Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate, created a real problem for herself this week during an appearance on The View. Asked by the very friendly host Sunny Hostin, what, if anything, she would have done differently than President Joe Biden, Harris amazingly responded: “There is not a thing that comes to mind.”
Really? Not a thing? Not one thing?
This is a problem for Harris, who has served as Biden’s vice president for almost four years now, given her attempt to present herself as a “change” candidate in what everyone agrees is a change election cycle. Most Americans are fed up with the direction in which the Biden-Harris administration has taken the country and are looking for someone who would change that direction.
But the Democratic nominee cannot think of a thing — a single thing — she would have done differently had she been the president since 2021. That is a problem.
Let’s think about what that means where the topic of energy is concerned. The folks at the Institute for Energy Research (IER) have since 2021 kept a list of things the Biden-Harris administration has done to make it harder to produce oil and gas in the United States. That list currently stands at no less than 250 items, starting on Biden’s very first day in office when he imperiously cancelled the Keystone XL Pipeline, a move that immediately diminished America’s energy security. The list goes on and on and on from there.
So, does this mean we can anticipate more pipeline cancellations without any real basis in the law in a Harris presidency? What about the draining of the U.S. Strategic Petroleum Reserve? Harris herself endorsed Biden’s raiding of that reserve for purely political reasons in the lead up to the 2022 midterm elections, damaging a key tool intended to provide national security during national emergencies, bringing it to its lowest level in 40 years. Does Harris’ answer mean we can expect her to drain the SPR to even lower levels?
What about Biden’s absurd “pause” in permitting for much-needed LNG export infrastructure, which has now gone on for 10 months? Can we expect this “pause” to become a permanent feature in a Harris regime? If she really can’t think of one thing she would do differently, it sure seems likely.
The Biden-Harris Department of Interior has spent four years now steadfastly refusing to honor the requirements in the Federal Lands Leasing Act to hold regular oil and gas lease sales both onshore and offshore. Should we assume that this scofflaw posturing would continue for another 4 years in a Harris-Walz regime?
The Biden-Harris executive branch has ignored pleas from energy developers of all kinds to work to streamline and simplify permitting processes and requirements. This pressing need has been aired not just by oil-and-gas companies, but by wind developers, solar companies, and even by Elon Musk and other electric vehicles makers. A pledge to work hard in a bipartisan way to get something, anything done in this realm would have been the lowest-hanging fruit possible for Harris to use in answering Hostin’s question. But no, not a thing came to the vice president’s mind.
Speaking of automakers, what about the pushback the Biden-Harris EPA has gotten from traditional car companies about the overly restrictive rules they have produced related to tailpipe emissions and mileage requirements? Does Harris’s statement that she would not do a thing differently mean these car companies can expect more crackdowns under a Harris-Walz presidency?
The Biden-Harris Transportation Department had a slush fund of $7 billion to create a national network of 500,000 rapid charging stations for EVs. In three years, they have only managed to install 8 such stations at last report. Does Harris’ answer to Hostin mean we can expect this breathtaking level of waste and incompetence to continue for another four years?
With barely 3 weeks remaining until Election Day and early voting already well underway, these are real, relevant questions someone should be asking of Harris and her running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. The costs of a status quo presidency where energy and energy security are concerned would be dire, and voters deserve some real answers.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Featured Image: Screen Capture/CSPAN
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact [email protected].
