Oil and gas industry allies welcome Harris’ stance on fracking — with an asterisk

Kamala Harris on Thursday offered her most extensive reflections yet on why she has changed her stance on fracking, but her explanation did little to allay concerns among oil and gas advocates about her energy record as president.

Some environmental groups have expressed disappointment with Harris, while acknowledging that if she does not win the presidential election, alternatives will have to face political realities.

In an interview with CNN on Thursday, Harris, the vice president and Democratic presidential candidate running against Donald Trump, reiterated that she no longer supports a ban on fracking, as she did when she last ran for president in 2019.

She cited the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, on which she had a decisive vote in the Senate, as an example of what can be done on climate change and clean energy policy.

“I saw that we could grow and expand the clean energy economy without banning fracking,” she told CNN’s Dana Bash.

Fossil fuel advocates welcomed Harris’ comments, but with a major caveat.

“Of course it’s great that she’s changed her position on hydraulic fracturing. That’s something we welcome,” Dustin Meyer, head of policy at the American Petroleum Institute, told POLITICO’S E&E News.

But Meyer said Harris’s explanation left many questions unanswered. “There are so many other key energy policies on which the vice president’s perspective remains an open question — everything from (electric vehicle) mandates to permit reform to the (liquefied natural gas) break — that we’re eager to hear more detail and clarity on her overall vision for American energy.”

Harris and her campaign have been testing their messages on fracking and other energy issues. In the weeks leading up to her CNN interview, the campaign pointed to record energy production under President Joe Biden in response to questions about fracking. The United States is now the world’s largest producer of oil and gas.

Harris did not make that argument in her interview Thursday. Instead, she said her values ​​“haven’t changed” since 2019, when she supported a ban on fracking and the Green New Deal, among other policies. “I have always believed and worked to see that the climate crisis is real, that it is an urgent issue that we should be using metrics to address that include meeting deadlines.”

She added that through the IRA, “we have set targets for the United States of America, and by extension, the globe, for when we should meet certain standards for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.” However, the IRA does not set emission reduction targets, although forecasters estimate that it puts the United States on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 40 percent by 2030.

The IRA also had some pro-oil and gas provisions, including requiring the Interior Department to pursue some offshore lease sales canceled by the Biden administration and requiring the department to continue future leases, both onshore and offshore, before it can approve more renewable energy. Harris also boasted about this, saying she “cast the deciding vote that actually increased fracking leases as vice president.”

Fracking is a huge issue in Pennsylvania, the nation’s second-largest natural gas producer and a swing state. Harris likely will need to win to secure the presidency. Trump has attacked Harris on fracking and energy issues and will hold a rally in the state on Friday.

“Explain its energy policy”

While fracking has accounted for much of the growth in domestic oil and gas production in recent years, most fracking occurs on private land. Furthermore, the president could not impose an outright ban and would likely need Congress first.

Multiple pro-fossil fuel groups said they wanted more information from Harris about her stance on energy.

Tim Tarpley, president of the Energy Workforce & Technology Council, said it was “no surprise” that Harris changed her position on fracking as public opinion has become more supportive of domestic drilling.

“The clarity that I would like to see, and that the men and women that we represent would like to see, is for her to do more than just say, ‘I’m not going to ban fracking.’ We would really like her to say that she supports what they’re doing and that she supports producing energy here in the United States,” Tarpley said. “She could go a little bit further and really explain what her energy policy is. We haven’t heard that.”

Kathleen Sgamma, president of the Western Energy Alliance, disagreed with the way Harris boasted about the IRA’s oil and gas provisions.

“The Biden-Harris administration has used the IRA to drive down leasing to ensure they are only offering the bare minimum. Lease sales have been anemic throughout,” Sgamma said, pointing to frustration from Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Joe Manchin (R-IW.Va.) with the administration’s handling of leasing mandates.

Environmentalists have also shown some skepticism about Harris’ stance, although they continue to support her candidacy.

“We’re disappointed that Harris has been so evasive about fracking, but overall, the gulf between her and Trump on protecting our environment and climate couldn’t be wider,” said Jim Walsh, policy director of Food & Water Action, which endorsed Harris. “From the day Harris takes office in January, we’ll be working hard to convince her that fossil fuel development is hurting this country, not helping it.”

Collin Rees, policy director at Oil Change US, said: “Vice President Harris’ comments were disappointing and fell far short of the real climate leadership we need,” adding: “The science is clear — we cannot meet our climate goals and adequately address the climate crisis without ending fossil fuels. Building clean energy is important, but it is insufficient without also working to justly phase out fossil fuel extraction.”

Still, one of Congress’s leading climate hawks, Rep. Jared Huffman (D-Calif.), said he was “fine” with Harris’ stance, calling the furor over it a “sideshow.”

“I don’t like fracking or any kind of fossil fuel extraction, but I think the obsession with fracking is a distraction from the bigger picture,” he said. “The imperative to addressing the climate crisis is to replace the fossil fuel economy with a clean energy economy as quickly as possible.”

He said it was “imperative to halt the expansion of fossil fuel infrastructure that is hindering the transition” to renewable energy.

And RL Miller, president of Climate Hawks Vote, said Harris is right.

As Miller told X, fracking is sometimes used as shorthand — “casually, I might add” — for all natural gas production, so banning it would be seen as politically unpalatable in areas like Pennsylvania.

“We laid a really important foundation at the national level, the Inflation Reduction Act, to start making things in America again, and by things I mean the important things that we’re going to need in the clean energy transition. Kamala got that — she cast the tiebreaker vote,” Miller said, concluding that Harris was “absolutely right” in her answers.

Pointing to oil and gas production

Before Thursday, Harris’ campaign had tried to avoid talking about the details of her fracking flipflops. Instead, her aides wanted attention to focus on the rising oil and gas production the U.S. has seen since 2021.

Asked on CNN Wednesday what had changed in the campaign, campaign spokesman Michael Tyler responded:

“She was very clear here. She is proud of the work she has done as part of this administration, ensuring that American energy production is at an all-time high,” Tyler told CNN host John Berman. “We look forward to continuing that progress in her first term here.”

Berman pressed, but Tyler persisted.

“Again, the vice president is very proud of the accomplishments of the Biden-Harris administration on energy production and the broader economy,” he said. “She wants to continue to build on the progress that we’ve made here. That’s on energy production and the economy in every way.”

And when Harris’ campaign first told reporters in July that she no longer supported a ban on fracking, officials initially avoided directly outlining her new position, instead accusing Trump of “making false claims about banning fracking” before explaining the change.

The campaign also highlighted “significantly higher” oil and gas production figures under a Biden administration and hundreds of thousands of jobs created across all energy sectors.

Harris campaign officials also began advocating for increased oil and gas production.

“As you know, natural gas production, like oil production, in this country is at record levels, just a fact,” Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) told Fox News host Laura Ingraham on the sidelines of the Democratic National Convention.

“Missing the Point”

But the Trump campaign doesn’t want Harris to get any credit for the record numbers. During the campaign, Trump promised a massive increase in oil and gas drilling and said production would be three times higher than it is now if he became president.

David Bernhardt, who served as Trump’s interior secretary and is now a campaign deputy, told reporters Thursday morning that oil and gas price data are still lower than previously forecast under Trump.

“While production has increased, it is actually lower than it would have been under President Trump’s policies. So they can take credit for missing the mark,” Bernhardt said.

It’s worth focusing on oil and gas statistics, says Paul Bledsoe, a lecturer at American University’s Environmental Policy Center and a former Democratic senator’s aide.

“The focus on the bright spot, which is U.S. natural gas production, supports her focus on lowering inflation and lowering costs for consumers. I think that’s a very important part of that,” he said. “Natural gas prices have remained incredibly low under the Biden-Harris administration, and that’s been a real bright spot, not just for consumers but for production.”

The article was co-authored by reporter Emma Dumain.