Blue state climate litigation policies drive higher utility bills as Hawaii doubles down

Aloha State pushes costly energy lawsuits

by Thomas J. Pyle, Washington Times, Tuesday, April 7, 2026

Household utility bills are on the rise, but not all states are feeling the pinch equally. Research has found that 86% of states with electricity prices above the national average are reliably blue, while eight of the 10 states with the lowest electricity prices tend to vote red. This is the predictable result of policy choices that prioritize climate symbolism over working families’ budgets.

Most blue state leaders are starting to get the message. After severe voter backlash in 2024, Democratic governors from New England to the Pacific Coast are retreating from their most ambitious climate commitments. Rhode Island delayed renewable energy standards. Last month, Massachusetts declared its natural gas terminal critical infrastructure. New York’s governor is now formally proposing to weaken the landmark 2019 climate law she once championed. The affordability reckoning is real, and pragmatism is winning.

Then there is Hawaii.

No state feels the practical impact of poor policy more acutely. Hawaii has the most expensive energy in the country. Its geographic isolation means energy costs are structurally higher than on the mainland. It has no regional grid to draw from, no pipeline network to fall back on. As a result, residents feel every policy misstep more acutely than consumers anywhere else in the country.

Yet instead of heeding nationwide warning signs, Hawaii lawmakers are moving in the opposite direction with SB 1166, a bill that would empower property insurers to sue oil and gas companies for alleged climate-related costs. Proponents say it is “worth a shot” to shift costs from ratepayers to energy companies, but this particular shot risks hitting Hawaii squarely in its own foot.

Even the insurance industry, the supposed beneficiary of this legislation, isn’t buying it. The American Property Casualty Insurance Association warned Hawaii lawmakers that these lawsuits would be “complex, lengthy and expensive.” The National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies said liability would be “difficult to prove.” The Hawaii Insurers Council, whose members write 40% of the state’s property and casualty premiums, said insurers likely won’t even bother filing lawsuits if the bill becomes law.

When the very industry a bill is designed to benefit is telling lawmakers to kill it, that should end the debate, but that assumes results are the goal.

There is a broader pattern here. California, New York and Rhode Island are pursuing similar strategies, making this less a local curiosity than a coordinated strategy to use the courts to do what climate advocates have failed to do in Congress.

Over the past decade, climate litigation has been sold to state and local governments as a cost-free way to hold the energy industry accountable. Sue the companies, the argument goes, and the money will follow. In reality, the track record tells a different story. These cases drag on for years, consume significant public resources and have yet to deliver the landmark recoveries their proponents promised.

Activist groups have learned that even losing lawsuits generates media coverage, puts pressure on energy companies to mount costly legal defenses and keeps the narrative alive through election cycles. For lawmakers, the appeal is simpler still: Filing a lawsuit lets you claim action on climate and insurance affordability without actually having to solve either. If the case fails, then blame the courts. If it drags on for a decade, then your time in office will have long since passed. It is low-accountability politics dressed up as environmental justice, and Hawaii residents will pay the price.

States that have kept energy more affordable haven’t done so by suing their way to lower prices. They did it by making sound decisions about their generation mix, their regulatory environment and their relationship with the industries that keep the lights on. Hawaii now has a choice. It can learn from that model, or it can keep doubling down on a strategy that is failing everywhere else it has been tried.

The Aloha State deserves better than being a test case for a strategy its own insurers won’t touch.

---30---

Thomas J. Pyle is the president of the American Energy Alliance.