To the editor: The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed the “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009,” otherwise known as “cap and trade.” Not surprisingly the ayes included James Langevin and our own Patrick Kennedy (temporarily sprung from rehab just so he could vote).

We’ve all heard how most members of the House never read the bill before voting on it. I’m curious to know whether our town leaders have read this bill. They’d better because, in addition to the inevitable increase in energy costs as well as the cost of everything produced or transported using energy, there is a freight train hurtling their way (and ours) called “greater energy efficiency in building codes.”

If the House bill were to become law, Rhode Island would be required to adopt a yet-to-be-written “National Energy Efficiency Building Code.” The bill provides some hints about what might be included in the code — more energy efficient windows, roofing materials, appliances, etc. The code would be mandatory for new construction and any “substantially renovated building space.” What does “substantially renovated” mean? Does that mean if I remodel my kitchen or add a bathroom I have to replace my roof, windows and furnace as well?

Although not clear from the text of the bill, I’ve heard speculation that homeowners will be required to upgrade their homes consistent with these new standards before they can sell. That would be a logical, albeit economically disastrous, means of enforcing the retrofit program embedded in the bill, the stated purpose of which is to “facilitate the retrofitting of existing buildings across the United States to achieve maximum cost-effective energy efficiency improvements...”

What additional resources would Barrington need to implement and enforce this new building code? The bill would require Barrington to certify compliance based on “independent inspections of a random sample of the new and substantially renovated buildings covered by the code in the preceding year.” Who pays for these inspections? Who conducts them? Does “independent” imply someone other than the town building official?

The goals of this bill are laudable. I am all for some level of shared sacrifice in support of energy conservation and environmental protection. However, is it too much to ask that our representatives actually read the bill before voting on it and that they consider the economic consequences of one of the most massive, intrusive pieces of legislation ever proposed?

Who can answer these questions and the many others likely on folks’ minds? Why not the two gentlemen who voted for it? How about our distinguished senators who will be called upon to consider this bill in the near future? Since our local Democrats seem to have no trouble getting members of our Congressional delegation to visit Barrington when the purpose is fund-raising, let me propose that the Town Council invite them for an opportunity to address questions about this pending legislation — when Mr. Kennedy is feeling up to it of course.

Lawrence O’Connell

Barrington