Cracks emerge among Democrats as $50 billion climate superfund bill advances

A proposed $50 billion climate superfund advanced through the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee on Sunday, but the debate exposed growing cracks within Democratic ranks, raising fresh questions about whether one of the Legislature’s most ambitious environmental proposals has the votes to reach the governor’s desk.

Despite attracting 19 Senate co-sponsors and 43 Assembly co-sponsors, the Senate version of the “Make Polluters Pay to Make New Jersey More Affordable Act” cleared committee only after several Democratic lawmakers publicly aired concerns about the legislation, with some suggesting their support may not extend beyond Sunday’s procedural vote.

The committee released S-2338 on a divided vote. Senate Budget Chairman Paul Sarlo (D-Wood-Ridge) and Sen. John Burzichelli (D-Paulsboro) joined Republicans Declan O’Scanlon (R-Little Silver), Doug Steinhardt (R-Lopatcong), Carmen Amato (R-Berkeley), and Mike Testa (R-Vineland) in voting against the bill. Sens. Patrick Diegnan (D-South Plainfield), Andrew Zwicker (D-South Brunswick), Teresa Ruiz (D-Newark), Linda Greenstein (D-Plainsboro), Renee Burgess (D-Irvington), and Gordon Johnson (D-Englewood) voted to release it.

Before the vote, Sarlo made clear he was unhappy with both the process that brought the bill before his committee and the conduct of some of its supporters.

“I’m not happy with how this whole thing has gone down with this bill and how certain people have acted, quite frankly, including the sponsors of the bill,” Sarlo said. He added that he had agreed to post the measure for a vote but acknowledged, “Not sure where the vote’s gonna go.”

His comments underscored the uncertain political footing of legislation that would authorize the state to seek tens of billions of dollars from fossil fuel companies to pay for climate-related damages.

Greenstein, a co-sponsor who appeared alongside environmental organizations promoting the bill at a June 24 press conference, said she had only recently learned of significant opposition from organized labor.

“I am very upset about this, because I have friends on both sides of this, and I didn’t know till the day before yesterday that many of my union friends are against this,” she said.

Johnson, another co-sponsor, also signaled that his support was far from unconditional.

“I am going to vote to get it out of committee,” Johnson said. “I’m voting yes to get it out of committee, but I have some issues.”

Their comments mirrored reservations expressed earlier in the day in the Assembly Budget Committee, where Assemblymen Gary Schaer (D-Passaic) and Kenyatta Stewart (D-Paterson) also voted to release the Assembly version while voicing concerns.

Environmental advocates celebrated the committee’s action.

“We applaud the bill sponsors and legislative leaders for moving the Polluters Pay Act forward,” said Matt Smith, New Jersey director of Food & Water Watch. “Passing the Polluters Pay Act before the state budget is finalized will make sure taxpayers are no longer forced to pay 100% of the costs of increasing flooding, extreme heat, and severe storms. Now let’s get this done.”

Antoinette Miles, executive director of the New Jersey Working Families Party, called the vote “a historic opportunity for lawmakers to show that they’re fighting to lower costs for New Jersey families.”

Still, Sunday’s hearing suggested that the bill’s long list of sponsors may overstate its actual support. Several Democrats used their committee votes to advance the legislation while simultaneously distancing themselves from it, an unusual dynamic that could foreshadow defections if the measure reaches the floor of either chamber.

With Republicans uniformly opposed, the bill’s fate will likely depend on whether Democratic leaders can hold together enough of their own caucus to overcome the growing signs of unease. Democrats typically don’t post bills that lack sufficient votes on their side of the aisle to pass.