In a surprising turn of events, Vice President Kamala Harris has inadvertently admitted that the Green New Deal, a highly controversial and economically disruptive climate initiative, remains a core component of her policy agenda. This revelation emerged during her first major media interview since becoming the Democratic presidential candidate, where she openly discussed her longstanding commitment to the principles underlying the Green New Deal, despite widespread opposition.
The Green New Deal, introduced in 2019 by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA), has faced criticism for its radical approach to addressing climate change. Critics argue that its ambitious goals, which include drastically reducing carbon emissions and transitioning to renewable energy, would cripple the U.S. economy, lead to massive job losses, and impose unsustainable financial burdens on American taxpayers. Although the Green New Deal failed to gain sufficient support for passage in Congress, its core tenets have been subtly embedded in various pieces of legislation under the Biden administration.
https://x.com/ajplus/status/1090278730474446848
During the interview, Harris was asked about her stance on the Green New Deal, to which she responded, "I have always believed – and I have worked on it – that the climate crisis is real, that it is an urgent matter to which we should apply metrics that include holding ourselves to deadlines around time." This statement, coupled with her assertion that her "values have not changed," has sparked a wave of criticism from conservatives who accuse her of covertly pushing the Green New Deal through other legislative means, such as the Inflation Reduction Act.
The Inflation Reduction Act, signed into law in 2022, was initially marketed as a measure to combat inflation by reducing the federal deficit. However, it has since been revealed that the Act includes significant provisions aimed at advancing climate-related goals. Many see this as a backdoor attempt to implement the Green New Deal without explicitly labeling it as such. Harris's recent comments have only fueled these suspicions, leading to accusations of deception and a lack of transparency from the administration.
https://x.com/RealSaavedra/status/1096499001170542592
The backlash has been swift and severe, with critics pointing out that Harris's admission contradicts earlier statements made by President Joe Biden, who has repeatedly distanced himself from the Green New Deal. During a 2020 presidential debate, Biden explicitly stated that he did not support the Green New Deal, instead promoting his own climate plan, which he claimed was distinct from the more radical proposals put forth by progressive Democrats.
Harris's inadvertent disclosure has also reignited debates over the scientific validity of man-made climate change and the broader implications of implementing policies based on the Green New Deal. Skeptics argue that there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that human activities are the primary drivers of global warming. They point to historical climate data that shows natural fluctuations in temperature long before industrialization, suggesting that current climate trends may be part of a broader, natural cycle.
Moreover, the globalist agenda behind the Green New Deal has come under scrutiny, with some alleging that it is less about saving the planet and more about redistributing wealth and consolidating power. Proponents of this view argue that the Green New Deal's "Climate Justice" protocols, which call for wealthier nations to financially support poorer countries in their climate efforts, are a thinly veiled attempt to establish a new form of economic feudalism under the guise of environmentalism.
As Harris continues to face criticism for her comments, the incident underscores the deep divisions within the Democratic Party and the broader American electorate over climate policy. With the 2024 presidential election on the horizon, Harris's stance on the Green New Deal is likely to remain a contentious issue, potentially influencing the outcome of the race and the future direction of U.S. climate policy.
