Chris Herb’s recent opinion piece, “Pair of CT bills trample privacy, can spawn litigation,” is a misleading attempt to stir fear and division while ignoring the urgent need to address Connecticut’s environmental and energy challenges. Rather than trampling on privacy or spawning frivol ous lawsuits, Senate Joint Resolution No. 36 and House Bill 6780 are critical steps toward ensuring a cleaner, healthier future for all Connecticut residents. At a time when federal environmental regulations are being dismantled at an alarming rate, it is more important than ever to empower the people of Connecticut to take action in protecting their environment. Without strong local and state-level protections, our communities will be left vulnerable to pollution, climate disasters, and corporate negligence. These bills ensure that Connecticut residents have the tools needed to defend their right to a safe and healthy environment, even as federal safeguards are being stripped away. The proposed constitutional amendment in SJR 36 is not a threat to homeowners —it is a safeguard for our right to clean air, water, and soil. The Connecticut Environmental Rights Amendment would not create a legal free-for-all where neighbors sue each other over personal choices. It would not create any new right to sue private citizens or businesses. It would set the framework to hold the government accountable for actions that harm the environment and public health, whether directly or through failure to uphold environmental standards through permitting or enforcement. Importantly, Green Amendments, like the Connecticut Environmental Rights Amendment, do not lead to an onslaught of frivolous litigation. In states like Pennsylvania and Montana, where Green Amendments have been enacted, there has been no wave of baseless lawsuits. Instead, the cases brought forward have involved real harm to the environment and public health and have helped shape the understanding of constitutional environmental protections. Furthermore, existing legal mechanisms already prevent frivolous litigation. Attorneys are bound by ethical and legal standards that prohibit advancing baseless lawsuits, with enforcement measures ranging from fines to implications for their law licenses in extreme cases. Lawyers who pursue frivolous cases risk damaging their reputations and losing clients, providing yet another safeguard against misuse of the law. The Connecticut Environmental Rights Amendment would empower the people to demand environmental protection from state and local government. Connecticut has already seen the devastating effects of climate change on our communities, from severe flooding, agricultural losses, and health disparities. Ensuring legal avenues exist to protect environmental rights is not only reasonable but necessary. House Bill 6780, meanwhile, is about transparency, not surveillance. The assertion that this bill will allow neighbors to spy on each other’s energy use is an exaggeration meant to distract from the real issue: the need for data-driven solutions to improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions. By making energy data more accessible, this bill empowers consumers, policymakers, and businesses to make informed choices that will benefit Connecticut’s economy and environment in the long run. The idea that this will lead to government intrusion into homes is pure fearmongering. Furthermore, claims that this bill compromises customer privacy to help the government “monitor” individuals in the name of climate goals are misleading. The purpose of HB 6780 is to provide aggregate energy use data, not personal surveillance. Similar data-sharing policies exist in other states and have helped identify opportunities for energy efficiency improvements, lower costs for consumers, and inform policies that benefit residents. This bill does not expose private home details but rather enables better decision-making at a time when energy affordability and sustainability are pressing concerns. It is telling that the strongest opposition to these bills comes from fossil fuel industry representatives rather than Connecticut residents concerned about their future. As we move toward a cleaner, more sustainable energy system, it is understandable that entrenched interests would resist change. But the reality is that Connecticut must act now to mitigate climate change and protect public health. Instead of spreading fear about baseless hypothetical lawsuits and privacy invasions, we should be focusing on how these bills will help build a future where clean air, water, and the people are protected, and where we have the tools to transition away from polluting energy sources. Connecticut residents deserve policies that prioritize their well-being over industry profits.  Julianna Larue of Rocky Hill is an Organizer for the Sierra Club Connecticut.   ...read more read less