Joe Courtney · TranslatePolitics.com

House of Representatives

Remembering Nancy Wyman

2026-08-31

“Nancy Wyman did a lot for Connecticut. She had many jobs in government. She helped make healthcare.gov work well in Connecticut. She was always nice to everyone. Many people are sad she died.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to share with the House the sad news of the loss of one of the State of Connecticut's finest public servants, former Lieutenant Governor Nancy Wyman, of Tolland, Connecticut. The news of her sudden passing on August 12 was met with universal sorrow from all corners of her beloved State, from the political leaders on both sides of the aisle and from people of all walks of life with whom she worked, always trying to help, particularly those in need and those whose problems she fixed over and over again. Nancy's epic journey of public service began as a PTA mom in Tolland, advocating for high-quality public education at a time when her own kids were enrolled in Tolland's public schools. She was so effective that she was encouraged to run for a seat on the school board, which she did and won. That began an extraordinary string of political success that eventually took her to the highest levels of State government. In 1986, she ran for a vacant seat in the Connecticut House of Representatives in a district next door to where I live, and at the same time, coincidentally, I was also running as a first-time candidate. We both prevailed and the following January were assigned our desks in the Connecticut House Chamber next to each other, which began a long and fruitful friendship, both politically and personally. She shortly became chair of the Education Committee and presided over one of the most difficult, contested issues in the State, namely allocating public school funding. To paraphrase Abraham Lincoln, it is an issue where you cannot please all the people all the time. Nancy never shrank from this task, and because of her patience and basic decency in her interactions with all her colleagues, the final result of her tenacious effort always earned respect and support. She carried that trademark skill in her campaigns for statewide office, with her election as State comptroller in 1998 and her election as Lieutenant Governor in 2010. The office of comptroller is not always well understood by Connecticut voters, but it carries great responsibilities, including administering the largest health and pension plans in the State for active and retired State employees and their dependents. She, once again, bore down into the nitty-gritty of price negotiation with private vendors, promoting wellness programs for State workers and acquiring valuable knowledge of the private health insurance market. That experience came into good use when, as Lieutenant Governor, she was assigned the task of implementing the Affordable Care Act as it was rolled out in 2014. This was no easy lift. As many will painfully recall, the Federal ACA exchange, healthcare.gov, in 2014 was completely overwhelmed and took over a year before millions of Americans were finally connected to affordable health coverage. Connecticut, however, opted under the law to operate its own exchange and, under Nancy's experienced hands, designed and initiated a data system that was completely functional on day one. I remember well in 2014 going to enrollment fairs around the Second Congressional District and witnessing the successful completion of healthcare coverage for constituents who, in many cases because of preexisting medical conditions, had not been insured for most of their adult lives. For them, it was an emotional, life-changing event. Although Nancy was not physically present at all those fairs, there is no question that her handiwork created joy, and the impact and spirit of her service were in that room. Mr. Speaker, Nancy's successful stewardship of the ACA rollout was not her only achievement as Lieutenant Governor. She was truly a partner, not an acolyte, to Governor Dan Malloy. Their passage of the Connecticut State budget in 2017, with fiscal guardrails, established the pathway to budget stability that reversed decades of chronic deficits into a string of surpluses and has completely transformed Connecticut's public finances into positive territory. Her record in public service, though, was not only defined by good administration and policy but also by the way she carried herself in high position, showing respect and empathy to all that she ever came into contact with. It didn't matter whether a person was a constituent or not, or what political party they belonged to, she was warm and polite and found ways to build connections and, in most cases, friendships. It goes without saying, her example is a powerful one, in 2026, when polarization and political tribalism is far too prevalent. She did, however, show favoritism, and that was to her beautiful family: her husband, Michael, of 59 years; her two daughters, Stacey Papa and Meryl Baldwin, and their husbands, Steve and Bill; their five grandchildren; and many more relations who are carrying a heavy burden of grief because of her passing. They did have great support on August 16th when hundreds and hundreds of her admirers and friends showed up at her wake, expressing their love and appreciation for the contributions Nancy's family made to her impactful life. I particularly thank the town manager of Tolland, Brian Foley, who showed so much care and compassion to help Nancy's family. Mr. Speaker, I ask the House to join me in a similar recognition and express our condolences to Nancy's family for their loss.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

House of Representatives

National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2027

2026-07-21

“I don't want this voucher program to pass. I want the government to spend more money on public schools near military bases. DoDEA and Impact Aid already give some money. But I want more. The government should give them more money first. Then maybe we can talk about vouchers. I want you all to vote no.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, I think Congresswoman Tokuda did a very nice job in terms of laying out the reality of what is actually going on in communities where military installations and military bases exist. Those are tax exempt properties where the communities are, again, more than glad to educate the children of military servicemembers. They have to find a way to finance the cost of that education. Unfortunately, the existing programs in place today, DoDEA and Impact Aid, fall short in terms of making sure that those communities are fairly reimbursed. Mr. Chair, we are not in a place where there should even be a discussion about starting new funding programs for education paid for by the taxpayer until we keep the promise to those communities that we are going to reimburse the cost of educating military schoolchildren. For that reason, Mr. Chair, I urge a ``no'' vote from all our colleagues, and I yield back the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I don't like vouchers. Vouchers cost money. That's an issue. The other side didn't address it.”

“I don't want taxpayers to pay for military parents' school choice. The government already pays some money for schools that military kids use. Starting this program will make the Pentagon spend more. We need that money for other things. I think military families should use the schools they have. I don't want them to have vouchers. I want more money for other education programs. I will fight for more money for those programs. I think this amendment will make it harder to get that money.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chair, I rise in strong opposition to this amendment. As a member of the House Armed Services Committee and the Education Committee, I represent a military district with about 7,000 sailors and officers. Many of those children use local schools which the Federal Government partially reimburses through the Impact Aid Program. The notion that we are going to start a new program--and really this program is about who pays. It is about funding vouchers. It is not really whether or not military families have a choice in terms of whether they themselves want to go to a parochial school or to a private school. That is not the point. The point that we are talking about here is, again, that this is going to put a stress on the Pentagon's budget, who already, as I said, underfunds Impact Aid and DoDEA schools. If you look at the President's budget that came over, Mr. Chair, there was actually a cut to Impact Aid in terms of what was sent over. We are going to be in a fight over at the Appropriations Committee to restore funding. Again, as someone who represents a district with public schools that are proudly in the business of offering education for K-12 students, this, again, is just going to be another pressure, external pressure, in terms of reducing what, in fact, these communities really deserve, which is to have the military fully compensate an item that families really depend on in terms of making sure whether they are deployed or whether when they are on base they are getting education and that the local community is not taking an unfair hit in terms of paying for those services. Again, this amendment would generate a new cost to the Pentagon's budget in terms of DoDEA funding and Impact Aid funding who, again, today are not actually up to the levels that fully paid for those services. For that purpose, I oppose the amendment. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗

“I like parts of this bill. It spends a lot of taxpayer money on ships and submarines. That will help some businesses make more money. I want to keep hiring more workers to build more ships. I don't like other parts of this bill. It spends $1 billion on old ships that don't work well anymore. I want that money spent on different ships instead. I don't like that this bill was mixed with another bill about voting. That other bill shouldn't be in here. It's not related. I want to take that part out. I want this bill to pass. But I want it changed to spend money on the things I want.”

Official Congressional Record

Mr. Chairman, as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Seapower and Projection Forces, I yield myself 2\1/4\ minutes. Mr. Chairman, I rise to endorse many provisions of the Seapower and Projections Forces mark of the 2027 NDAA, which our subcommittee crafted under the able leadership of my good friend, Chairman Trent Kelly. A whole range of much-needed Navy warships and auxiliary platforms are authorized in this bill using multiyear contracting, which will save money for the taxpayer and provide certainty to our shipbuilding industrial base to invest and grow. The bill authorizes $15 billion for the Pentagon's number one acquisition priority, the Columbia-class ballistic submarine program. It also provides $12.5 billion for Virginia-class attack submarines and full funding for shipyard wage improvements and workforce pipelines which are vital to hiring and retention. Adding more Virginia subs will grow our undersea fleet and keep our commitment to Pillar One of the AUKUS security agreement to sell three in-service subs to the Australian Navy in the 2030s. Multiyear contracts for destroyers and oilers are also included, as well as investments in missiles and hypersonics from unmanned surface vessels. Ukraine has demonstrated how effective unmanned systems are in their defense against Russia's Black Sea invasion, and we must embrace that trend and expand our unmanned capabilities. There are areas of disagreement in this bill. Particularly, its approval of the administration's request for $1 billion for obsolete battleships without a detailed design. I would note, last month the Senate Armed Services Committee wisely voted to reject this wasteful request. That money should, instead, be spent for the Marine Corps' request for new landing ships, which is missing from both this bill and the new reconciliation bill. Mr. Chair, the NDAA has passed for 65 consecutive years because of disciplined avoidance of irrelevant hyperpartisan amendments. Unfortunately, the NDAA rule passed earlier today merging the NDAA with a completely nongermane voter suppression bill, the SAVE America Act, violates that long tradition. If Republican leadership is serious about passing a 66th NDAA with bipartisan support, the SAVE America Act merger should be stripped from the bill or later in conference. Mr. Chairman, I look forward to achieving that outcome, if not today, then later in the NDAA negotiations with the Senate. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

View on ourcommons.ca ↗