Kamala Harris’s running mate has an unquestioning devotion to the loudest, most radical environmentalist voices.
Minnesota governor Tim Walz, Kamala Harris’s running mate, is a committed Green New Dealer with a record of falling for environmentalist scams and blocking conventional-energy development.
In June, Walz pledged Minnesota to only use wind, solar, and other environmentalist-favored sources of power by the year 2040. “We are going to see these projects get in the ground, we are going to see them create jobs, we are going to see them create energy independence for Minnesota, and at the same time we are doing our part to reduce carbon emissions,” he said. At the start of next year, Minnesotans will be legally required to get 25 percent of their electricity from green sources, while for the state’s largest utility, Xcel Energy, the requirement will be 30 percent. This law will also forbid Minnesotans from selling conventional power to other states. According to legal complaints against Walz from neighboring states, it is “constitutionally suspect” and “an improper attempt by Minnesota to export its wholly internal energy-policy decisions to its neighboring states in patent violation of those states’ rights and sovereignty.”
Minnesota has 132 policies and fiscal incentives that encourage the use of green energy, according to the Database of State Incentives for Renewables & Efficiency. That’s more than any other state with the exception of California, which is sunnier and far more naturally suited to the generation of solar power. Minnesota’s lucrative financial incentives, which include a state energy rebate, renewable-energy credits, property-tax exemptions, and an exemption from the 7 percent state sales tax, cause taxpayers to bear much of the cost of green energy.
“The Biden-Harris administration is delivering unprecedented funding and resources to help Minnesota fight climate change, safeguard public health and grow its economy,” Debra Shore, the Environmental Protection Agency administrator responsible for Minnesota, said in a July press statement on authorizing Walz to spend $200 million on “climate-smart food systems.” “EPA congratulates Gov. Walz for his leadership and innovative plans to drastically cut greenhouse gas emissions by decarbonizing the state’s food system across agricultural, industrial and waste sectors, to building a greener, cleaner, healthier future for all Minnesotans.”
According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, Minnesotans get roughly 4 percent of their electricity from solar power, which is only slightly more than what the rest of the country derives from solar power. Meanwhile, the state has the 23rd-highest carbon dioxide emissions in America. This means that Walz’s green giveaways and attempts to pick energy-source winners and losers haven’t been particularly effective at meeting his and his allies’ goals.
Nevertheless, having spent hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars on their pet projects, Walz is vehemently praised by extremist environmentalists such as Greenpeace. “As Governor, Tim Walz has made huge strides to address the climate crisis,” the far-left Sunrise Movement, best known for vandalizing works of art in the panic over global warming, said in a press statement. “He has done this by pitching climate action as a way to make people’s everyday lives better, create good-paying green jobs, and invest in making communities stronger. That is a winning message, and one the Democratic ticket should put at the forefront of their agenda.”
Most solar subsidies are paid out to individuals who have residential solar-panel installations — or as a 30 percent federal tax credit. These subsidies are so high that some solar-leasing companies have been installing rooftop systems, which run at least $10,000, at no up-front cost to the consumer. Moreover, some companies go door to door in Minnesota to sell time-shares for “community solar gardens” to unsuspecting environmentalists in a widespread scam. When individuals sign up, they get locked into a yearslong contract for communal solar panels that generally don’t even generate enough electricity to power their house. Additionally, if a resident moves out of the area, he might still be liable for his share of the cost, making some such agreements virtually impossible to exit.
