Bipartisan legislation, the culmination of long-building frustrations and grievances by lawmakers and quickly passed Tuesday night by the state Senate, would curtail the independence of Connecticut’s elections watchdog as it celebrates its 50th anniversary.
For the first time since its birth as one of the good-government reforms after Watergate, the appointment of the executive director of the State Elections Enforcement Commission would be subject to the approval of the legislators whose campaign finances are overseen by the agency.
The bill passed 34-1 after a brief debate, with the sole dissenting vote cast by Sen. Mae Flexer, D-Windham. She did not enter the Senate chamber during the debate or roll call and voted remotely from elsewhere in the Capitol complex, as allowed by legislative rules.
Unlike previous efforts to put the elections watchdog on a tighter leash, Senate Bill 1405 is the result of negotiations by the Democratic and Republican leaders of the Senate and House. The bill now goes to the House for expected passage. Gov. Ned Lamont has yet to say if he will sign the bill.
SEEC, as the elections commission is known, enforces elections and campaign finance laws and administers the Citizens’ Elections Program that was created 10 years ago as an anti-corruption measure. It provides public financing of campaigns once candidates raise qualifying contributions.
The bill would limit SEEC’s post-election audits on publicly financed candidates to no more than 20% of campaigns, rather than the 50% now allowed, and bar the commission from issuing declaratory rulings and formal written guidance in the six months before elections.
As originally drafted, the bill would have given the General Assembly the ability to review and reject the formal guidance the commission often publishes.
An amendment drafted and adopted Tuesday gives the four legislative caucus leaders the right to review any guidance document that exceeds 40 pages before publication and also allows a hearing on such documents.
The five-member State Elections Enforcement Commission, whose members are appointed by the governor and four legislative caucus leaders, would lose its status as the sole authority to hire and fire the agency’s leader, the executive director and general counsel.
Under the bill, the commission’s choice for the job would be subject to a confirmation hearing and vote by the legislature’s Executive and Legislative Nominations Committee, the panel that bottled up the reappointment of the state’s top utilities regulator until the governor agreed to appoint one of the committee members and a former lawmaker to the regulatory authority.
Confirmation also would require a majority vote of the House and Senate.
In a letter signed by all five members, the commission warned against the change.
“[H]aving an executive director appointed and evaluated by the very people regulated by our campaign finance laws will create the perception that elections enforcement is partisan,” they wrote. “This, in turn, will have the consequence of undermining public confidence in campaign finance enforcement.”
The League of Women Voters also urged rejection of the bill, saying the independence of SEEC is crucial to ensuring fair elections and transparency in campaign finances.
“It is not a moment to muck around with the institutions that safeguard free and fair elections. It is not a time to loosen accountability and transparency on how campaigns are financed, or how government funds are used,” the League wrote.
Tom Swan of the Connecticut Citizen Action Group, part of the coalition that helped pass public financing 10 years ago, said, “This is a blatant power grab by the legislature, and we will urge the House to amend it to restore the integrity of SEEC and protect the CEP.”
Passage comes at a time of transition for the commission. Its former general counsel and executive director, Michael J. Brandi, took early retirement after 12 years in the job in late 2024 due to poor health. Clare Kindall, the former solicitor general of Connecticut, is the interim director and counsel.
Kindall, an applicant for the permanent job, acknowledged shortcomings at SEEC but questioned the scope and timing of the legislation.
“The Citizens’ Election Program is kind of the crown jewel of Connecticut democracy. I mean, it has made such a huge difference in Connecticut, as far as elections and people’s abilities to run and to keep elections clean,” she said. “And given what’s happened nationally, is anybody reading the room?”
Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff, D-Norwalk, who is the co-chair of the Executive and Legislative Nominations Committee, said in an interview before the debate that he would quiz any nominee for the SEEC job as to their approach and philosophy.
“How they view the role of the agency versus what’s in the law versus what they think otherwise,” Duff said. “How do they view things? Are they there to assist and help, or are they there in a different mechanism?”
Duff objected to lobbying on the bill and other elections measures by Kindall and her predecessor as agency overreach.
On and off the Senate floor, leaders of both parties described the legislation as reflecting grievances about the aggressive efforts at times to verify the legitimacy of qualifying contributions for public financing and a slow and occasionally inconsistent review process of grant applications.
“Sometimes it’s like walking through mud, and I think that’s what frustrates me,” Duff said. “We had an instance where SEEC literally knocked on the doors of people in a community that gave $5 donations to make sure they were real. They harassed some of my own $5 contributors.”
To qualify for public financing, candidates need contributions ranging from $5 to $250. A certain percentage must be in the communities in a legislator’s district. Donors must sign a form attesting to their identity, residence and employer. The commission was slow to approve grant applications in 2024.
Like Duff, Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding, R-Brookfield, said the frustrations with SEEC have been cumulative.
“This is something that has been problematic, and I think it’s getting in the way of good government,” Harding said. “It’s getting in the way of democracy in action and allowing candidates to get grants, allowing candidates to run their campaigns effectively and efficiently. And so I think this has gone beyond frustration. This is at a point, frankly, where this is getting in the way of elections.”
The legislative leaders eased passage by creating a new committee, the Government Oversight Committee, which originated the bill, bypassing the Government Administration and Elections Committee that is co-chaired by Flexer and formerly handled all elections-related bills.
Flexer was visited in her office immediately before the debate by Duff, Sen. Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox, D-Trumbull, and the Senate Democratic caucus’s chief of staff, Courtney Cullinan. Flexer said later she shared her misgivings about the bill.
Sen. Sujata Gadkar-Wilcox, Courtney Cullinan and an unidentified staffer leave Mae Flexer’s office. Credit: mark pazniokas
“I think the bill just went too far, and organizations like the League of Women Voters and Common Cause outweigh the bipartisan and bicameral support. I’m going to vote with them,” she said.
Gadkar-Wilcox, a law professor elected last fall, is co-chair of the oversight committee that produced the bill. On the floor, she was joined by Sen. Rob Sampson, R-Wolcott, the ranking Republican on the committee, praising the bill as making necessary changes while maintaining a degree of independence.
“I think this bill strikes that balance,” she said.
“I think we found the delicate balance where we’re making good policy to keep the mission of the SEEC intact, but we’re also making reforms that I think will be beneficial to candidates going forward and making sure that our system is fair and is just,” Sampson said.
Gadkar-Wilson, Sampson, Harding and Senate President Martin M. Looney, D-New Haven, were the only lawmakers to speak on the floor.
Looney called public financing a success but said SEEC is in need of reform.
“We all know that treasurers often find it very frustrating to operate in dealing with SEEC in terms of the procedures they have to go through during the course of the campaign,” Looney said. “We know there have been many times where information has been provided and then seek claims that they’ve never received. It has to be provided all over again.”
