These news briefs were originally written for CT Politics, The Connecticut Mirror’s weekly newsletter providing updates on the 2025 legislative session. To sign up for CT Politics, click here. Shore Line East bill advances Members of the Transportation Committee voted Wednesday to advance legislation directing the Department of Transportation to restore commuter rail service on Shore Line East to pre-pandemic levels as part of a bid to boost its struggling ridership. The legislation, Senate Bill 714, is supported by many lawmakers in eastern Connecticut who argue that the line has suffered from a lack of investment over the last two years, when service was slashed to obtain budgetary savings. “We need to get the line moving again, we need restoration in order to see ridership return,” said state Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, who co-chairs the Transportation Committee. But other lawmakers raised concerns about the cost of the bill, which budget officials in Gov. Ned Lamont’s office recently put at around $46 million. On Wednesday, Cohen said she estimated the costs would be much lower, around $25 million. Before a vote on the bill can take place in either chamber, it will likely have to go before the Appropriations Committee to fully vet the costs. The vote to move the bill forward on Wednesday attracted bipartisan support. Lamont proposed keeping service on the rail line flat as part of his $55.2 billion budget proposal, which included an increase in rail funding to keep up with cost of inflation. — John Moritz, Environment and Energy Reporter Firearm sales People who have been convicted of felonies and certain misdemeanors in other states would be barred from purchasing a firearm in Connecticut under a proposal heard in the legislature’s Judiciary Committee this week. Rep. Steven Stafstrom, D-Bridgeport, said the proposal made sense, since people who commit a crime in Connecticut are currently held to a stricter standard than someone who committed a crime in another state. “Why are we treating our own residents more harshly than we are somebody out of state?” he asked on Wednesday. Jennifer Deneen, associate director of UConn’s ARMS Center for Gun Injury Prevention, said during the hearing that the law would close “a critical gap” in the state’s background check law. “In absence of a comprehensive federal firearm policy recognizing the impact of neighboring states’ firearm laws and limiting firearm migration, these should be part of a broader strategy to reduce gun related harms,” she said, adding that research showed a connection between gun laws in certain states and gun deaths in others. Republicans argued that the proposal could actually penalize someone who committed a misdemeanor out of state. In Connecticut, records of misdemeanors are wiped after seven years under the Clean Slate Law, giving them the opportunity to purchase a firearm. For other states that don’t have this law, they said, a misdemeanor charge would prevent them from purchasing a firearm in Connecticut long after the crime was committed. — Emilia Otte, Justice Reporter Stone Academy students’ reimbursement More former Stone Academy students may receive tuition reimbursement from the state after House Bill 7098 unanimously passed out of the Higher Education and Employment Advancement Committee Tuesday.The bill builds on and expands previous legislation that passed last year, which only refunded former nursing students for credits recognized after a state audit.The proposed legislation this year says former students should also be refunded for credits and fees that “had no value – whether the credits were supported by documentation or not,” Attorney General William Tong said in support of the bill.The bill doesn’t specify how much money a student would be eligible for, but did say the Office of Higher Education can pull up to $150,000 of funds from the private career school student protection account.“It’s been well publicized what former Stone Academy students went through, and they’re an important part of our state’s workforce. They’re aspiring to be nurses, something the state is badly needing, ” committee co-chair Derek Slap, D-West Hartford, said ahead of the vote. “Not only were they, in my opinion, treated pretty poorly and left in the lurch here in their education, incurred a lot of debt in many cases, but many of these folks are single mothers. They’re people who were really struggling but aspiring to get their education. … This bill makes a lot of sense to help right a wrong and get these young folks on their way to a successful career.”— Jessika Harkay, Education Reporter Minimum salary for teachers A bill that would raise the minimum salary for teachers to over $63,000 dominated the Education Committee’s public hearing Wednesday.Senate Bill 1459 proposes Connecticut raise teachers’ minimum salary to “300% of the federal poverty level for a family of two,” which would total $63,450. The state comptroller’s office would then be required to establish a grant program as of Aug. 1 to “provide teacher retention grants to each municipality” and “to increase the salaries of certified teachers to reach the minimum salary.”The bill received over 500 letters of support, mainly from educators across the state.“I have devoted my career to shaping the minds and futures of our children, yet despite my decades of service, I have never reached a six-figure salary. In fact, my own son, when just 22 years old, was already earning a higher salary than I do now,” said Elaine Surveski, a teacher from Torrington.“Establishing a minimum teacher salary and increasing pay across the board will provide much-needed relief to educators struggling to make ends meet,” Surveski continued. “Many of my colleagues work multiple jobs just to pay our bills and support our families. The demands of our profession are immense, yet the compensation fails to reflect our dedication and expertise.”— Jessika Harkay, Education Reporter DUI laws for boating Last September, 24-year-old Ryan Britagna was in a boat that hit an unlit breakwater off the coast of Old Saybrook. He and two of his friends, Ian Duchemin and Christopher Hallahan, all died.“In the aftermath of this tragedy, I’ve come to understand something deeply troubling: while our state takes impaired driving on the roads seriously, the same accountability does not apply to our waterways. A person convicted of a DUI on the road can still operate a boat without restriction. This is not just an oversight, it is a deadly loophole,” Britagna’s mother, Jessica Britagna, told lawmakers on Monday.The Transportation Committee is considering a bill that would link DUI offenses committed in a motor vehicle to DUI offenses committed while operating a boat, so that suspending or revoking a driver’s license would also suspend or revoke a boating license, and vice versa.Rep. Devin Carney, R-Old Saybrook, said he felt the proposal “certainly made sense.“We want to make our roadways and our waterways as safe as humanly possible. And unfortunately this legislation did come as the result of a tragedy and we just want to make sure something like that never happens again,” Carney said.Sen. Christine Cohen, D-Guilford, agreed. She said that, living on the shoreline, she was well aware of the “culture” of drinking and boating.“We want folks to go out and enjoy themselves, and if that involves drinking, so be it. But please do not get behind the wheel of a boat, of a car, any vessel, because there are lives on the line,” she said.— Emilia Otte, Justice Reporter Trump pushes for pipeline into New England President Donald Trump posted on his social media platform this week that building a natural gas pipeline into New England would save families thousands of dollars on their utility bills — though he did not provide evidence for those figures.“All we need is a simple approval from New York,” Trump said on Truth Social. “Every other state in New England, plus Connecticut, wants this, in order to help the Environment, and save BIG money.”Trump also announced that he planned to meet with New York Gov. Kathy Hochul on Friday to discuss the topic of pipelines and other issues.His comments came weeks after Gov. Ned Lamont met with members of Trump’s cabinet to discuss energy policy, including the potential to build new gas pipelines and nuclear reactors.“‘I think their reaction was, ‘We’re looking for places where we can work with you,’” Lamont told The Connecticut Mirror in an interview on Tuesday.— John Moritz, Environment and Energy Reporter Private equity in nursing homes The Human Services Committee passed a bill Thursday that would bar nursing homes and hospitals from taking on new ownership interests from private equity firms and real estate investment trusts if they receive Medicaid reimbursement.Under the bill, private equity firms and REITs would not be able to acquire nursing homes and hospitals in Connecticut starting Oct. 1 if those facilities want to continue getting Medicaid reimbursements. Facilities already owned by those companies will be allowed to continue receiving Medicaid funds.Republicans on the committee raised concerns about the measure.“It’s a big overreach,” said Sen. Jason Perillo, a ranking Republican on the panel from Shelton. “I laud the intent here. We want to keep people safe and healthy, but this goes far beyond that.“There are very good actors who happen to be for-profit, and there are also very bad actors that are for-profit. … We should be focusing on those bad actors who have a track record of poor practices in other states, and we should be stopping them from acquiring nursing homes here in Connecticut.”— Jenna Carlesso, Investigative Reporter Democrats move forward with unfinished energy bill A legislative committee on Thursday voted to advance Democrats’ signature bill to address Connecticut’s stubbornly high cost of electricity — even as the sponsors conceded they’re still working out the details.“This is a work in process,”  said state Sen. Norm Needleman, D-Essex, who co-chairs the Energy and Technology Committee. “We’re looking to make it an energy affordability bill that contains a lot of components.”The legislation Needleman and others on the committee have drafted is Senate Bill 4, which currently contains 11 sections that mostly deal with ways to attract new investments in natural gas and nuclear infrastructure, a new program to build thermal energy projects and protections for utility line workers.Needleman said that typically, a major bill dealing with utility prices would have many more sections and that he planned to add to the legislation as it proceeds in the Senate.Republicans came to Thursday’s meeting with their own legislation, Senate Bill 647, which would shift the cost of programs that covered public benefits charges on utility bills onto the state budget, while also capping the costs of certain power purchase agreements. Several Republicans noted that hundreds of residents had written in to the committee to show support for the bill.But Democrats countered that those who showed up in person to the public hearing last week had tended to speak out against S.B. 647.Rep. Jonathan Steinberg, D-Westport, said that most of the GOP proposals were “non-starters” but that ideas with bipartisan support could still be included in the Democrats’ legislation as it is written and expanded.In a pair of party line votes, the Energy and Technology Committee voted to sink the Republican proposal and move forward with the Democrats’ plan.— John Moritz, Environment and Energy Reporter Dogs, cats, rabbits Under a bill that passed through committee this week, individual municipalities would be able to ban pet stores from selling dogs, rabbits and cats.House Bill 6832 passed through the Planning and Development Committee on Wednesday and next heads to the House floor. Supporters say the bill will help cut down on the presence of puppy mills and abusive conditions for animals.“Puppies that are sourced from puppy mills spend only a short time in the devastating conditions the millers keep, but their parents spend lifetimes,” wrote Jessica Barnes of the Lucky Dog Refuge in Stamford, in public testimony. “They are not socialized, they barely have room to move around, they are discarded, and forced to breed litter after litter. They are used for profit and profit only.”Meanwhile, opponents said the state already has strict rules for pet shops, and passing this law could lead to black market sales of pets.“Allowing municipalities to enact their own regulations and bans would create a confusing patchwork of ordinances that would undermine uniform protections for pets and consumers alike statewide. Removing the uniform standards that exist statewide by allowing cities and towns to enact their own regulations and bans could potentially cause more harm to the animals we are all working to protect,” wrote Alisa Clements, deputy director of outreach and advocacy at the Pet Advocacy Network.— Ginny Monk, Housing & Children’s Issues Reporter Another John B. Larson viral moment U.S. Rep. John B. Larson had another viral moment this week. This one more politically advantageous than the video of him freezing due to a “complex partial seizure” on the House floor a month ago. He had no trouble finishing sentences this time.Let’s have Rachel Maddow set it up, just as she did on her MSNBC show. “I’m happy to report that Congressman John Larson is definitely back and at full strength. He has been eating his proverbial Wheaties. He appears to be very hydrated, very energized, and, may I suggest, you get out of his way.”Cut to to the 76-year-old Larson, a Democrat who has represented Greater Hartford for 26 years, thundering in a committee meeting about the Republican majority showing not even a teeny bit of interest in Elon Musk’s plans for Social Security, which Musk calls a “Ponzi scheme.”“Men and women on this committee are good people. They’re honest and caring people, and that’s why I do not understand why you would relegate this committee to no longer being of significance, and resort to saying you will do whatever Elon Musk and Donald Trump tell you to do. Where’s the independence of the committee? Where’s the legislature? We’re an equal branch of government!”“Where’s Elon Musk? I’m sure he’s a genius and is a very credible person because of the wealth he’s accumulated, but that does not put him above the law or the responsibility to come before this committee in this Congress. If he’s so great, if these plans and all the fraud and abuse that he found are so imminent, why isn’t he here explaining it? You know why? Because he’s out to privatize Social Security. He’s been on television the last couple of days talking exactly about Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and what he intends to do, privatize it. The American people, some of them may have been born at night, but not last night. People are aware of this.”Maddow was pleased.She closed by noting, “That is veteran Democratic Congressman John Larson of Connecticut, just ripping the bark off today about Social Security and what Republicans are really doing here.”— Mark Pazniokas, Capitol Bureau Chief Birthing centers The Human Services Committee this week passed a bill focused on bolstering maternal care in Connecticut. Among other provisions, it charges the state with developing a strategy to increase birthing centers and birthing hospitals in underserved regions of the state. Over the past several years two rural labor and delivery units have shuttered — one at Windham Hospital, owned by Hartford HealthCare, and the other at Johnson Memorial, owned by Trinity Health of New England, in Stafford. Sharon Hospital, owned by Nuvance Health, also requested permission to close its maternity unit, but the state ruled that it must stay open.In granting permission to Windham and Johnson Memorial to close labor and delivery services, the state required both hospitals to hire third-party consultants to study the feasibility of building a free-standing birth center in the area and said they must support its establishment if the study deems it’s possible. Birthing centers offer a more “home-like” alternative to hospitals for people with low-risk pregnancies. But several advocates have spoken out that free-standing birthing centers are meant to complement full-service labor and delivery units in hospitals, but they are not a sustainable replacement for them.— Katy Golvala, Health Reporter ...read more read less