Darn constituent pressure. Climate nuts had a freak out last November when influential State Representative Mark Cusack suggested Democrats move away from the 2030 climate mandates and adopt the exceedingly taxing measures as goals not mandates, going into the 2026 election year.

So when House Democrats set up a series of member only briefings today with Ways and Means Chair Aaron Michlewitz and Energy Committee Chairman Cusack to discuss the mandates the State House News Service characterized the closed door sessions this way: ““Lawmakers are weighing constituent pressure over rising utility bills against concerns from environmental advocates about weakening statutory decarbonization targets.”

In other words, your monthly tax bill which also includes the price of electricity, has become an electoral liability.

No doubt Speaker Mariano remembers a similar situation of constituent pressure in the mid-1990’s, as MWRA bills rose dramatically in response to the Boston Harbor cleanup. How’d the House handle that: Pass a seemingly important piece of legislation that sounded good to the media, providing cover to at risk incumbents, without any real ratepayer relief.

AI Ethics on Beacon Hill? Somehow the topic of energy policy never came up during a State House panel on AI ethics. Rather regrets that Trump was asserting “national consistency” through an Executive Order issued last month that might preclude states from regulating the burgeoning technology. Still State Senator Michael Moore suggested the rather heavy handed approach of asking not what AI could do, but “what should AI be allowed to do…whose jobs should they be allowed to take.”

Can we start with state legislator jobs?

Elizabeth Mahoney of the Mass High Tech Council admitted that “we worry about” AI companies seeking states with friendlier AI regulatory frameworks.

Gideon Epstein of the ACLU warned against algorithmic decision in the fields of home loans, healthcare and criminal justice. The ACLU favors adjusting the legal standard to prove discrimination, dropping the three part standard of purpose, intent and effect to a singular standard of effect only.

But Tepring Piquado of the National Science Policy Network warned against a rigid regulatory framework “six months from now, AI could be a whole new landscape, could look different.”

Could and should Mass GOP finalize a challenger at the April convention?