Daily Caller
Kamala Harris Would Be A Total Disaster For American Energy
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
By Carla Sands
President Dwight Eisenhower once declared that “pessimism never won any battle.” Yet, many Americans are understandably pessimistic these days.
Families are worried about how to put gas in the tank and food on the table. Most Americans feel that the American Dream is out of reach. As our nation faces mounting challenges, our leaders need to offer a positive vision for our future that Americans can believe in.
The United States is blessed with vast energy resources that can power our economy with affordable, reliable energy. Getting the government out of the way is a good place to start unleashing American energy in a way that will reverberate throughout the economy. This is key to bringing the American Dream back within reach.
Unfortunately, today’s reality is that the Left’s apocalyptic vision of a climate crisis is the kind of pessimism that loses battles. The Biden-Harris administration’s whole-of-government war on energy perpetuates a very bleak vision of our nation’s future.
As the United States regulates hydrocarbon production out of business, our manufacturing jobs move abroad and we become reliant on foreign sources of energy. This not only harms our economic and national security, but these foreign sources also fail to meet our stringent environmental standards for production at home.
Instead of producing abundant American energy, we look to OPEC+ for hydrocarbons and increase our dependence on China for needed critical mineral production. Meanwhile, China emits more greenhouse gasses than all developed nations combined.
The Paris Agreement, which President Joe Biden rejoined, has the United States pay Beijing, even as they continue to increase emissions. At home, American standards of living move backward; the government limits everything from what kind of car we can drive to what kind of stove we can cook on. Air-conditioning and air travel become accessible only to the rich.
This is a far cry from delivering the American Dream and is unpopular with voters. As a result, Vice President Kamala Harris has recently pursued an energy messaging strategy that Reuters has kindly termed “strategically ambiguous” and The Washington Post has deemed “climate silence.”
To those paying attention, the Democrat nominee’s “climate silence” is a deafening contrast to her unambiguous record of commitment to radical climate policies throughout her career.
As a senator, Harris advanced a $10 trillion Green New Deal and even supported removing the filibuster to pass it. As a 2020 presidential candidate, she proudly declared her opposition to fracking. Her current campaign disavowed this position but has failed to explain this shift. When asked in her one sit-down interview, Vice President Harris continued her strategic ambiguity, noting only that her “values haven’t changed.”
And despite public flip-flopping, her record as vice president bolsters the conclusion that her anti-energy bent is consistent. As vice president, she holds a critical role in this administration’s whole-of-government war on energy. She was the tie-breaking vote on the so-called Inflation Reduction Act, which supercharged inflation to give “green” handouts to corporations and pet projects. Yet her nomination acceptance speech failed to mention energy at all and mentioned climate only once in passing. This is a telling omission from the Democrat nominee.
There is a clear logic to hiding the ball as she seeks to appeal to both energy voters in Pennsylvania and her radical climate base. Further, as the Washington Post observed, Vice President Harris’s climate policies contrast with the desire “to paint a rosy picture of the future.”
The Post is correct in calling this pessimistic vision a “lose-lose” messaging issue.
This is because, at its heart, this is a lose-lose policy proposition.
Fortunately, there is a win-win policy that offers both prosperity and environmental protection. We must unleash American energy and allow all energy sources to compete on a level playing field. We must remove burdensome government barriers and allow American ingenuity and free-market principles to drive innovation.
This is positive policy with a proven track record.
In 2019, building on the incredible innovations of the shale revolution and the pro-energy policies of the Trump administration, the United States became a net energy exporter for the first time in nearly 70 years. At the same time, this country had the largest net reduction of energy-related carbon dioxide emissions in the world. Throughout the Trump administration, the United States also reduced air pollution by 7%.
American energy means we can liberate ourselves and our allies from depending on nations like Russia and China. We can protect the environment and improve the lives of Americans.
Put simply, an America First approach to energy means we can embrace the spirit of the American Dream.
This is a realistic policy vision that also paints a brighter picture of our future. Americans deserve clarity, not ambiguity. They deserve the opportunity to achieve the American Dream, starting with energy freedom.
Carla Sands is a former U.S. ambassador to Denmark. She currently serves as vice chair of the Center for Energy & Environment at the America First Policy Institute.
Daily Caller
House Unanimously Passes Bill Boosting Secret Service Protection For Presidential Candidates
Former President Donald Trump on the stage in Butler, Pa. on July 13, 2024, as shots are fired at him. (Screen Capture/CSPAN)
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
The House unanimously passed a bill Friday that would bolster U.S. Secret Service protections for major presidential candidates in the aftermath of a second assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.
The bill, titled the “Enhanced Presidential Security Act,” passed the House in a 405-0 vote after two assassination attempts on Trump took place between in July and September. The bill would require the Secret Service director to equally apply standards for protections for presidents, vice presidents, as well as major presidential and vice presidential candidates.
“It’s unacceptable that now we’re at two assassination attempts on President Trump,” House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said in a press release. “The Secret Service has to provide the same level of protection for presidential candidates as for presidents so that something like this doesn’t happen a third time. The future of our country is at stake.”
“Political violence has no place in our country, but when it does rear its ugly head, we must ensure we’ve done everything possible to prevent it from being successful,” Scalise continued.
On July 13, 20-year-old Thomas Matthew Crooks took aim and fired multiple shots at the former president from a rooftop positioned just 130 yards away from a rally stage in Butler County, Pennsylvania. Leading up to the rally, Crooks was reportedly spotted by attendees, flagged by Secret Service, and even identified by a local counter sniper over an hour before Trump stepped on stage.
Within two months of the Butler shooting, 58-year-old Ryan Wesley Routh attempted to assassinate Trump while the former President was golfing at the Trump International Golf Course in West Palm Beach, Florida. Routh was arrested by authorities after his “AK-47 style rifle with a scope” was spotted in the bushes on the course by a Secret Service agent.
Daily Caller
East Anglia educated environmental scholar says it’s time to “Scrap Green Energy Handouts Once And For All”
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Vijay Jayaraj is a Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K.
As the presidential election nears, it is reasonable to ask why the United States continues to give away billions to “avert” a fabricated climate crisis to countries that have little interest in participating in the charade beyond accepting handouts.
The United States has been a significant contributor to global climate initiatives, most notably through its involvement in the Paris Agreement.
At the 15th U.N. Climate Conference in 2009, rich countries pledged to provide $100 billion a year in climate finance by 2020 to assist developing nations fight climate change. This target was said to have been achieved for the first time in 2022, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
Having the world’s largest economy, the United States was expected to support a large portion of the Green Climate Fund (GCF), which resulted in a promise of $1 billion.
GCF claims to be the “world’s largest dedicated climate fund” with a portfolio valued at $12 billion, or $45 billion when co-financing of projects is included. According to the GCF website, the fund delivers “transformative climate action in 140 countries” to keep “average global temperature rise well below 2 degrees Celsius.”
To which one might respond: Poppycock! No “climate action” will have a significant effect on temperatures, and the 2 degrees cited hardly matter environmentally in any case. Climate policies “will have a trivial effect on temperature but disastrous effects on people worldwide,” concludes a recent paper by Prof. Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Prof. William Happer of Princeton University.
Besides, contrary to doomsday predictions, the Earth is flourishing in many ways. Global poverty has decreased dramatically over the past few decades, and agricultural yields have increased significantly partly, because of higher levels of atmospheric CO2. Natural disasters — often cited as evidence of climate change — are causing fewer deaths than ever before, despite population growth and development along coastlines and other vulnerable areas.
The outrage of having taxpayer money poured down the climate rat hole is compounded by the fact that recipients of GCF grants include China and India, the world’s largest emitters of greenhouse gases that are rapidly expanding consumption of fossil fuels. Meanwhile, the bone-headed policy of the United States is to reduce the use of these affordable and abundant fuels to the detriment of household budgets, business profitability, electric grid reliability and national security.
So, instead of pouring billions into international climate projects, the United States should prioritize its own energy security. This means developing its oil, coal and natural gas and strengthening partnerships with reliable allies like Canada.
The United States’ vast reserves of natural gas have been made available through advanced extraction technologies such as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling, making the country one of the world’s leading producers. This abundance can ensure a reliable and cost-effective energy supply for other nations and reduce U.S. dependency on foreign sources, enhancing national security.
The intermittent nature of wind and solar power — both GCF darlings — necessitates backup power sources or massive battery storage systems that come with their own environmental and economic costs. The materials needed for batteries, for instance, are often mined in regions with poor environmental records or by using child labor.
By contrast, modern fossil fuel extraction in the United States and Canada is subject to some of the strictest environmental regulations in the world. Ironically, by outsourcing energy production to less regulated countries in the name of “going green,” the United States causes more environmental harm globally.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the subsequent energy crisis in Europe starkly illustrated the dangers of energy dependence. European countries, having underinvested in fossil-fuel infrastructure and a reliance on Russian gas, found themselves in a precarious position.
This example alone is enough for the United States to reset its priorities. Promotion of failed and mostly unwanted “green” policies should be replaced with aggressive development of fossil fuel resources, as well as nuclear power and building robust energy partnerships with allies.
Vijay Jayaraj is a Research Associate at the CO2 Coalition, Arlington, Virginia. He holds a master’s degree in environmental sciences from the University of East Anglia, U.K.
WATCH: “Government Heroin” documentary exposes safer supply scandal in London, Ontario
Canada’s 2nd ‘Million Person March for Children’ against gender ideology to take place Friday
BP Dumping Key Green Energy Business
$8.6 billion committed: Province to fund up to 30 new schools and 8 modernizations in each of next 3 years
-
Daily Caller1 day ago
East Anglia educated environmental scholar says it’s time to “Scrap Green Energy Handouts Once And For All”
-
Daily Caller2 days agoUnion Bigwigs Decline To Endorse Anyone For President Despite Rank-And-File Members Overwhelmingly Backing Trump
-
National1 day agoLiberal House Leader tells gov’t-funded media they must ‘scrutinize’ Conservatives
-
Alberta1 day agoJK Rowling defends Central Alberta politician against LGBT activist: ‘Bully’
-
National2 days agoConservatives plan non-confidence vote against Trudeau gov’t next week, setting up possible fall election
-
COVID-191 day agoDemocracy Fund defending Ontario Amish community against quarter million dollars in COVID fines
-
Bruce Dowbiggin1 day agoThe Explosive Cost of Canada’s Civil Service Hiring Binge
-
conflict1 day agoSecond Wave Of Blasts Sweep Through Lebanon As Hezbollah Walkie-Talkies Suddenly Explode