Green Amendment is no magic wand

Dominick Calsolaro’s commentary (“On Nov. 2, affirm that a clean environment is a human right,” Oct. 22, urges voting for the “simple, fifteen-word” proposed state constitutional amendment guaranteeing a right to clean air and water and a healthy environment. He says the amendment will prevent government entities from “approving corporate projects over the health and safety of citizens,” saying they’d have “to put people first.” There would be no more horror stories like Hoosick Falls, Ezra Prentice Homes, Rensselaer’s Dunn landfill or Norlite. This sounds like a magic wand, solving all our environmental problems, so we can march forward into the bright sunshine of a new day.

If only it were that easy. This is just a feelgood measure, nothing more. Its words are so general they mean nothing, requiring nothing of anyone. Applying its lofty language to nitty-gritty issues like Calsolaro’s horror stories would be very arguable. There are always trade-offs. Indeed, “putting people first” can conflict with environmental concerns.

Meanwhile, state agencies will likely spend extra time and money giving lip service to the amendment. Needing more state workers to crank out more empty

verbiage.

And, as Calsolaro points out, the amendment will facilitate litigation. Providing new legal tools for NIMBY-ISM and obstructionism, as if New York’s economy is not already hamstrung by a welter of business-unfriendly measures.

I’m all in favor of a healthy environment. It requires hard work, facing painful trade-offs. This amendment is a cynical excuse for not actually doing anything. It’s fine to say we have a “human right” to a healthy environment, but it has to be paid for. There’s no free lunch.

Frank S. Robinson

Albany