[00:00:00] Welcome to the Powering America podcast. I'm Bryan Hyde. Today, I'm joined by Yael Ossowski. He is deputy director of the Consumer Choice Center, and thanks for joining us on today's program. It's a pleasure to be here, Bryan. Thank you so much. Take a moment, if you would, and tell us just a little bit about your background, who you are, and what you do. Well, broad question. Uh, so yeah, I'm a deputy director at a little group outfit we call Consumer Choice Center. We launched it about nine years ago. Uh, really focused on consumers who like cool stuff, who like affordable prices, and do not want the government intervening into every aspect of their life. Uh, so we are kind of present all over the world. Our launch was in Germany, actually, back in, uh, 2017, and since then, very active in the United States, in Canada, throughout Europe, uh, Dubai, Brazil, India, South Asia, you name it. And essentially, our goal is to represent [00:01:00] consumers who, unlike many other consumer groups, uh, do not want the government to, uh, tax, regulate, and intervene much more in our economy. So you'll see us writing articles in mainstream media. You'll see us testifying before Congress or any kind of legislative committees all over the world, uh, doing interviews such as this, and really just trying to represent a, a consumer who wants to be able to enable more choices in their life, not less. So it's been a, a fun journey. I myself is a, I'm a French Canadian, uh, who grew up in North Carolina, and, uh, hop back and forth between Europe and the US and, uh, try to do this and make it a global fight. And there's so many lessons that we learn in one country that implements a regulation, and we can see that the, they're sort of like a battle plan, as it were, and it's implemented in another jurisdiction. And we learn those lessons, mount campaigns, and try to fight for essentially the little guy. Let's talk about, uh, government involvement in terms of, uh, climate. Uh, I mean, we've heard a lot about [00:02:00] climate change over the years, but, uh, I'm, I'm looking at an article on your website, "Climate Lawfare Liability Shield Comes at the Right Time in Congress." First of all, set the stage for me. When we talk about, uh, the climate lawsuit racket, what does that look like? Yeah, it's a complicated affair, but, uh, it, it does, like many issues in American life, begin with lawyers and end with lawyers. And, uh, this really relates to many local jurisdictions, also entire states, mainly blue states. So I'm looking at you, California. Uh, I'm looking at Minnesota. I'm looking at New York, Vermont. There are states where you have attorneys general who have launched lawsuits against oil and gas companies, and stating that using either consumer deception or public nuisance laws that these entities, energy entities, have caused climate change. They've lied to consumers over the years, and essentially taken them to civil court- And in civil court, they aim to [00:03:00] prove that this deception happened, it's against the law, whether it be state law or federal law, and that therefore these energy giants have to pay a price, and that verdict or that price is intended to go to the state or to the municipality, and then that money is to be used for whatever green slush fund or climate resilience fund. Again, this is a trend that has been happening the last 10 or 15 years. Very much a part of the sort of tort litigation playbook. We see this in many different industries. Uh, we saw it with e-cigarettes, tobacco. We've seen it with asbestos. We've seen it with talc, baby powder. Uh, we've seen it with ride sharing now. That's a, a sort of a huge avenue. But the climate change lawsuits are something that are not just very new, but actually have an impact directly on consumers. We actually have research that tacks on every time that you have one of these lawsuits exactly what that bill will mean for you as a consumer when you fill up, and then also your [00:04:00] energy prices at home, 'cause it's not just oil and gas companies, it's also electricity providers. So there are lawsuits that are launched in places like my own North Carolina that go against some of these firms, and basically you as a consumer end up paying for it. So that is essentially w- how it's been the last 10 years. It's a coordinated movement. Uh, these are usually left-leaning AGs or left-leaning, uh, city lawyers who might be in, in some of these places. They get a lot of funding from Michael Bloomberg Philanthropies, uh, from the Center for Climate Change, the Sabin Center at New York University. Uh, there's an entire gamut, entire industry related to this. So that is sort of the, an opening salvo, uh, if you would, i- into the climate change lawsuit racket. So that, that sounds very much like a shakedown, and I'm using that word advisedly because I'd like to next ask you to tell me a little bit about the Stop Climate Shakedowns Act of 2026, uh, which was recently [00:05:00] introduced in Congress. Yeah, it's interesting. Again, um, it's a very, it's a very interesting time in Congress in that there are so many things they are doing and so many things they aren't doing, things where they could take more power, things that, you know, you've, realistically you, you ask what are they even doing? This is actually a good bill, and, uh, we don't often have that, I think, from a, a sort of liberty perspective. Uh, but this bill, what it would do is it would take all of these state lawsuits and essentially render them null. It would not, of course, take away any ability for people to sue against an energy company. That is still a right that is reserved, uh, but not on public deception or nuisance or any of these state-level statutes that have been used. It would move those cases to federal court. And in federal court, normally you do have a higher burden, uh, but then also you're not trying to set national energy policy and sort of a backdoor energy tax through some California lawsuit, something launched by, uh, the City of Fresno or San Francisco or [00:06:00] Minneapolis. Uh, it actually would have to be heard by a federal judge. So that's one. And then another part of the bill is there are these super fund laws that are passed in several states. It's, uh, essentially an open door to open up a lawsuit against any of these oil companies or gas companies by stating that at this point in time, we choose it, let's say, between the years of 1995 and 2005, we determine as the State of Minnesota that you polluted X amount, therefore you owe us $100 billion. Uh, so essentially it would nullify the, the attempts to do that. And, and this is, a, an effort by Wyoming representative, Representative, uh, Harriet Hageman, who's very good, and then also Texas Senator Ted Cruz. And I think it's, it's a good thing because we have in law, uh, the ability to go after people who harm us directly, and that is something that is still respected by this law. We do not, however, have a right to frivolous, crazy lawsuits that will [00:07:00] only raise prices for consumers. So actually, a good bill that has been conceived and concocted, concocted in Congress. So let's talk about the, uh, likelihood of this getting through Congress. I, I know that it's, you know, kind of a razor-thin, uh, majority that the GOP holds right now, and I would expect them to probably be in favor of something like this. Um, are the prospects good for this actually making its way through Congress and ending up on the president's desk? I, there's never gonna be, I think, uh, I think from here on out in all of Congress, I don't think we'll ever see a, you know, one bill that's passed, uh, that is very skinny and only has a few things. So it will inevitably just throw into the reconciliation process. So everything that I've heard, uh, all the research that I've done, the communications that I've gotten from the office state that they are attempting to put this in generally tied to affordability and to President Trump's agenda. So it is just one small sliver of what could be in the next reconciliation bill. It is a big issue because, again, it is happening [00:08:00] in various states. You have New York State that has any, any of these sort of super fund laws. You have Vermont, you have Minnesota, you have California. Again, a lot of left-leaning states and a lot of lawsuits that are launched at the municipal level in those states as well. So I actually, I think it's somewhat likely. You never know how things are gonna shake out. We don't really know in this era of Trump exactly what gets to the final desk or, uh, who gets put up there. But if we're talking about Americans feeling the pinch at the pump, which especially with the war in Iran- Uh, with just general inflation starting to rise, with just general pressure in the economy, you know, could be a very good thing. So I, I see it as, uh, somewhat likely. We'll rate it that if I, if I had to put it on the prediction markets. Okay. Uh, fair enough. Now let's, let's talk about to people who wanna sink their teeth into this and, and become better informed on it, to steer us towards some of the resources they might access. Yeah. So we've done a good amount of research at Consumer Choice Center, so you can find [00:09:00] consumerchoicecenter.org. I think that's good. There's been a lot of debate about this amongst legal scholars, uh, which has been very interesting. Actually, the Federalist Society has hosted a lot of conversations about general tort litigation and the climate. Uh, so this is an ongoing thing. Again, one of, of the people that I respect a lot of that is from, uh, Cato Institute, Walter Olson, who's written a lot about, uh, public litigation battles and sort of the, the rule of lawyers for a very long time, so he has written out on this. Uh, also at the Manhattan Institute, they've had some very good research on it. And this is, you know, it's something that we assume is only happening in these areas, but, you know, it pops up everywhere. So there's a... I did in Carolina Journal, I, I did a, a report on Duke Energy. And Duke Energy is actually one of the, the big electricity providers in North and South Carolina, and they're being sued for climate change related reasons. The funny caveat of this is they're actually the [00:10:00] biggest nuclear energy provider in the South, and actually help power South Carolina to reach 54% nuclear energy in that state. So they are leading the so-called climate charge by, you know, providing this sort of, uh, climate, carbon emission-free technology, and they are being sued and caught up in this as well. Uh, so there's, uh, something I put together in Carolina Journal. I wrote a piece also in Governing Magazine, uh, because one interesting aspect of this is that in those municipal lawsuits I mentioned, uh, many of those are actually... It's not the cities themselves that are fighting them. They hire very big time law firms from New York City, from LA to fight these battles for them, and they take a huge percentage of the cut. So if you have one of these climate lawsuits, 30 to 40% of the settlement will end up going to a lawyer who's in Manhattan or downtown LA, or someone who's affiliated with RFK's former firm at [00:11:00] Morgan & Morgan. Uh, you know, this is the billboard advertising attorneys you see everywhere. So it's a bit fascinating to see that all this is kind of happening. There, there isn't too much of a national spotlight on it. It definitely is a problem, and, uh, if you've ever seen the billboard lawyers, you'll know kinda why this is a pretty lucrative affair That, that makes sense. Um, and that's one of the things I wanted to touch on was, uh, you know, uh, talk to me about the disincentive this provides for, for those who might otherwise be tempted to, to file these, these frivolous lawsuits. Can you name names? I mean, can you tell me some of the, the groups, the environmental groups that are behind this? I'm j- I'm just curious if there are any that I might recognize. Well, they're, they're surely not groups that you, uh, you know, would donate to or support, I would assume. Uh, but yeah, I have a great, uh, article that I wrote, 'cause The New York Times had a very interesting article about this very issue, and of- you can likely guess what their framing was. And the perspective that they took [00:12:00] in talking about this and litigation that's been going out nationally is they focus on two entities. There's the Center for Climate Integrity and Climate Central. These are two NGOs that have been funded sort of through the Bloomberg Philanthropies network, and they have not just helped push many municipalities into filing these lawsuits, but they actually train lawyers and act as a training academy for people who will enter as either district attorneys or attorneys general or work in AG offices in blue states throughout the country. So they are sort of the two main groups. Um, again, a lot of this is coming out of New York University. Uh, they have the Sabin Center for Climate Change. They follow a lot of these different lawsuits. Another group is Greenpeace, not a surprise. Uh, Greenpeace itself, they've been filing all kinds of lawsuits on projects, not just in North America, but all over Europe. And, uh, we're actually awaiting [00:13:00] right now, very interesting probably for your listeners if they haven't heard, uh, but Greenpeace actually had a verdict against them in the state of North Dakota. Uh, so that is a $345 million judgment that they will have to pay. They have currently appealed that, uh, not in North Dakota, uh, but actually in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, where they are based. So they are seeking to have a European court overturn that verdict from an American jury, where they were found to have essentially committed all types of malfeasance around the Dakota Access Pipeline, Standing Rock, if we remember that. Uh, this, this kind of stuff, this law fare has, again, been used against entrepreneurs and oil producers, gas producers, and now smartly, uh, has been used against some of these groups who have made it, you know, much riskier to invest, much riskier to put down pipelines. You know, we're talking about a global energy crunch, and many of these groups that I mentioned who are the source for many of the reporters who will cover this, um, they're, they're kind of the [00:14:00] ones who are putting their fingers in the pie, as it were. And again, just to clarify where, where the rubber meets the road, you know, for people who feel like, "Well, we don't really have a dog in this fight," actually every time you fuel up your vehicle or every time you pay your heating or air conditioning bill, um, you do pay a bit of a price for, you know, the cost of those, uh, those lawsuits. Yeah, and in, in economic terms it's pretty simple. So you have, uh, oil and gas firms, they get sued. They're dedicating more of their resources to very expensive legal teams to fight these battles in court, and they have to carry those costs and put them into the product that they sell. So that leads to higher prices at the pump, higher prices whenever you get your gas bill, if you happen to get natural gas. It, it's just natural economics, and we have seen that. Again, there have been a few studies, uh, that have been done specifically on looking at the lawsuits and what it costs you at the pump. I mean, the estimate is anywhere from 10 to 15, uh, cents per gallon that has been tied directly to [00:15:00] energy lawfare. Now, that is something that when we look at things in the Middle East, when we think at, you know, trying to fill up our car before we're going on Memorial Day somewhere, it's a big deal, and it's a lot for American families that have to deal with it. And we just cannot assume that there's an infinite money printing machine when it comes to energy, 'cause energy has real hard costs when it comes to labor, when it comes to extraction, pipelines, transportation, and legal cost being something even bigger that they have to concentrate on means they just have to charge just a little bit more, and that impacts you and me. And again, just to reiterate, 'cause I, I know some would say, "Well, then you wanna just let the energy companies get away with anything." They're doing lawful activity. They're not engaging in, in unlawful things, but they're still facing these, these lawsuits. So, uh, it sound- it sounds like relief could be on the horizon. Again, we're talking with Ya- we're talking with Yael Ostsky. He is with the Consumer Choice Center, and, uh, where can people find your website? So [00:16:00] it's just consumerchoicecenter.org. Uh, we're very active on all the socials, so you'll find us on X and Instagram. Uh, just look for Consumer Choice Center. We're the only one. Thank you so much for joining us today on the Powering America podcast. Thank you, Brian.