NJBIA is strongly opposing a bill scheduled for a vote today that will force fossil fuel companies to retroactively pay billions for their undefined role in climate change, which will exacerbate New Jersey’s affordability crisis by adding costs for residents to fill their tanks and heat their homes.

Bill A-4696 (Allen, D-32; Hall, D-28; Collazos-Gill, D-27) is up for a vote in the Assembly Environment, Natural Resources and Solid Waste Committee.

NJBIA Deputy Chief Government Affairs Officer Ray Cantor said the Climate Superfund Act legislation bill strikes the unlikely balance of being both loud in its lack of constitutionality and tone-deaf to the affordability challenges facing New Jersey residents.

“It’s one thing to push an ideological agenda to retroactively punish companies that provide a legal, necessary product that has been instrumental in our collective survival and prosperity,” Cantor said.

“It’s another thing to try to achieve it at a time of alarmingly escalating taxes and energy costs that will without question result in higher costs when we fill up our cars or heat up our homes.

“It’s not good policy nor is it good for our cost of living. Supporters of this type of bill don’t seem to realize or care that it’s New Jersey residents who wind up feeling the pain.”

In December, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed a law that forces fossil fuel companies to pay $75 billion in damages over 25 years for their unspecified role in climate change.

Last month, New York was sued by 22 other U.S. states for making it law.

Additionally, last week, the New York State Business Council, the American Petroleum Institute and the National Mining Association filed a lawsuit in Manhattan federal court claiming Hochul and New York lawmakers exceeded their authority for passing the law. The filing asked for the law to be deemed unconstitutional.

Similarly, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the American Petroleum Institute filed a federal lawsuit against the state of Vermont, which was the first state to enact a climate Superfund law -- despite not producing or refining fossil fuels.

“At its core, these acts are simply cash grab attempts,” Cantor said. “There is so much to legitimately legally challenge with these laws or bills you almost don’t know where to start.

“We eagerly await to see how these lawsuits fare. And in our view, these climate acts have a long, long way to go to pass legal muster.

“Beyond the fact that the courts generally disfavor the retroactive application of laws, especially when such application would be punitive, you don’t need a law degree to know that everything about modern society, from life expectancy to the food we eat, the clothes we wear, and the cars we drive, are dependent on fossil fuels.”