a school night in Monroe instead of in Shelton, where the pow
er in that part of the county is. The state even accepted an altered, emailed form without a proper “Print Name” field, leaving the identities of its signers in question. We may know who that is, but we don’t. It’s a glaring lack of oversight and accountability.
The Democrats operated similarly. They had a different form than the GOP (not their fault) and called it a “Town Meeting”, perhaps because then they only needed one signature at the bottom. Again, the form lacks a “Print Name” field, so we don’t officially know who is submitting the form. The nominee they selected was a party staffer—someone closely tied to the political machinery. Was this truly an open, fair meeting where all registered Democrats in the district were informed and had a chance to consider other candidates? Or was it just another way to rubber-stamp a single, pre-selected individual?
The Democrats, with their overwhelming majority, have the authority to fix these flaws but instead perpetuate a system that blocks competitors while making their own path easy. These issues aren’t new. They’re baked into a system designed to consolidate power and maintain control.
As another example, look at Bridgeport Mayor Joe Ganim’s prior campaign paperwork suffering from the same problems—missing fields, weak chain of custody, and zero accountability. Perhaps more egregious, look at the state’s track record regarding his run for governor in 2019. Despite their being able to account for any campaign money, the SEEC left the investigation open for five years, then assessed a token fine. In the most recent mayoral run, the state ignores the fact that a highly unqualified, out-of-town individual with a checkered financial history was made Treasurer of their campaign. They also have willful ignorance of the people Ganim took money from in the campaign, partly due to the fact that they kept the phone-book sized filing offline, so nobody would see it.
The state is long overdue for an explanation as to why they allow this structure in Bridgeport to remain in place.
In summary, the current framework is outdated, opaque, and designed to protect those in power. It’s a process that’s seamless for them but intentionally arduous for outsiders. What’s more, they are the jury, deciding who is worthy to be on the ballot. It’s time for meaningful reform to embrace the times and take steps for a fair, transparent, and inclusive system that encourages candidates and public involvement.
Recommendations for Reform
1. Strengthen Oversight and Enforcement: Make the Elections Division within the Secretary of State’s office and the State Elections Enforcement Commission (SEEC) independent, with significantly expanded authority. This includes the power to investigate criminal offenses (not just civil), issue subpoenas, convene grand juries, and impose meaningful penalties, including jail time. The code, long manipulated by elected officials, is ready for revision from outsiders to give the SEEC real power to enforce fair elections.
2. Ensure Full Transparency: Move all election filings online, thus accessible to the public. This eliminates the plausible deniability often practiced by state employees who turn a blind eye to rule-breaking. Currently, obtaining party filings requires formal requests, and even then, they’re rarely scrutinized. Transparency would put an end to this willful ignorance. Plus, if everyone knew ahead of time that their submissions were subject to the harsh light of the public eye, they may act more honorably from the start.
3. Implement Ranked Choice Voting and Online Voting: Use the upcoming special election for the 21st District Representative seat as a pilot program for ranked choice voting and/or online voting. Have names only, no labels like party affiliations. The legislature recently approved these measures—there’s no reason not to roll them out now.
