In the State Senate chamber's nearly 400-year old history, no member has ever been investigated, disciplined, censured, or expelled. With a two-thirds vote of the 36-member Senate, history could be rewritten. These are just some of the Senate's options under a process outlined this week by the Senate's top two leaders - President Pro Tempore Don Williams and Minority Leader John McKinney.

As you may recall, back in June, Senator DeLuca stepped down from his position as Minority Leader after being arrested on an FBI warrant for seeking the assistance of a man alleged to have mob ties to intimidate his granddaughter's husband, Mark Colella. DeLuca and other family members believed Colella was abusing his granddaughter.

While other legislators have gotten into trouble with the law while in office, DeLuca's situation appears to have fallen into a grey area. While he plead guilty to a misdemeanor threatening charge with no jail time, the nature of his offense paired with his relationship with a man facing federal racketeering charges, have raised ethical questions amongst DeLuca's colleagues. Nonetheless, DeLuca adamantly refuses to resign from his Senate seat.

So what's the legislature to do? Senate President Williams and Senate Minority Leader McKinney announced the convening of a six member committee - three Democrats and three Republicans - to hold public hearings on the issue and examine their options. The committee is expected to reach a decision by November.

November isn't soon enough for Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz. This past week Bysiewicz said DeLuca should "spare taxpayers the formidable expense" of holding public hearings and possible a special election. If DeLuca resigns before September 18, the special election to replace him could be held on the normal election day, November 6. That could save taxpayers up to $250,000 of costs for holding a separate special election in the 10 towns that DeLuca represents.

Regardless of what is decided for DeLuca, McKinney hopes that this situation will help the General Assembly create a proper process for dealing with future ethics questions. "At the end of the day, this General Assembly must take steps to restore public confidence and to ensure its members are held to the highest of ethical standards," he said. The work of the legislative committee and the decisions that follow will certainly make for an interesting historical case study.

In the wake of last week's bridge collapse in Minnesota, Connecticut legislators are speaking out about Connecticut's own need for bridge and highway safety improvements. After all, CT is no stranger to tragedy of this sort. Many remember when the Mianus River Bridge in Greenwich collapsed in 1983 killing three people. However, the push to ensure that such a disaster never happens again in CT is bringing out the good, the bad, and the... controversial political policy.

The bad news is that sometimes it takes a tragedy to thrust important issues to the forefront and to remind us of the safety that we take for granted. In relation to the rest of the country, CT has taken good care of its bridges. CT is ranked 12th lowest out of the 50 states in percentage of structurally deficient bridges. Nonetheless, CT still has over 400 bridges that inspectors have rated poor or worse so there is still work to be done.

"The people of Connecticut can be assured that we are making every effort to regularly inspect all of our bridges and keep them safe and well-maintained," said Governor Rell this week. The Governor announced Monday that she will seek legislative approval for $100 million in bonding for bridge repair and replacement projects over the next two- years. This announcement followed a recent decision for the Department of Transportation (DOT) to continue bridge inspections every two-years. The DOT had shifted inspections to every four-years for bridges in "fair" condition in order to cut costs.

The controversy? The Governor's announcement has fueled a political tug-of-war with Democratic House leadership. Speaker James Amann said that Democrats have had a "Fix It First" plan to fund maintenance and repair of bridges and roads since the beginning of legislative session, but that the Governor rejected it as unaffordable. The Democrats originally wanted $300 million to fund the plan, but the Governor would only agree to $40 million.

Amann suggests that the Governor's sudden change to $100 million is simply reactionary prevention. "The question is why it took the governor seven months to turn "Fix It First" from a stumbling block to a starting point," he challenged. Amann was adamant that only a minimum of $150 million would suffice for the plan. He and other legislators also added that it may be necessary to explore raising the gas tax and implementing tolls to replenish the Special Transportation Fund used to fund such projects.

Remaining at odds over this issue and other bonding issues has drawn out special session for over 2 months past the end of regular session. According to administration, Democrats have requested more than $200 million in borrowing for miscellaneous projects in their home districts. The Governor charges that this is "pork barrel" spending as CT ranks second among all the states in the nation in per-capita debt - more than $14.2 billion. With the bonding bills tied up, so too are transportation improvements, school construction projects, sewage treatment plant upgrades, and other capital improvement projects.

Regardless of the political complexities involved, the fact that both the Governor and the general assembly can agree that transportation improvements are necessary to keep CT safe is a good thing. The legislature is hoping to go back into session just before or after Labor Day to work out the final details of the bonding bills that will affect these improvements. Rich Harris, the governor's spokesman, said it well, "The issue is not about credit or blame...the people of Connecticut don't care about that. What they care about - especially when they are on the road - is whether the bridges in this state are safe." It looks like state officials and legislators will need to build bridges - both literally and politically - to keep citizens safe.