Kamala Harris looks like the frontrunner for the Democratic nomination for the November vote. Based on her track record as California attorney general and as vice president, this is going to be bad news for the oil industry.
Overviews of her career that have flooded the media space note her lawsuits against oil companies including Chevron, which she prosecuted for hazardous materials mishandling. Plains All-American Pipeline also became a target for California’s AG back in 2015 for an oil spill off the state’s coast.
Interestingly, Harris’ claim that she also sued Exxon, which she made during the run-up to the 2020 elections appears to be inaccurate, according to Inside Climate News. What is accurate, however, is that she does appear to be an even more dedicated transition champion than Joe Biden.
Back in the early 2000s, when she was a district attorney for San Francisco, Harris set up what she dubbed the first environmental justice unit in her department to handle crimes such as hazardous waste and other environmental crimes, as Euronews calls them.
“Crimes against the environment are crimes against communities, people who are often poor and disenfranchised,” Harris said in 2005, as quoted by the publication. “The people who live in those communities often have no other choice but to live there.”
The former California attorney general, who then became state senator, was also a strong supporter of the Green New Deal that has made the state a poster child for the transition despite its steep cost. Harris has also publicly stated she was in favor of a ban on fracking, which has made her popular among climate activists.
“She is the kind of leader who will hold the fossil fuel industry accountable, and that’s what we need right now,” Jared Huffman, a Democrat Representative from California, told Bloomberg in an interview. “She would absolutely carry on and build on the success of the Biden administration on climate and clean energy.”
However, there is a problem with that when it comes to the November elections. To win the presidency, Harris—provided she gets the Democratic nomination—would need to win voters from energy-focused states. And this means oil and gas states, such as Pennsylvania.
Back in 2019, during the primaries, Harris spoke in favor of not only a fracking ban but also of a carbon tax—a transition tool that is not exactly popular among voters. She called it a “climate pollution fee”, to slap on the oil and gas industry “as far upstream as possible” and then use the money to advance the transition.
“Her record is something that climate and environmental justice advocates would get excited about, and I think she could really lean into her record as a prosecutor by going after big oil and gas,” Danielle Deiseroth, head of left-wing think tank Data for Progress, told Axios.
Yet, “If the Dems don’t win PA they are COOKED. And her views aren’t compatible with winning there,” Scott Jennings, a strategist for the Republicans, told the publication.
What this suggests is that Harris could either focus on her core voter base and risk losing swing states such as Pennsylvania, or she could do what she did when she teamed up with Biden in 2020—soften the rhetoric to win the oil and gas country voters. Even if she does that, however, in case of a Democratic presidency with Harris in the White House, the federal government will be going after Big Oil.
“While we have yet to see the first case where a fossil fuel company is held liable for damages from climate change, the prospect of a DOJ-led lawsuit would increase the chances of finding liability, with an increase in the potential for damages, litigation costs and reputational risk,” consultancy Rapidan Energy Group told clients in a note this week, as quoted by Bloomberg.
By Charles Kennedy for Oilprice.com
