April 22, 2025 • 26 mins
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) joins for an Earth Day discussion on the financial impacts of climate change and how Big Oil has betrayed our trust.
IG: @ThisisGavinNewsom
Email: ThisisGavinNewsom@iheartradio.com
Phone: 855-6NEWSOM
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
One of the issues that animates so many of us
living in states like California, but people all across the
United States, from Florida, Louisiana, people in states that have
been ravaged by some of the most extreme storms and
our lifetime hurricanes, floods, fires here on the West Coast.
I think all recognize the imperative of focusing on the
(00:24):
issue of climate change. Of course, so much of our
focus is moved in other directions, but mother Nature, she
bats last, and she bats a thousand and that's why
this week, as we celebrate Earth Day in the United
States of America, I thought it was important to talk
about the state of climate policy in the United States
of America. California just reached two thirds of all of
(00:47):
our electricity now renewable electricity. We're in the how business,
and my next guest is also focused on how America
can lead the globe on low carbon green growth. This
is Gavin Newsom and this is Senator Sheldon Whitehouse Well, Senator,
(01:08):
thanks for taking the time to be on the podcast,
and I thought it was a great time to have
a chance to sit down and talk to you about
one of the most pressing issues of our time. That's
issue of climate and what the climate is in Washington,
d C. The Trump administration has come in even more
ferociously from my perspective, trying to analyze some of the
progress that we've made here in the state of California,
(01:30):
but all across the United States. A lot of the
progress that was advanced you advanced in your colleagues during
the Biden administration and the IRA and the Infrastructure Bill,
promises that were promoted in Project twenty twenty five that
are taking shape. The EPA coming out with a set
of recommendations and rulemaking that they're looking to advance that
(01:53):
is jaw dropping. So I really appreciate the timeliness of
your visit and the opportunity to dialogue about some of
these things. Tell me what I don't know in this space,
and tell me what folks listening should know about the
state of climate policy in America.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
I think what most people don't know is how close
we are to a climate driven economic collapse that comes
when climate risk becomes uninsurable so you can't get up
property insurance policy on your home. There are plenty of
Californians who are experiencing that. And then when you can't
(02:33):
get property insurance on your home, you can't get a
mortgage on it, you can't sell it to somebody who
needs a mortgage. So unless you're selling it to a
billionaire who can pay cash, you're screwed. So no mortgage
means your property values crash. And when your property values crash,
if that happens to enough people, which it will, because
(02:55):
this is driven by climate risk that touches millions and
millions of people, you then get an economic wipeout, like
the two thousand and eight mortgage meltdown caused across the country,
harming people who had no problems with their mortgage. It
was just the economic wipeout.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
So someone listening may think that may be slightly hyperbolic.
Then again, folks living on the coasts, folks living in
the South, in places like Louisiana, obviously in Florida, not
just in California, are feeling that reality. Obviously, the wildfires
here in the Western United States, of the hurricanes in
(03:31):
the southern part of the country. What is a what's
the national prism them to begin to address this issue. Obviously,
we've got to deal with some of the underlying issues
of climate change. But in an adaptation policy. We often
are talking about sea level rise, we're talking about other
strategies to mitigate, but you're talking about a looming financial crisis.
(03:52):
Chris raises the bar of concern. Correct.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
Yeah, and Florida, I think is first and worst. Florida
has more liability from the fund it's set up to
backstop the insurers who go bust there, which is like
a dozen already because they're basically little pop ups that
aren't for real, right, and the state steps in when
they don't pay claims, and then the taxpayer has to pay.
(04:17):
And they've got a separate state backed insurance company that
is trying to look like an insurance company and carrying
all this liability that probably they won't be able to
make good on. Those two risks to ensure to Florida
are bigger than the state's actual sovereign debt. So there's
(04:37):
a huge overhang over Florida and it's going to do
nothing but get worse. You've got property insurance rates that
have tripled in a lot of places in Florida and
that are expected to triple again. You know, that's really brutal.
And when that happens, it starts cascading out through the economy.
The International Financial Stability Board put out a global warning
(05:02):
to banks look out for this. This is coming because,
for instance, if all these properties value go down because
they're not mortgageable any longer, then their value goes down
on the loan to value ratio of a bank. And
now suddenly a bank doesn't look solvent any longer, and
it's got its own problems. So these problems cascade out
into the economy, and that's what we have to prepare
(05:24):
people for. And I think you know you asked a
great question is what do we do about it? Step
one is to stop what is causing this, which is
a climate change. But behind that the climate denial operation
of the fossil fuel industry, which, through disinformation and political corruption,
(05:44):
is just ruining our ability to deal with a problem
whose solutions are actually pretty evident if we could get
around the wiles and the mischief of the fossil fuel industry.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
I appreciate the clarity on that. I mean, the climate
crisis is nothing more than a fossil fuel crisis. Is
the burning of oil and gas and.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Then lying about it to the public at industrial scale.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
And having the best scientists having the best researchers in
this space for decades and decades and being able to
see into the future and then knowingly lied about it.
They weren't just in denial, they actually suppressed this information
from the public for decades.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
The scientists have known their stuff about climate this whole time.
I mean, the scientist community can really take a bow
for really excellent presentations and really excellent understanding and predictions.
And that includes the ones paid by Exxon.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Ago, and Exon needs some of the greatest geologists. They
hire some of the best in the brightest minds, best
can be broadly described, but for the job intended. So
they're to be able to track the talent because they're
able to dig deep into their wallet to get that talent.
But as a consequence, they're deep deeper into our wallets right.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
Now because spend similar talent in the disinformation propagandizing, setting
up phony front groups.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
The whole armada.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
Of disinformation effort that they run is also being done
at a very uh I hate to say it, it's
being done very professionally.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
And so, Senator you're one of the few folks. I mean,
there's a handful of you, and I you know I
give a do where it is deserved. There is a
handful of US senators that have the guts because I
think it takes guts to say what you just said
and the courage to be out front, to call balls
and strikes and to call out those that are responsible
polluters should pay. But they're socializing the con one one
(07:45):
incon one o one on all of us. So the
question is why is it just simply because it's electorally
ill advised to be so candid? Is it because of
the corruption that is sort of imbued in the system.
It's the unwilling to take the risk of to be
more resolved in this space. Is it just what we've
(08:06):
come to expect, and that is big money influencing having
outsized influence.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Boom, big money having outsized influence. If you set up
an enormous armada of phony front groups and you put
Madison Avenue tested fake messaging through that, and you backstop
it with literally billions of dollars in dark money into Congress,
into the back pocket of Mitch McConnell so that he
(08:32):
can throw super packs drop ads on Democrats. You put
that whole machine together, and up against it, you have
Democrats being like well meaning and talking about polar bears.
It's like, totally not a fair fight. It's the panzer
tanks versus the Polish cavalry. You just don't have a chance.
So we need to be much better about it. The
(08:53):
good news is we don't have to build the apparatus
of lies. All we have to do is build a
much more adept and shark apparatus to point out the
lies well said, and we'll people see what has been
done to them when they understand did what was his name,
Harvey used to say, the end of the story.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
Yeah, of course, Yeah, that's the end of the story.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
That's the end of the story.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
You allied to.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Yeah, you allied to at an industrial scale.
Speaker 1 (09:22):
So we're all dealing with the consequences. Of course. You know,
as a governor of California that's dealt with more natural
disasters than most governors, and I think Jerry Brown could
have said that prior to me. And in the last
ten years, we've experienced some of the worst wildfires in
US history, not just California history. Obviously, the wildfires in
southern California that occurred instead of winter, Yeah, nine months,
(09:46):
the driest conditions we've experienced down there in modern history,
and in January, with one hundred mile an hour winds
attached to a fire, we experienced a loss of thirteen
plus thousand properties. The issue of insurance, by definition, is
top of mind. Is the number one concern people have
(10:07):
right now of accessing whatever insurance they had so they
can recover their lives and get back on their feet.
But the idea of getting back and rebuilding, the number
one concern is can I get a mortgage now? Because
can that mortgage be attached to a requirement.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
To have insurance? Yeah, and that's the cascade. You can't
predict the risks, so you can't get the insurance. So
the buyer who you want to sell your property to
you can't get a mortgage, so you have to drop
the price, and you've got this property values crash that
then cascades out through the economy. And it has been
warned of so clearly that the Chairman of the Fed,
(10:44):
Jay Powell, Federal Reserve, came a month ago to the Senate,
spoke to the Banking Committee and said, you know, ten
to fifteen years from now, there'll be whole regions of
the United States where you can't get a mortgage anymore.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
And he's a pretty conservative, I mean not pretty very concerned,
not very dreams and not very green. So it's just
look at bottom line. Is climate risk is financial risk? Yes,
and it's language. I think hopefully that could bring people
to the table on fundamentally addressing the solutions. Now, let's
we talk about prevention. We could talk about low carbon
(11:17):
green growth, we could talk about decarbonizing our economy and
changing the way we produce and consume energy, but also
how do we address the situational reality ten or fifteen years.
Obviously we're looking at IBPC, we're looking at twenty forty
five goals in carbon neutrality, that in that timeline, but
beyond that, the insurance market and stabilizing it. It's not
(11:39):
unique to Florida, it's not Nique Louisiana, as up in Montana,
of all places, they were discussing this as a top priority.
Obviously in California, is there a federal frame you talking
to your colleagues about a federal strategy to address some
of these insurance concerns.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
I think until we turn the corner on fossil fuel emissions,
the insurance industry is going to continue looking out into uncertainty.
How bad does this get? Every year that we add
more fossil fuel emissions, we add to their uncertainty, we
add to their peril, and so they're going to continue
to withdraw away from that risk. The board member of Alians,
(12:20):
which is one of the biggest insurance companies in the world,
as you know, just recently wrote an article about how
climate change means the end of the insurance industry business model,
and by the way, that takes down mortgages that require insurance,
and by the way, that also takes down a lot
of financial transactions where there's an insurance component to a
(12:40):
complex financial transaction. So this cascades out very, very widely,
and very rapidly, and we simply have to start with
first principles. This is caused by fossil fuel emissions. We're
not dealing it, dealing with it properly because of fossil
fuel mischief politically, through their dark money and through their lives.
(13:03):
We've got to break the back of the fossil fuel
disinformation machine, get back to legislating properly. And then there's
the possibility that the insurance interests is okay. Now we
see an end through this, we can work our way
through how we redesign products so we can still provide
coverage in Florida, for instance, which is really in terrible,
(13:26):
terrible shape.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Well, it's interesting, you know, I can't help when I
when you bring up dark money to see to me
how transparent in the light of day that corruption is.
I just think about that infamous meeting with oil executives
that then candidate Donald Trump had where he said, give
me a billion dollars and I'll roll back basically the
twentieth century. I'll give you what you want. And he did,
(13:49):
and he did.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
He's trying and is.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
That a gross exagerate? Goes back to my opening question
to you. I mean, EPA, this is a wreck. I mean,
I've seen. We went through Trump one point zero, we
went through Bush. I mean, well, remember I'm from my
old office, is in Ronald Reagan's office, and so even
going back to the James Watts days, and I remember
all the vandalism was being done on the environment back then,
natural resources, not just in terms of environmental policy and
(14:13):
waivers and the Clean Air Act and the like Endangered
Species Act. But this seems from my perspective, we're just
a few weeks into this administration. This seems tenex The
acceleration of that kind of analysm and regressive policy making
is am I oversating.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Though you are not just one example that we're looking
at a lot, both in the judiciary and the Environment
pub Works committees. Is the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund that
the Trump administration is desperate to attack, and in order
to do so, they're not just having EPA try to
figure out ways to undo the fund. They got the
(14:54):
US Attorney for the District of Columbia to try to
cook up a fake criminal case so they could use
the fake criminal case as a justification to get a
court order freezing the funds prior to seizing them. The
problem was that the career staff said, there's no crime here,
(15:15):
we can't do this. So what did they do?
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Fired?
Speaker 2 (15:17):
The chief of the Criminal Division went forward with the
political US attorney signing the pleading completely on his own.
Not one person in the office would sign it. Then
the judge threw it out. So they're willing to break
through barriers of bad behavior, including maladministration of the criminal laws,
(15:39):
to try to get harm done to climate initiatives, and
to try to earn the billion dollars or whatever it
was that they spent on on Trump. We know it's
north of one hundred million. That was what was disclosed.
But when you hide it through C four's and through
super PACs and in it goes, and who knows what
we wanted to do was crypto fund I mean the
(16:00):
whole thing. It's just really hard to tell. But he
could easily have gotten a billion dollars. We just don't
know yet.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
You know, it's interesting. I think back and forgive me
for going back to Ronald Reagan, because you have been
a recent champion of trying to protect California's waivers under
the Clean Air Act. And just for those listening, it's
an interesting fact California's modern environmental movement. There were very
many moments, obviously off shoil spill in Santa Barbara, but
(16:33):
Ronald Reagan really established the regulatory regime as governor in
nineteen sixty seven with the creation of the California Air
Resource Board, and in nineteen seventy a Republican by the
name of Richard Nixon gave Reagan the authority under that
Clean Air Act to advance that waiver. Same person that
brought us the Endangered Species Act, among many other environmental rules,
(16:56):
including the EPA itself. Republicans, I'm old enough to remember,
not that I wasn't around for that necessarily, but I
do remember another Republican, George H. W. Bush, on the
issue of some issues around the ozone layer as well.
What the hell's happened in this country that we've lost
(17:16):
sort of a bipartisan appreciation for clean air, clean water,
having a life you can live out loud without asthma,
and being able to live longer and healthier lives. I mean,
there's a lot of rhetoric in this space, but what
the hell's happened this new reality?
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Well, I think the new reality has a lot to
do with corruption and a lot to do with Citizens United,
which unleashed political spending on an unprecedented level. And nobody
had a bigger incentive to spend money politically than a polluter,
and nobody had a bigger incentive to hide that it
(17:56):
was them spending money politically louter. So you could go
in and make your backroom deal with the Republican Party
and say you knock it off on climate, you knock
it off on environmental enforcement, we will give you all
the money that you need, and nobody will know it's us.
It'll all come through Californians for Peace and Puppies and Prosperity,
or some phony front group that will prop up for you,
(18:20):
and the motives are huge. The International Monetary Fund says
that the subsidy for fossil fuel in the United States
every single year from being allowed to pollute for free
is seven hundred billion dollars.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
This subsidy, the sub American taxpayers are pain in the aggregate.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
In the in the form of pollution harms that in
proper economics are baked into the price of the product,
but they're not in the price of the product. So
they would economists call a negative externality, which is a
form of subsidy. Ask Milton Friedman, the great conservative economists, right,
and when you're fighting for a seven hundred billion dollar subsidy,
(19:00):
how much would you spend a year in politics to
protect seven hundred billion? I mean, the number goes through
the roof. It's astronomical. So the notion that they could
have given a billion dollars to trump the notion that
they could spend ten billion dollars a year influencing Congress
is completely plausible when you're playing for stakes of that magnitude.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
It wasn't that long ago that these guys made sixty
three billion dollars net profit in ninety days. Yeah, with
some of the most egregious gas spiking we've ever experienced
in US history, with no account of zero accountability. As
the price of the barrel of oil was going down,
the price of gasoline was going up, and there were
(19:41):
no new regulatory in positions or fees attached to that.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
That's the thing about this line that Republicans like to
utter that you know what we need is energy independence.
We will never have energy and dependence in the United
States America with fossil fuel because the price is not
set in America. Thank the price is set by a
(20:08):
foreign cartel. That's exactly where that sixty two million came from.
Putin comes over the border, prices spike in OPEC, and
instead of being loyal to their American customers and keeping
the prices where they were doing just fine, they ramped
their prices up to meet the cartel price and gouged
and gouged and gouged and made the biggest profits in
(20:30):
the history of the corporation.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
And somehow they had the American people, hardworking folks, defending
these oil companies despite the fact they were directly being
fleeced by the same folks, the same petro dictators overseas
that were determining domestic policy, not just influencing forum.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Well, that climate denial machine got turned on full blast
to say that this was Joe Biden's fault and we
did not have and the president then President I did
not have a strategy to fight back. Now, ultimately they
went for the clawback legislation, and by fighting for the
clawback legislation, they actually turned that issue where actually people
(21:12):
started to blame the fossil fuel industry, particularly once they'd
seen those profit reports. So we were able to turn
that issue, but it took some willingness to fight, and
it took a while before the Biden administration got around
to where they were willing to fight back. There were
months in which there was a one way street of
public information all saying Biden inflation, Biden gas prices. Biden
(21:37):
did this, which is.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
A great irony because under the Biden administration we were
never more energy independent in terms of net exports. I
think it's between thirteen point three or four billion a
million gallon of barrels a day that were exporting more
than Trump administration ever exporting. We're also producing more clean
energy and green energy. And I want to compliment you
on the IRA the three hundred and sixty nine billion
(21:59):
dollars up to a trillion dollars. We'll see where it
counts up to of tax credits and obviously the infrastructure bill.
Are you seeing the benefit. There's been a lot of
you know, I'm talking to Ezra Client on the podcast.
You know where he thought there was the mistake of
those bills. It wasn't attached to streamlining and green tape
and addressing the issue of a regulatory thicket in terms
(22:20):
of advancing those alternative energy stratu.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
We could have done more. But right now you're seeing
an awful lot of Republicans, Senators and congressmen coming into
John Thune, coming into Speaker Johnson and saying, hold on,
hold on, not so fast. This is a factory in
my district. This is a factory where I've got employees,
This is an investment where I was there when we
(22:45):
cut the ribbon not so fast. So I think we
did a fairly good job there. It just isn't enough
because you simply can't have a competition for energy in
which one side, the polluting side, pollutes for free and
gets a seven hundred billion dollar negative externality subsidy and
(23:08):
the other side has to fight and plus with that
huge subsidy. They're attacking the other side constantly in the
public media, lying about them, attacking politicians. It's a very,
very tough environment. I will tell you, Governor, if the
United States of America had the vehicle efficiency standards that
California has, the carbon price that California has, if national
(23:32):
energy policy was as good as California's, we would be
on our way through this problem. We would have a
much wider pathway to climate safety. As it is, it
is a very narrow path, and we've got to fight
really hard to make sure that we succeed well.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
I appreciate that, and again it goes back to my compliments,
and they weren't lightly extended to you for being a
fierce champion of protecting our heartened status because of those
waivers that have allowed us to advance our clean car goals,
to allow us to have an influence to support other
states efforts. These one seventy seven states. We call them because.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
We're joining forces, one of them in Rhode Island right
behind you.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
God bless and all the other climate alliances we've created,
not just in the United States, but also internationally in
the MoU you under two coalitions and the like. But
let me ask you just in closing, there's one major
conference coming up. It's COP what referred to as COP thirty.
What is COP What is COP thirty represent and do
(24:33):
you think it represents this next big international climate? What
do you think this moment represents Trump? Trump Ism? What
do you think we represent? You, your state, Rhode Island,
California represent to the international community at this critical moment
as well, what.
Speaker 2 (24:48):
We are seeing is a long litany of fossil fuel
lies about what our future is going to be. On
a collision course with the insurance in tries look at
what our future is going to be. The fossil fyo
industry can lie for free. The insurance industry makes trillion
(25:09):
dollar bets on getting it right and has fiduciary responsibilities
to do its best. And the insurance industry is predicting
real calamity with that cascade through real estate markets and
into world economic meltdown. So if in Brazil at the
cop we are focusing on that insurance risk and what
(25:31):
it means for real estate markets. According to The Economist magazine,
a twenty five trillion dollar hit to the world's largest
asset class real estate. If we can focus on that,
then we can focus our minds adequately to find that
narrow pathway to climate safety. If it's more nebulous, talk
about ambitions and you know, green this, and you know,
(25:54):
it's like, no, now we're down to a very narrow path.
We've got to nail this, BEFO. We're going to leave
our children and grandchildren a pathway to climate safety.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
I appreciate it. It's interesting. I mean, it's in closing.
I appreciate, I really appreci I mean, again, anyone listening
appreciates the insurance pressures there under the issue of affordability
is the issue of our time. It's defined the last
few years. I think it had big an outsize, influenced
clearly in the election, not just here but around the globe.
But the issue of insurance and climate and connecting that dot,
(26:24):
I think is profound, and so I'm very grateful, thank you,
Senner for taking the time, thank you
One of the issues that animates so many of us
living in states like California, but people all across the
United States, from Florida, Louisiana, people in states that have
been ravaged by some of the most extreme storms and
our lifetime hurricanes, floods, fires here on the West Coast.
I think all recognize the imperative of focusing on the
(00:24):
issue of climate change. Of course, so much of our
focus is moved in other directions, but mother Nature, she
bats last, and she bats a thousand and that's why
this week, as we celebrate Earth Day in the United
States of America, I thought it was important to talk
about the state of climate policy in the United States
of America. California just reached two thirds of all of
(00:47):
our electricity now renewable electricity. We're in the how business,
and my next guest is also focused on how America
can lead the globe on low carbon green growth. This
is Gavin Newsom and this is Senator Sheldon Whitehouse Well, Senator,
(01:08):
thanks for taking the time to be on the podcast,
and I thought it was a great time to have
a chance to sit down and talk to you about
one of the most pressing issues of our time. That's
issue of climate and what the climate is in Washington,
d C. The Trump administration has come in even more
ferociously from my perspective, trying to analyze some of the
progress that we've made here in the state of California,
(01:30):
but all across the United States. A lot of the
progress that was advanced you advanced in your colleagues during
the Biden administration and the IRA and the Infrastructure Bill,
promises that were promoted in Project twenty twenty five that
are taking shape. The EPA coming out with a set
of recommendations and rulemaking that they're looking to advance that
(01:53):
is jaw dropping. So I really appreciate the timeliness of
your visit and the opportunity to dialogue about some of
these things. Tell me what I don't know in this space,
and tell me what folks listening should know about the
state of climate policy in America.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
I think what most people don't know is how close
we are to a climate driven economic collapse that comes
when climate risk becomes uninsurable so you can't get up
property insurance policy on your home. There are plenty of
Californians who are experiencing that. And then when you can't
(02:33):
get property insurance on your home, you can't get a
mortgage on it, you can't sell it to somebody who
needs a mortgage. So unless you're selling it to a
billionaire who can pay cash, you're screwed. So no mortgage
means your property values crash. And when your property values crash,
if that happens to enough people, which it will, because
(02:55):
this is driven by climate risk that touches millions and
millions of people, you then get an economic wipeout, like
the two thousand and eight mortgage meltdown caused across the country,
harming people who had no problems with their mortgage. It
was just the economic wipeout.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
So someone listening may think that may be slightly hyperbolic.
Then again, folks living on the coasts, folks living in
the South, in places like Louisiana, obviously in Florida, not
just in California, are feeling that reality. Obviously, the wildfires
here in the Western United States, of the hurricanes in
(03:31):
the southern part of the country. What is a what's
the national prism them to begin to address this issue. Obviously,
we've got to deal with some of the underlying issues
of climate change. But in an adaptation policy. We often
are talking about sea level rise, we're talking about other
strategies to mitigate, but you're talking about a looming financial crisis.
(03:52):
Chris raises the bar of concern. Correct.
Speaker 2 (03:54):
Yeah, and Florida, I think is first and worst. Florida
has more liability from the fund it's set up to
backstop the insurers who go bust there, which is like
a dozen already because they're basically little pop ups that
aren't for real, right, and the state steps in when
they don't pay claims, and then the taxpayer has to pay.
(04:17):
And they've got a separate state backed insurance company that
is trying to look like an insurance company and carrying
all this liability that probably they won't be able to
make good on. Those two risks to ensure to Florida
are bigger than the state's actual sovereign debt. So there's
(04:37):
a huge overhang over Florida and it's going to do
nothing but get worse. You've got property insurance rates that
have tripled in a lot of places in Florida and
that are expected to triple again. You know, that's really brutal.
And when that happens, it starts cascading out through the economy.
The International Financial Stability Board put out a global warning
(05:02):
to banks look out for this. This is coming because,
for instance, if all these properties value go down because
they're not mortgageable any longer, then their value goes down
on the loan to value ratio of a bank. And
now suddenly a bank doesn't look solvent any longer, and
it's got its own problems. So these problems cascade out
into the economy, and that's what we have to prepare
(05:24):
people for. And I think you know you asked a
great question is what do we do about it? Step
one is to stop what is causing this, which is
a climate change. But behind that the climate denial operation
of the fossil fuel industry, which, through disinformation and political corruption,
(05:44):
is just ruining our ability to deal with a problem
whose solutions are actually pretty evident if we could get
around the wiles and the mischief of the fossil fuel industry.
Speaker 1 (05:56):
I appreciate the clarity on that. I mean, the climate
crisis is nothing more than a fossil fuel crisis. Is
the burning of oil and gas and.
Speaker 2 (06:04):
Then lying about it to the public at industrial scale.
Speaker 1 (06:08):
And having the best scientists having the best researchers in
this space for decades and decades and being able to
see into the future and then knowingly lied about it.
They weren't just in denial, they actually suppressed this information
from the public for decades.
Speaker 2 (06:27):
The scientists have known their stuff about climate this whole time.
I mean, the scientist community can really take a bow
for really excellent presentations and really excellent understanding and predictions.
And that includes the ones paid by Exxon.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Ago, and Exon needs some of the greatest geologists. They
hire some of the best in the brightest minds, best
can be broadly described, but for the job intended. So
they're to be able to track the talent because they're
able to dig deep into their wallet to get that talent.
But as a consequence, they're deep deeper into our wallets right.
Speaker 2 (07:01):
Now because spend similar talent in the disinformation propagandizing, setting
up phony front groups.
Speaker 1 (07:09):
The whole armada.
Speaker 2 (07:12):
Of disinformation effort that they run is also being done
at a very uh I hate to say it, it's
being done very professionally.
Speaker 1 (07:22):
And so, Senator you're one of the few folks. I mean,
there's a handful of you, and I you know I
give a do where it is deserved. There is a
handful of US senators that have the guts because I
think it takes guts to say what you just said
and the courage to be out front, to call balls
and strikes and to call out those that are responsible
polluters should pay. But they're socializing the con one one
(07:45):
incon one o one on all of us. So the
question is why is it just simply because it's electorally
ill advised to be so candid? Is it because of
the corruption that is sort of imbued in the system.
It's the unwilling to take the risk of to be
more resolved in this space. Is it just what we've
(08:06):
come to expect, and that is big money influencing having
outsized influence.
Speaker 2 (08:11):
Boom, big money having outsized influence. If you set up
an enormous armada of phony front groups and you put
Madison Avenue tested fake messaging through that, and you backstop
it with literally billions of dollars in dark money into Congress,
into the back pocket of Mitch McConnell so that he
(08:32):
can throw super packs drop ads on Democrats. You put
that whole machine together, and up against it, you have
Democrats being like well meaning and talking about polar bears.
It's like, totally not a fair fight. It's the panzer
tanks versus the Polish cavalry. You just don't have a chance.
So we need to be much better about it. The
(08:53):
good news is we don't have to build the apparatus
of lies. All we have to do is build a
much more adept and shark apparatus to point out the
lies well said, and we'll people see what has been
done to them when they understand did what was his name,
Harvey used to say, the end of the story.
Speaker 1 (09:10):
Yeah, of course, Yeah, that's the end of the story.
Speaker 2 (09:12):
That's the end of the story.
Speaker 1 (09:13):
You allied to.
Speaker 2 (09:14):
Yeah, you allied to at an industrial scale.
Speaker 1 (09:22):
So we're all dealing with the consequences. Of course. You know,
as a governor of California that's dealt with more natural
disasters than most governors, and I think Jerry Brown could
have said that prior to me. And in the last
ten years, we've experienced some of the worst wildfires in
US history, not just California history. Obviously, the wildfires in
southern California that occurred instead of winter, Yeah, nine months,
(09:46):
the driest conditions we've experienced down there in modern history,
and in January, with one hundred mile an hour winds
attached to a fire, we experienced a loss of thirteen
plus thousand properties. The issue of insurance, by definition, is
top of mind. Is the number one concern people have
(10:07):
right now of accessing whatever insurance they had so they
can recover their lives and get back on their feet.
But the idea of getting back and rebuilding, the number
one concern is can I get a mortgage now? Because
can that mortgage be attached to a requirement.
Speaker 2 (10:22):
To have insurance? Yeah, and that's the cascade. You can't
predict the risks, so you can't get the insurance. So
the buyer who you want to sell your property to
you can't get a mortgage, so you have to drop
the price, and you've got this property values crash that
then cascades out through the economy. And it has been
warned of so clearly that the Chairman of the Fed,
(10:44):
Jay Powell, Federal Reserve, came a month ago to the Senate,
spoke to the Banking Committee and said, you know, ten
to fifteen years from now, there'll be whole regions of
the United States where you can't get a mortgage anymore.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
And he's a pretty conservative, I mean not pretty very concerned,
not very dreams and not very green. So it's just
look at bottom line. Is climate risk is financial risk? Yes,
and it's language. I think hopefully that could bring people
to the table on fundamentally addressing the solutions. Now, let's
we talk about prevention. We could talk about low carbon
(11:17):
green growth, we could talk about decarbonizing our economy and
changing the way we produce and consume energy, but also
how do we address the situational reality ten or fifteen years.
Obviously we're looking at IBPC, we're looking at twenty forty
five goals in carbon neutrality, that in that timeline, but
beyond that, the insurance market and stabilizing it. It's not
(11:39):
unique to Florida, it's not Nique Louisiana, as up in Montana,
of all places, they were discussing this as a top priority.
Obviously in California, is there a federal frame you talking
to your colleagues about a federal strategy to address some
of these insurance concerns.
Speaker 2 (11:54):
I think until we turn the corner on fossil fuel emissions,
the insurance industry is going to continue looking out into uncertainty.
How bad does this get? Every year that we add
more fossil fuel emissions, we add to their uncertainty, we
add to their peril, and so they're going to continue
to withdraw away from that risk. The board member of Alians,
(12:20):
which is one of the biggest insurance companies in the world,
as you know, just recently wrote an article about how
climate change means the end of the insurance industry business model,
and by the way, that takes down mortgages that require insurance,
and by the way, that also takes down a lot
of financial transactions where there's an insurance component to a
(12:40):
complex financial transaction. So this cascades out very, very widely,
and very rapidly, and we simply have to start with
first principles. This is caused by fossil fuel emissions. We're
not dealing it, dealing with it properly because of fossil
fuel mischief politically, through their dark money and through their lives.
(13:03):
We've got to break the back of the fossil fuel
disinformation machine, get back to legislating properly. And then there's
the possibility that the insurance interests is okay. Now we
see an end through this, we can work our way
through how we redesign products so we can still provide
coverage in Florida, for instance, which is really in terrible,
(13:26):
terrible shape.
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Well, it's interesting, you know, I can't help when I
when you bring up dark money to see to me
how transparent in the light of day that corruption is.
I just think about that infamous meeting with oil executives
that then candidate Donald Trump had where he said, give
me a billion dollars and I'll roll back basically the
twentieth century. I'll give you what you want. And he did,
(13:49):
and he did.
Speaker 2 (13:49):
He's trying and is.
Speaker 1 (13:50):
That a gross exagerate? Goes back to my opening question
to you. I mean, EPA, this is a wreck. I mean,
I've seen. We went through Trump one point zero, we
went through Bush. I mean, well, remember I'm from my
old office, is in Ronald Reagan's office, and so even
going back to the James Watts days, and I remember
all the vandalism was being done on the environment back then,
natural resources, not just in terms of environmental policy and
(14:13):
waivers and the Clean Air Act and the like Endangered
Species Act. But this seems from my perspective, we're just
a few weeks into this administration. This seems tenex The
acceleration of that kind of analysm and regressive policy making
is am I oversating.
Speaker 2 (14:31):
Though you are not just one example that we're looking
at a lot, both in the judiciary and the Environment
pub Works committees. Is the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund that
the Trump administration is desperate to attack, and in order
to do so, they're not just having EPA try to
figure out ways to undo the fund. They got the
(14:54):
US Attorney for the District of Columbia to try to
cook up a fake criminal case so they could use
the fake criminal case as a justification to get a
court order freezing the funds prior to seizing them. The
problem was that the career staff said, there's no crime here,
(15:15):
we can't do this. So what did they do?
Speaker 1 (15:17):
Fired?
Speaker 2 (15:17):
The chief of the Criminal Division went forward with the
political US attorney signing the pleading completely on his own.
Not one person in the office would sign it. Then
the judge threw it out. So they're willing to break
through barriers of bad behavior, including maladministration of the criminal laws,
(15:39):
to try to get harm done to climate initiatives, and
to try to earn the billion dollars or whatever it
was that they spent on on Trump. We know it's
north of one hundred million. That was what was disclosed.
But when you hide it through C four's and through
super PACs and in it goes, and who knows what
we wanted to do was crypto fund I mean the
(16:00):
whole thing. It's just really hard to tell. But he
could easily have gotten a billion dollars. We just don't
know yet.
Speaker 1 (16:10):
You know, it's interesting. I think back and forgive me
for going back to Ronald Reagan, because you have been
a recent champion of trying to protect California's waivers under
the Clean Air Act. And just for those listening, it's
an interesting fact California's modern environmental movement. There were very
many moments, obviously off shoil spill in Santa Barbara, but
(16:33):
Ronald Reagan really established the regulatory regime as governor in
nineteen sixty seven with the creation of the California Air
Resource Board, and in nineteen seventy a Republican by the
name of Richard Nixon gave Reagan the authority under that
Clean Air Act to advance that waiver. Same person that
brought us the Endangered Species Act, among many other environmental rules,
(16:56):
including the EPA itself. Republicans, I'm old enough to remember,
not that I wasn't around for that necessarily, but I
do remember another Republican, George H. W. Bush, on the
issue of some issues around the ozone layer as well.
What the hell's happened in this country that we've lost
(17:16):
sort of a bipartisan appreciation for clean air, clean water,
having a life you can live out loud without asthma,
and being able to live longer and healthier lives. I mean,
there's a lot of rhetoric in this space, but what
the hell's happened this new reality?
Speaker 2 (17:33):
Well, I think the new reality has a lot to
do with corruption and a lot to do with Citizens United,
which unleashed political spending on an unprecedented level. And nobody
had a bigger incentive to spend money politically than a polluter,
and nobody had a bigger incentive to hide that it
(17:56):
was them spending money politically louter. So you could go
in and make your backroom deal with the Republican Party
and say you knock it off on climate, you knock
it off on environmental enforcement, we will give you all
the money that you need, and nobody will know it's us.
It'll all come through Californians for Peace and Puppies and Prosperity,
or some phony front group that will prop up for you,
(18:20):
and the motives are huge. The International Monetary Fund says
that the subsidy for fossil fuel in the United States
every single year from being allowed to pollute for free
is seven hundred billion dollars.
Speaker 1 (18:33):
This subsidy, the sub American taxpayers are pain in the aggregate.
Speaker 2 (18:37):
In the in the form of pollution harms that in
proper economics are baked into the price of the product,
but they're not in the price of the product. So
they would economists call a negative externality, which is a
form of subsidy. Ask Milton Friedman, the great conservative economists, right,
and when you're fighting for a seven hundred billion dollar subsidy,
(19:00):
how much would you spend a year in politics to
protect seven hundred billion? I mean, the number goes through
the roof. It's astronomical. So the notion that they could
have given a billion dollars to trump the notion that
they could spend ten billion dollars a year influencing Congress
is completely plausible when you're playing for stakes of that magnitude.
Speaker 1 (19:19):
It wasn't that long ago that these guys made sixty
three billion dollars net profit in ninety days. Yeah, with
some of the most egregious gas spiking we've ever experienced
in US history, with no account of zero accountability. As
the price of the barrel of oil was going down,
the price of gasoline was going up, and there were
(19:41):
no new regulatory in positions or fees attached to that.
Speaker 2 (19:45):
That's the thing about this line that Republicans like to
utter that you know what we need is energy independence.
We will never have energy and dependence in the United
States America with fossil fuel because the price is not
set in America. Thank the price is set by a
(20:08):
foreign cartel. That's exactly where that sixty two million came from.
Putin comes over the border, prices spike in OPEC, and
instead of being loyal to their American customers and keeping
the prices where they were doing just fine, they ramped
their prices up to meet the cartel price and gouged
and gouged and gouged and made the biggest profits in
(20:30):
the history of the corporation.
Speaker 1 (20:33):
And somehow they had the American people, hardworking folks, defending
these oil companies despite the fact they were directly being
fleeced by the same folks, the same petro dictators overseas
that were determining domestic policy, not just influencing forum.
Speaker 2 (20:50):
Well, that climate denial machine got turned on full blast
to say that this was Joe Biden's fault and we
did not have and the president then President I did
not have a strategy to fight back. Now, ultimately they
went for the clawback legislation, and by fighting for the
clawback legislation, they actually turned that issue where actually people
(21:12):
started to blame the fossil fuel industry, particularly once they'd
seen those profit reports. So we were able to turn
that issue, but it took some willingness to fight, and
it took a while before the Biden administration got around
to where they were willing to fight back. There were
months in which there was a one way street of
public information all saying Biden inflation, Biden gas prices. Biden
(21:37):
did this, which is.
Speaker 1 (21:38):
A great irony because under the Biden administration we were
never more energy independent in terms of net exports. I
think it's between thirteen point three or four billion a
million gallon of barrels a day that were exporting more
than Trump administration ever exporting. We're also producing more clean
energy and green energy. And I want to compliment you
on the IRA the three hundred and sixty nine billion
(21:59):
dollars up to a trillion dollars. We'll see where it
counts up to of tax credits and obviously the infrastructure bill.
Are you seeing the benefit. There's been a lot of
you know, I'm talking to Ezra Client on the podcast.
You know where he thought there was the mistake of
those bills. It wasn't attached to streamlining and green tape
and addressing the issue of a regulatory thicket in terms
(22:20):
of advancing those alternative energy stratu.
Speaker 2 (22:24):
We could have done more. But right now you're seeing
an awful lot of Republicans, Senators and congressmen coming into
John Thune, coming into Speaker Johnson and saying, hold on,
hold on, not so fast. This is a factory in
my district. This is a factory where I've got employees,
This is an investment where I was there when we
(22:45):
cut the ribbon not so fast. So I think we
did a fairly good job there. It just isn't enough
because you simply can't have a competition for energy in
which one side, the polluting side, pollutes for free and
gets a seven hundred billion dollar negative externality subsidy and
(23:08):
the other side has to fight and plus with that
huge subsidy. They're attacking the other side constantly in the
public media, lying about them, attacking politicians. It's a very,
very tough environment. I will tell you, Governor, if the
United States of America had the vehicle efficiency standards that
California has, the carbon price that California has, if national
(23:32):
energy policy was as good as California's, we would be
on our way through this problem. We would have a
much wider pathway to climate safety. As it is, it
is a very narrow path, and we've got to fight
really hard to make sure that we succeed well.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
I appreciate that, and again it goes back to my compliments,
and they weren't lightly extended to you for being a
fierce champion of protecting our heartened status because of those
waivers that have allowed us to advance our clean car goals,
to allow us to have an influence to support other
states efforts. These one seventy seven states. We call them because.
Speaker 2 (24:09):
We're joining forces, one of them in Rhode Island right
behind you.
Speaker 1 (24:12):
God bless and all the other climate alliances we've created,
not just in the United States, but also internationally in
the MoU you under two coalitions and the like. But
let me ask you just in closing, there's one major
conference coming up. It's COP what referred to as COP thirty.
What is COP What is COP thirty represent and do
(24:33):
you think it represents this next big international climate? What
do you think this moment represents Trump? Trump Ism? What
do you think we represent? You, your state, Rhode Island,
California represent to the international community at this critical moment
as well, what.
Speaker 2 (24:48):
We are seeing is a long litany of fossil fuel
lies about what our future is going to be. On
a collision course with the insurance in tries look at
what our future is going to be. The fossil fyo
industry can lie for free. The insurance industry makes trillion
(25:09):
dollar bets on getting it right and has fiduciary responsibilities
to do its best. And the insurance industry is predicting
real calamity with that cascade through real estate markets and
into world economic meltdown. So if in Brazil at the
cop we are focusing on that insurance risk and what
(25:31):
it means for real estate markets. According to The Economist magazine,
a twenty five trillion dollar hit to the world's largest
asset class real estate. If we can focus on that,
then we can focus our minds adequately to find that
narrow pathway to climate safety. If it's more nebulous, talk
about ambitions and you know, green this, and you know,
(25:54):
it's like, no, now we're down to a very narrow path.
We've got to nail this, BEFO. We're going to leave
our children and grandchildren a pathway to climate safety.
Speaker 1 (26:03):
I appreciate it. It's interesting. I mean, it's in closing.
I appreciate, I really appreci I mean, again, anyone listening
appreciates the insurance pressures there under the issue of affordability
is the issue of our time. It's defined the last
few years. I think it had big an outsize, influenced
clearly in the election, not just here but around the globe.
But the issue of insurance and climate and connecting that dot,
(26:24):
I think is profound, and so I'm very grateful, thank you,
Senner for taking the time, thank you
Host
Gavin Newsom
Popular Podcasts
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy And Charlamagne Tha God!
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Decisions, Decisions
Welcome to "Decisions, Decisions," the podcast where boundaries are pushed, and conversations get candid! Join your favorite hosts, Mandii B and WeezyWTF, as they dive deep into the world of non-traditional relationships and explore the often-taboo topics surrounding dating, sex, and love. Every Monday, Mandii and Weezy invite you to unlearn the outdated narratives dictated by traditional patriarchal norms. With a blend of humor, vulnerability, and authenticity, they share their personal journeys navigating their 30s, tackling the complexities of modern relationships, and engaging in thought-provoking discussions that challenge societal expectations. From groundbreaking interviews with diverse guests to relatable stories that resonate with your experiences, "Decisions, Decisions" is your go-to source for open dialogue about what it truly means to love and connect in today's world. Get ready to reshape your understanding of relationships and embrace the freedom of authentic connections—tune in and join the conversation!