Posted on 08/30/2024 7:29:33 AM PDT by Libloather
Vice President Kamala Harris vowed Thursday that she would “not ban fracking” if elected president – a major reversal from her position during her first White House run.
“As vice president I did not ban fracking. As president I will not ban fracking,” Harris said in her first interview since replacing President Biden at the top of the Democratic ticket.
Harris’ latest position on fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is diametrically opposed to her stance on the oil and gas extraction technique during her 2019 Democratic presidential primary campaign.
However, the Democratic nominee claimed in her back and forth with CNN’s Dana Bash that she made her position on fracking “clear on the debate stage in 2020” – which she argued was “that I would not ban fracking.”
“There’s no question I’m in favor of banning fracking,” the then-presidential candidate told a climate activist at a CNN town hall in 2019.
The vice president’s position on fracking is key to her electability in the oil-rich battleground state of Pennsylvania, which has 19 Electoral College votes up for grabs in November and could decide the winner of the race.
“In 2020, I made very clear where I stand,” Harris said in her sitdown with CNN’s Dana Bash. “We are in 2024 and I’m not changing that position nor will I going forward. I kept my word and I will keep my word.”
When asked what made her flip-flop on fracking, Harris asserted, “My values have not changed.”
The 59-year-old vice president went on to explain that she now believes it is possible for the government to “guard against what is a clear crisis in terms of the climate” while also allowing fracking.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
CNN’s Daniel Dale Fact Checks Kamala Harris’s Shifting Position On Fracking
Bash asked Harris: “In 2019 you said, quote: ‘There is no question. I’m in favor of banning fracking.’ Fracking, as you know, is a pretty big issue, particularly in your must-win state of Pennsylvania. Do you still want to ban fracking?”
Harris replied: “No. And I made that clear on the debate stage in 2020 that I would not ban fracking as vice president, I did not ban fracking. As president I will not ban fracking.
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/cnns-daniel-dale-fact-checks-kamala-harriss-shifting-position-on-fracking/
As president I will not ban fracking, I’m just not going to use it !
The American people are pretty stupid.
But here’s how it may play out.
Conservatives mostly know she’s a liar.
But why should liberals vote for her, if she’s going to destroy the earth like a republican?
I think the strategy of, “Look In really a conservative!” can be a dangerous one for her.
No need to ban fracing if you close public lands to drilling.
Well, then, Kamala, let’s put this fracking topic to the test: since both presidential candidates are not opposed to fracking, start the process to remove the current ban right now. Why wait until after the election? Maybe the Trump campaign could take this idea and put it in her face; let’s see her reaction.
She’ll bam fracking. Or she’ll load so many regulations on the industry that will make fracking impossible.
“I think the strategy of, “Look In really a conservative!” can be a dangerous one for her.”
This sudden policy shift is called a “dog whistle.” It’s a signal that only the insider party members hear, that the new policy is only a lie to get votes from the uninitiated. It’s a trick that worked really well at the local level where five hundred votes can win an election. It’s easy to get five hundred fellow travelers to understand that a lie is a lie. Will it work on a national level? The average communist/socialist/democrat voter isn’t very sophisticated, and you can hardly send them all a secret memo explaining the strategy. Whereas at the local level you can meet in a few Starbucks and get the word out to your five hundred voters pretty easily.
But it may take 25 years to get approvals....
Agreed. I believe there are many other steps that the gubment has to approve to truly allow fracking: 1) allow the lease for the lands, 2) allow fracking, 3) allow water use, 4) allow for water runoff...
The warmageddon cult Dims can block any one of those, technically claim they haven't banned fracking, but in reality have banned all the same.
As usual she is playing both sides of the aisle. On one hand, she says she won’t ban fracking because she didn’t do it as vice-president, thus implying she voluntarily withheld using her power to affect policy so we can now trust she won’t do it as president. On the other hand, her entire strategy regarding Biden’s disastrous policies is to imply that she couldn’t do anything as vice-president. Can’t have it both ways were this media of ours honest.
She opposed fracking, until she didn’t.
One simple question: Was she lying then, or is she lying now?
We allowed 11+ million illegals into the nation and now she decides to flip?
Why build a wall when we were flying illegals into the USA at taxpayer’s expense?
Was she drunk for the last four years and missed all that?
As both an oil guy and a rancher, I’ve never understood why environmentalists dislike fracking.
Fracking is done (now) mainly in horizontal wells, with wellbores that are 1-2 miles long. These wells drain huge areas of land, compared to putting in a a hundred or more little vertical wells.
The way they do it (generally) is a nice straight line across the top of the section (a square mile) with the wells placed either 330 or 660 yards apart. One road, one clean pipeline system, common tank batteries, one set of power lines. Vertical is a 1/2 acre pad every 20 acres, with a bizarre patchwork of roads, powerlines, and crap everywhere.
It’s so much more environmentally friendly.
It’s the same oil that comes up, same water, same CO2. Probably less of a “carbon footprint” because it just takes so many less wellbores.
We just happen to be able to do that in the USA vs. Iran or Saudi or wherever, which I think is the real issue. Qatar funded a bunch of junk science because horizontal wells were cutting into their profit margins; paid Mark Wahlburg to make stupid movies.
If the issue is “less oil”, it does nothing. It’s just from where the oil comes from -— Texas, OK, NM — or from Russia and radical Muslims.
Won’t ban it, just won’t approve any permits....same thing.
She won’t do much of anything. She shuns serious work if possible.
A Democratic Congress assisted by her flying monkeys will be the ones who will do the work of killing off our domestic hydrocarbon production.
I would use my veto power if elected President again to protect Texas and Pennsylvania’s oil and natural gas industry, and the well-paid jobs and lavish tax revenues it provides to fund the medical and educational needs of the people of Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Texas and other states.
I will also nomination people to federal office who know the importance of home heating and air conditioning, reliable electricity at globally competitive pricing, jobs that are paid for by willing customers instead of coerced taxpayers, and the need to protect our land.
RE: Kamala Harris claims she will ‘not ban fracking’ as president
Yeah, yeah, and Obama said he was against Gay Marriage when he ran for President until he said his views have “evolved” after he got elected.
Between what she said/did before and what she says now, believe the former. She WILL “evolve” again.
Kamala Chameleon.
RE: As both an oil guy and a rancher, I’ve never understood why environmentalists dislike fracking.
Well, let me explain what the environmentalists are agruing:
* They claim that fracking can contaminate groundwater, cause air pollution, and contribute to climate change by releasing methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
* Additionally, liberals often view fracking as being linked to earthquakes and other seismic activity.
Because of these, They believe that the potential benefits of fracking, such as increased energy production and job creation, are outweighed by the environmental and health risks involved.
Harris, who spent the past 3 years blocking every Trump EO, has now co-opted so many of the positions she blocked she has left little daylight between her and Trump - except proving to all that Harris is a devious, underhanded, plagerizing liar and Trump is an above-board, honest, no-nonsense do’er.
Well same methane is released from any drilling. You generally don’t waste methane because that’s money.
The water you drink is less than 500 feet below the surface. Horizontal wells frack miles below that surface. There is much less chance of an up hole leak because there are less wells and the horizontals are much more robust casing.
The “earthquakes” is bedrock settling from poor water disposal. Basically, instead of putting water back to the formation from whence it came, they dispose of it in shallow formations. Eventually the water weighed enough to shove the rock down. This has been made illlegal and now water goes back to the same depth or lower.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.