The Biden-Harris administration is many things, but steadfast on policy isn’t one of them.
When President Joe Biden ran in 2020, he caved to the Bernie Bros and let Sen. Bernie Sanders “Unity Task Force” influence his climate change agenda. Fossil fuels bad, pipelines must go, and green was the order of the day.
Vice President Kamala Harris was on board, until she stepped into the Democratic presidential nominee spotlight and realized she had swing states to win. Hence her about-face on fracking, (a method of extracting oil and gas from rocks by injecting a blend of water, sand and chemicals). She said this in 2019: “There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking,” according to The Hill.
But that was before Harris had to duke it out with Donald Trump for swing states. And Pennsylvania, a state in which fracking is a hot topic, is one such election prize.
How does she explain her big switch? “What I have seen is that we can grow and we can increase a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking,” Harris said in a CNN interview.
If clean energy and oil production can exist side by side, then why all the fuss about pipelines and exports? Well, that policy is “evolving” too.
On Tuesday, the Biden administration granted a gas export terminal the authority to ship fuel abroad after a court blocked its efforts to delay such permissions.
Biden and Co. announced earlier this year that it would pause new approvals for liquified natural gas (LNG) exports, but that pause was halted in court in July, The Hill reported.
The gas comes from the US. It will be transported to Mexico and later to other countries.
The pause on the gas shipment was a win for progressives, and the reversal is not being taken well.
“The Department of Energy’s decision to approve the New Fortress LNG Terminal is deeply concerning,” said Allie Rosenbluth, U.S. program manager at advocacy group Oil Change International, in a written statement.
“By doing so, it has broken its own commitment to pause LNG export authorizations — a commitment made out of recognition that its current guidance doesn’t adequately consider the risks LNG exports pose to the climate, environment, and public health and safety,” Rosenbluth said.
The move does recognize, however, that Harris can’t be seen as a lone flip-flopping wolf. If fracking is suddenly part of a clean energy future, then Biden must bolster that stance with a nod to exports.
It’s a risky move. Will this alienate progressive voters? Or can Harris count on the furor over abortion rights to provide enough wind for her sails?
A big question for voters, especially those who view Harris’s “new” policies with approval is this: can she be trusted to stay the course should she win on Election Day? Will her newfound enthusiasm for fracking and cheaper oil and gas evaporate once Pennsylvania has decided? And will the return of gas exports continue, or be relegated to the “fossil fuels bad” pile after Inauguration Day?
Cynics have long said that voters shouldn’t take politicians at their word. In this election, however, the “word” changes as rapidly as New England weather.
