Staff Reports
Kamala Harris has a history of making bold statements that set her apart in the crowded political field, and her declaration in 2019 regarding fracking is no exception. Out on the campaign trail, she left no room for ambiguity when she made it clear that she stood against the popular practice. The moment she publicly endorsed a ban on fracking, she inadvertently highlighted her commitment to the radical environmental agenda that has taken hold on the left.
For those not in the know, fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is a method used to extract oil and gas from deep underground, and it has been credited with boosting America’s energy independence. Yet for Harris and her progressive allies, such practical benefits seem to go right out the window in favor of more utopian, green dreams. This brings to mind the question: how could a politician, especially one with aspirations for the highest office in the land, advocate against a practice that not only creates jobs but helps keep energy prices down for the working class?
Kamala’s green-energy policies would destroy Pennsylvania's economy — and hurt every single American https://t.co/MnOWRMLv9G
— Ben Owen (@hrkbenowen) August 1, 2024
Harris’s stance undoubtedly appeals to the far-left base of the Democratic Party, a faction that tends to vilify fossil fuels while proposing untested renewable energy solutions that could leave Americans in the dark—literally. The irony is rich, as she and her allies push for wind and solar technologies that currently can’t meet the nation’s energy demands and might end up leading to higher energy bills for Americans who can least afford them.
Of course, Harris’s declaration serves as a fascinating contrast to Biden’s contradictory policies. In an effort to cater to both progressive environmentalists and pragmatically minded voters, Biden has flip-flopped on energy issues, advocating for fracking while simultaneously attempting to appease those who want to see it gone. Harris’s unwavering position shows that, for her, principle trumps practicality, which may not bode well in a general election matchup against common sense.
In the end, Kamala Harris’s assertion about fracking not only signals her commitment to a radical climate agenda but also highlights the divide between elite political aspirations and the needs of everyday Americans. With many families concerned about rising energy costs and economic stability, her anti-fracking battle cry is more of a rallying call for bureaucratic red tape than anything remotely constructive. If Harris’s approach represents the future of American energy policy, it’s no wonder that conservatives continue to rally against the potential consequences of these leftist policies.
