In June, anti-energy New Jersey legislators and activist groups made a frantic push to pass a climate superfund bill before the general assembly took its summer recess. That effort ultimately stalled as leaders of the proposed legislation struggled to find enough votes before the deadline. [some emphasis, links added]
Now, with the general assembly returning to normal business in just a few weeks, business and labor groups are once again raising red flags about a potential new campaign to pass this legislation that would have profoundly negative impacts on the state’s economy and energy prices for consumers.
In a column published in the USA Today/Gannett NJ Network, Deputy Chief Government Affairs Officer Ray Cantor of the New Jersey Business & Industry Association put it bluntly:
“While supporters offer this bill as a free, $50 billion lunch to feed the state coffers, the facts are that it would undeniably add to the gas and energy costs of all New Jersey residents and ratepayers during our energy affordability crisis. …
“But beyond that, supporters never acknowledged how the legislation was being pushed in 14 other states, thus adding to costs of energy manufacturers beyond New Jersey.
“Nor did they ever mention what would happen when, not if, future penalties were assessed after the first $50 billion hit here in the Garden State.”
Opposition isn’t only coming from business leaders but also from labor groups.
In a separate column for BINJE, William Mullen, President of the New Jersey State Building and Construction Trades Council, said the bill would hurt good-paying union and construction jobs:
“Our members also understand that industrial investment does not happen in a vacuum. New Jersey competes every day with other states for advanced manufacturing facilities, energy projects, logistics operations, data centers and other large-scale developments.
“Businesses considering those investments evaluate taxes, energy prices, operating expenses, permitting requirements and the predictability of a state’s legal and regulatory environment. A novel retroactive liability program creates another layer of uncertainty for companies making investment decisions that may extend decades into the future.
“That uncertainty directly affects working people.”
Cantor further wrote that the bill attempts to penalize companies that everyone in New Jersey relies upon, including supporters:
“But many see it for what it actually is: one of the most anti-business bills in state history, retroactively penalizing New Jersey energy manufacturers $50 billion for legally providing fossil fuels — an essential product used by all New Jerseyans, including supporters of the bill.
“The negative economic impact this bill would have on affordability and jobs in New Jersey cannot be understated.”
While Mullen said that citizens of the state are at least owed a full economic analysis of the bill so it’s clear what the impacts are:
“The Legislature should not advance A3735 without an independent economic impact analysis, a comprehensive workforce assessment, a fiscal review and a thorough evaluation of the legal risks. Policymakers should know how the proposal would affect energy prices, public infrastructure costs, industrial investment and union employment before creating a $50 billion retroactive liability program.”
Finally, Cantor pointed out that previous analysis has shown that New Jersey residents would face significantly higher energy costs:
“The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform has already found that the average New Jersey household would end up paying an extra $14,000 over the 20-year life of the bill.”
Bottom Line
The legislators and anti-energy activist groups pushing the climate superfund law didn’t concede defeat earlier this summer.
Now, with the general assembly poised to return next month, both business and labor groups are raising the red flag that a second push to pass the bill could be coming, with workers and consumers paying the price.
Read more at EID Climate
