California legislation will allow state fair plans, with individuals and insurers suing oil and gas companies for natural disasters, formally failing to advance on the California Senate Judiciary Committee last night. [emphasis, links added]
SB 222, sponsored by San Francisco Senators Scott Wiener and Rockefeller-backed Center for Climate Integrity, has only five out of five of the 5 committee votes.
The legislation is a flash point in the ongoing debate on homeowners insurance in California as climate law activists hope to capitalize on the recent devastating wildfires across the state.
Democrats vote on SB 222 due to cost and feasibility issues
Democrats Sen. Angelique Ashby and Sen. Anna Caballero completely voted against the bill, while Democratic chairman Tom Umberg and Sen. Maria Durazo abstained They don't believe the legislation will help stabilize California's soaring home insurance premiums.
Senator Caballero noted in a statement to the Associated Press before the hearing that she supported strong environmental policies – but believes SB 222 has not met its goal:
“If this actually leads to faster, better, more efficient building of a house in a fire area, I might support it… But from my point of view it's more about lawyers. This is about litigation.transparent
At the hearing, Central Valley Democrats and former trial lawyers responded to her earlier comments The legislation “more about lawyers” than meaningful climate actionwarns that this could lead to extended litigation while not helping California housing or affordable crisis:
“Looks like a simple solution Not always an easy solution. I hope we create opportunities for workers who continue to work here today, who can earn livable wages, and solve climate problems in ways including carbon capture, hydrogen and biogas. […]
“These jobs will create livable wages and help us achieve our climate goals. I think we are all working to achieve the same goals. I just don't think we'll get there through this lawsuit. ” [Emphasis Added]
Senator Ashby, a former lawyer representing Sacramento, also opposed the measure. Senator Ashby warned that the bill would “absolutely increase gas costs” and questioned that relying on private litigation is an effective tool:
“And I think in the end, this bill (at least for me) is too much about private action and litigation strategies. This is that it costs too much money in lawyers and courts, and not enough for people. I know it's a form of accountability and we sit on the Judiciary Committee. I went to law school. I get it. This is what the legal system should do – responsibility.
“But sometimes, the accountability mechanism can be reversed. It's so expensive that it becomes part of the problem. I really believe this bill will drive us into this space. ” [Emphasis Added]
Several unions also played a crucial role in opposing SB 222.
A large number of construction and union representatives opposed the bill, including boiler manufacturers, ironworkers and the California Labor Council.
Keith Dunn, National Construction and Construction Trade Commission, warns The bill could cost jobs and undermine industries that have been navigated in California’s complex regulatory climate:
“When aspiring legislation like SB 222 faces economic realities, it can’t do anything but increase the cost of the people you claim to protect. For men and women in the construction industry, the increased cost of SB 222 will lead to job loss and economic instability.”
Rockefeller activists lash out at Democrats after Bill’s defeat
Although SB 222 can be considered technically, its prospects appear dim.
One of the major sponsors of the bill, Rockefeller-backed Climate Integrity Center, slammed the Democratic Committee members of the social media platform Blue Army Judicial Committee after the bill failed to advance.
California could have set an example of how to earn big oil salary for its role in the insurance crisis and help protect residents from an uninsured future.
Instead, some legislators decided to protect the big oil from a sense of responsibility and deprive citizens of the tools to recover devastating losses.
[image or embed]
– Climate Integrity Center (@climateintegrity.bsky.social.social) April 9, 2025 at 10:03 AM
California Environmental Voters is a political group that works with the CCI to promote legislation, and despite the concerns of experienced lawmakers about affordability and the bill’s legal structure, they denounce Democratic abstentions as betrayal.
The bill’s failure is the latest in a series of stinging failures by climate labor activists, as various jurisdictions across the country have dismissed Rockefeller-backed climate lawsuits in recent months.
Reading break in the climate of Eid
