NJBIA will testify against the controversial Climate Superfund Act and the proposed committee amendments to it that are scheduled for a vote today, arguing they will have a devastating impact on New Jersey’s two remaining refineries, consumers and the business community at-large.
The bill, S-3545, would retroactively penalize New Jersey companies tens of billions of dollars for providing fossil fuels. Proposed amendments would change the name of the bill, increase retroactive liability to $50 billion, and provide an alleged liability exemption for New Jersey refineries.
“The proposed substitutions of this bill do not change our opinion on it in any way, shape or form,” NJBIA Deputy Chief Government Affairs Officer Ray Cantor said in a statement prior to the Senate Budget & Appropriations Committee hearing where S-3545 is one of more than 75 bills up for a vote in the final days of the lame-duck session.
“The refineries that are supposedly exempted, of which we only have two remaining in New Jersey, are still very much exposed to damages,” Cantor said. “The language semantics does not change the fact that the bill will still have enormous financial impacts to those companies, which contribute $8.4 billion to the national economy, pay $1.4 billion in state and local taxes, pay $4 billion in labor income, and support 35,700 jobs in the state.”
If the bill becomes law, New Jersey residents will experience major price increases at the pump and job creators will be put at financial risk, Cantor said. Passage of the bill would have a chilling effect on the business community knowing retroactive penalties can be levied against it for providing a legal and essential product.
“This bill remains completely unjust and likely unconstitutional,” Cantor said. “We wholly reject the changes and continue to urge the Legislature to either vote ‘no’ on the bill or drop it altogether in lame duck.”
Earlier this week, the New Jersey Business Coalition sent a letter to all members of the Legislature detailing the business community’s concerns. The letter, signed by more than 100 organizations, cited four reasons to oppose the bill: affordability, impact to jobs and the economy, unfairness, and the poor message it sends to the business community that complying with the law can nonetheless result in substantial liabilities.
