
Sorry, New York: West Virginia won't clean up your climate mess
The Empire State Building, the Brooklyn Bridge, even the subway — none of these iconic landmarks would exist without the blood and sweat of West Virginia coal miners.
West Virginia still powers the nation, supplementing its coal production with oil and natural gas.
An overview of the city is seen on Wednesday, May 31, 2023, in Welch, McDowell County, West Virginia.
AP
But New York elites want to punish West Virginians for doing the very jobs that provide them so much comfort in their ivory towers.
The Climate Change Superfund Act, which the Democrat-run state Legislature passed and Gov. Kathy Hochul signed into law in December, imposes liability on energy producers for doing just that — producing energy.
It declares that carbon emissions cause climate change, and are therefore to blame for any and every undesirable weather condition the state faces.
New York's state government has bungled disaster response time and again. Its politicians want someone to blame, and they chose the energy industry.
They chose wrong.
West Virginians don't back down.
And we won't allow political elites to serve as judge, jury and executioner against the industry that employs thousands of West Virginia coal miners and gas and oil technicians and operators.
New York's law imposes strict liability on any company producing a certain, arbitrary amount of carbon emissions, to be determined by the state Department of Environmental Conservation.
Worse, the law targets past emissions, punishing producers retroactively for lawfully running their businesses.
One World Trade Center rises amongst the downtown Manhattan skyline in New York City, U.S., July 22, 2025.
REUTERS
The DEC doesn't have to find fault. It doesn't have to file a lawsuit and convince a judge or jury that a particular energy producer caused specific harm to New York.
No, the law declares energy producers to be automatically 'responsible' just because politicians say so.
That's not justice, and it's not the rule of law.
That's authoritarian bureaucrats picking winners and losers.
And the losers will be many.
The statute requires energy producers to pay $75 billion to the state of New York — money that could be spent on salaries and benefits for workers, or for new infrastructure projects to make everyone's energy more affordable.
That $75 billion loss will cause three things: job loss, higher prices at the pump and higher utility bills — hurting hardworking Americans across the board, New Yorkers included.
The only winners are the political elites who aim to bend America to their radical agenda, no matter the cost.
Fortunately, the United States Constitution has something to say about this lawlessness.
For starters, it prohibits any state from unduly regulating commerce in another state.
West Virginia can't tell Idaho potato farmers how to harvest their spuds — and New York can't tell West Virginia energy companies how to mine coal or extract gas and oil.
The Constitution also doesn't allow states to come up with their own regulatory schemes when the federal government has rules controlling specific conduct, especially in areas of unique federal interest.
The US Environmental Protection Agency regulates greenhouse-gas emissions; New York doesn't have that power.
So New York can't go back in time and penalize energy production in other states that the EPA said was lawful.
In fact, a federal appellate court ruled against New York City when it tried to do much the same thing just a few years ago.
On top of that, the law is simply unfair.
Our country was founded on the principle of due process of law.
Every citizen has the right to be heard, and every citizen has the right to conform their conduct to the law.
New York's law takes away those rights.
Imagine a state lowering the highway speed limit from 65 to 55 miles per hour — then ticketing you for going 65 last year.
That's what this law does to energy producers, slammed with a staggering $75 billion fine by unelected backroom bureaucrats without any meaningful chance to defend themselves.
It blatantly offends the Constitution and the fundamental sense of fairness that has existed in our country for 250 years.
That's why I, along with 21 other state attorneys general, three energy trade associations and one energy company, have sued the New York politicians responsible for implementing the Climate Change Superfund Act.
Our coalition is asking a federal court to issue an injunction stopping this unconstitutional overreach that would wreck our nation's power grid and put thousands of Americans out of work.
New York's political elites may think they can seize control of America's energy industry, but we won't allow them to go unchecked.
This is a fight for America's energy independence, for American jobs and for the rule of law. West Virginia won't go quietly.
J.B. McCuskey is the attorney general of West Virginia.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
32 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Chileans bang empty pots to protest hunger and war in Gaza
Hundreds of Chileans took to the streets Saturday afternoon to show support and solidarity with the Palestinian people, in what they called the 'March of the Empty Cooking Pots'. (AP Video shot by Alexandre Plaza)

37 minutes ago
Republican Winsome Earle-Sears is on the defensive in Virginia's race for governor
HOPEWELL, Va. -- Against an olive drab backdrop in a barbecue joint filled with the aroma of pulled pork and the sweat of a Virginia summer, Republican Winsome Earle-Sears told voters she was running her campaign for governor like a military-style operation. The lieutenant governor, a former Marine, said she would protect Virginia just as she did America. The way the Earle-Sears tells it, not all attacks come from soldiers. Earlier that day, she was asked on national television why Republican President Donald Trump had not endorsed her and whether she stood by her description of him as liability back in 2022, before his return to the Oval Office about two years later. She challenged the question as backward-looking and called the interview by CNN's Manu Raju a trap. The interview quickly unraveled into a squabble. 'They ambushed me to talk about things that are so in the past, when we've got to move forward,' she told a crowd gathered at Saucy's Sit-Down Bar.B.Q, a mainstay in Hopewell. Her words in both settings, while cast in military terms, reflected a campaign on the defensive. Earle-Sears, who faces Democrat Abigail Spanberger, a former congresswoman, in November, is taking her 'Operation Defend & Deliver' campaign across the state. The off-year election all but guarantees that Virginia will have its first female governor in a race that offers an early sense of voter sentiment before the 2026 midterms. An Earle-Sears victory also would make her the first Black woman to serve as a governor, according to the Center for American Women in Politics. But that feels like a distant prospect at the moment. The nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project says Spanberger has raised more than $27 million so far, with more than $15 million on hand. Nearly every Democrat in Virginia politics has pledged to support her. When Democrats Ghazala Hashmi and Jay Jones won their respective primary races for lieutenant governor and attorney general, the three nominees went on a bus tour across Virginia. Earle-Sears' ticket lacks that kind of unity, though that is not entirely of her doing. Once the Republican statewide nominees had solidified before the June primaries, GOP Gov. Glenn Youngkin asked John Reid, the candidate for lieutenant governor, to leave the ticket after opposition research linked him to a social media account with sexually explicit photos. Reid denied the allegations and refused to step down, but a rally for the statewide ticket was canceled. After that, the three top Republican candidates did not campaign together for months. Earle-Sears' campaign, meanwhile, has had its own challenges. This summer, a pastor with little political experience stepped down from managing her campaign, and her team has failed to gain traction with big money donors. Attorney General Jason Miyares, seeking a second term, has raised nearly as much money, with roughly $2 million short of the lieutenant governor. He has more in the bank — nearly $7 million compared with almost $5 million for Earle-Sears. One of her biggest donors, a political action committee tied to the Republican Governors Association, gave $500,000 to her campaign in June. But by this time in August 2021, the association had donated more than $2 million to Youngkin's campaign. Responding to written questions about the donations, a spokesperson for the association said: 'Winsome Earle-Sears is the only candidate in this race who will keep Virginia on the right track forged by Gov. Glenn Youngkin. Under their leadership, parents' rights have been protected, Virginia's economy is growing, and communities are safe.' Youngkin, who is term-limited, has offered more than $21,000 in support to Earle-Sears through his political action committee between March and June. When asked in June whether he would give more, his PAC said the governor was "working to elect the entire GOP ticket and is urging all Virginians to support the commonsense team this November to keep Virginia winning.' Republicans went into this election facing tough sledding in swing-state Virginia. Ever since Democrat Jimmy Carter won the White House in 1976, Virginia has backed a governor from the opposite party of a first-term president in the following year. Whatever the outcome in Virginia, 2025 is a special case, given the gap between Trump's terms. Trump stopped short of an outright endorsement when asked last weekend about supporting Earle-Sears. 'I mean, I would,' he said. 'I think probably she's got a tough race. ... She shouldn't have, because the candidate she's running against is not very good, but I think she's got a tough race. But I would.' Many state Republicans are more forceful about standing behind their nominee. At the Hopewell gathering, Republican Dels. Mike Cherry and Scott Wyatt, who are seeking reelection, urged voters to back the lieutenant governor. In a prayer, Cherry asked God to 'imbue her with strength and stamina for the days that are to come in the final, waning days of this election.' Wyatt encouraged voters to help Earle-Sears continue the successes of Youngkin's administration. Then Earle-Sears walked onto the stage, smiling and cracking jokes. She described a political climate where Democrats and the media were hitting her with everything they've got. She predicted that she would show them come November. 'How many of you have seen or read about the polls, which say I am 10 points down?' she said. 'Don't believe it.' Not that she doesn't need more money to make that happen. 'Are we going to pass the offering bucket?' Earle-Sears said to a chuckling crowd. 'OK, see, you're laughing again, and I'm not laughing because that's what it's going to take for us to win.'
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
I Asked ChatGPT How the ‘Big Beautiful Bill' Will Affect Social Security Taxes — Here's What It Said
As the 'Big Beautiful Bill' is reportedly tied to proposed sweeping reforms of federal taxation and entitlement programs, many Americans are wondering: What does it mean for Social Security, especially the taxes that fund it? I asked ChatGPT to break down what the Big Beautiful Bill meant for Social Security Taxes — here's what it said. Read Next: For You: What Is the 'Big Beautiful Bill'? Essentially, this bill is aimed at overhauling the tax system, cutting government spending and possibly reforming entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare. Trending Now: Could It Affect Social Security Taxes? According to ChatGPT, any major tax overhaul could impact how Social Security is funded in several ways below. Raising or Eliminating the Payroll Tax Cap Currently, only wages up to $168,600 (as of 2024) are subject to the 6.2% Social Security tax. The 'Big Beautiful Bill' proposes eliminating this cap, requiring high earners to contribute more, a change that could extend the life of the Social Security trust fund. Changing the Tax Rate The bill could mean an increase in the Social Security tax rate for workers and employers alike. Even a small rate bump would generate billions in revenue but could face stiff opposition. Means-Testing or Changing Benefit Formulas Instead of raising taxes, the bill may reduce future benefits for high-income retirees or change how cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) are calculated, indirectly affecting how much taxpayers benefit from the system they fund. What Should Workers Expect? The 'Big Beautiful Bill' raises real questions about the future of Social Security funding. If you're a working American, especially under 50, it's smart to stay informed and prepare for potential changes in how much you contribute and what you can expect in return. Editor's note on political coverage: GOBankingRates is nonpartisan and strives to cover all aspects of the economy objectively and present balanced reports on politically focused finance stories. You can find more coverage of this topic on More From GOBankingRates 5 Ways Trump Signing the GENIUS Act Could Impact Retirees6 Big Shakeups Coming to Social Security in 2025 This article originally appeared on I Asked ChatGPT How the 'Big Beautiful Bill' Will Affect Social Security Taxes — Here's What It Said Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data