State Lawmakers Prepare to Force Fossil Fuel Companies to Pay for Climate Change

Vermont and California are moving to redirect the financial burden of climate change back to those who helped cause it.

By Paul Blest, More Perfect Union

As it stands today, you, the taxpayer, will have to foot the bill for climate change, an ever-growing tab rapidly coming due in multiple ways. But in several states, lawmakers are asking: what if the companies that caused climate change pay for it instead?

California became the latest on Wednesday, as a bill from Sen. Caroline Menjivar, SB 1497, cleared its first committee hurdle. “We’ve heard the phrase ‘you break it, you buy it,’” Menjivar told her fellow lawmakers Wednesday. “That is exactly the approach SB 1497 is looking to take: the top polluters are responsible for breaking so much of our environment, so now they’re going to have to pay for it.” 

Vermont could soon become the first state to pass a law altogether demanding payment from oil companies for the damages to the climate caused by fossil fuel companies. Earlier this month, Vermont’s bill passed the Senate with support not only from Democrats and Progressives (the state’s third major political party), but a majority of Republicans as well. The legislation now heads to the Vermont House, where it received a committee hearing on Wednesday.

Climate “superfund” bills are gaining momentum around the country, with lawmakers in five states introducing bills that would assess penalties to the companies for damages caused by their products over 20 years, from 2000 to 2020. 

The superfund bills are notably distinct from the dozens of ongoing state and local efforts to sue oil and gas companies for covering up that they knew about the harms of their work to the climate decades ago. Vermont is one such state suing Exxon, Shell, and other fossil fuel giants; its litigation is led by Attorney General Charity Clark, who has also endorsed the superfund bill. 

Watch our deep dive into California’s landmark climate suit against oil companies:

During Wednesday’s hearing in Burlington, lawmakers heard from Vermonters advocating for the bill including Lauren Hierl, a Montpelier city councilor who argued the new superfund could be used for climate and infrastructure resilience including wastewater. 

“The climate science is very clear: in a warmer world, flooding is anticipated to be more common and more severe in the coming years,” Hierl said. “We’re massively underresourced as we try to take on these challenging issues alone, community by community.”

Vermont is moving aggressively on the bill after a devastating flood last summer, which killed more than a dozen people and is projected to cost more than $2 billion for recovery. “We expect floods, and we have managed around them for decades. But the magnitude of the floods are changing,” Andy Jones, the manager of a community farm in Burlington that lost $200,000 in crops due to the flood, told lawmakers.

The bills are colloquially dubbed “superfunds” in reference to the decades-old federal environmental law that taxed chemical and petroleum companies to create a superfund to clean up land contaminated by hazardous substances. In California, Menjivar’s bill targets companies “responsible for more than one billion metric tons of covered fossil fuel emissions, in aggregate globally.”

The method of determining financial responsibility varies based on the legislation; Massachusetts and New York are seeking $75 billion from the companies over 25 years, while supporters of a bill in Maryland said it could generate $9 billion over the next decade. Vermont’s bill would task the state treasurer with determining the exact amount. (In contrast, a study published in the journal Nature on Wednesday calculates climate change’s economic impact will reach about $38 trillion a year by 2049.)

While legislation is moving along in Vermont and California, the movement for superfund bills faced a setback this week when Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul and legislative leaders appeared to leave New York’s iteration of the bill, which passed the state Senate last June, out of the budget. The bills introduced in Massachusetts last year and Maryland earlier this year have seen little movement.

Passing superfund laws would undoubtedly result in litigation from the fossil fuel companies, which Vermont Gov. Phil Scott has cited as a reason why the state shouldn’t go first; Exxon’s $350 billion-plus in assets dwarfs Vermont’s $8.5 billion annual state budget. But for proponents of the bills, there are severe consequences to not waging that fight.

“Who’s picking up the tab for the devastation caused by climate change? We are,” Sen. Anne Watson, the sponsor of the Vermont bill, told her fellow lawmakers last month. “Everyday Vermonters, my constituents and yours, are picking up the tab for property damage, for increased health care costs, lost crops, habitat destruction, and the list goes on.”

What else is happening in the states

• The Alabama Senate has passed a bill prohibiting state subsidies for companies that don’t voluntarily recognize employee unions, instead forcing them to an election even if a majority have stated their intent to unionize. Georgia and Tennessee have passed similar ALEC-backed laws. Workers at a Mercedes plant near Birmingham, AL will vote on unionizing beginning May 13, and other Alabama autoworkers could join them.

• Early data on New York’s new minimum-wage law for delivery gig workers found that the city’s 60,000 app-based delivery drivers are making, cumulatively, $16 million per week more than they were before the law passed. Workers still have concerns over tipping and lockouts, however.

• After passing a law last year to effectively pre-empt local crypto mining regulations in Arkansas, the Republican-controlled state Senate has passed a bill that would tighten oversight and impose fees for “extraordinary energy use.”

• Bayer is lobbying lawmakers in states including, Iowa, Missouri, and Idaho to pass legislation shielding the Roundup maker from lawsuits alleging that the weedkiller caused cancer.

• Arizona House Republicans once again blocked an effort to repeal the state’s Civil War-era abortion ban, reinstituted last week by the state Supreme Court. 

• Virginia lawmakers will meet next month in a special session to pass a budget, following months of Gov. Glenn Youngkin slamming the Democratic-controlled legislature. During the regular session, Senate Democrats killed Youngkin’s plan for a $2 billion NBA/NHL arena in northern Virginia. 

• Telecommunications giants like Verizon and AT&T are aggressively lobbying state governments to weaken federal rules that require them to lower poor customers’ internet bills in order to access funding from a $42 billion federal program to expand broadband access.  

What we’re reading

• Alabama Mine Cited for 107 Federal Safety Violations Since Home Explosion Led to Grandfather’s Death, Grandson’s Injuries. Where Are State Officials? | Lee Hedgepeth, Inside Climate News

• The invisible seafaring industry that keeps the Internet afloat | Josh Dzieza, The Verge

• Why you’re paying more at the store while executive profits soar | Sarah Krueger, WRAL

• Farmers’ long fight for the Right to Repair gets little traction in John Deere’s home state of Illinois | Jennifer Bamberg, Investigate Midwest

• An insurer and a private equity team up to provide “primary care” | Adam Gaffney, Health Class