Timothy Herbst, 2018 Republican candidate for governor, writes in this commentary “A politician cannot credibly beat the drum about election integrity when they participate in a taxpayer-funded “clean elections” system while simultaneously engaging in nefarious political conduct with outside political spending designed to influence an election.”
From Herbst:
Earlier this year, I wrote an op-ed critical of Republican Senator Tony Hwang. Perhaps most revealing is what happened privately after that op-ed was published. Republicans from across Connecticut – elected officials and party activists alike quietly contacted me to say they agreed. The response was almost universal: someone needed to say this out loud and you did.
I am a Republican. I believe in limited government, fiscal discipline, accountability, election integrity, and government transparency. I also believe our party damages itself when we refuse to hold our own elected officials to the same ethical standards we demand from Democrats.
That brings us to Connecticut’s Citizens’ Election Program.
Passed in 2005, the program was designed to reduce the influence of big money in politics and restore public trust in elections through taxpayer-funded campaigns. And while Connecticut’s public financing system has become a national model in some respects, it has also exposed an uncomfortable truth: publicly financed campaigns are not automatically ethical campaigns.
Over the years, candidates from both parties participating in Connecticut’s so-called “clean elections” system have been investigated, fined, charged, or convicted for violating campaign finance laws.
Democrats have certainly had their scandals. Former State Senator Dennis Bradley was convicted on federal wire fraud and conspiracy charges tied to a scheme to improperly obtain public campaign financing. Former State Representative Christina Ayala became embroiled in absentee ballot and voter fraud allegations that further damaged public confidence in elections.
But Republicans cannot pretend these problems exist only on the other side of the aisle.
In 2016, Branford Republican and then RTC chairman Ray Ingraham withdrew from a State Representative race after acknowledging what he described as a “serious lapse in judgment” involving certification forms tied to his publicly financed campaign. The State Elections Enforcement Commission referred the matter to its enforcement unit.
More significantly, in 2021, then State Representative Jason Perillo was fined $10,000 by the Connecticut State Elections Enforcement Commission for illegally coordinating with the FixCT super PAC during the 2018 gubernatorial election cycle. According to the commission’s findings, Perillo participated in discussions surrounding the creation and operation of the PAC, helped shape messaging, and crossed legal lines separating supposedly independent expenditures from campaign activity. That matters because Perillo has become one of the louder Republican voices demanding accountability and integrity in Connecticut elections.
But accountability cannot be selective. A politician cannot credibly beat the drum about election integrity when they participate in a taxpayer-funded “clean elections” system while simultaneously engaging in nefarious political conduct with outside political spending designed to influence an election.
Nor can politicians claim to support transparency while lawmakers in Hartford pursue efforts to weaken Connecticut’s Freedom of Information laws. Transparency is not a threat to democracy. Transparency is what allows democracy to function.
When elected officials seek to limit what can be obtained through FOIA requests, voters are entitled to ask a simple question: what exactly do they not want the public to see?
Public records laws exist because government business belongs to the public. Emails, communications, and records tied to official government activity are not private political property. They are part of the accountability structure that allows citizens and journalists to expose misconduct and evaluate whether public officials are acting ethically.
If politicians truly believe in accountability, they should welcome scrutiny — not fear it.
Republicans should understand the political reality here: behavior like this hurts the Republican brand.
Every time Republicans lecture voters about integrity while excusing ethical lapses inside our own ranks, we lose credibility with the independent voters we need to win statewide elections. Every time we apply one standard to Democrats and another to ourselves, we reinforce the perception that our principles are situational.
Election integrity is bigger than voter fraud. It includes campaign finance integrity, transparency, and respect for the laws governing elections.
If Republicans want Connecticut voters to take our arguments seriously, we must demonstrate that the same standards apply to everyone — especially ourselves.
Integrity is not situational. Either the rules matter, or they do not.
