It’s Not Just Fracking — Pennsylvanians Oppose Harris’s Climate Policies

Her agenda threatens jobs, economic productivity, affordable energy, and a reliable grid in the name of ‘clean energy.’ Pennsylvanians aren’t on board.

F racking haunts Vice President Kamala Harris. Her flip-flop — advocating a federal ban on fracking in 2019 only to recant it in 2024 — has enraged many in Pennsylvania, a critical swing state that relies heavily on its energy sector.

But recent polling by the Commonwealth Foundation shows that most Pennsylvanians object to not only a fracking ban but also most heavy-handed environmental policies — many of which the vice president embraces. Harris’s revised fracking stance reflects a broader emphasis that pushes overregulation and climate alarmism rather than reliability and cost.

The vice president highlighted this strategy during a recent interview.

“We don’t have to ban fracking to do the work that we can do to also invest in a clean-energy economy,” she said. Put simply, lawmakers don’t need to ban something that technocrats can regulate out of existence.

This quiet-part-out-loud moment demonstrates what Harris’s policies promise for the energy sector’s future: more regulations, fewer well-paying jobs, unaffordable energy, and an unreliable grid.

Harris has long been a climate extremist. In addition to her previously proposed fracking ban, she also promised to abolish Senate filibuster rules to pass the Green New Deal — a multitrillion-dollar boondoggle that would have fundamentally transformed American energy, and not for the better.

Instead of promising lower energy costs and ensuring American energy security, Harris’s platform urges Americans to “tackle the climate crisis” and “advance environmental justice.”

However, Pennsylvanians, who struggle to put food on the table because of their skyrocketing utility bills, don’t see climate change or green-energy policies as a top priority. When asked about what the federal government should prioritize, 68 percent said ensuring affordable energy, while only 32 percent said combating climate change. Only 4 percent said they would be willing to pay more for green energy.

Their concerns about energy affordability are warranted. More than three-fourths of Pennsylvanians report higher energy bills compared with bills two years ago, which explains why so many Pennsylvanians — 78 percent — are worried about the availability of affordable energy.

Moreover, Pennsylvanians value the state’s already-robust energy sector and want to expand it. Eight out of ten voters believe that natural-gas drilling is vital to the Keystone State’s economy. Also, about three-fourths support expanding energy infrastructure, such as pipelines that further propel Pennsylvania natural gas into regional and worldwide markets.

Getting Pennsylvania energy to market, however, has proven difficult under President Joe Biden and Harris. Between banning drilling, blocking new pipelines, drastically reducing permits and leases, and raising energy costs with the Inflation Reduction Act, the current administration has been no friend to affordable energy.

In January, Biden and Harris “paused” — i.e., banned — liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports, linking this multibillion-dollar industry to the “perilous impacts of methane on our planet.” Federal and state permitting struggles also block the needed expansion of pipeline infrastructure.

Keystone State voters see LNG in a different light. More than half — 54 percent — oppose the Biden-Harris LNG pause. Even Pennsylvania’s Senate delegation — Senators John Fetterman and Bob Casey, both Democrats — broke ranks with their party and released a statement urging the Biden-Harris administration to reverse the order.

The LNG pause is in step with the broader regulatory regime maintained by the federal government, which Harris supports but Pennsylvanians don’t.

This gap is abundantly clear when Harris talks about the automotive industry.

“Contrary to what my opponent is suggesting, I will never tell you what kind of car you have to drive,” she said during a Michigan rally.

Yet rather than outright banning gasoline-powered cars (which two-thirds of Pennsylvanians oppose), Harris urges draconian and onerous regulations that will limit what cars consumers can drive.

For example, the Environmental Protection Agency, under the direction of the Biden-Harris administration, issued a new rule mandating that 56 percent of new light cars must be electric vehicles (EVs) by 2032.

Pennsylvanians, however, aren’t sold on EVs — literally. When asked to cite specific “lifestyle changes to protect the environment” they have adopted or plan to adopt, only 5 percent have purchased or plan to buy an EV.

Whether it’s banning hydrocarbons or mandating EVs, Pennsylvanians aren’t keen on government red tape. A solid majority — 57 percent — believe that excessive regulations prevent energy production, drive up consumer costs, and provide few environmental or safety benefits.

But Pennsylvanians see energy as more than a commodity. An astounding 86 percent believe that American energy independence is essential. To most Pennsylvanians, energy production is a pathway to national security and sovereignty.

Harris’s quixotic climate alarmism only fuels reductive narratives. There is no such thing as “green” or “clean” energy, as all energy production entails externalities, such as lithium and cobalt mining or the carbon-emitting materials that go into making solar panels and wind turbines. Instead, a better approach — and one that would win the hearts and minds of Pennsylvanians — is to focus on energy affordability and reliability.

Harris may have recently changed her tune on fracking, but her record and current rhetoric send a clear message: She champions a regulatory state that threatens jobs, economic productivity, affordable energy, and a reliable grid in the name of “clean energy” — and Pennsylvanians don’t share her enthusiasm.