Committee sends 'Polluters Pay' act to floor as Cruz-Hageman bill and pension fund conflict complicate $50 billion revenue plan.

An Assembly panel voted on Thursday to advance a bill that would force three major oil companies to pay New Jersey $50 billion for climate damages. Yer the revenue stream faces an existential threat from federal legislation that could vaporize the entire scheme before the state collects a single dollar.

The Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee forwarded the newly renamed "Polluters Pay to Make New Jersey Affordable Act" in a party-line vote, according to the New Jersey Monitor, though official vote tallies had not been posted as of press time. The committee has five Democratic members and two Republican members for the 2026-2028 session. The bill is now eligible for a floor vote, with the next Assembly voting sessions scheduled for June 25, 26, 29, and 30.

The bill captures Shell, ExxonMobil, and British Petroleum, according to Assemblyman Ravi Bhalla (D-32nd), a committee member and one of more than three dozen Democratic cosponsors on the bill.

Those companies would owe the state $50 billion in equal installments over 20 years, with the first payment set at 20 percent of the total. The entire unpaid balance accelerates immediately if a firm misses a payment, liquidates, or ceases business. The money would flow into a special trust fund for climate adaptation grants, and the fund could issue bonds against the expected revenue.

But a federal bill introduced in April by Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Representative Harriet Hageman (R-WY), the "Stop Climate Shakedowns Act of 2026," would prohibit all retroactive climate liability lawsuits, dismiss pending cases, and void state energy penalty laws. The bill would include New York's and Vermont's existing superfund statutes, and New Jersey's proposed law. The bill has not yet received a committee vote in Congress. The American Petroleum Institute and the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers issued a joint endorsement of the Cruz-Hageman bill on April 20.

The Trump administration's Justice Department is already suing New York and Vermont to block their superfund laws. At least 10 states are considering similar legislation, according to the API. If the Cruz-Hageman bill passes, New Jersey's $50 billion revenue stream evaporates before the first installment comes due.

State Assemblywoman Alixon Collazos-Gill (D-27th), the bill's prime sponsor, pitched the measure as a matter of justice.

"Fossil fuel companies have known for decades about the climate consequences of their products, have profited enormously in the process, and it's only right that they contribute to addressing the damages communities across the state are now facing," she said at Thursday's hearing, according to the New Jersey Monitor.

More than 230 clergy and faith leaders across all 21 New Jersey counties submitted testimony in support of the bill on June 2, organized by the interfaith environmental group GreenFaith. The coalition includes Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, and Quaker leaders. "Fossil fuel companies are privatizing profits and socializing costs," said Imam Saffet Catovic of Green Muslims of New Jersey, according to the Jersey Vindicator.

Business groups warned the committee that oil giants would simply pass the costs to consumers. "Every cost finds a citizen in the end because money is like water: It always runs downhill, and here in New Jersey, it runs right into the ratepayers' basement," said John Goodnight, a lobbyist for Americans for Prosperity, according to the Monitor.

The New Jersey Business and Industry Association, in written testimony to the committee, cited a U.S. Chamber of Commerce Institute for Legal Reform analysis claiming the bill would cost each New Jersey household an additional $13,735 over 20 years in higher transportation, utility, and consumer goods costs. NJBIA Deputy Chief Government Affairs Officer Ray Cantor called the claim that costs would not be passed on "patently false," according to Insider NJ.

The three target companies control significant market share in fuel and petrochemicals, giving them pricing power that complicates the assumption that costs would flow entirely to consumers.

Environmental advocates pushed back. Matt Smith, a regional organizer with Food and Water Watch, pointed to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, where BP and related firms paid $20.8 billion in a criminal settlement. That case used a different legal framework than the statutory liability proposed in the NJ bill, but one where costs were absorbed through reductions in shareholder dividends and asset sales rather than consumer price hikes, according to Smith.

But New Jersey faces a complication no advocate mentioned at Thursday's hearing: the state is simultaneously trying to extract $50 billion from companies it partially owns through public employee pension funds. The New Jersey Treasury Division of Investment held $598.9 million in direct stock of the target companies and related fossil fuel firms as of 2021, the most recent data available, according to a 2022 analysis by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. That represents roughly 0.7 percent of the pension fund's total assets. The pension fund serves roughly 800,000 active and retired public workers. The state's total fossil fuel holdings exceeded $4.8 billion. 

If the bill passes and the target companies are forced to pay, shareholder value would decline, directly affecting the retirement accounts of teachers, police officers, and state workers. Previous bills to divest the pension fund from fossil fuels, like S198 from the 2024-25 session, hav stalled in the Legislature. If both bills passed, New Jersey would be extracting billions from companies it no longer owned. If only the superfund bill passes, the state is financially attacking its own portfolio.

Senator John McKeon (D-27th), the Senate sponsor of the companion bill S2338, has framed the legislation as a budget lifeline. New Jersey faces a $3 billion structural deficit, and Governor Mikie Sherrill has proposed $2 billion in cuts plus $700 million in revenue from closing corporate tax loopholes. McKeon said the superfund bill was "part of [Sherrill's] campaign platform," though he did not provide direct evidence of her position, and that it would create 18,000 jobs, though he did not cite a specific economic study. McKeon also said revenue sharing with the Department of Labor brought labor unions on board after the AFL-CIO opposed a prior version of the bill during the last legislative session, but NJBallot could not independently confirm current AFL-CIO position as of press time.

The Senate companion has not moved. S2338 was introduced January 13, 2026, and has not received a committee vote in the current session, according to legislative tracking databases.

The bill's strict liability framework requires no proof of specific wrongdoing. To be captured, a company or its corporate predecessor must have engaged in fossil fuel extraction between 1995 and 2024, have sufficient links to New Jersey, and be deemed responsible for at least 1 billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions by the state Department of Environmental Protection. The DEP would determine proportional liability based on emissions share. The bill does not specify the methodology, and the DEP has not published detailed calculation standards.

Republican Assemblyman Mike Inganamort (R-24th) warned the committee that New Jersey would spend years and millions of dollars building a bureaucracy and defending lawsuits before seeing a single dollar, according to the Monitor. "That is not sound government," he said.

Business groups also questioned the program's constitutionality, arguing that lawmakers are seeking to punish oil firms for business practices that were and remain legal. Similar laws in New York and Vermont have drawn lawsuits from fossil fuel industry groups, Republican state attorneys general, and the Trump administration. Those suits are ongoing.

Whether leadership schedules the bill for a floor vote, or if the Senate version escapes committee, remains to be seen.

Sources

●      New Jersey Monitor, "NJ Assembly panel advances bill aimed at fining fossil fuel firms," June 4, 2026

●      NJ Legislature Bill Search, A3735/S2338, "Polluters Pay to Make New Jersey Affordable Act," introduced January 13, 2026

●      Congress.gov, S. 1956 / H.R. 3287, "Stop Climate Shakedowns Act of 2026," introduced April 2026

●      American Petroleum Institute press release, "API, AFPM Endorse Federal Legislation to Stop Climate Shakedowns," April 20, 2026

●      U.S. Department of Justice press release, "Justice Department Sues New York and Vermont," February 2026

●      Inside Climate News, "More States Consider Climate Superfund Bills," November 2025

●      Insider NJ, "NJBIA: Climate Superfund Act Adds to NJ's Affordability Crisis," June 4, 2026

●      NJBIA testimony to Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee, June 4, 2026

●      Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, "New Jersey Pension Fund Fossil Fuel Holdings," 2022 (data from 2021)

●      NJ Spotlight News, "Sherrill Campaign Platform on Climate," October 2025

●      Patch, "NJ Climate Superfund Bill Stalled in Senate Budget Committee," April 6, 2026

●      LegiScan, NJ S2338 2026-2027 Regular Session

●      Archer Law advisory, "New Jersey Climate Change Response Act," January 2025

●      E&E News, "New Jersey Climate Superfund Bill Stalled," January 13, 2026

●      Jersey Vindicator, "Faith Leaders Across New Jersey Urge Lawmakers to Pass Climate Superfund Act," June 4, 2026

●      NJ Legislature, Assembly Environment and Solid Waste Committee membership, 2026-2028 session

●      Food and Water Watch, "New Jersey Climate Superfund Act Committee Vote," March 11, 2025