February 3, 2025
Senate bill blames oil companies for the Southern California wildfires. Invites insurers to sue also

Welcome to the February 3-7 edition of the NFIB California Main Street Minute from your small-business-advocacy team in Sacramento.
The Marquee Bill is Now Lit
Don’t trouble Sen. Scott Wiener’s mind with any other possible cause for the Southern California wildfires than the global warming fueled by nefarious oil companies. He’ll hear nothing else.
Last Monday (January 27), the San Francisco lawmaker introduced Senate Bill 222, which “would authorize a person to bring a civil action, if specified criteria are met, including damages of $10,000 or more, against a party responsible for a climate disaster or extreme weather or other events attributable to climate change due to the responsible party’s misleading and deceptive practices or the provision of misinformation or disinformation about the connection between its fossil fuel products and climate change and extreme weather or other events attributable to climate change. The bill would make responsible parties jointly, severally, and strictly liable to a plaintiff for the climate disaster or extreme weather or other events attributable to climate change.”
Furthermore, insurance companies could also sue oil companies. A lot to unpack here in what The Orange County Register calls “a cynical attempt to use the wildfires tragedy to attack California’s oil companies.”
But roping in the insurance companies to add kindling to Wiener’s ire presents its own problems. “One potential complication,” reports the San Francisco Chronicle, “is that U.S. insurers often invest in fossil fuel companies, a 2023 analysis published by the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies showed. Such investments generally make up a fairly small percentage of insurers’ portfolios, but they still totaled more than half a trillion dollars nationally in 2019. Dave Jones, director of the Climate Risk Initiative at UC Berkeley, said in a recent New York Times column that since it is unlikely insurers would sue fossil fuel companies on their own, states should require them to do so as a condition of rate increases.”
It’s all about helping insurance companies, don’t you see? No matter how reluctant or suspicious they might be of the hand reaching out to them. “By forcing the fossil fuel companies driving the climate crisis to pay their fair share,” Wiener said in his news release announcing SB 222, “we can help stabilize our insurance market and make the victims of climate disasters whole.”
Oh, yes, that’ll work.
SB 222 has yet to be assigned its first hearing date. The Main Street Minute will keep NFIB members apprised of its progress.
Related …
“Conversion of the state’s electric power system to renewable sources such as wind and solar is doubly tricky,” writes CalMatters’ Dan Walters. “Not only must the state phase out natural gas-fired generation while still meeting current needs, but it must expand output to cover demand from many millions of electric cars it assumes will be purchased and install enough battery backup capacity to cover demand when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine.
“There’s no question that eliminating California’s carbon footprint is technologically possible, given enough financial investment. But is it politically possible?”
An Echo Oregon Doesn’t Need to Hear
This Thursday, a committee of the Oregon Legislature will hear a bill giving striking workers unemployment benefits. Sound familiar?
California tried it in 2023 with Senate Bill 799, which Gov. Gavin Newsom commendably vetoed and which we thanked him for in this news release. Undeterred, unions came back in 2024 with Senate Bill 1116, which under the burden of a growing state budget deficit and the state’s $20 billion debt to the federal government for outstanding UI loans, died a natural legislative death. NFIB’s letter of opposition can be read here.
Unlike California, Oregon didn’t have to beg Uncle Sam for some loans to shore up its unemployment insurance trust fund. So, why borrow a bad California idea? A bad idea that isn’t dead here, yet.
Democratic Gubernatorial Field Continues to Grow
Taran Singh Brar announced on his Instagram page last Tuesday (January 28) that he will seek the Democratic nomination for governor of California. Brar, an activist and filmmaker, has made a very small national name for himself by being the man behind the 30-foot chicken that follows President Trump around to various places. Will the chicken return if he’s excluded from debates by the more serious Democratic candidates?
So, here’s the updated roster of declared candidates, those considering a run, and those the media say are considering a run:
— Toni Atkins, former State Senate President
— Rob Bonta, attorney general of California
— Xavier Becerra, secretary of the U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services
— Taran Brar, activist, filmmaker, chicken provocateur
— Stephen Cloobeck, hospitality industry entrepreneur
— Elani Kounalakis, lieutenant governor of California
— Kamala Harris, former vice president of the United States
— Katie Porter, former U.S. Representative
— Tony Thurmond, California superintendent of public instruction
— Antonio Villaraigosa, former mayor of Los Angeles
— Betty Yee, former state treasurer of California
On the Republican side, there’s the temptation to say it really doesn’t matter in a state where ‘Other’ (6.6 million) outnumber registered GOPers (5.6 million) and Democrats account for almost as many as both combined (10.3 million), but it’s still very early, the issues are unknown, and as we’ve seen for some time, party designation doesn’t count for much anymore.
National
Highlights from NFIB Federal Government Relations Principal Josselin Castillo’s weekly report
— NFIB sent letters to Sen. Steve Daines (MT) and Rep. Lloyd Smucker (PA-11) in support of the Main Street Tax Certainty Act.
— NFIB filed an amicus brief in the case Community Associations Institute, et al. v. U.S. Department of Treasury.
— ICYIMI: BOI Injunction lifted: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled to reinstate the CTA and its onerous BOI reporting requirements, lifting the preliminary injunction while the case makes its way through the lower courts. Press release.
What businesses should do next? Although filing is not currently required, business owners should have their BOI information ready. Businesses can review the status on FinCEN’s website and sign up for alerts here in case FinCEN changes things.
NFIB’s BOI page also has additional information.
Next Main Street Minute, February 10. All Main Streets Minutes can be found on the NFIB website here. Pull down the California tab in the upper-right-hand corner.
NFIB is a member-driven organization advocating on behalf of small and independent businesses nationwide.
Related Articles



