OPINION:
When leftists start to talk about affordability, hold on to your wallet.
Voters went to the polls in New York City, New Jersey and Virginia on Tuesday and elected Democrats, one of them an avowed socialist. All promised in their campaigns to lower the cost of living. Unfortunately, what they have in mind will instead increase the prices of virtually everything, thanks to their hostility toward our natural energy resources.
High inflation is one of the legacies of Joseph R. Biden’s presidency, and it began on his first day in office with a series of direct attacks on domestic production of oil and natural gas. It raised the price of energy dramatically, driving up the cost of almost everything produced in our economy, and it was done on purpose.
The environmental left’s plan always includes increasing the cost of fossil fuels because they want to force people to abandon them. Just look at the candidates who won Tuesday. In New York City, Zohran Mamdani, the socialist, views energy policy as a “social justice” issue. While in the New York State Assembly, he sponsored the bill that authorized state-owned renewable energy projects, with the obvious goal of governmental control of the entire sector and the elimination of fossil fuels as a consumer option. Mr. Mamdani believes the government should decide who gets how much electricity and when.
Because nothing says “affordability” like good old socialist rationing.
In New Jersey, Democrat Mikie Sherrill defeated Republican Jack Ciattarelli. As a result, the state will continue to be a participating member of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. This multistate carbon tax scheme artificially and deliberately raises the cost of electricity for residents.
In Virginia, the RGGI question was in the other direction because the commonwealth is not a member under current Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican who is term-limited. The Democrat elected to succeed him this week, Abigail Spanberger, says she will return Virginia to RGGI and make her residents pay as much as $500 million more for electricity each year.
These are insane policies designed to influence the behavior of consumers by intentionally causing economic pain while making the bogus claim that it will all somehow boost “affordability.”
As you might expect, however, Democratic dishonesty about extreme environmental goals is not limited to those three jurisdictions. The U.S. Supreme Court may be about to take up a case from Boulder, Colorado, in which the litigants want oil companies to cover the specific financial costs local governments say they encounter while dealing with climate change in their communities. “Accountability” is what they said they were after when they filed the lawsuit, because of the alleged local financial drain. The truth is, they were never looking at restitution for specific harms at all.
In reality, it is “somewhat of a convoluted way to achieve the goals of a carbon tax,” said David Bookbinder, a longtime environmental lawyer who spent years as a key part of the legal team on the Boulder case. He made this revealing confession on a panel at a Federalist Society event, describing how environmental activists are using the courts to tighten the economic screws on unwitting consumers of energy.
“You sue an oil company, an oil company is liable. The oil company then passes that liability on to the people who are buying its products,” Mr. Bookbinder said. “In some sense, it is the most efficient way.”
This backdoor carbon tax is exactly like all the other environmental deceptions: dressed up in language to appeal to the public but intended to punish the very people it purports to help.
Lest you think these threats are only domestic, the assaults come from international origins as well. Just last month, the Trump administration had to beat back an attempt to implement a global carbon tax through a United Nations-linked organization that governs the shipping industry. The plan to raise the costs of shipped goods by 10% or more in the name of fighting climate change failed only after the U.S. threatened to retaliate against countries that supported it.
“President Trump has made it clear that the United States will not accept any international environmental agreement that unduly or unfairly burdens the United States or harms the interests of the American people,” read a statement jointly issued by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy.
That’s a policy that protects the people of this country. What Democrats offer — whether it’s seizing the means of production or slapping a crushing carbon tax on everyone — is the opposite of that. Always remember this: They may rail against perceived enemies in the energy industry, but it’s you they will punish.
• Tim Murtaugh is a Washington Times columnist and founder of Line Drive Public Affairs. He served as a senior adviser on the 2024 Trump campaign and as communications director on the 2020 Trump campaign.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.