Last month, an opinion piece criticized my record on environmental issues. I agree with the writer on one important point, protecting our environment is essential—future generations depend on it. But her piece misrepresented my voting record. Legislators should be scrutinized, but that scrutiny should be based on facts, not selective scoring or political spin.
The Connecticut League of Conservation Voters (CTLV) gave me a 39 percent score based on 7 out of 18 possible votes. That number is misleading. As a member of the Environment Committee, I was scored on five bills that never reached the House floor. House leadership chose not to call them for a vote—an indication they lacked broader support. My NO votes in committee reflected that reality.
CTLV also dinged me for a NO vote on the HB 6917 in committee, even though I voted YES after it was amended on the floor—though the Senate ultimately failed to take it up. That’s how legislation evolves. It’s important to note that legislators not on the committee weren’t scored on these six early-stage bills. If scored equally, my CTLV rating would be 55 percent—a majority alignment.
I voted in favor of six bills that CTLV supported: SB 4–Clean Energy, SB 9–Climate Resiliency, HB 5013–Invasive Plants, HB 5019–Battery Recycling, HB 6917–Solid Waste Management, HB 7174–Riparian Buffer Zones.
The opinion piece implied I opposed some of these bills. That is false. Moreover, I was recently appointed co-chair of the Riparian Area Working Group by the Environment Committee chair—further evidence of my engagement and leadership on environmental policy.
I disagreed with CTLV on five bills.
HB 5004–Climate Mandates: This bill set aggressive net-zero carbon goals by 2050, which would drive up electricity costs across the state. HB 6957–Solar Panel Installations: A multi-subject bill that overrides self-governance of condo associations regarding solar panels. HJ 67–Conservation and Development Plan: Contains alarmist projections of a 20-inch sea level rise by 2050, compared to the best data which predicts three to four inches. HJ 68–PURA Commissioner Reappointment: I opposed the reappointment of Marisa Gillette, who made multiple decisions that increased electricity bills through the “Public Benefits” charge. HB 7231–Sunday Hunting on Private Land: My support for this bill was rooted in the principle of property rights.
I will continue to weigh facts, core principles and the voices of my constituents when casting votes. Outside interest group “scores” will not dictate my decisions. Environmental protection is a real and urgent concern—but so is the need for legislation that balances benefits with costs, respects property rights and considers unintended consequences. That’s the kind of thoughtful leadership the people of the 62nd District deserve.
The writer suggested voters are ready for a new representative. That’s her right to say—but it’s premature. There is still another legislative session ahead. I remain committed to doing the work, listening to all voices and serving every constituent—including the writer.