Image 01 Image 03

Hochul Moves to Delay NY Climate Law Over Costs

Hochul Moves to Delay NY Climate Law Over Costs

“We cannot meet the Climate Act’s 2030 targets without imposing new and additional crushing costs on New York businesses and residents.”

New York Gov. Kathy Hochul is now openly moving to scale back and delay parts of the state’s 2019 climate law, a significant shift for a policy she once championed.

The change comes as cost concerns are becoming a reality. Rising utility bills and fuel costs have forced a harder look at what it actually takes to meet the law’s targets on the current timeline.

“There were so many unforeseen factors,” Hochul said, referring to the 2019 law. “There’s going to be enormous costs.”

Those costs are not coming out of thin air. Internal estimates tied to potential compliance scenarios point to noticeable increases in gasoline prices and home energy costs, with some projections running into the thousands of dollars annually for families.

The closer the state gets to implementation, the less theoretical those numbers become, and the more pressure builds around the timeline itself.

“We cannot meet the Climate Act’s 2030 targets without imposing new and additional crushing costs on New York businesses and residents.”

That line stands in contrast to how the law was originally framed. At the time, the emphasis was on leadership, long-term transition, and setting an example nationally, but Hochul is now making cost concerns central to the case for revisiting the timeline amid affordability pressures.

Hochul has pointed to a mix of factors that have reshaped the landscape since 2019, including inflation, supply chain disruptions, and broader instability in energy markets. Those pressures have made the original deadlines harder to sustain without passing costs along to consumers.

“I cannot deal in hypotheticals and aspirations when I have to govern a state where my people are suffering.”

The revisions under discussion would delay enforcement and adjust how emissions are calculated, effectively stretching the timeline that had been treated as fixed. That approach has drawn support from business groups and some moderate Democrats who argue the current framework risks pushing costs higher at the worst possible time.

The fight over the law is still playing out, but the pressure behind it is no longer theoretical. Rising utility bills and fuel costs have pulled what was once a long-term climate push into a much shorter political window, forcing a reassessment that is happening in real time.

That shift carries its own gravity. Once the costs tied to a policy start showing up in monthly bills, the argument changes, and it rarely shifts back to where it started.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments


 
 0 
 
 14
lichau | March 22, 2026 at 10:10 am

“Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth”
Words of wisdom from Mike Tyson


     
     0 
     
     4
    Ghostrider in reply to lichau. | March 22, 2026 at 1:58 pm

    After much elegance and fanfare, the details of life and the universe eventually exhibit haphazard, jury-rigged arrangements, along with ignorance, stupidity, and poor planning.

    What shall we make of climate change projects: these socialist edifices abandoned early in construction by the architect?


     
     0 
     
     0
    Dimsdale in reply to lichau. | March 22, 2026 at 4:47 pm

    And reality hits bare knuckled….like Chuck Norris.


 
 0 
 
 20
Peter Moss | March 22, 2026 at 10:13 am

Considering that “climate change” is a weapon wielded by totalitarians to rob citizens of their labor and their liberties, perhaps Madam Governor will finally see the light and work towards the repeal of all statutes and regulations in which mitigating a nonexistent problem is the underlying premise.

Oh, who am I kidding?

She’ll blame Donald Trump and the Republican Party for destroying the earth and double down on the idiocy.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Spike3 in reply to Peter Moss. | March 22, 2026 at 9:46 pm

    Kathy, baby, didn’t you hear fellow democrat Al Gore say that NY would be under water by 2013? Are you trying to turn your state into an aquarium? Now you get yourself together girl, and stand behind those new Mondummy taxes!


 
 0 
 
 18
pablo panadero | March 22, 2026 at 10:25 am

Gee, must be an election year…..


     
     0 
     
     9
    JackinSilverSpring in reply to pablo panadero. | March 22, 2026 at 12:57 pm

    Agreed. Her first lie is that in 2019 there were so many unforeseen factors. Quite the contrary, many experts foresaw exactly what would with the impossible nightmare of nut-zero. Of course, closing the Indian Point nuclear power plant only compounded the issue. Her second lie is that she’s going to delay enforcement. Yea, she’ll delay it until the election is over, just like she delayed the fee for driving in lower Manhattan.


     
     0 
     
     0
    diver64 in reply to pablo panadero. | March 23, 2026 at 10:16 am

    The costs are the same now as they were when the Dems in NY rammed it through. Let’s not forget what is going on. The law is the law. Hochul sees what a disaster it will be for her reelection so just tried to ignore it and Environment Groups sued saying uphold the law you passed. A judge just ordered NY/Hochul to implement the law they passed and Dems appealed. They all knew it would destroy NY but rode the wave a few years ago. Now that the costs are coming due they are trying to weasel out of what they did. Turns out that Hochul and the Dems didn’t kick that can far enough down the road.

Hochul gets a hard knock from reality. Will Mamdani be the second one?


     
     0 
     
     2
    Close The Fed in reply to isfoss. | March 22, 2026 at 10:45 am

    The NYC musselman is now proposing a 50% inheritance tax on all estates over $750,000, said tax being applied to 100% of the estate if it is over $750,000. Your parents’ home will be his castle.


       
       0 
       
       0
      Spike3 in reply to Close The Fed. | March 22, 2026 at 9:47 pm

      Hurrah for collective warmth!


       
       0 
       
       0
      diver64 in reply to Close The Fed. | March 23, 2026 at 10:18 am

      The Dems in NY don’t know what they are doing. Mamdani wants a crushing inheritance tax, Hochul is admitting the tax policies drove New Yorkers to Florida and they have a revenue problem so is bizarrely begging them to come back and fund their sanctuary policies, social welfare, free everything for illegals. I don’t know how she thinks people who left because of her policies are just going to change their minds and go back so she can take all of her money


 
 0 
 
 24
txvet2 | March 22, 2026 at 10:35 am

“There were so many unforeseen factors,”

They weren’t unforeseen, they were predicted. You just ignored them.


 
 0 
 
 5
ztakddot | March 22, 2026 at 11:33 am

But the world is going to end because of climate change according to Gore AOC and Sanders if we don’t do something now!!!! Hochul must be one of those climate deniers,


 
 0 
 
 7
guyjones | March 22, 2026 at 11:55 am

The vile, stupid and evil Dhimmi-crat “climate change” cultists breathlessly rush to pay obeisance to their wooden/stone political idols, first, and then tardily comprehend the entirely predictable, deleterious and impoverishing consequences of that religious fanaticism.

These pukes are despicable.

Leftists: We must enact policies now, or climate change will kill us all!

Also leftists: We can’t really afford these policies against this scam we insist will kill us all, so these will be more like guidelines because it’s an election year.

Still leftists: Pee on us some more, and tell us it’s raining. Vote blue!

It’s all so stupid.


 
 0 
 
 6
destroycommunism | March 22, 2026 at 12:18 pm

when has that ever been a problem for a lefty?
“crushing taxes” etc

the subsidies given to these welfare loving grifters is mind boggling not so much in the dollar amounts but in the fact that we keep allowing the rrest of the country to be forced to pay the ransom note

Delay NY’s sacred Climate laws? Preposterous! What’s next? Allowing women-only bathrooms and sports teams? NY voters don’t care about raising taxes and costs if needed to strictly enforce Climate laws! Has she run this by Mayor Mamdani yet?


 
 0 
 
 7
D38999 | March 22, 2026 at 1:15 pm

“There were so many unforeseen factors,” But aren’t the leftist elites so much smarter than us mere Kulaks?

“There were so many unforeseen factors,”

No… not unforeseen – Ignored.


 
 0 
 
 6
CommoChief | March 22, 2026 at 2:35 pm

Hardly unknown costs. This reveals again just how incompetent the d/prog are at governance. They use propaganda hype and heartstrings to sway the gullible to vote for their idiotic, unworkable policies. When the bill comes due or in this case looms in an election year they panic. The d/prog suddenly pivot to find something, someone, anything else to transfer blame.

It has been pointed out in great detail for many years just how bad an idea the NY net zero nonsense would be. Objections were not just ignored but as in Covid any dissent was ruthlessly attacked and demonized. Now on the precipice of the costs hitting home suddenly the d/prog and a pause. Well where was this willingness to pause while the debate occurred, when these idiots were told point blank that NY lacked the power generation capacity and that sufficient scalable grid level ‘green’ power generation was not possible within the timeline? Nope, they ran roughshod over any objections b/c the ‘climate change dangers’ were so very imminent and so critically severe. Bump that. They passed the the plan into statute and now gotta eat it. Tell them to kick rocks.

Hochul has pointed to a mix of factors that have reshaped the landscape since 2019, including inflation, supply chain disruptions, and broader instability in energy markets deciding to run for reelection.


 
 0 
 
 1
starlightnite50yrsago | March 22, 2026 at 3:34 pm

She needs to put on her dunce hat.


 
 0 
 
 1
drsamherman | March 22, 2026 at 11:18 pm

Is New York State going to start calculating the cost of its budget programs on the number of millionaires it has to lure back to the state from Florida, Texas, and other no-income tax states? Good luck with that. The term “zero-based budgeting” comes to mind. Zero-tax base, zero budget.

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.