Latest news with #GreenAmendment
Yahoo
22-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Green Amendment enshrines rights in constitution. This is popular on all sides.
Democratic lawmakers this month reintroduced a Green Amendment to the Wisconsin constitution that would formalize peoples' rights to a clean, safe, and healthy environment. The bill comes as there is deep gridlock at the state capitol, which is a barrier to our rights to clean water protection. The Green Amendment is a sign that we need a path forward to meaningfully address critical water issues in Wisconsin. The good news is that many voters in Wisconsin have already voted for their desire for the state to recognize their rights to a clean environment. Clean Water Now referendums in 2021 and 2022 showed strong, nonpartisan success when voters were directly asked on their ballots how much they care about Wisconsin's water. Opinion: MPS is on the brink of collapse. New board leader shouldn't be chosen in secrecy. The question was simple: "Should the State of Wisconsin establish a right to clean water to protect human health, the environment, and the diverse cultural and natural heritage of Wisconsin?" Here's what happened: In the spring of 2021, voters in the counties of Marquette (73%), Portage (77%) and Wood (76%) approved referendums. In the spring of 2022, voters in the counties of Eau Claire (79%) and La Crosse (86%) followed suit. In the fall of 2022, voters in the counties of Adams (79.7%), Bayfield (80%), Green (84%), Juneau (79.6%), and Outagamie (79.5%) also approved referendums. County governments have stepped up to pass resolutions in support, too: Monroe County in 2022; Ashland and Marinette counties in 2023. When voters are asked if they believe in the right to clean water, they vote yes in strong numbers that transcend political party lines. However, through a bad deal with Gov. Evers over shared revenue funding, state legislators took away citizens' rights to add advisory referendums to local ballots. Though state leaders took away our right to voice our opinions directly on our ballots, they can't deny the overwhelming, nonpartisan success of the Clean Water Now referendums or our basic right to clean water. The people of Wisconsin don't have to wait for the passage of a Green Amendment to make progress on protecting Wisconsin's clean water and heritage of our beloved natural spaces. Our next state budget has several key issues legislators can support for the health of people and our environment, such as: PFAS pollution, including the $143.6 million in Evers' proposal for the DNR to support PFAS monitoring and remediation across Wisconsin. PFAS is truly a statewide problem that impacts people's drinking water in big cities and small towns alike. Lead pipes, where the budget allocates $200 million to support lead service line replacement through the DNR's Safe Drinking Water Loan program as well as $725.9 million in revenue bonds that will fund state match requirements and expand loan opportunities through the Drinking Water Loan Program and the Clean Water Fund Program. Stewardship of land and water with legislators having the power to renew and fund the Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Program which is wildly popular across the political spectrum of voters. Opinion: Changes to Social Security would cost average Wisconsin resident $7,000 a year While we wait for a Green Amendment, we need legislators to take action today to protect our drinking water and respect what voters across party lines support. Allison Werner is executive director of the River Alliance of Wisconsin. This article originally appeared on Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Lawmakers need to support clean environment in state budget | Opinion
Yahoo
14-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Not asking for a perfect world – just a livable one
Evalina Sain, an Omaha Central High School student and executive director of Students for Sustainability in Nebraska, speaks at a rally of mostly young people calling for adoption of a Green Amendment in the state. (Paul Hammel/Nebraska Examiner) Pure water. Clean air. Healthy soil. A livable environment. These things should be guaranteed as integral to the well-being of our beautiful state, as a well-functioning government or the Earth spinning on its axis. Yet for decades, the workings of fossil fuels and carbon emissions have made things like a clean environment precarious. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, climate change has exacerbated the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events to the point at which, in 2024 alone, extreme weather cost Nebraska $2 billion in damages. Climate change is costing Nebraska business. It's costing us health. It's even costing us lives. And it's making countless Nebraskans wonder: What will happen when the droughts keep killing our crops? When the heat waves keep forcing us indoors? When the summer storms keep destroying our homes? That's why we and others want the Nebraska Legislature to consider Legislative Resolution 22CA, also known as the Green Amendment. LR 22CA, introduced by State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln, states that 'all people have a right to a clean and healthy environment' and that 'the state, and each subdivision thereof, shall serve as trustee of the natural resources of Nebraska.' The Green Amendment would promote policies to stabilize our climate — stability that Nebraska desperately needs. While Nebraska does have some provisions related to the environment in its constitution, there is no outright affirmation of what we all know to be true: that every Nebraskan deserves access to a safe, healthy environment. The Green Amendment would change that. Additionally, the Green Amendment would unlock actions to protect Nebraska's life-giving natural resources. Three states, New York, Pennsylvania and Montana, have versions of a Green Amendment, and in Montana, a group of young people used this once-symbolic amendment to push for real climate action in their state. In Held v. State of Montana, 16 young plaintiffs sued the Montana state government over its inaction on climate change, stating that not acting on such a crisis restricted access to a clean environment and was therefore unconstitutional. They won. This example from Montana shows what a driving force a Green Amendment can be — legally, politically and socially. Just like in Montana, a Green Amendment in Nebraska would allow young Nebraskans to start uniting around climate action. It would allow us to use the court system to hold corporations and the government accountable for climate action. It would empower Nebraskans of all ages to work with our communities and local governments toward a sustainable future. In fact, we're already starting. The youth environmental group Omaha Students for Sustainability organized a rally on Feb. 26th, along with organizations like the Nebraska Sierra Club, to show our support for LR 22CA. Dozens of proponents testified at the hearing before the Natural Resources Committee that day, and their testimonies made it clear that the Green Amendment would not only promote climate action, but also would demonstrate how much the government cares about the futures of young Nebraskans. Forward-thinking legislation is more crucial now than ever, especially with Nebraska's oft-discussed 'brain drain.' The University of Nebraska at Omaha reported that in 2022, roughly 31,600 people 25 years of age and older migrated out of Nebraska. Young people are consistently leaving our state for reasons ranging from a lack of economic opportunity to political discontent. A Green Amendment would be a major step toward stopping this brain drain. Cementing the legal right to a clean environment would show young Nebraskans that their elected officials, no matter their party, prioritize the future of our state and the people living in it. I don't think anyone disagrees that all Nebraskans deserve a clean and healthy environment. They may disagree on how to achieve that goal. Not everyone, understandably, thinks it should be up to the government to create a perfect world. But we're not asking for a perfect world. We're asking for a livable one, and I think the government has a responsibility to provide at least that. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
27-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Young people advocate for state ‘Green Amendment' to protect the environment
Evalina Sain, an Omaha Central High School student and executive director of Students for Sustainability in Nebraska, speaks at a rally Wednesday of mostly young people calling for adoption of a Green Amendment in the state (Paul Hammel/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — A group of young people descended on the Capitol on Wednesday in hopes of convincing state lawmakers to support adding a 'Green Amendment' to the Nebraska Constitution. Such an amendment — which would require approval by Nebraska voters — would give citizens a legal right to a 'clean and healthy environment,' including 'pure water,' clean air and 'healthy soils.' Advocates said the language would grant citizens and communities a pathway to sue state regulators if they weren't taking steps to protect the environment, or had taken steps that harm it. Some cited the example of the AltEn ethanol plant in Mead, which had skirted state environmental rules for years before the state eventually shut it down in 2021. 'We are here to fight for the right of a livable environment,' said Sara Holler, a Washington, D.C.-based activist with the youth-led environmental group, Capitol Hill Academy. 'The future for our generation should not be up for debate,' added Lake Liao, the founder and executive director of that organization, who said the younger generation would have to live with the consequences of failing to protect the environment. But detractors of the effort, including Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, indicated such an amendment would empower governmental entities to 'destroy private property rights.' 'Ill-defined constitutional amendments are dangerous to Nebraskans,' said Laura Strimple, the governor's spokeswoman. Holler and Liao were among speakers attending a rally and legislative hearing Wednesday over the proposed constitutional amendment. State Sen. George Dungan of Lincoln is the main sponsor of the proposal, Legislative Resolution 22CA. He said Wednesday that he introduced the measure after being inspired by the activism of young people to protect the environment. Three states, Montana, New York and Pennsylvania, currently have green constitutional amendments, with at least nine states, including Iowa, considering similar proposals. On Wednesday, more than 20 high school students with the Nebraska affiliate of the national group, Students for Sustainability, and members of Sustain UNL, a group based at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, wore bright-green T-shirts and carried placards reading 'No Nature? No Future' and 'Protect Our Planet.' Mia Perales, a UNL student studying environmental engineering, said a Green Amendment would allow citizens in her home neighborhood of South Omaha a way to force regulators to address odor and wastewater issues associated with meat processing plants there. Evalina Sain, an Omaha Central High School student and executive director of the local Students for Sustainability chapter, said Nebraska loses young college graduates because the state hasn't embraced more progressive steps to protect the environment. Investment in clean energy and the environment, she added, also provides jobs. But the lone opponent to testify in person against LR 22CA during the legislative hearing, predicted that lawsuits spawned by a Green Amendment would cost the state billions in court judgments and legal costs. 'Liberal lawyers,' according to Omaha attorney David Begley, would file dozens of lawsuits claiming that the state had failed to protect citizens from contamination in groundwater and chemicals. 'In my opinion, this is the most extreme and expensive bill that has ever been offered in the Unicameral,' Begley said. 'Our budget deficit will skyrocket.' He said it would be cheaper to ship proponents of the Green Amendment to 'Santa Monica' (California), where they would discover 'mankind can't control the climate.' Proponents said Green Amendments have not opened 'the floodgates' to more lawsuits in other states or inspired frivolous legal action. Dungan said states with such amendments have seen an average of three to 10 new lawsuits a year. Senators on the Legislature's Natural Resources Committee asked several questions about what a Green Amendment would allow. State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward, for instance, asked whether it would allow her to sue neighbors if the nitrate levels in her groundwater exceeded safe levels for drinking. Sheridan Macy, an Omaha native and lawyer who drafted the proposed amendment for Nebraska, said it would allow the senator to file a lawsuit against state and local regulators who might have failed to take steps to avoid nitrate contamination in local aquifers. 'Nebraska is a great place to grow up and raise a family,' Macy said. '(But) if we do not take steps to protect our environment, that will change.' The committee took no action on LR 22CA after the hearing. Macy said if the Legislature fails to act, people would consider an initiative petition drive to put the issue on the ballot. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
04-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Green amendment gets grilled, but moves forward
Maya van Rossum is the founder of the nonprofit Green Amendments for the Generation and author of The Green Amendment: The People's Fight for a Clean, Safe, and Healthy Environment. She is working to pass Green Amendments in New Mexico and across the country. (Courtesy photo) A proposed so-called 'Green Amendment' to enshrine a right to 'clean and healthy air, water, soil and environment' in the New Mexico Constitution moved through its first committee Monday, but not without bipartisan questioning signaling a possible uphill battle. The committee voted 6-3 along party lines to approve the bill, but as a 'no recommendation' vote, which means the committee will neither endorse nor oppose the bill, which heads to the House Energy and Natural Resources Committee. House Joint Resolution 3, sponsored by Sen. Antoinette Sedillo Lopez (D-Albuquerque) and Democratic Reps. Joanne Ferrary of Las Cruces, Patricia Roybal Caballero of Albuquerque and Farmington's Joseph Franklin Hernadez, if passed, would place a constitutional amendment on the next general election ballot. HJR3 would allow New Mexico voters, in turn, to adopt additional language for the state's constitution and add rights to 'to clean and healthy air, water, soil and environments; healthy native flora, fauna and ecosystems; a safe climate; and the preservation of the natural, cultural, scenic and healthful qualities of the environment.' Maya van Rossum, an environmental lawyer and author who has pressed for green amendments in other states, as well as in New Mexico previously, said the amendment would put environmental rights on 'equal footing' with civil rights and property rights. With the federal government poised to roll back environmental standards, HJR3, if passed by the Legislature and then adopted by voters, would provide the state more control, said Cliff Villa, a University of New Mexico environmental law professor and senior climate policy advisor. 'The New Mexico Green Amendment does not depend on the federal government to protect our health and environment,' Villa told the committee, ' it allows New Mexicans to protect New Mexicans and exercise existing authorities across our state government.' Public comment supporting the bill came from representatives in environmental nonprofits, church groups, teachers and Democratic party members from across the state. As in years past, critics expressed concern that a Green Amendment could thwart developments, and put the state at risk for increased financial liability from litigation. Opposition speaking on Monday included lobbyists for the New Mexico Chamber of Commerce and realtor groups, the Cattle Growers Association – which often oppose environmental bills – as well as several clean energy companies. Both Pattern Energy, a wind, solar and transmission construction company – which is constructing the controversial SunZia transmission line – and Interwest Energy Alliance, which promotes wind and solar in the intermountain west, spoke against the bill, saying the groups are concerned the amendment could be used to block development of renewable energy projects. 'The language in the proposal is so broad, neither government-decision makers nor private developers can accurately guess what it requires, leading to incredible inefficiencies, uncertainty and legal risk in the context of renewable energy development,' said Deborah Condit, a lobbyist for Interwest Energy Alliance. The advocates tried to counter concerns about renewable energy projects, noting that nuisance laws, not green amendments, had been used in some of the examples critics cited. 'We have to acknowledge that clean energy projects are already being challenged under a wide variety of theories,' van Rossum told the committee. 'But with the passage of HJR3, as long as government fulfills their duty to fully assess and minimize environmental impacts, government and proponents of clean energy projects would be better prepared to avoid and defend against community concerns.' SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE Lawmakers asked about the potential for higher liability costs or increases in lawsuits against state or local governments should the constitutional amendment be adopted. Sedillo Lopez countered by saying the amendment 'is not a way for people to get monetary damages, it's a way for people to ensure that the state of New Mexico protects our air, land and water.' Rep. Cynthia Borrego (D-Albuquerque) voted to pass the bill, but said there may need to be further amending to assuage renewable energy industry concerns. 'I think there are significant questions in my mind still regarding local agencies, state agencies, and the questions they've raised,' she told the sponsors. 'I think those questions need to be answered, and hopefully will be, in the next committee.' A similar version of the amendment has been introduced for the past five years, but has never made it beyond committees on either side of the Roundhouse. If passed by New Mexico voters, the state would join Montana, New York and Pennsylvania as the fourth to have a Green Amendment. Debate and comments over the bill stretched the hearing to the full two hours, meaning the rest of the committee's agenda – which included expanding felony voting rights and installing a climate health program – got bumped to Wednesday's meeting. With a slew of bills assigned to the remaining agendas, the committee's chair, Rep. D. Wonda Johnson (D-Rehoboth) warned the committee may have to meet over the weekend. van Rossum, in a call with Source NM Monday, said she was satisfied with the committee outcome, given that the ultimate goal is to place the proposal before voters. She also said that the Green Amendment has not been used to stop any clean energy projects, calling statements otherwise a 'scare tactic.' 'Really what's happening here is there really is a misrepresentation of what are the impacts or the implications of the New Mexico Green Amendment, particularly we hear a lot about advancing clean energy,' she said. 'It's really a line of misinformation that's being used to…dissuade people from being in support based on false claims.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
