Beware of Gov. Hochul’s Cap and Invest Shift

Environmental advocates are frustrated that Governor Hochul has postponed a controversial “climate” initiative, but the rest of us should be outraged that it remains on the table if she secures re-election in 2026.

Moreover, she’s touting an equally absurd decision that adheres to the same misguided rationale.

The postponed initiative is the “cap and invest” tax targeting fossil-fuel companies, which was anticipated to be announced in her State of the State speech on Tuesday (her office even confirmed this plan to City Limits on January 9).

In stark contrast, she is moving forward with the Climate Superfund Act, which expects fossil-fuel companies to pay $3 billion annually for the next quarter-century.

This expense is certain to be passed on to consumers, just as they will with the other tax when she eventually implements it.

Hochul’s team claims the delay of the “cap” tax is due to its “complexity,” despite announcing plans for it two years ago.

Most of the revenue generated from both taxes is intended to be spent on other environmentally-focused projects, all aiming to fulfill the ambitious objectives of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act.

This legislation falsely asserts that New York will reduce statewide greenhouse-gas emissions by 85% by 2050.

In reality, the state is already lagging in meeting its interim goals for 2030 — yet it continues to squander tens of billions of dollars, driving energy prices up and dangerously diminishing its dependable energy supply in pursuit of unattainable green targets.

Eventually, state authorities will recognize the futility of these pursuits; perhaps Hochul’s decision to delay the “cap” tax signals that this realization is approaching.

However, she currently markets the Superfund as “taxing corporations,” even though it merely increases business expenses in New York—costs that will either be passed on to consumers or lead companies to exit the state.

Additionally, she endorsed that last month, before determining that the theme of her State of the State would be her sudden emphasis on “affordability.”

Only after this did she decide to postpone the “cap” tax, which would raise fuel prices by an estimated 12 cents per gallon next year (and more in the future) while also increasing home heating costs.

All while New Yorkers already grapple with the highest energy costs in the country.

Unless Hochul ultimately renounces this reckless climate agenda, her postponement of the “cap” tax mirrors her earlier “pause” on congestion tolls: she reinstated that after Election Day, and she is poised to add this anti-“affordability” tax if she is victorious in 2026.

The outcome won’t be pleasant: Low-income families may receive rebates to alleviate some impact of the “cap” tax, but middle-class and affluent New Yorkers — the primary demographics contributing to the state’s population exodus — will have further incentives to leave.

Meanwhile, the state will persist in pushing for the electrification of heating, cooking, vehicles, and more, despite the fact that most of its electricity is sourced from fossil fuels, while wind and solar cannot sufficiently meet New York’s current requirements, let alone future demands.

This folly also underlies the state’s ban on fracking, which needlessly deprives residents of job opportunities and a potential tax influx for the state and local governments.

While most of the U.S. is poised for an energy boon under new Trump policies, New York is sinking deeper into the quagmire of green myths.

If desired, you can thank Kathy Hochul’s pragmatic decisions for sparing us from a small portion of that suffering, at least for now.