American Experiment is pleased to announce we are releasing a groundbreaking new study detailing the high cost renewable energy mandates in Minnesota. On the 2018 campaign trail, many DFL candidates, including Governor Tim Walz, said they would make obtaining 50 percent of Minnesota’s electricity by 2030 a top priority in their policy platform. Now DFL’ers in Minnesota are pushing their own version of the Green New Deal, mandating that Minnesota must get 100 percent of its electricity from “carbon free” resources by 2050. Our study found that attempting to achieve a 50 percent renewable energy mandate would cost Minnesota $80.2...
Politicians in St. Paul are itching to spend more money. They claim it will be someone else’s money spent on you. But beware. To borrow from P. J. O’Rourke, the good news is that the rich will pay for everything. The bad news is that you’re rich.
The following article is a guest column by Kristi Rosenquist, a Grassroots Citizen Activist in Minnesota: When President Trump said, “The noise [from wind turbines] causes cancer,” the reactions were immediate. Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley called Trump’s statement “idiotic.” Democratic Presidential candidate and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders mocked Trump in a Bernie 2020 video – standing alongside a road in Iowa with wind turbines in the background. And, no discussion of wind energy, no matter how minor, would be complete without the comparison to “dirty coal:” “A power source that does cause many health problems, including cancer, is coal, an extremely dirty...
If adding wind to the grid is so affordable, as renewable energy advocates claim, why do utility companies need to charge Iowa families an additional $240 per year for their electricity?
To think that new intervention will cure the ill effects of previous intervention is the triumph of hope over experience. At the very least, the new intervention will have unintended consequences of its own and to soothe these will require further interventions in turn.
Given Minnesota’s leadership in the metro and the governor’s mansion, if you are cheering on the idea of punishing sanctuary cities, be careful what you wish for. Minnesota’s already overburdened welfare state would grow if the administration carried out this policy. And imagine, given Minnesota’s free-for-all at the voting booth and loose absentee ballot laws, how voter fraud could change the state forever.
Should we persist with policies like increased minimum wages and 'Ban the box' laws because their intentions are noble, or do we junk them because their outcomes are harmful?
Those who advocate for Minnesota's "Green New Deal" are not the adults in the room. How can one credibly claim that global warming is an "existential crisis," yet refuse to utilize the most reliable, affordable, and scaleable sources of carbon-dioxide free electricity available? I submit that they cannot. But do we need to make a Green New Deal at all? The following article argues that we do not.