Letter: Kim Fawcett is 'Easy Choice' for State Rep.

S. Frank September 15, 2012 at 11:08 pm

If you are in favor of equal rights Fawcett should not be your candidate. She voted against same sex marriage in CT. She used to be my candidate, but based on her voting record, she is no longer. She does not vote the way those that voted for her want. She votes the way she wants. She does not represent me.

S. Frank September 16, 2012 at 12:13 pm

She voted against a bill decriminalizing possession and use of limited amounts of marijuana for those with seriously debilitating diseases. CT voters were in favor of allowing this. She also voted to repeal the dealth penalty when polls among voters favored keeping it.
She does not seem to care about our opinion.

Jane S. September 16, 2012 at 01:53 pm

I think it is going to far from an "easy choice" this election. For the first time she is running against some one who actually is qualified to make a run for it. She may have the seat now, but in order to keep it she is going to have to get out there and tell the voters how she is going to start helping them and figure out what her stance is, she is seasoned now, so it's time to look at what the people are saying. The 2 items above that S. Frank is saying she voted against are huge issues, because they show the people if the legislator is flexible and tolerant and looking toward the needs of the people. Civil Rights and Medical Marijuana are becoming the test of the people...If legislators are not ready for accepting same sex marriages, they should not be elected, because they are denying the civil rights of people who are voters. I am not a marijuana user, but even I can do the math... if you regulate, and tax it, CT would probably have a better chance at having a balanced budget!!!

Gideon Tomlinson September 20, 2012 at 11:01 am

"Haven't we learned over the past 15 years or so that extreme views only serve to divide us when what we really need is more of the common sense kind of politics that Kim Fawcett has practiced on our behalf? " Great point, especially when you compare her to her right-wing ideologue opponent: Chris DeSanctimonious. http://www.ratemyprofessors.com/ShowRatings.jsp?tid=484232&page=3

Diane S. September 20, 2012 at 01:11 pm

In 2011 on the Appropriations Committee, Kim missed 23 out of 33 public hearings. In 2012 Kim missed 17 of 21 public hearings. In 2012 on the Energy and Technology Committee Kim missed all 4 public hearings, not attending any of them. In April 2012 when the legislature was in session Kim thought it was more important to go on a 7 day school trip to Ecuador and the Galapagos islands thus causing her to miss the extremely important vote on S.B. 280, an act revising the Death Penalty for Capital Felonies.
I ask you to look at this law and see all the important provisions that concern the residents of CT. Her vote was cast as absent. This is a link to a gov’t website showing the votes she missed while away: http://cga.ct.gov/2012/jnl/H/2012HJL00411-R00-JNL.htm There are many issues that face the residents of CT and I’m not saying one party’s thoughts and ideas are always right. There should be compromise and bipartisanship. Kim doesn’t feel this way. In 2011 she voted 98% of the time with her party and in 2012 97% percent of the time. Kim also wasn’t present and didn’t cast a vote for paid sick leave. Kim voted for the legalization of marijuana, allowing DUI convicts to serve their time at home, a rise in gas taxes, and incredibly Kim voted in favor of H.B. 6650 a law stating that people convicted of violent crimes and those committing sexual assault on a minor can earn early release credits.

Bud Morten September 20, 2012 at 10:29 pm

Rare indeed "is the elected official whose independence from party pressures allows her to truly represent the interests of her district."
Do you know that Kim voted with her party - that would be the party that has controlled the Assembly for 36 of the past 40 years and is therefore fully responsible for the very serious fiscal and competitive problems our state faces and for all of the unfunded mandates that impact our local property taxes - 98% of the time in 2011 and 97% of the time in 2012. For a specific example, consider the following excerpt from a letter in 2010: "In July of this year Fawcett first voted against giving an additional $3 million in campaign funds (your tax dollars) to candidates running for governor in the Citizens Election Fund. But when the Democratic leadership needed her vote to override Governor Rell’s veto Fawcett voted in lock-step with her political bosses, reversing her original vote and voting for the funding. The voters deserve to know what prompted this change. Is this indicative of her independence or is it a reflection of the fact that she is beholden to the Democratic majority that has put us in the financial mess we are in." http://minutemannewscenter.com/articles/2010/10/02/fairfield/opinion/letters/doc4ca3a63a112f6130749299.txt?viewmode=fullstory

Rick Fawcett September 22, 2012 at 07:03 pm

As Kim's husband, it used to bother me to see the misrepresentation of things. Now, I am learning it is a handful of people that apparently have an axe to grind.... Either way, if you would like to dive deeper into any of the things written, feel free to reach out to Kim through her Web site at www.kimfawcett.com. Her blog responds to some of the attack stuff being written against her, too.