Kamala Harris is championing a catastrophic Canadian policy
By: Rachel Marsden
VANCOUVER, British Columbia – The carbon tax scam here in Canada is an 
abysmal failure, to the point where it’s increasingly looking like Prime 
Minister Justin Trudeau is going to have to scrap it if he wants any hope of 
getting re-elected. Apparently, US Democratic presidential contender, Vice 
President Kamala Harris, didn’t get the memo.
Harris, like many Democrats, has repeatedly advocated in favor of pricing 
carbon. Because who cares if people have to pay more for fuel, or things that it 
touches in the consumer supply chain — which is everything? “Under my plan, 
there will also be a carbon fee,” Harris said during a CNN town hall earlier 
this year. “We have to monitor whether it is gonna be passed on to consumers, 
but I’m going to tell you, that should never be the reason not to actually put a 
fee in…a particular carbon fee.”
Harris’ statement is a rare gem that has apparently managed to survive her word 
salad chopper. Look, you don’t have to “monitor” whether a government tax will 
be “passed on to consumers.” The answer is yes. There. I’ve just saved American 
taxpayers a fortune in bureaucratic costs.
As for increasing the cost of living not being a reason to impose yet another 
tax — yeah, that sure seems like it would be a wise position to take in an 
election … if the number one issue wasn’t actually cost of living and the 
economy.
Harris seems to be implying that climate change — which the tax is meant to 
“fight” — is more important than people’s ability to make ends meet. That’s a 
great position if you’re running for president of Greenpeace and not of the 
United States. A Gallup poll published in October found that voters place 
climate change at the very bottom of the priority list in this election, with 26 
percent of voters deeming it “not important.” Only transgender rights ranked 
lower. The economy ranked first among the 22 issues, with just 1 percent saying 
that it didn’t matter.
Canada has already been down this road — and is on the verge of making a U-turn. 
Carbon taxes have long been imposed either at the provincial or federal level, 
and they’re now considered so unpopular and useless that Prime Minister Trudeau 
is even being advised by prominent members of his own party to reconsider it 
amid skyrocketing cost of living over the past few years. He’s also heading into 
a federal election next fall against a Conservative Party opponent who has made 
the tax’s total demise a key campaign promise. The fact that it was just 
increased to 17 cents per liter of gas in April adds fuel to a political fire 
with a large enough carbon footprint to stomp out Trudeau’s political career. 
And even the leader of one of the two provinces with its own carbon tax, the 
westernmost province of British Columbia, has said that if the feds scrap it, 
he’ll do the same.
What’s the point of this tax, anyway? The extra cash is taken from all those 
so-called evil jerks who dare to own gas guzzling vehicles instead of nice 
electric ones powered by lithium and cobalt batteries mined by child slaves in 
Africa and which contaminate water and air with actual pollutants rather than 
just the plant food otherwise known as carbon dioxide.
About 90 percent of the carbon tax is then distributed by the government as it 
sees fit in the form of “carbon tax rebates,” based on family size and location. 
The more non-driving kids you have, the more the government will transfer you 
cash they stole from the single guy or gal who needs to fuel up so they can keep 
going to their income-taxed job. In other words, blatant wealth redistribution.
The other 10 percent of this slush fund is supposed to go into grants for 
businesses. There’s limited transparency regarding the recipients, but the 
Canadian government does pride itself on what it calls a “feminist approach to 
environment and climate action,” according to one of its websites.
“Through its climate finance programming, Canada will seek to apply a 
rights-based, gender-responsive and intersectional approach,” it specifies. I’m 
sure the guy driving miles to work in his Chevy pickup every day will be 
thrilled.
But one can at least feel good about the fact that paying a higher tax on fuel 
means that the bad weather will stop, right?
Guess not. In one of the latest examples, an “atmospheric river” hit the Pacific 
Northwest over the weekend. Not long ago, that used to just be called “heavy 
rain,” or “autumn” in this part of the world. Now it’s an excuse to bombard 
people with climate change propaganda and guilt. Guess my paper straws haven’t 
managed to get the job done. Maybe we could just go back to tossing recyclables 
in the trash, since things seemed better when we were all doing that. The 
climate tax didn’t even ensure that people in Vancouver cleaned the drains, so 
there was some flooding.
“As human-caused climate change continues to warm the planet, the number of days 
that the western U.S. will experience atmospheric rivers is projected to 
increase,” according to the US Department of Agriculture.
"Atmospheric rivers are also expected to be bigger and more hazardous on 
average.”
Sounds like something that only higher taxes can fix. And no one seems to 
understand that better than Kamala Harris, clearly unbothered about pratfalling 
straight into the same hurricane of citizen outrage that Canadian leftists have 
started to flee.
COPYRIGHT 2024 RACHEL MARSDEN