Does Kamala Harris want to ban fracking or not? Does she want to wreck America’s energy grid in service of radical climate alarmism or not? It all depends on which statement you believe. Or, as several climate experts warn, don’t rely on anything “presidential calamity” Kamala says now — she’s completely untrustworthy.
In the wake of Harris’s CNN interview, Climate Depot’s Marc Morano, Junk Science’s Steve Milloy, and Heartland Institute president James Taylor are right to warn how untrustworthy and what a climate radical she is. As Morano cautioned, “Harris-Walz will continue the ideological Net Zero fairy-tale that government spending and mandates can alter the Earth’s climate system. Harris’s plans will continue to hammer America first.”
“By their fruits you shall know them,” Jesus Christ said (Matthew 7:16). Put another way, actions speak louder than words. Thus when Kamala says she doesn’t want to ban fracking anymore, we must ask — is that consistent with her actions? Under the rule of Harris and Biden, the government revoked the Keystone XL pipeline’s permit because of climate propaganda and halted fracking and oil leases on federal land, to name just two examples.
Harris affirmed her dedication to climate alarmism, E&E Legal senior policy fellow Milloy pointed out. “Biden-Harris anti-fossil fuel climate policies are single-handedly responsible for the standard-of-living crushing inflation experienced since 2021 and the high prices for everything that are not abating,” he said.
Milloy noted the “meaningless” nature of Kamala’s “flip-flopping” on fracking, which is “vital to keeping the lights and air conditioning on in the rest of the country.” The EPA under Harris could over-regulate fracking without officially “banning” it. Milloy gave more examples of Biden-Harris administration idiocy.
The administration “has put a moratorium on the LNG terminals that are used to export fracked gas and Biden-Harris has stopped holding auctions for federal leasing of lands for fracking,” Milloy emphasized. “They stopped pipelines needed to transport oil and gas. She was a Senate co-sponsor of the Green New Deal, which would ban fossil fuels and meat. In the CNN interview, she said she wants to … lead the world in the social suicide that is the race to net zero. She's not a presidential candidate. She's a presidential calamity.”
Again, the Biden-Harris administration tightened pollution rules and targeted gas-powered appliances. There’s no evidence Harris’s actions will change. In fact, during the CNN interview, Kamala suggested that the “values” of the radical, socialist, destructive Green New Deal were implemented via the Biden-Harris administration’s Inflation Reduction Act.
“You mentioned the Green New Deal. I have always believed — and I have worked on it — that the climate crisis is real, that it is an urgent matter, to which we should apply metrics that include holding ourselves to deadlines around time,” Harris rambled. “We did that with the Inflation Reduction Act… That value has not changed.” That terrifying comment is what one of the climate experts specifically highlighted.
Morano said Harris “touts spending ‘a trillion dollars’ and applying ‘metrics that include holding ourselves to deadlines around time.’ So Harris’s position on climate change still echoes the Harris of 2019.” Indeed, “Her repeated attempts to say she will not ‘ban’ fracking do not address the fact that continuing Green New Deal/Inflation Reduction Act policies will impose the death of a thousand cuts on fracking and other U.S. energy production.”
Taylor agreed, saying Harris already “displayed her true colors and her political dishonesty by vowing in the interview to focus on climate change and the Green New Deal even after cynically flip-flopping on fracking and the Biden-Harris electric vehicle mandates.” Kamala claims now to oppose the latter unpopular policies, but can we trust her? No. This woman lies for a living.
As Taylor put it, “You can't have climate activism and the Green New Deal without electric vehicle mandates and fracking bans. Apparently, she is hoping to confuse American voters until she can revert to climate totalitarianism after the November election.” A wise warning. Her promises are meaningless in light of her record of radical climate agendas.
