Connecticut lawmakers will include $10.5 million for the state’s microtransit pilot program as part of the state’s upcoming budget, that’s according to State Sen. Christine Cohen, who is chair of the Transportation Committee.

“This $10.5 million provides programming in different areas across the state that really allow folks to have their independence, to travel freely to social activities, to doctors appointments, to and from work and so much more,” Cohen said.

The program, which started in 2024, has proven to be popular throughout the state, according to Cohen. The pilot program offered in 18 towns and cities across the state, operates much like Lyft and Uber, where residents can book rides with various contractors.

Transit advocates like Cohen hope the program may be expanded statewide.

They say it meets an urgent need, as many municipalities in Connecticut lack comprehensive mass transit coverage.

“My goal would really be to see these micro transit options in towns in all 169 towns eventually, so that even our most remote settings have options with respect to public transportation,” Cohen said.

Jeremy Tillinger, the director of policy at Via, a rideshare contractor with the pilot program, spoke about the service in late April. Tillinger said the program is already bringing in positive results.

“At a time when affordability and the rising cost of gas prices is on everybody’s minds, micro transit is providing an innovative, cost efficient solution for many,” Tillinger said.

Peggy Lyons, the First Selectwoman of Madison, said many of her residents want the program to continue.

Lyons said about 25,000 rides were booked for the program running in Madison, Guilford, Middletown and East Hampton last year.

“This is kind of filling in that gap and just within the way our state is structured, I think a lot of people are starting to depend on this, and they would hate to see it go,” Lyons said.

HARTFORD, Conn. (WTNH) — With a nearly party-line vote, the Connecticut State Senate gave final approval to a bill introducing new regulations on homeschooling families.

Twenty-two Democrats voted in favor, with three others joining the entire 11-member Republican caucus in opposition.

The bill that was put before senators for debate is a modified version of one that was first introduced in March, drawing a sizable protest of homeschooling families who viewed the attempt at new regulations as an afront to their autonomy.

The original legislation would have required homeschooling parents to annually provide proof that their curriculum aligned with a general set of state-mandated topics. It also included a provision requiring that parents seeking to remove their child from the public school system first be subjected to a background check of sorts in which school officials would consult the Department of Children and Families (DCF) to see if anyone in the child’s household had a history of abuse.

The legislation was introduced amidst a string of alarming headlines documenting cases of alleged child abuse and, in two cases, the deaths of children who had been removed from the public school system.

The Democrats backing the bill have pointed to these cases as illustrating the need for reform. They have also repeatedly cited a 2018 report compiled by the state’s Office of the Child Advocate which surveyed six school districts and found “that over a span of three academic years, 2013 through 2016, there were 380 students withdrawn from the six districts to be homeschooled, and that 138 of these children (36%) lived in families that were the subject of at least one prior accepted report to DCF for suspected abuse or neglect.”

Republicans largely sided with the sentiments of the homeschooling parents, who felt they were being unfairly scapegoated. They also questioned the effectiveness of the measures introduced by Democrats, arguing some of them, like the requirement to provide proof of instruction, were burdensome, while not directly addressing the issue of abuse.

In the weeks following the public hearing, Democratic leadership in the House also registered discontent with certain sections among their own ranks.

The fierce Republican opposition, paired with scattered Democratic dissent, caused House leadership to remove the curriculum portion while maintaining a DCF check before removal from public schools and a requirement that homeschooling parents annually register themselves online.

A spokesperson for Gov. Ned Lamont said Monday that the governor is likely to sign the legislation.

Now just six months before the midterm elections in November, U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro said affordability and cost-of-living issues are still at the front of voters’ minds.

But the New Haven Democrat argued that the challenges to democracy that could threaten those elections should also be top of mind, whether it’s undermining the legitimacy of elections or intimidating local election workers.

“The cost of living crisis is the biggest problem on Americans’ minds today, and Congress should rightly be focused on how we’re trying to bring down those soaring costs of healthcare, of food, of housing, gas prices,” DeLauro said at a Monday forum. “But the survival of our democracy, our great American experiment in government of, by, and for the people, is also at stake.”

“Congress can and must focus on both — tackling the affordability crisis and securing the future of our democracy,” she added.

While Congress is on a week-long recess, the top Democrats who sit on three congressional committees held a meeting in New Haven on Monday known as a “shadow hearing,” which are convened by the minority party. They are largely symbolic but give Democrats a chance to steer the conversation and choose all of the witnesses that testified about voting in America and the way states conduct elections.

Instead of sitting in one of the many wood-paneled hearing room in the U.S. Capitol complex, they gathered at Gateway Community College in New Haven to hear from a panel of experts on elections that consisted of a current and former secretary of the state, a Yale Law School professor, a member of the nonpartisan League of Women Voters of Connecticut and two voting advocacy groups.

DeLauro helped convene the meeting alongside U.S. Rep. Jim Himes, D-4th District, and U.S. Rep. Joe Morelle, D-N.Y., who serves as the ranking member of the House Administration Committee, which has jurisdiction over federal election oversight.

They argued that Republicans’ legislative push to change voting and the recent Supreme Court ruling that dilutes part of the Voting Rights Act could lead to the disenfranchisement of voters, particularly voters of color, in the 2026 midterm elections and create barriers for local elections administrators.

One of the main concerns that came up throughout the hearing was cuts to funding that help states and localities with election security.

Lawmakers and the panelists pointed to President Donald Trump’s latest budget proposal that would make steep cuts to an election security program that’s part of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).

Himes, who serves as the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, noted the importance of securing elections from foreign interference and importance of such federal funding.

“This is not a new problem, and every American should be alert to signs of malign interference by our adversaries,” Himes said. “But rather than using the awesome capacity of our intelligence community to bolster election security infrastructure, the administration over the course of these last 16 months has consistently pivoted resources away from this cause, dismantling institutions that were specifically designed to combat efforts by our adversaries, foreign and domestic, to interfere in U.S. elections.”

During her testimony, Connecticut Secretary of the State Stephanie Thomas said her office relied on CISA’s funding and other federal resources during the 2024 elections. She said the cybersecurity agency gave them regular security briefings on foreign interference, and CISA and the FBI provided de-escalation training for their workforce.

“This is not unique to Connecticut. This is the nation,” Thomas said. “Those services are now no longer in existence, or the funding has been cut so much that the election community is concerned about what 2026 looks like.”

As the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, DeLauro said she’d work on bringing those requests or changes to her fellow congressional appropriators when they negotiate federal funding for fiscal year 2027 in the coming months.

“We need funding to make sure that states can get messaging out to assure American voters that polls are safe and they can show up,” Thomas said. “Essentially we need funding. We don’t need more hoops.”

Monday’s hearing comes on the backdrop of Congress weighing Republican-led legislation that would have implement major changes to voting if enacted. But the bill is unlikely to become law and faces significant hurdles.

The SAVE America Act has been a top priority for Trump and congressional Republicans. But it has effectively stalled in the U.S. Senate since it doesn’t have the votes to clear the 60-vote threshold to bypass a filibuster — something Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has repeatedly cited amid Republican fury over it.

The bill would require documentation to prove people are U.S.-born citizens or naturalized citizens in order to register to vote. Proper ID would also be needed for those who are moving to a new address or switching party affiliation. Documentation to prove citizenship would include a birth certificate, a U.S. passport or a naturalization certificate. A driver’s license wouldn’t qualify.

Trump has also signed an executive order that would limit mail-in voting, which has become a popular form of voting that the president has also used in past elections. Connecticut was one of nearly two dozen states to sue over this order.

If enacted, the SAVE America Act would make major changes to how people vote in Connecticut. The state doesn’t require documentation to prove citizenship when registering to vote. Instead, they must attest that they are a citizen and sign a form. If they lie, they would face criminal prosecution.

Thomas previously warned against the SAVE America Act in late March alongside Gov. Ned Lamont and Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz. 

At the time, Connecticut Republicans pushed back, citing allegations of voter fraud in the state. Bridgeport has been the most noticeable case where people have been criminally charged with violating absentee ballot rules.

“The reason why this is happening is because of blue states like Connecticut that have refused to address real, live examples of election fraud,” state Sen. Rob Sampson, R-Wolcott, said back in March. “The whole point of the SAVE America Act is to make elections honest.”

Trump reiterated his calls to get rid of the filibuster so the Senate can pass it. That would allow the upper chamber to pass it with a simple majority, and Republicans control 53 seats. Thune has also pushed back against this, saying he doesn’t have the votes among Republicans to ax the filibuster.

In a Truth Social post last week, Trump argued that failing to pass the SAVE America Act would lead to “the worst results for a political party in the HISTORY of the United States Senate,” in addition to a plea to “terminate” the filibuster.

As states like Connecticut continue to weigh their own changes, Ann Reed of the League of Women Voters of Connecticut said she hopes no-excuse absentee voting will get taken up in the final days of the General Assembly’s session, which ends on Wednesday.

And she said she’s worried about the misinformation around voting and the lack of trust among people just months out from a major election.

“This conversation is a national one, but the election battles are being fought in every state,” Reed said. “People are rightfully concerned about election security.”

CT Mirror reporter Andrew Brown contributed to this story.