Staff Reports
A top aide to Vice President Kamala Harris is now backtracking on her once-ironclad stance against fracking, showcasing yet another classic case of political flip-flopping that has become as familiar as a bad reality TV show. Back in 2019, Harris declared her intention to ban fracking outright, but as the electoral landscape shifts, so too does her position—a move that raises eyebrows and adds fuel to the fire for critics who argue that she’s merely a political chameleon.
Critics have long claimed that Harris lacks any real convictions and, instead, tailors her message to fit whatever will get her the most votes. Recent polling data shows that nearly half of Americans suspect Harris is merely pandering, with only 36 percent believing she speaks her true thoughts. This doesn’t exactly scream confidence in a leader, does it?
Harris campaign aide seems to be walking back her support for fracking on campaign trail – a top climate campaign staffer told PoliticoPro notes she's not promoting expanding it and said she didn't promote increased leases for fracking in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).
But… pic.twitter.com/EqFKgNg0nR
— Andy Kaczynski (@KFILE) October 21, 2024
Camila Thorndike, serving as Harris’s climate engagement director, told Politico that the vice president has decided against supporting new land leases for fracking. This comes after Harris celebrated the Inflation Reduction Act, which contained provisions expanding such leases—a bit of a contradiction, wouldn’t you say? The irony is crystal clear. While Harris cast a crucial tie-breaking vote for this legislation, her team is now trying to redefine her commitments in a way that avoids an uncomfortable confrontation with her past.
The chameleon-like qualities continue as Harris brazenly claimed she never supported a ban on fracking. In a recent interview, she insisted that her previous remarks were misinterpreted. It’s like watching a magician perform tricks with words, and the audience is left wondering which card to believe. This has raised serious questions among Pennsylvanians about what the VP truly thinks and, more importantly, what she would do if she ascended to the presidency.
Ending fracking in Pennsylvania would be a monumental mistake. Thousands of jobs and millions in revenue for state programs rely on this practice. According to estimates, around 121,000 jobs in the state link back to fracking, and the financial impact is staggering—$3.2 billion in state and local tax revenue alone. Local municipalities benefit in many ways from royalty payments, which help fund essential services like schools, police, and conservation efforts.
It’s clear why Harris’s ever-changing stances on fracking send a shiver down the spine of many in swing states, particularly Pennsylvania—a critical state for Democrats aiming to maintain their so-called Blue Wall against former President Donald Trump’s potential comeback. With polls showing a tight race and Harris’s lead within the margin of error, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Yet, as she zigzags through her policy platform, voters are left wondering: is she more interested in winning votes, or does she actually stand for something?
