We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

The presidential campaign for Vice President Kamala Harris has received considerable criticism for holding vague policy positions. In the case of energy, the Democratic candidate has been a moving target, especially with regards to her revolving-door stance on fracking. 

Her activist supporters include anti-fossil fuel crusader Bill McKibben, who said in September that Harris should be forgiven for not running on a platform of being opposed to fracking. He explained during a speech in New York, according to Bloomberg News, that the election outcome in Pennsylvania would have a big impact on the outcome for the country. 

Her stance on fracking, McKibben said, “doesn’t make me happy, but it’s obvious why we need to cut her slack here.” Remarking on her moderate stances on a number of issues, including fracking. Supporter Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., also begged voters to ignore her past statements, and told NBC News that she was being “pragmatic” and that she is only “doing what she thinks is right in order to win the election.”

“It’s clear Kamala Harris is lying about her positions because she’s just trying to appear as a moderate to fool voters. But voters are too smart for it, and it’s clear the environmental left isn’t falling for it, either. If she was genuine in her position, they would be protesting her every day of the week,” Larry Behrens, communications director with Power the Future, told Just the News. 

Green groups believe she’s anti-fossil fuel

When running for president in 2019, Harris expressed support for a ban on hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, a drilling and completion technique that released huge amounts of oil and gas from previously inaccessible hard rock layers, called shale, deep underground. She then reversed her stance this summer, saying she’s actually not for a ban on fracking. 

Harris has taken other anti-fossil fuel positions, such as cosponsoring the “Green New Deal”. As California’s attorney general, Harris sued the Obama-Biden administration to stop fracking off the coast of California. 

For this election, Harris is trying to unburden her campaign from these positions she’s held and present herself now as a supporter of the fossil fuel industry. During her September debate with former President Donald Trump, Harris boasted of being part of an administration that is overseeing record-high production rates, and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, made the same boast. 

Despite Harris and Walz claiming oil and gas production rates as an accomplishment, Harris’ supporters include the Green New Deal Network, which didn’t endorse President Joe Biden but has endorsed Harris. 

“The Kamala Coalition will defeat climate change, lower costs, and deliver what working people need, regardless of their race, class, gender, or geography. This election will come down to groups like ours turning our people out, and weʻre all in,” Kaniela Ing, national director of the Green New Deal Network said in a statement. 

The Natural Resource Defense Council has also endorsed Harris, saying “She understands the need to act on climate. She grasps the opportunity to supercharge a generation of prosperity by making American workers and businesses the winners in the global shift away from the fossil fuels of the past to the cleaner ways that power our future.” 

Just an act to get votes?

Various attempts to get her to clarify why she changed her position in this election have only added to the confusion and uncertainty. The waters were further muddied last week when the Harris campaign’s Climate Engagement Director Camila Thorndike told Politico Pro that Harris isn’t supporting the expansion of drilling, but she wouldn’t ban fracking. 

In 2023, 64% of U.S. crude oil production came from formations requiring hydraulic fracturing. It’s not clear how a second Harris administration could limit drilling while not pushing for restrictions on fracking. 

In a post on X, Thorndike appeared to contradict her claim that Harris would oppose expansion of oil and gas production. She said she didn’t explain herself well in the interview and reiterated that Harris doesn’t support a ban on fracking and again touted Harris’ supposed support for oil and gas. Harris “cast the tie-breaking vote on the biggest pro-climate law ever, which, yes, opened new fracking leases. People know that’s her position,” Thorndike wrote. 

Thorndike has been an outspoken opponent of the oil and gas industry. The Washington Free Beacon reports that Thorndike, who worked for the anti-fossil fuel Rewiring America firm, called on people who work in the oil and gas industry to “consider putting their talents elsewhere.” She’s accused the industry of “ecoterrorism,” and claimed it weaponizes “individualism, white supremacy+toxic patriarchy.” 

Many of her critics say Harris’ moderate current moderate stances are just an act to get votes. Kevin Mooney, senior investigative researcher for Restoration News told Just the News, that Harris is technically the incumbent and a lot can be inferred by what the current administration has done. Along with its democratic allies, the Biden-Harris administration has taken 250 actions that industry supporters say have made it harder and more expensive to produce oil and gas. 

“I don’t take what she says very seriously, and apparently her anti-fracking supporters don’t either. They say the quiet part out loud. She’s just saying what she needs to say to get elected, but they know the real Kamala Harris is going to double down on shutting down the natural gas industry, which is dangerous for all of us,” Mooney said. 

Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western Energy Alliance, commented that it’s telling that Harris’ positions are being communicated through her aides rather than her speaking to voters directly. 

“In the absence of a clear statement from the candidate herself, it appears that this ‘climate engagement director’ is engaging in wishful thinking on what she hopes the policy will be. In the meantime, voters have basically concluded that the change in position is to win their votes, not an expression of true support for American oil and natural gas,” Sgamma said. 

Starving the industry

Andrew Lewis, president and CEO of Commonwealth Foundation, told Just the News that, while Harris might not be providing much clarity on energy issues, actions speak louder than words. “Pennsylvania is poised to be the decisive state in determining who will occupy the White House in 2025. With energy as a dominant issue in the state, voters are seeking clarity around Harris’ position on fracking,” he said. 

Polling by the Commonwealth Foundation found that 80% of Pennsylvania voters believe that natural gas drilling is important to the state’s economy, and 75% support expanding natural gas infrastructure, such as pipelines. Only 23% support the Biden Administration’s pause of new LNG-export permits. 

“It’s important to evaluate our officials by what they do, not just what they say. As Vice President, Harris has championed policies that are damaging to Pennsylvania’s energy industry. By pausing new LNG export permits, halting the ability to transport LNG by rail, and impeding pipeline and infrastructure development, the Biden-Harris Administration is starving the fracking industry,” Lewis said. 

If Harris had hoped to win over more voters by appearing as a moderate on energy policy and a supporter of American oil and gas, it appears her past positions, comments of her aides, and most of all, her endorsements from climate activists are raising more doubts than assurances.