The Register Citizen (Torrington, CT)
Climate lawsuits won’t help state’s struggling businesses
It’s no secret that Connecticut has a ways to go to be more friendly place to do business. Our state has the second highest tax rate in the U.S. and had three of the slowestgrowing urban job markets in the entire nation over the past five years. According to the Tax Foundation’s 2019 State Business Tax Climate Index, we rank No. 47 overall, coming up dead last in property taxes and scoring similarly poor on other measures. Cities like Hartford, New Haven and Bridgeport are growing slowly relative to other large and midsize cities in the U.S.
The new isn’t all bad, of course. Connecticut’s unemployment has fallen to just 3.8 percent, despite anemic growth in jobs. And while this is cause for some optimism, it comes on the heels of Cigna, a major employer in the health insurance sector, threatening to leave the state just as others have in recent years.
With this in context in mind, one thing should be clear. Connecticut should do everything possible to avoid other negative impacts on the business climate. This includes frivolous litigation targeting manufacturers that could further drive companies from our state.
In recent years, local governments from coast to coast have joined with forprofit trial attorneys to label manufacturers as “public nuisances” when it comes to climate change, attempting to score big paydays by linking manufacturers to rising sea levels and other climate change symptoms. Landmark lawsuits in San Francisco and Oakland, as well as in New York City, have employed the strategy of using courts, as opposed to our elected officials, to litigate climate change. Of course, the real motive is money. City officials are trying to collect money for infrastructure and they are suing energy manufacturers by partnering with profitmotivated trial attorneys seeking a big payday for themselves.
Fortunately, this strategy of labeling manufacturers as “public nuisances” has repeatedly failed in the courts. In fact, three significant cases were dismissed in 2018 by federal judges. In the case of San Francisco and Oakland, Judge William Alsup of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California last June dismissed the climate lawsuits filed by these cities. Alsup wrote that climate change issues “demand the expertise of our government agencies, our diplomats, our Executive, and at least the Senate.” The place for such issues, he reasoned, was certainly not the courts.
Closer by, in New York City, U.S. District for the Southern District of New York Judge John Keenan last July dismissed a climate lawsuit filed by New York City that targeted manufacturers in the name of climate change. Similar to Alsup, Keenan wrote, “Global warming and solutions thereto must be addressed by the other two branches of government.”
These judges are correct. Climate change issues should be decided by our elected officials, not the courts. Not to mention the tremendous danger that suing manufacturers carries in terms of creating a toxic environment for business. The last thing Connecticut needs is frivolous litigation that could further drive companies from our state.
The reality is that there are more meaningful ways to address climate change that involve working jointly with businesses, as opposed to suing them. The evidence says, too, that manufacturers, including the small manufacturers I represent, are leading the way on combating climate change with less emissions and a smaller environmental footprint. They are part of the solution, not part of the problem.
Data shows that, over the past decade, manufacturers have reduced their emissions by 10 percent while increasing their overall value to the economy by 19 percent. In fact, Bloomberg reported in 2017 that the five biggest energy manufacturers reduced their emissions by an average of 13 percent between 2010 and 2015, outpacing the U.S.’s 4.9 percent reduction over the same period. Deploying new technology and working hand in hand with manufacturers, not suing them, is the path to combating climate change.
As I have looked at this issue over the last four or five years, I’ve seen that manufacturers often get blamed but if you look at the actual science, their contribution is minuscule compared to the pollution that is caused by our highways and that which comes over from adjacent states. The other huge problem is that because of the increasingly hot weather, more people are using more air conditioning.
We want data driven policy and cooperation between the government and private industry. We’re made out to be the bad guys when, in today’s world, bad operators are rare and especially in a state like Connecticut and the real issues are far more complex and have very little to do with manufacturing.
Given the bad state of Connecticut’s business climate, state and local leaders should turn away from the courtroom and instead turn towards manufacturers. In the end, that’s a wining strategy for the business environment and the global environment.
The reality is that there are more meaningful ways to address climate change that involve working jointly with businesses, as opposed to suing them.