From MasterResource
By Robert Bradley Jr.
“To tackle the climate crisis, lower energy costs, and secure energy independence….” (General Preamble)
Kamala “climate light” Harris as campaigner will not say that climate change is an “existential crisis” (much less yell it as the alarmists want). Harris refutes the notion that she would ban hydraulic fractionation with natural gas, reversing her previous pronunciations. She also states that electric cars (EVs) will not be mandated for drivers, backing away from a Biden Administration goal. Finally, Harris speaks little about the Green New Deal in general.
She is trying to get elected in the face of energy exceptionalism, which is the opposite of the Green New Deal. But her vagueness allows allows the major themes of ’24 Democratic Party Platform are controlling.
The energy/climate narrative in the 91-page document does not include energy in Chapter Three: Lowering Cost. But Chapter 4, “Tackling the Climate Crisis, Lowering Energy Costs & Security Energy Independence” (p. 30) starts with climate alarmism and continues with the villains Donald Trump and Big Oil:
Every year, the devastation caused by climate change grows more urgent. Across the country, Americans experience the dire impacts of climate change: Floods and storms wipe more homes off the map. Wildfire smoke spreads thousands of miles, forcing millions to shelter indoors. We’ve had the worst droughts in a thousand years, and the fastest sea-level rise in over a century. Last year was Earth’s hottest on record. Natural disasters and extreme weather have cost America over one trillion dollars in damages in just the last seven years.
… It’s a consequence of delay and destruction by people like Donald Trump and his friends in Big Oil, who still deny what we all see happening right before our eyes…. Now, Trump is set to do Big Oil’s and polluters’ bidding again.
It is all-good-things from the federally directed “energy transition,” which bribes consumers to buy the energies and energy-using appliances/vehicles that they would not naturally purchase. The term forced energy transformation applies, at the expense of consumers and taxpayers.
Now to the platform’s claims about lower energy costs, jobs, American Climate Corps, electric vehicles, and climate policy.
“Lower energy costs” revolves around “cheaper, cleaner energy and with tax credits to make home energy use more efficient and affordable.” Except that free market choices by consumers themselves–with their own money on the line–is not what the government wants. And special tax favors for some are paid by all. Classic misdirection….
Jobs? The claim that the “landmark” Inflation Reduction Act “has so far directly created over 300,000 jobs in communities nationwide” is the broken window fallacy as election propaganda. What would have the (taxpayer) resources done if not hijacked by the federal government? What cheaper, more reliable electric generation capacity would there be without DOE grants, the Production Tax Credit, and the Investment Tax Credit? What would the price of a new car be without the subsidies to electric vehicles. What would the price of new appliances such as stoves, refrigerators, washing machines be without the book of mandatory efficiency standards from DOE.
American Climate Corps. “Democrats launched the American Climate Corps, a new work force training and service initiative that will put more than 20,000 young Americans to work on clean energy, conservation, and climate resilience projects nationwide,” with a goal to triple its size by the start of 2030.” Ouch! And civil libertarians please stand up. The idea of a New Deal works program propagandizing youth is scary, Orwellian to the max.
Electric Vehicles. This one has turned into a campaign liability, so the Platform entire paragraph is worth reciting.
With tax credits, Democrats helped quadruple sales of electric vehicles, with the goal that 50 percent of all new passenger cars sold in the U.S. by 2030 be electric. We’re protecting American children from asthma-related diesel pollution by giving school districts rebates to buy thousands of electric school buses so kids don’t have to breathe polluted air. We’ll keep working to electrify the nation’s fleet of school buses, transit buses, and federal vehicles, including the U.S. Postal Service fleet. We’ll double funding to repair and expand active transportation and public transit, reducing pollution and traffic, and connecting people to jobs and opportunity. And we’ll work to electrify our ports and waterways, prioritizing progress towards a goal of zero-emissions freight.
So what are the cost and operational disadvantages of this forced transition. If electric vehicles, school buses, and port machinery were not already in service, why not? And where is the money coming from in the federal budget? Is a surplus being worked down? Or is the deficit/debt ballooning?
Climate Activism. No surprise here. “President Biden has restored America’s global climate leadership, once again making our nation the world’s pivotal force against climate change. The United States rejoined the Paris Climate Agreement on day one of his presidency, and President Biden set an ambitious goal to reach net-zero emissions by 2050, inline with climate science.” Continuing:
The Administration has rallied the world to commit for the first time to transitioning away from fossil fuels. It set a bold new goal for nations to triple renewable energy worldwide and to double energy efficiency by 2030; and it helped to launch a new global clean-energy supply chain partnership to make that happen…. As Democrats, we believe the United States has an indispensable role to play in solving the climate crisis, and we have an obligation to help other nations carry out this work.
The failure of climate mitigation policies, now in its fourth decade, speaks for itself. Oil, natural gas, and coal are each in a global growth mode despite governments madly spending money and increasing mandates at the expense of consumers and taxpayers. Social injustice at the expense of the average person–whatever happened to Democrats as the Party of the small and vulnerable?
Finally, the bogeyman of Big Oil returns in the heart of the document. “Throughout, we’ll keep standing up to Big Oil, as our clean energy boom breaks the industry’s monopoly hold on energy markets.”
Going forward, we’ll also eliminate tens of billions of dollars in other unfair oil and gas subsidies. When windfall profiteering causes prices to spike at the pump, we’ll release our own supplies to keep costs down for American families. And, when we hear of potential collusion or price-gouging, we’ll hold oil and gas executives accountable.
Maybe with electoral defeat, the Democratic Party can remake itself on energy and climate policy.
Related
