Harris’ energy policy is strategically ambiguous, her aides say

Philadelphia — In the 25 days since vice-president Kamala Harris entered the race for the White House, she has kept energy executives guessing.

Is she the climate and anti-pollution warrior who was attorney-general of California? Or the pragmatic No 2 in the Democratic Biden administration that oversaw record US oil production and exports.

In speeches over the last week, she has mentioned the word “climate” seven times, but the words “energy”, “fracking” and “oil” have yet to cross her lips.

Opinion polls show broad support for tackling climate change, especially among younger voters. But her campaign aims to avoid alienating either side. Several aides describe her plan on controversial energy issues as one of strategic ambiguity.

The goal is to attract voters in battleground states like Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin where elections are decided. There, blue-collar workers rely on extractive, power and manufacturing industries and often back Republican policies that seek to maximise and prolong fossil fuel output.

Harris’ Republican rival in the November 5 election already has voiced his view. In an interview with billionaire Elon Musk on Monday, Donald Trump called Harris a “radical left lunatic”. He questioned the urgency attached to climate change.

In five of her speeches the last week, she uttered the same
10-word phrase in the context of Trump, saying: “He intends to surrender our fight against the climate crisis.”

Harris’ late entry to the presidential race has given her little time to finesse policies. One campaign official, when asked about specific policy proposals, observed: “We barely have campaign signs.”

Toeing the Biden line more closely

The Harris campaign declined to provide specific answers to detailed questions about her energy policy and how her past statements align with her current approach, but suggested that she would adhere more closely to the policies of the Biden administration than some of her policies in California or when she first sought the presidency in 2019.

President Joe Biden talked tough on fighting Big Oil but did little to restrict fossil fuel output. US oil and gas output have reached record highs under his administration, and top energy companies Exxon and Chevron both made record profits.

Unlike governments in Europe, Biden never imposed a windfall tax on the earnings those companies made when oil and gas prices soared after Russia invaded Ukraine in 2022.

As vice-president, Harris has supported Biden’s landmark climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

“As president, Kamala Harris will finish implementing the IRA and the bipartisan infrastructure law and build on their successes,” a campaign spokesperson said, referring to legislation that contains lucrative clean energy subsidy programmes.

She and Biden have sought to expand offshore wind energy and other renewables with lease auctions and subsidies, striking a contrast with Trump, who has criticised offshore wind and other clean energy technologies and regularly states his support for the fossil fuel industry.

Harris no longer favours a fracking ban on federal lands

The Harris campaign has clarified her position on one issue. She no longer supports a ban on fracking on federal lands. Biden tried and failed to impose that ban, which was contested by several states and blocked by a federal judge in Louisiana.

In 2019, Harris outlined a detailed energy and climate platform that supported the ban and opposed all new fossil fuel infrastructure projects.

As a US senator and presidential candidate in 2019, Harris supported a Democratic resolution to create a “Green New Deal,” a sweeping progressive effort to shift the country towards renewable energy.

As California attorney-general from 2011-2017, Harris won multimillion-dollar settlements with oil majors Chevron and BP over pollution violations from underground fuel storage tanks.

Stephen Brown, an energy consultant and former lobbyist with Tesoro, who had a large refining footprint in California, said Harris had not engaged constructively with the oil and gas industry during her years on Capitol Hill from 2017-2021.

“I can’t say that we were tremendously welcomed in her office by either her or her staff, and so there wasn’t a lot of engagement,” he said. “So fast forward to what it is today, and it’s sort of an open book. It’s an open question.”

In Pennsylvania — a must-win state for both Harris and Trump, locked in a close race — she has won the endorsement of all the major labour unions.

The state is the nation’s second-largest producer of natural gas and hopes to capitalise on increased demand from Europe for liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports. Biden paused all new LNG export permits earlier in 2024 and the Harris campaign declined to say whether she will lift the pause and encourage new facilities.

Rob Bair, president of the Pennsylvania State Building & Construction Trades Council, whose members work in the state’s power plants, refineries and natural gas fields, said he had spoken with the Harris team and is confident she will pursue an “all the above” energy policy, but he acknowledged some clarity would help him to persuade members to vote for her.

“Would it be great if she came out and said, ‘I love fracking, I want LNG exports, I want more nuclear facilities’? Sure, but that’s not realistic,” Bair said.

The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, an influential refining trade group, has embarked on an eight-figure ad campaign in battleground states on the potential pitfalls of electric vehicle mandates.

“Until the vice-president says otherwise, we have to believe she still stands for everything that was in her 2019 policy plan and for every policy she cosponsored as a senator,” said Chet Thompson, AFPM president and CEO.

Reuters