In her lone interview since being gifted the Democratic Party’s nomination from President Joe Biden almost six weeks ago, Vice President Kamala Harris told CNN’s Dana Bash that she no longer wants to ban hydraulic fracturing. That is a real change of heart, given that she promised more than once to do exactly that during her brief run for the party’s 2020 nomination.
Had Harris decided to leave her answer at that, it could have been believable to many. However, she went on to embellish that statement by adding: “I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020.” That is a statement that simply is not accurate.
The only debate in which Harris participated in after being tapped as Biden’s running mate was her showing against then-Vice President Mike Pence. There, Harris twice avoided directly answering a question about whether she personally favored a ban on that longstanding, well-regulated and safe industrial process, saying only that: “Joe Biden will not end fracking. He has been very clear about that.” She later reiterated the same answer.
In an appearance on CNN following the airing of Harris’ edited, pre-recorded interview with Bash, CNN reporter Daniel Dale said he had gone over the transcript of the Harris-Pence debate “and nowhere in there does she make clear that she had abandoned her previous support for a fracking ban.”
This is a crucial point that American voters must understand in assessing Harris’ real intentions where energy policy is concerned — since about 70% of overall U.S. oil and gas production involves “fracking.” Her decision to equivocate and mislead both Bash and the public in the only interview she has held to date is hardly an adequate response to such a simple, straight-forward question. Unfortunately for voters, it was not the only misleading answer Harris gave Thursday as it relates to energy.
In a Friday email, Aaron Johnson, vice president for public and legislative affairs for the Western Energy Alliance, pointed out that Harris also misled the country when she claimed to have voted to expand federal oil and gas leasing.
“Federal data shows leasing is at historic lows under her tenure as VP,” Johson points out. “Recent analysis by Western Energy Alliance (WEA) of data by the Bureau of Land Management shows the number of onshore acres offered for lease sales, the number of leases issued, and the number of acres issued under those leases each trend down significantly.”
Indeed, Interior Secretary Deb Haaland — herself a longtime opponent of oil and gas development before receiving her appointment from President Biden — has steadfastly refused to comply with federal statutory leasing requirements. Data provided by the WEA shows the number of acres offered for oil and gas leasing declined from 7.362 million in 2019 to just 291,000 in 2023, and the number of new leases fell from 1,841 to only 144 over the same period.
If Harris had truly been advocating for more oil and gas leasing during the last 3.5 years — and there is no record of any such thing happening — nobody at DOI was listening.
It is more obvious with each passing day that the Harris-Walz strategy in this campaign is to avoid giving direct, detailed answers about their plans for energy policy should they be elected. Having already established long, well-defined records as opponents of a strong U.S. oil and gas industry, they hope to skate through the next 70 days by just offering the kinds of winks and nods that Dana Bash sadly allowed them to offer up on Thursday without insisting on clarity with follow-up questions.
American voters deserve better, both from Harris and Gov. Tim Walz, and also from a media establishment that always seems to become studiously lazy and incurious when talking to Democratic presidential contenders.
Featured Image Credit: The White House
