Closing Statement

During these final hours of the 2012 campaign, let me bring focus on what I believe is most important in this race.  I started my campaign with a different sort of message.  It wasn't about one hot button issue or another, but about the underlying issues.  My goal has been to get people more connected with their communities and their government.  This is something that is not done over five months, and then left.  It is an ongoing project.  So, I hope everyone will get out and vote on Tuesday, and then, find ways to become more involved in their local communities, whether it be attending regular town halls with your state legislators, joining local boards and commissions, getting active in the local parent teacher organizations, becoming more involved in your places of worship, joining various civic organizations, or starting something new.

As part of the 2013 CT Health Foundation's Health Leadership Fellows Program, we did an assessment about our leadership styles.  Every person have different styles, and each style has its importance.  My style is of an 'observer'.  I gather as much information as I can to think out the best solutions to problems that we face.  Over the past several months, I've received lots of feedback from many of you about the issues we face, how to address them, and how to run my campaign.

Some have said that I should bring up things from my opponent's past or talk more about organizations she is part of that don't have the best interest of Connecticut in mind.  When pushed, I've talked a little bit about this, but that isn't the sort of campaign I wanted to run.  It didn't serve the goal of getting people more involved in their communities, and would more likely turn people off from politics.

Others have urged me to challenge my opponent on every issue, to make clear every difference.  Yet I've spoken about places where my opponent and I agree.  None of us want to pay higher taxes.  All of us want better schools for our children.

Yet there is an important underlying issue to how we address all of these concerns.  My opponent often says that the more government does, the less it does well.  I would suggest that this is the key issue.  From my years in business, I've come to recognize that it is not the size of an organization that determines its success.  It doesn't matter whether the organization is a non-profit, a business, a school, or the government.  What matters is that the organization stays on mission.

There are times when government gets off mission, when it becomes burdensome or wasteful.  This can happen with small government or large government.  There are times when government fails to complete its mission.

Then, there are times when we come together as part of a government by, of and for the people.  There are times when government does "form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity".  We've seen a little of this over the past week as we've dealt with Hurricane Sandy, including calls for government interventions in businesses, like the utility companies.

No, the more government does, focusing on its mission as outlined in the Constitution, the more it does well.  That is the fundamental difference.  I want to be your State Representative in Hartford, making sure that the government does what it should be doing as well as possible, and not offering platitudes about smaller government.

Please, join with me in renewing our social contract, our commitment to our families, friends and neighbors in our great state of Connecticut and our great country.