Three years ago, a relatively unknown Greenwich Businessman challenged Connecticut’s Junior Senator and the Democratic Party’s former Vice Presidential candidate in a primary because he believed that the U.S. Government was wasting taxpayer dollars in an ill conceived war in Iraq. To the surprise of many, he won the primary and changed to discourse about the war across our country.

Last week, the New York Times had an article about Ned Lamont considering a run for Governor of Connecticut. It has been followed up by an editorial in the Journal Inquirer.

As a former staffer Mr. Lamont’s Senate bid, I won’t comment on the editorial’s views about Mr. Lamont’s political savvy or the quality of the staff. Instead, I want to focus on this key section:

Connecticut doesn’t need progressive government. Not exactly. It has pretty much had that forever. It needs rethought government, restructured government — a progressive government its citizens can actually afford. Because we can’t afford this one.

That might mean, for example, less top-heavy and top-down government and more actual service: lower taxes, less bureaucracy, fewer state-employed bodies but more help with health insurance, and small-business development, and college costs for people who make less than $30,000.

Is it possible?

Can we at least talk about such a hybrid?

Is anything remotely like this in Ned Lamont’s head?

I don’t have any inside insights into what Mr. Lamont is thinking, nor recommendations about how he can best get his voice heard. Is his work with former legislator, state budget chief and chancellor of the Connecticut State University system, William J. Cibes Jr. on the Blueprint for Connecticut’s Future the best approach? Would running for Governor provide him a better soapbox to talk about how we can address the financial difficulties our state faces? These are issues that Mr. Lamont needs to work out for himself.

Yet Ned Lamont is exactly the person who can lead us in a serious discussion about the issues raised in the Journal Inquirer editorial. He needs to decide what venue is best for him to call us into that discussion and we need to decide if we are ready for such a discussion. I sure hope we are.

Beyond leading the discussion, could Mr. Lamont be an effective chief executive officer of our state? His role as head of Lamont Digital, as well as his previous work as chairman of the State Investment Advisory Council during previous rough financial times for our state leads me to believe he would do a very good job. Everyone talks about the importance of small business in addressing our state’s financial problems. Maybe we need someone who has run a small business to lead our state.

Most importantly, there is the old saying that only Nixon could go to China. Perhaps something is similar today. Perhaps only a successful small businessman with progressive political views from Greenwich can get us to address the financial issues that our state faces. Let us hope that Ned Lamont can help us change the discourse about our state finances the way he helped change the discourse about the war in Iraq.