Known for its high cost of living and some of the highest prices for electricity and fuel in America, California’s growing costs of living, housing, and transportation—coupled with crime, smash-and-grab robberies, staggering homelessness population, pollution, and congestion—has resulted in many businesses and individuals fleeing the state and its cities in search of more affordable living conditions.
According to the California Policy Institute, since 2005, more than 237 businesses have left California, including 11 Fortune 1000 companies such as AT&T, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Exxon Mobil, and Chevron. The Golden State has also experienced more than 343,000 residents moving out of California—the highest exodus of any state in the country.
Presidential candidate Kamala Harris has had a long relationship with California, serving as San Francisco’s district attorney for two terms from 2004 to 2010, and eventually serving as California Attorney General from 2011 until 2017. Yet, despite the high California costs of living, as well as businesses and residents migrating away, Harris supports the state’s policies that may potentially pose harm to America’s energy, agricultural, economic, employment, and living standards, as well as the future of national security.
While the state government, supported by Harris, specifies that electricity from solar and wind is critical to meeting California’s ambitious requirement to switch to 90% carbon-free electricity by 2035 (and 100% by 2045), these “green” wind and solar projects are primarily financed with taxpayer money, disguised from taxpayers as “Government subsidies.”
The “green” electricity policy has resulted in California continuously shutting down coal, natural gas, and nuclear-generating stations that are reliable in providing uninterrupted electricity; however, these “green” electricity sources of wind and solar are not clean, green, renewable, or sustainable. And they also further endanger wildlife.
Unable to address how occasionally generated electricity from wind and solar will help alleviate the coming increase in electricity demand, Harris has not commented on the reality that is becoming increasingly apparent—these “green” solutions are not working, especially as electricity demands are projected to double by 2050 due to AI, charging of EVs, data centers, government-mandated electric heating and cooking, and charging grid-backup batteries.
These alternative solutions, such as wind and solar, cannot produce thousands of essential products requiring petrochemical feedstocks. Humanity requires these products and fuels from fossil fuels, but “renewable” energy sources only generate occasional electricity, posing challenges to producing products or fuels.
There has been a steady drop in California refineries due to the state’s regulatory and tax landscape, leading to the gasoline and diesel supply decreasing while the demand is increasing.
The falling production rates and working refineries in the state are giving California regulators and legislators what they want: less crude oil produced and consumed. The price for this declining production and usage is being paid for by Californians, particularly low and middle-income households.
Harris is campaigning to eliminate the U.S. of oil, fully backing California Governor Newsom’s efforts to continually decrease California’s in-state oil production. The presidential candidate’s continued support of Newsom’s energy policies will force the state, which has the 4th largest economy in the world, to become the only state in the country that imports most of its crude oil energy from foreign countries. This dependence on foreign countries to aid in the state’s crude oil energy demand has already shown signs of increase, growing from five percent of imported crude oil in 1992 to almost 60 percent of today’s total imported crude oil.
Harris’ support of this continuation in the decrease of crude oil production and consumption may potentially hurt businesses that make cars, trucks, aircraft, boats, ships, farming equipment, medical equipment and supplies, communications equipment, military equipment, etc., which demand crude oil for their supply chain of products.
