With Election Day just a few weeks away, the one thing that is certain about Vice President and Democratic nominee Kamala Harris’ energy policy is that…no one is certain about where she really stands.
EID and media outlets alike have highlighted Harris’ marked shift from her first presidential campaign in 2019, which saw an embrace of far-left energy positions such as banning all fracking and eliminating the filibuster to pass the Green New Deal, to her current embrace of record oil production.
Media scrutiny has intensified this week, with CNN’s Erin Burnett calling out Harris’ “very sharp turn” on energy positions. One of these core pivots, as reported by CNN’s KFile founding member Andrew Kaczynski this week, is her previous pledge to prosecute oil companies over emissions:
“Archived material from Harris’s 2020 campaign found more than a dozen mentions of prosecuting Big Oil either for pollution or climate change. Citing climate change as an urgent threat, Harris said aggressive action was imminently needed.”
So which Harris will voters get, should she win the election? Steven Winberg, the former acting U.S. Department of Energy Under Secretary for Energy, wrote this week in the Washington Times that the answer could come in a forthcoming Solicitor General brief requested by the Supreme Court on the viability of Honolulu’s climate lawsuit.
The SG’s position on climate litigation, Winberg argued, would presumably align with Harris’ stance, given she is “the new standard-bearer of the administration and the Democratic Party”:
“Unlike campaign promises and omissions, legal filings are binding. Overtures to swing voters who support fracking mean nothing if climate lawsuits are allowed to prevail…
“If the Biden-Harris administration endorses climate change lawsuits with the full weight of the Department of Justice, voters will have a clear picture of where Ms. Harris truly stands on oil and natural gas. It won’t be on the side of everyday Americans.”
And the stakes remain high. In a recent piece, economics editor of the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal Jordan McGillis argues that if SCOTUS allows climate cases to proceed, the lawsuits “could raise gas costs for us all”:
“Now it may be up to the US Supreme Court to set the matter straight: Is climate change an area of special federal interest or can states give Big Oil the boot? If the latter, the outcome from 50 new sets of legal hoops is inevitably higher energy prices for all Americans.”
Harris’ Bet: Flip-Flops for Votes
The fact that restrictive energy prices drive up household costs may help explain why Harris has avoided her previous hardline positions. CNN’s Kaczynski emphasized “the delicate politics of energy,” as well as a recent Gallup poll that ranks climate change as the second least important issue to voters, ranking far behind the economy.
Similarly, a recent Commonwealth Foundation poll found that voters in Pennsylvania – a must-win state for Harris – support increased investment in natural gas and view it as key to bringing down energy costs.
Jeff Eshelman, President and CEO of the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA), spoke more about Harris’ dilemma with Fox News:
“This election season, Vice President Harris is taking credit for production records because she knows we need more energy, not less. Despite her policies and remarks derived from environmentalists’ talking points about shutting down our industry, I believe Harris also knows American oil and natural gas producers have the cleanest oil and natural gas operations in the world and adhere to the highest environmental and safety standards.”
But how will Harris actually govern?
Harris’ climate engagement director Camila Thorndike added to the confusion when asked by POLITICO Pro if Harris would support “aggressive actions” like declaring a climate emergency or stopping all natural gas exports. Thorndike said the quiet part out loud that Harris is essentially just doing “what it takes to win’:
“So we are spending all of our time and energy and focus on what it takes to win… Clearly, climate emergencies are all around us, driving a sense of urgency to do what it takes to win and build on the accomplishments of the last four years and make possible any kind of policy landscape where these conversations can continue…” (emphasis added)
Bottom Line: The question remains if VP Harris is saying what she needs to say in order to get elected or if her 2024 policy stances on energy will actually be how she governs – making the pending Solicitor General brief of even greater importance.
Read the full story at EIDClimate.org.
The post Election 2024: VP Harris’ “Very Sharp Turn” on Energy Raises Questions, SG Brief Could Give Answers appeared first on .