Kamala means lotus in Sanskrit, and the flower symbolizes rebirth. True to her name, the Democrat nominee Kamala Harris is undergoing a significant transformation. Once billed as the most Leftist candidate in an American presidential election, she is now changing her long-held positions on crucial issues. Just days after President Biden (literally) handed over his nomination to the Vice President, her campaign began reversing many of her previous stances to make VP Harris a more palatable choice for the next POTUS.
In one such effort, her campaign has already made it clear that if elected president, Harris will not seek to ban fracking, also known as hydraulic fracturing, a practice that has a substantial impact on the economy.
Energy, especially the oil segment, is a key issue that is not only a national priority but also directly impacts ordinary Americans' lives and purses. Hence, the presidential candidates’ previous records, stated opinions, and proposed policies regarding oil, energy, and renewable energy can and do sway voters at the booth.
Former President Trump has been vocal about boosting energy production and making America energy independent, even turning the country into an oil exporter. His proven record in office gives him a clear advantage over Harris, whose views are highly contentious and detrimental to the country’s larger interests.
Few have forgotten Harris’s stand on energy during her tenure as senator, a candidate in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, and as the Vice President. In 2019, she told a climate crowd during the CNN town hall, “There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking.” Earlier, in 2016, as California’s attorney general, she had filed a lawsuit against the Obama administration’s Interior Department, challenging potential fracking off the state’s coastline. At the time, Harris opined, “We must balance our energy needs with our longstanding commitment to protecting our natural resources and public health,” stating that fracking activities pose a “threat to the health and well-being of California communities.”
Fracking is the process of breaking up rock formations to extract oil and gas from deep underground. Supporters credit the process with making America less oil-dependent, nearly doubling natural gas production, creating jobs, and boosting the economy. On the other hand, critics cite water contamination, environmental pollution, use of cancer-causing chemicals, and threat to ecological balance as reasons to regulate the practice.
More than thirty states in the U.S. employ fracking. Considered a significant technological advancement for the oil and gas industry, hydraulic fracturing has made deposits that were unworkable just a few decades ago accessible and productive, thus changing the American energy landscape. The boom is credited with significantly lowering natural gas prices and reducing the use of coal in energy production. Besides, royalty payments and employment opportunities have changed the face of entire communities.
In a bid to secure key swing states like Pennsylvania, a major gas producer, the Harris campaign wisely walked back her call for a nationwide fracking ban, off the bat. While the move may appease some voters, it will likely irk many of her environment-protectionist, renewable energy-enthusiast support base. Still, in the prolonged honeymoon phase of the presidential campaign, VP Harris has not spoken about her change of heart.
As the country’s debt crosses $35 trillion, her boss announced another massive student loan waiver program, defying the Supreme Court ruling. Meanwhile, Harris, a career politician on the extreme left, swiftly moves to the center to gain broader appeal. She was anointed by party leadership as the nominee without a primary, a process that would have helped scrutinize her policy positions. One thing is clear: she is driven more by expediency than conviction.
