Loading this candidate’s profile from the FEC filings and campaign records.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Loading this candidate’s profile from the FEC filings and campaign records.
Where They Stand is a nonpartisan guide to everyone running for Congress: their money, their own words and how incumbents voted. Find your ballot →
Candidates › CT-02 race › 2025–2026
R Republican nominee for U.S. House, CT-02
Has not served in Congress
4 priorities from votegeorgeforcongress.com, in the order they are listed there. Every heading and the text under it is copied exactly, as one passage for each page it is from, and links to that place on the page; hover a source to see which passage it opens.
stop the scare tactics and fix the system so Social Security and Medicare stay solvent and are there for the people who earned them.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · votegeorgeforcongress.com
Heading as listed on votegeorgeforcongress.com ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com at this heading)
we need serious guardrails so new technology doesn’t wipe out people’s jobs and opportunities before they even get started in life, and so American workers—not just a few tech monopolies and foreign adversaries—benefit from the next wave of innovation.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · votegeorgeforcongress.com
Heading as listed on votegeorgeforcongress.com ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com at this heading)
Heading as listed on votegeorgeforcongress.com ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com at this heading)
As a working man and small business owner, I see firsthand the shortage of skilled workers holding back our economy. Too many young people are pushed toward a four-year degree that often leaves them with a useless degree and buried in debt, while the trades—once a respected path to success—are overlooked. We need to restore respect for trade education by reintroducing classes like wood & metal shop into high schools, expand technical programs like on the job learning, and create new training centers that prepare students for high-demand careers.
Defense manufacturers like Electric Boat in eastern Connecticut and Pratt & Whitney are the backbone of our local economy. But retirements and the lack of investment in trade education have created a dangerous shortage of skilled workers—putting jobs, contracts, and even our national security at risk, while making us even more dependent on foreign labor and expertise.
Connecticut’s strength is its diversity of industries, and trade education doesn’t just mean construction—it teaches problem-solving, creativity, and opportunity across countless fields. The bottom line is simple: we’re not looking out for our own, and that ends now.
In Congress, I’ll fight to direct federal funds toward apprenticeships, job training, and technical education that connect students directly with local employers. By building strong partnerships with Connecticut’s manufacturers, defense industries, and small businesses, we can ensure the next generation has the skills to step into good-paying jobs right here at home.
I’m not a politician. I’m one of you—an everyday working man who knows what it takes to build a life here and wants the same chance for every family in the 2nd District.
Join me in getting back to building a better tomorrow for Connecticut’s next generation. Let’s Help Connecticut Build Again!
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · votegeorgeforcongress.com/building-opportunity
The High Cost of Living ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense at this heading)
Connecticut is one of the most expensive states to live in, and families are being squeezed from every direction. According to an article published in June 2024 by The Connecticut Project Action Fund:
Housing costs 24% more than the national average
Utilities are 30% higher
Food and healthcare are 9% higher
Democrats’ Failed Policies ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense at this heading)
Democrats in Hartford just voted to extend the corporate tax surcharge through 2028—a move that will reduce money companies could otherwise use to reinvest in operations, create jobs, or expand in Connecticut.
Families and Workers Are Leaving ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense at this heading)
As a small business owner and father, I see firsthand how rising costs erode opportunity and drive families and hardworking young people out of Connecticut.
- According to CT Insider, in the year ending July 1, 2023, the state saw a net outflow of 9,016 people, following a prior loss of 10,081 the year before.
- Between 2011 and 2020, Connecticut lost nearly 220,000 residents to other states—an average of more than 21,000 people per year, according to Census Bureau data summarized by the Yankee Institute.
My Plan in Congress ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense at this heading)
In Congress, I’ll work with local leaders—mayors, first selectmen, town councils, school boards, and chambers of commerce—to make life affordable again and ensure Connecticut becomes a place where people want to live, grow, retire, and seize new opportunities.
Together, we’ll:
- Push for energy policies that lower utility bills
- Deliver tax relief to keep more money in your pocket
- Secure federal investments to strengthen infrastructure, stabilize housing, and grow good-paying jobs
- Make Connecticut more competitive to attract businesses to Connecticut and to great job opportunities.
- Support term limits to end career politicians putting themselves ahead of the people.
And I refuse to bow to extreme green ideology that relies on shame, propaganda, and fear instead of real solutions.
Time for Change ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense at this heading)
For 20 years straight, Democrats have had a grip on our state—and look where it’s gotten us.
I’m not one of them. I’m one of you. Together, let’s take Connecticut back. Let’s Get to Work.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense
Heading as listed on votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense at this heading) · “Dollars and Sense” on votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/dollars-and-sense at this heading)
As a first‑generation American, with a wife and son who immigrated to the United States through the legal process, George has a personal understanding of both the opportunities America offers and the challenges within our immigration system. That experience informs a policy approach focused on building a system that is orderly, predictable, and fair for those who follow the rules.
Today’s system is strained by outdated processes, inconsistent enforcement, and long delays that create confusion, incentivize illegal crossings, and contribute to human suffering. Reform must restore credibility, improve efficiency, and ensure that immigration laws are applied consistently and humanely.
Border security is a necessary part of a functioning system, but it does not mean shutting down lawful trade or travel. A modern economy depends on both. The focus should be on closing gaps that allow illegal activity and exploitation to thrive, while ensuring that legal commerce and legitimate visitors can move efficiently through expanded and modernized ports of entry.
A comprehensive approach should include the following priorities: ↗ (opens votegeorgeforcongress.com/secure-our-borders at this heading)
- Strengthen border security and restore order. Enforcement tools should be used where they are most effective, including physical barriers in appropriate locations, cooperative international arrangements, and improved interior enforcement. At the same time, expanding legal ports of entry can reduce bottlenecks, improve oversight, and make it easier for people and goods to move lawfully.
- Reform and accelerate the asylum process. Individuals fleeing legitimate political or religious persecution should receive timely and fair decisions. Raising standards, reducing backlogs, and increasing adjudication capacity can ensure that valid claims are protected while fraudulent claims are addressed efficiently. Clear consequences for abuse of the system are necessary to maintain integrity and protect resources for those truly in need.
- Replace catch‑and‑release with consistent processing. The system should have sufficient detention and monitoring capacity so that individuals who do not meet legal standards are processed and, when appropriate, removed in a timely and humane manner. Predictability and consistency are essential for both applicants and taxpayers, and they help discourage criminal networks from exploiting our laws.
- Modernize legal immigration pathways. Legal immigration should be accessible and realistic for those who follow the law and want to contribute to our communities. Updating visa systems and reducing excessive wait times can help shift demand away from illegal entry and toward lawful processes, while ensuring that immigration continues to strengthen the country economically, culturally, and socially.
- Support allies and recognize long‑term contributors. Policies should provide a permanent solution for allies who supported U.S. efforts abroad, including Afghan partners who risked their lives alongside American troops. The system should also distinguish between recent unlawful entry and individuals who have lived, worked, and raised families here for many years, allowing for practical and humane policy decisions that reflect both accountability and stability for communities.
Immigration challenges are not confined to the border; they affect communities nationwide, including in Connecticut. Human trafficking, drug trafficking, and gaps in enforcement undermine public safety and public confidence, and they demand better coordination between federal, state, and local authorities and consistent application of the law.
Effective reform requires a commitment to the rule of law, accountability, and a system that works in practice—not just on paper. The goal is to secure the border, uphold legal standards, and maintain an immigration system that reflects both our national interests and long‑standing American values of opportunity, family, and fairness.
source ↗ (opens the page at this passage) · votegeorgeforcongress.com/secure-our-borders
FEC filings, Jul 1, 2025 to Oct 14, 2026 · Official FEC bulk data · committee C00914481
69¢ of every dollar raised has been spent across 7 reports ($218.3K of $315K). Cash on hand went from $17.9K on Sep 30, 2025 to $96.7K on Oct 14, 2026.
| Report | Raised in the period | Spent in the period | Cash on hand at its close |
|---|---|---|---|
| OCTOBER QUARTERLY 2025 through Sep 30, 2025 | $27,295 | $9,407 | $17,888 |
| YEAR-END 2025 through Dec 31, 2025 | $20,990 | $29,359 | $9,519 |
| APRIL QUARTERLY 2026 through Mar 31, 2026 | $16,242 | $19,206 | $6,555 |
| PRE-CONVENTION 2026 through Apr 25, 2026 | $203,435 | $6,378 | $203,612 |
| JULY QUARTERLY 2026 through Jun 30, 2026 | $16,035 | $19,697 | $199,951 |
| OCTOBER QUARTERLY 2026 through Sep 30, 2026 | $29,955 | $105,169 | $124,737 |
| PRE-GENERAL 2026 through Oct 14, 2026 | $1,025 | $29,050 | $96,712 |
Each report’s own period, as filed with the FEC; a report filed again counts once, as its latest copy.
Each loan as the campaign’s report through Oct 14, 2026 lists it, with what is still owed. A loan from an earlier cycle can appear here, and one repaid in full drops off the report, so the list need not add up to the row.
1 endorser listed on George Austin’s own campaign site.
This is the campaign's claim, checked by an editor against its page; the endorsers have not confirmed it to us. Each name opens the campaign’s page with that name highlighted.
Election not held yet · Full results ↗
Every contest for this seat that named this candidate, most recent last; a result is shown once the race is called. Election dates and results from civicAPI (civicapi.org). civicAPI aggregates results from Secretaries of State and equivalent election bodies, and makes its own race calls. civicapi.org ↗
Official FEC filing record for the current cycle. The priorities they publish are quoted from their own site, in their order.
Statements are quoted from these pages exactly. Headings, order and wording are the campaign’s; the record marking is ours.
A donor who gave several times appears once. The 12 largest donors by total given are listed. In all, 74 itemized contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $29.2K.
The largest of the committees is listed. In all, 2 committee contributions were filed this cycle, totaling $1.5K. Counted from the givers' own filings, which can run above the total the campaign itself reports.
Total reported receipts $314,977
Every dollar the committee reported receiving this cycle, split by the source the FEC filing attributes it to. Open a source marked + to see who gave. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
Loading the map
Tap or hover over a state, or focus the map and use the arrow keys, to read its total. Ctrl or ⌘ and scroll to zoom.
92% of the money placed by state came from inside Connecticut: $26.9K of $29.2K.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 69 contributions · 92% | $26,925 |
| 2 contributions · 3.4% | $1,000 |
| 1 contribution · 1.7% | $500 |
| 1 contribution · 1.7% | $500 |
| 1 contribution · 0.9% | $250 |
By the state each donor wrote on the filing, across 5 states and territories. Donors who have given $200 or less this cycle are not itemized, so they cannot be placed on a map. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total.
| Employer as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an employer · 23 contributions · 31% of ranked | $8,650 |
| Written instead of an employer · 2 contributions · 5.4% of ranked | $1,500 |
| 3 contributions · 4.7% of ranked | $1,300 |
| 1 contribution · 3.6% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 2 contributions · 3.6% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 1 contribution · 3.6% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 2 contributions · 3.3% of ranked | $900 |
| 3 contributions · 3.1% of ranked | $850 |
A further $1,500 came from donors whose answer names no employer (N/A), so it is not ranked. Itemized gifts over $200, grouped by the words donors filed: not an industry classification, and a gift from an employee is not a gift from the employer. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($27,902) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.
Money groups spent on their own, not through a campaign. Each ad is filed against the candidate it names, so money attacking an opponent shows on the opponent’s row. Open a candidate to see who spent it.
The campaign also refunded $200 in contributions, which the categories below do not include.
Total itemized disbursements $217,149
Every itemized payment the committee reported this cycle, sorted by what it said each one was for. The categories are ours; the wording they are matched against is the committee’s own. Open a category to read the filed descriptions and who was paid. FEC filings through Oct 14, 2026.
All 200 itemized payments filed this cycle. Spending below the itemization threshold is not filed line by line.
| Name | Amount |
|---|---|
| 12 payments · 19% of all spending | $42,276 |
| 10 payments · 13% of all spending | $28,047 |
| 7 payments · 11% of all spending | $24,937 |
| 1 payment · 4.5% of all spending | $9,858 |
| 5 payments · 4.2% of all spending | $9,250 |
| 4 payments · 4.2% of all spending | $9,105 |
| 5 payments · 4.1% of all spending | $9,000 |
| 1 payment · 3.4% of all spending | $7,500 |
The people, firms and committees paid the most, across every kind of payment. Each share is of everything the committee reported spending this cycle, not only the itemized payments above. A payee that is itself a committee links to its own profile.
| Occupation as filed | Amount |
|---|---|
| Written instead of an occupation · 24 contributions · 35% of ranked | $10,150 |
| 5 contributions · 5% of ranked | $1,450 |
| 3 contributions · 4.8% of ranked | $1,400 |
| 3 contributions · 4.5% of ranked | $1,300 |
| 2 contributions · 3.4% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 1 contribution · 3.4% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 1 contribution · 3.4% of ranked | $1,000 |
| 1 contribution · 3.4% of ranked | $1,000 |
Itemized gifts over $200, grouped by the words donors filed: not an industry classification, and a gift from an employee is not a gift from the employer. The FEC’s grouping also counts joint-fundraising memo lines, so these rows can add up to more than the itemized total. Gifts of $200 or less ($27,902) are not itemized, so no employer or occupation is filed for them.