Connect with us

Energy

Opinion: A Kamala Harris Presidency Is The Stuff Of Nightmares

Published

6 minute read

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By PETER MURPHY

 

Vice President Kamala Harris is one election away from winning the White House and accelerating America’s climate hysteria that is already well underway thanks to the outgoing President Joe Biden.

“There is no question I’m in favor of banning fracking,” then-Sen. Harris said during a CNN-sponsored town hall back in 2019, during her ill-fated run for president.

That same year, she threw her support behind the Green New Dealproposed by  New York Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Ed Markey. That is a plan that would spend trillions of taxpayer dollars to “transition” America from oil, gas and coal sources to so-called wind, solar and batteries–or, rather, to subjugate the nation to an all-powerful green state under the command of the federal government.

Harris later teamed with AOC to introduce the Climate Equity Act, which was a confusing, word-salad of a bill to address climate “injustice” in “front-line communities” using the familiar means of creating a massive new federal bureaucracy.

During Harris’ short-lived campaign for president, which crashed and burned months before the 2020 caucus and primary votes, she called for a climate pollution fee that would “make polluters pay for emitting greenhouse gases into our atmosphere.”  Typical of so many climate falsehoods, Harris conflates carbon emissions with “pollution.”

In his letter to the nation last Sunday announcing he was dropping out of the presidential race, President Joe Biden boasted that he had overseen passage of the “most significant climate legislation in the history of the world” — an apparent reference to his misnamed Inflation Reduction Act. This “significant” legislation included hundreds of millions of dollars of corporate welfare for companies to build wind turbines, solar panels and electric vehicles and other climate-related projects.

Because, after all, the U.S. is “the world’s largest historical contributor to climate change – still the second largest today after China’ said a story posted by the climate-rabid media outlet, Yahoo News.  Expect a President Harris to double down on such unscientific drivel.

In a modern historical anomaly, Harris is poised to become a major party’s presidential nominee without a single caucus or primary vote, which is a throwback to the old days of party bosses and smoke-filled rooms at convention time.

Still, Harris is among the most privileged Americans to ever become a presidential nominee of a major political party, though not without difficulties. Her parents were both college professors, but they divorced when she was young. Following law school, Harris became a prosecutor in the Alameda County attorney’s office. With the assistance of her politically powerful mentor and very close friend, the charismatic California State Assembly Speaker Willie Brown, she was appointed to several public jobs, elected as San Francisco district attorney, attorney general of California, and then U.S. senator.

After becoming a senator, Harris began running for president. Her 2020 presidential campaign helped reveal her radical positions on climate and a host of other issues and enabled her to get on the short list of vice presidential choices.

With Biden’s mental and physical decline now so obvious, Harris has become the beneficiary of a ninth-inning political coup d’état against the president, engineered by Democratic Party leaders, who pressured him to drop his re-election campaign on the eve of the party’s nominating convention.

Harris is no Scranton-born, working-class pretender, who rode Amtrak. She does not have any record of political centrism, moderation or bipartisanship, which Biden practiced off and on throughout his career and helped him win the presidency in 2020.

By contrast, Harris is a product of the one-party state of California, who supported destructive policies on climate change, energy, crime and welfare that helped spark in California high fuel costs, declining living standards and a population exodus.

The election of 2024 will have climate change on the ballot, as did the 2020 election. The big difference this time is that Americans have experienced more than ever the inflationary and detrimental effects of climate policies with no impact on climate change.

And, it is not a supposed moderate candidate making the climate sale to the public, but a true believer, Kamala Harris.

Peter Murphy is Senior Fellow at the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (CFACT), a Washington D.C.-based organization in support of free market, technological solutions to energy and environmental challenges.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Economy

Ottawa’s muddy energy policy leaves more questions than answers

Published on

From the Fraser Institute

By Kenneth P. Green

Based on the recent throne speech (delivered by a King, no less) and subsequent periodic statements from Prime Minister Carney, the new federal government seems stuck in an ambiguous and ill-defined state of energy policy, leaving much open to question.

After meeting with the premiers earlier this month, the prime minister talked about “decarbonized barrels” of oil, which didn’t clarify matters much. We also have a stated goal of making Canada the world’s “leading energy superpower” in both clean and conventional energy. If “conventional energy” includes oil and gas (although we’re not sure), this could represent a reversal of the Trudeau government’s plan to phase-out fossil fuel use in Canada over the next few decades. Of course, if it only refers to hydro and nuclear (also forms of conventional energy) it might not.

According to the throne speech, the Carney government will work “closely with provinces, territories, and Indigenous Peoples to identify and catalyse projects of national significance. Projects that will connect Canada, that will deepen Canada’s ties with the world, and that will create high-paying jobs for generations.” That could mean more oil and gas pipelines, but then again, it might not—it might only refer to power transmission infrastructure for wind and solar power. Again, the government hasn’t been specific.

The throne speech was a bit more specific on the topic of regulatory reform and the federal impact assessment process for energy projects. Per the speech, a new “Major Federal Project Office” will ensure the time needed to approve projects will be reduced from the currently statutory limit of five years to two. Also, the government will strike cooperation agreements with interested provinces and territories within six months to establish a review standard of “one project, one review.” All of this, of course, is to take place while “upholding Canada’s world-leading environmental standards and its constitutional obligations to Indigenous Peoples.” However, what types of projects are likely to be approved is not discussed. Could be oil and gas, could be only wind and solar.

Potentially good stuff, but ill-defined, and without reference to the hard roadblocks the Trudeau government erected over the last decade that might thwart this vision.

For example, in 2019 the Trudeau government enacted Bill C-48 (a.k.a. the “Tanker Ban Bill”), which changed regulations for large oil transports coming and going from ports on British Columbia’s northern coast, effectively banning such shipments and limiting the ability of Canadian firms to export to non-U.S. markets. Scrapping C-48 would remove one obstacle from the government’s agenda.

In 2023, the Trudeau government introduced a cap on Canadian oil and gas-related greenhouse gas emissions, and in 2024, adopted major new regulations for methane emissions in the oil and gas sector, which will almost inevitably raise costs and curtail production. Removing these regulatory burdens from Canada’s energy sector would also help Canada achieve energy superpower status.

Finally, in 2024, the Trudeau government instituted new electricity regulations that will likely drive electricity rates through the roof, while ushering in an age of less-reliable electricity supply: a two-handed slap to Canadian energy consumers. Remember, the throne speech also called for building a more “affordable” Canada—eliminating these onerous regulations would help.

In summation, while the waters remain somewhat muddy, the Carney government appears to have some good ideas for Canadian energy policy. But it must act and enact some hard legislative and regulatory reforms to realize the positive promises of good policy.

Continue Reading

Alberta

Unified message for Ottawa: Premier Danielle Smith and Premier Scott Moe call for change to federal policies

Published on

United in call for change: Joint statement

“Wednesday, Alberta’s and Saskatchewan’s governments came together in Lloydminster to make a unified call for national change.

“Together, we call for an end to all federal interference in the development of provincial resources by:

  • repealing or overhauling the Impact Assessment Act to respect provincial jurisdiction and eliminate barriers to nation-building resource development and transportation projects;
  • eliminating the proposed oil and gas emissions cap;
  • scrapping the Clean Electricity Regulations;
  • lifting the oil tanker ban off the northern west coast;
  • abandoning the net-zero vehicle mandate; and
  • repealing any federal law or regulation that purports to regulate industrial carbon emissions, plastics or the commercial free speech of energy companies.

 

“The federal government must remove the barriers it created and fix the federal project approval processes so that private sector proponents have the confidence to invest.

“Starting with additional oil and gas pipeline access to tidewater on the west coast, our provinces must also see guaranteed corridor and port-to-port access to tidewater off the Pacific, Arctic and Atlantic coasts. This is critical for the international export of oil, gas, critical minerals, agricultural and forestry products, and other resources. Accessing world prices for our resources will benefit all Canadians, including our First Nations partners.

“Canada is facing a trade war on two fronts. The People’s Republic of China’s ‘anti-discrimination’ tariffs imposed on Canadian agri-food products have significant impacts on the West. We continue to call on the federal government to prioritize work towards the removal of Chinese tariffs. Recently announced tariff increases, on top of pre-existing tariffs, by the United States on Canadian steel and aluminum products are deeply concerning. We urge the Prime Minister to continue his work with the U.S. administration to seek the removal of all tariffs currently being imposed by the U.S. on Canada.

“Alberta and Saskatchewan agree that the federal government must change its policies if it is to reach its stated goal of becoming a global energy superpower and having the strongest economy in the G7. We need to have a federal government that works with, rather than against, the economic interests of Alberta and Saskatchewan. Making these changes will demonstrate the new Prime Minister’s commitment to doing so. Together, we will continue to fight to deliver on the immense potential of our provinces for the benefit of the people of Saskatchewan and Alberta.”

Continue Reading

Trending

X