Never say never. And never did she say never when it comes to hydraulic fracking, according to US presidential hopeful Kamal Harris. Even if she did.Confused? You’re not alone.In an apparent policy reversal, the Democratic nominee told CNN in an interview on Thursday — her first and only one of the campaign thus far — that she has no intention of banning the controversial drilling technique that accounts for most of the US’ oil and gas production.“I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020 that I would not ban fracking, as vice president, I did not ban fracking, as president I will not ban fracking.”“I kept my word and as president I will keep my word.”.But even CNN’s fact checkers cast doubt on that claim. Harris did not actually appear in a debate as a candidate for president in 2020 but was rather repeating the position of then-candidate Joe Biden on the issue.However, the network noted she supported the Green New Deal in Congress and in her only debate as a presidential hopeful during the Democratic primaries in 2019 unequivocally stated her opposition to the technique of shattering tight rock formations to increase production of oil and natural gas.“There’s no question I’m in favour of banning fracking,” she said at the time. .The issue is particularly sensitive in swing states like Pennsylvania where fracking has sparked a natural gas drilling renaissance.When pressed further on the issue of climate change, Harris said oil and gas production can exist alongside emissions reduction.“We have set goals for the United States of America and by extension, the globe, around when we should meet certain standards for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, as an example. That value has not changed,” she said. “What I have seen is that we can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking.”.It’s a moot point; even as president Harris has no authority to ban fracking except on federal land. And in fact, the Biden administration implemented several anti-industry policies aimed at restricting development of federal waters off Texas and the Eastern Seaboard, and onshore Alaska.Even so, industry types are leery of a potential Harris administration. As a California prosecutor, she launched several lawsuits against major oil companies including Chevron and Plains All-American for hazardous goods mishandling and an offshore oil spill in 2015.As attorney general, she also investigated ExxonMobil for misleading the public on climate change and succeeded in securing an USD$86 million settlement from Volkswagen for cheating on diesel emissions tests,Harris’ about-face on the issue appeared to be “an effort to avoid alienating both producer-aligned and climate-forward voters, especially in natural gas-intensive Pennsylvania, which is home to 19 electoral votes,” ClearView Energy Partners said in a research note for its clients.Opposing it, quite literally, could cost her the election it added.
Never say never. And never did she say never when it comes to hydraulic fracking, according to US presidential hopeful Kamal Harris. Even if she did.Confused? You’re not alone.In an apparent policy reversal, the Democratic nominee told CNN in an interview on Thursday — her first and only one of the campaign thus far — that she has no intention of banning the controversial drilling technique that accounts for most of the US’ oil and gas production.“I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020 that I would not ban fracking, as vice president, I did not ban fracking, as president I will not ban fracking.”“I kept my word and as president I will keep my word.”.But even CNN’s fact checkers cast doubt on that claim. Harris did not actually appear in a debate as a candidate for president in 2020 but was rather repeating the position of then-candidate Joe Biden on the issue.However, the network noted she supported the Green New Deal in Congress and in her only debate as a presidential hopeful during the Democratic primaries in 2019 unequivocally stated her opposition to the technique of shattering tight rock formations to increase production of oil and natural gas.“There’s no question I’m in favour of banning fracking,” she said at the time. .The issue is particularly sensitive in swing states like Pennsylvania where fracking has sparked a natural gas drilling renaissance.When pressed further on the issue of climate change, Harris said oil and gas production can exist alongside emissions reduction.“We have set goals for the United States of America and by extension, the globe, around when we should meet certain standards for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, as an example. That value has not changed,” she said. “What I have seen is that we can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking.”.It’s a moot point; even as president Harris has no authority to ban fracking except on federal land. And in fact, the Biden administration implemented several anti-industry policies aimed at restricting development of federal waters off Texas and the Eastern Seaboard, and onshore Alaska.Even so, industry types are leery of a potential Harris administration. As a California prosecutor, she launched several lawsuits against major oil companies including Chevron and Plains All-American for hazardous goods mishandling and an offshore oil spill in 2015.As attorney general, she also investigated ExxonMobil for misleading the public on climate change and succeeded in securing an USD$86 million settlement from Volkswagen for cheating on diesel emissions tests,Harris’ about-face on the issue appeared to be “an effort to avoid alienating both producer-aligned and climate-forward voters, especially in natural gas-intensive Pennsylvania, which is home to 19 electoral votes,” ClearView Energy Partners said in a research note for its clients.Opposing it, quite literally, could cost her the election it added.
