Editor’s note: The Bristol Edition (TBE) asked the town committee chairs, Democratic and Republican, respectively, to answer a question as part of what we hope will be a regular feature. The question was: How do you think Connecticut is handling COVID and what, if anything, would you do differently?
Our hope is that questions like this will give our readers a chance to see the thoughts of the opposing parties in a more complete context, something more valuable than a billboard or a campaign sign.
One of the things we like about a format like this is that writers are not responding to each other, since they have not seen what the other has written.
We are off to a tentative start, however, since we received no column from the Democratic chair. We discussed whether or not to publish this piece without a corresponding piece, and we decided we would go ahead, since we initiated the discussion. We hope to pick up with the original plan in the new year.
Here, then, is the response of the chair of the Bristol Republican Town Committee.
Regards, The TBE editorial team
By Jeff Caggiano
The Bristol Edition is soliciting my opinion for a regular exchange of ideas in Bristol so we can localize political issues and I think it is great. The first topic, COVID-19, drives a passionate response due to my vast 34 years of training and work experience.
In 2020 Gov. Lamont became the state’s authority on a virus, and the elected leaders in the Democratic party followed his lead on every issue. The virus is a health concern, and is increasing in cold and flu season, and generally our policy is not matching science.
Seventy percent of deaths in Connecticut have occurred in nursing homes, and this is a big reason the state has the fourth highest death rate per capita. The survival rate for those under 30 is 99 percent. Why did we ban youth sports instead of restricting fans?
Recently, government officials revoked a liquor license for a local Bristol bar, because policy has determined that the coronavirus magically rests during the day and preferentially infects people after 10 p.m. The Governor just added a $10,000 fine for new offenders. At the very least, this severe penalty will shut down just about any restaurant, and all are already struggling. I have to question if either action slows the virus.
The Governor implemented travel restrictions because “we have managed to contain the virus better.” I compliment the state for a robust testing program, but our robust testing automatically lowers the percentage positivity compared to other states. Positive infections per 100 thousand offer a more accurate measure of risk across states.
I recently traveled to South Carolina, and the rate of infection was 51 per 100k residents in Hartford County*. Yet Connecticut was boasting a relatively low 6.48 percent positive infection rate (36,000 tests conducted in a state of 3 million).
With a 14.8 percent positivity rate, one would assume Charleston was a COVID hotspot and more than twice as risky as Bristol. However, South Carolina only tested 9,000 people (pop 5 million). Charleston, S.C., had a 25/100k infection rate. Wasn’t I safer in South Carolina? (I tested negative as would have been expected, and also artificially lowered the state’s positive infection rate.)
I want to acknowledge the service of our officials, as I believe they have good intentions. Additionally, their job is made difficult because media companies capitalize on fear. However, I expect more to question policies that contrast science or just don’t make sense. I assume this will be recognized and appreciated by the majority of Bristol residents.
Caggiano is chairman of the Republican Town Committee.