On June 1, the fate of House Bill 1660 – the last of 10 bills this session attempting to give the state and its citizens some control over high-pressure natural (fracked) gas pipelines – was decided. Not surprisingly, its end was just as ugly as that of its predecessors.
What was surprising, though, was that Democrats did it in.
HB 1660 was good legislation, attempting to give homeowners a fair shake. It would have allowed real flesh citizens asked to sacrifice their homes – for the purported common good but really to increase corporate “citizen” profits – the chance to recover something at least close to their true monetary loss and move on with their lives, in the event an “incineration zone” was planned for their backyards, by requiring the pipeline company to purchase their entire property rather than just an “easement” for the pipeline’s path.
Especially as pipeline companies insist that pipelines do not devalue properties, this should have resulted in only a resale inconvenience to pipeline companies, certainly no greater than the inconvenience of relocating to a second preference home.
But, after listening to Kinder Morgan and business lobbyists, Senate Democrats found this legislation to be insufferable (perhaps pipeline devaluation is not such a myth after all?), and stabbed it thrice – and with it, all New Hampshire Democrats.
First, they irrationally limited its application to homes within 250 feet of a proposed pipeline easement, although pipeline blasts cause death and destruction at far greater distances.
Second, they “poison-pilled” it with an unrelated amendment they knew the House would never accept. Then, when a compromise was, nonetheless, on the floor, they came in for the kill.
Although supported by a majority of Senate Republicans and in need of just two votes from Senate Democrats to pass, all 10 Democratic senators voted it down.
I am a lifelong Democrat, having been raised on the belief that its basic tenets support the “little man” and the environment. Ostensibly opposing HB 1660 because the House would not consider clearly unrelated energy legislation, Senate Democrats, at best, used citizens as sacrificial pawns in childish political gamesmanship.
But their united, unwavering opposition to HB 1660 from the start paints a worse reality: Senate Democrats did not want a “little man” rights impediment to “big dog” profits.
As for the environment, methane gas (the primary component of fracked gas, which also contains carcinogens and numerous unhealthy impurities) is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. By reputable scientific accounts – not political, scientific – we have maybe 10 to 15 years left to produce real reductions in greenhouse gas emissions to possibly prevent the most devastating effects of global warming and climate change.
Increasing our reliance on fracked methane gas is clearly not a step in the right direction. By floods, droughts, famines, catastrophic weather conditions, loss of drinking water, etc., millions of lives are at stake – the most susceptible being the weakest.
But Senate Democrats thumbed their noses at this all-important environmental issue and cleared the path for methane gas pipelines.
Notably, admirably, Litchfield Republican Reps. Frank Byron and Ralph Boehm supported HB 1660. Despite the fact that approximately 100 Litchfield property owners would be affected by the Kinder Morgan pipeline (should it return, a distinct possibility), Litchfield Democratic Sen. Donna Soucy voted it down.
I got her message loud and clear: She does not need my vote. Good, for the next time she comes calling for it, at any level of representation, Sen. Soucy (and the other nine Democratic senators who sent the same message: Dan Feltes, Lou D’Allesandro, Martha Fuller Clark, Andrew Hosmer, Molly Kelly, Bette Lasky, David Pierce, Donna Watters and Jeff Woodburn) should not expect it.
Not without a lot of atoning.
(Richard Husband lives in Litchfield.)