Kamala Harris has flip-flopped on any number of issues since the Democratic [sic] Party undemocratically selected her as their candidate, but one issue she’s always believed in is climate change — and all the radical “green” initiatives that accompany it.

“Harris calls climate change an existential threat and says the United States needs to act urgently to address it,” The Washington Post reports. “As a presidential candidate in 2019, she released a $10 trillion climate plan that calls for investing in renewable energy, holding polluters accountable, helping communities affected by climate change and protecting natural resources.”

In other words, Harris was already currying favor with the green energy crowd back in 2019 — at the expense of American workers and our energy independence as a nation.

Moreover, the Post adds, “As California attorney general, she prosecuted oil companies for environmental violations. As vice president, she was the tie-breaking vote in the Senate for the Inflation Reduction Act, which provided about $370 billion to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below their 2005 levels by the end of this decade.”

One of the signature initiatives of the Biden-Harris administration was the aforementioned Inflation Reduction Act, which neither reduced inflation nor sparked domestic energy development as promised but did pump billions of taxpayer dollars into “green” projects. Adding insult to injury, Biden and Harris continued pushing solar and wind energy along with an expansion of electric vehicles.

“Trump’s campaign,” reports Reuters, “has said the Biden-Harris administration’s efforts to support adoption of electric vehicles and eventually curb the use of fossil fuels poses a risk to the nation’s power grid at a time of soaring electricity demand. It pledged changes that would ease permitting for new power plants.”

As for other Biden-Harris initiatives, Trump “opposes U.S. auto-emissions regulations announced in March, lumping them into a group of Biden’s green initiatives that he says are distorting markets, driving up prices and limiting consumer choice,” Reuters adds. “Trump has also promised to put an end to the offshore wind industry, already struggling under the weight of high costs and local opposition to projects.”

That weight occasionally forces politicians like Harris to waffle on issues like fracking, but extreme environmentalists in the Democrat Party usually get their way in the end.

Recently, the U.S. Oil and Gas Association asked rather rhetorically on X, “Harris’s new position in Oct is she now opposes fracking and no longer supports her position in July when she changed her position to support fracking which was subsequently a change in her prior, prior position of June which was to oppose fracking? Got it.”

That’s the essence of what we can expect if Kamala Harris becomes the next president. Pennsylvania’s in play in this year’s presidential election, so it’s no wonder she wants to appeal to Keystone State voters. But once she’s safely in the White House, what’s to keep her from running back into the arms of the radical Left — from defaulting to her own extreme positions?

As The Washington Times reported this summer, “When President Biden bowed to the pressure of Democratic Party elites and pulled out of the presidential race, he also gave the radical environmental movement one last gift: Vice President Kamala Harris.”

Harris wants to regulate every part of our lives, from the type of cars we drive to the food we eat. That’s going to cost billions of dollars, and we’re all going to pay for it.

As the Times noted, “Mr. Biden spent a comparatively paltry $369 billion on the green agenda by passing the Inflation Reduction Act. That inflation is still reaching into the pocket of every working American speaks to its failure. Mr. Biden, however, has spent less than 4% of what Ms. Harris wanted to, and that should frighten anyone who steps into a grocery store.”

Maybe that’s why Harris has tried to sound more like a moderate than a climate extremist. Americans have heard doom and gloom predictions about melting ice caps and rising sea levels for decades. Instead, what’s rising is the price we pay for consumer goods, foodstuffs, and energy. For most hardworking folks, putting food on the table and paying utility bills are more pressing issues than worrying about Al Gore’s long overdue climate Armageddon.

“As climate policy turns from distant, grandiose promises of future carbon cuts into the very real prospect of present-day energy price hikes, U.S. voters are asking whether it’s worth it,” writes skeptical environmentalist Bjorn Lomborg in The Wall Street Journal.

American voters will make their choice on Tuesday, and it’s a simple one: Harris has a history of cozying up to climate extremists, while Trump has supported — and briefly fostered — American energy independence all along.