The Kamala Interview
The Dana Bash (CNN) interview of Kamala Harris wasn't long enough. It didn't touch on enough controversial positions and changes in positions to satisfy the voter who is trying to evaluate candidates. Nor did it provide enough follow-up questions to draw Harris out as to why she has made changes and what those changes really are.
Fracking, for example, came up for the longest exchange but fell short of providing definitive information. Kamala acknowledged she had previously opposed fracking, although she attempted to backdate her opposition a bit more than was warranted. Bash asked her what scientific reason had caused her to reverse her position. Harris avoided answering that question. One would conclude, therefore, that no scientific fact had caused her to change her stated view. Did science conclude that fracking was dangerous for the environment? If it didn't, why had she opposed it. If it did, why did she now support it?
Kamala stated that her experience as vice president had convinced her to make the change. She had learned that the country could continue to use fracking under Biden's current practices without damaging the environment. If she indeed learned this lesson as vice president, why did she change her position during the year 2020 campaign before being elected to her position? More importantly, would she continue to support fracking if the United States greatly increased oil production as a tool for bringing down prices and reducing the power of Russia and Iran on the international stage?
Under Trump, America became a leading oil exporter. Russia and Iran didn't make enough profit through oil production to be able to threaten other countries with war and terrorism. Under Biden, oil production was deliberately cut. America stopped export of petroleum products. New wells were less likely to be drilled. Fracking, therefore, became less of an issue. Even now, pumping remains relatively stagnant and ANWR in Alaska is largely abandoned. IS THIS THE CONDITION UNDER WHICH KAMALA SUPPORTS FRACKING? Would she support fracking if Trump's “drill, baby, drill” policy were in place? If not, then her vaunted support of fracking is a mere illusion.
Dana Bash also quizzed Harris on her previous statements that illegal entry into the United States should no longer be considered a crime. Did she still wish to decriminalize illegal entry into the United States? Harris put on her dancing shoes and tap danced around the issue. She simply asserted that if someone entered the country illegally, there should be consequences. That may sound good, but it is clearly no answer at all. What should those consequences be? Should the Justice Department hold a party and kiss the culprit on both cheeks? Should there be a fine? Should such entry constitute a felony? The public deserves to know what Harris means by her words.
Harris also speaks about price controls to reduce prices. Nixon tried that many years ago and it turned out to be an absolute disaster. Price controls produce shortages because companies reduce production if they can't make a profit. The scarcity thus produced then causes substantial price increases.
Harris has taken many other controversial positions which, if implemented, would wreck the economy and/ or harm the people. Her view that cow belching contributes to global warming has caused her to opine that cows should be slaughtered and that people should stop eating steaks and hamburgers. How many restaurants would that position put out of business? How many jobs would be lost as a result? How many ranchers would be bankrupted? And what would that do to Texas?
Harris is changing many of her positions for purely pragmatic positions. She's changing the positions because she wants to get elected, not because she has actually changed her views. She is still just as far left as she ever was. The proof of that is that she has selected a vice presidential running mate who shares the bulk of her radical views. As the most radical of former senators, she has chosen the most radical of all governors to campaign at her side. They are thus both forced to run around the country trying to explain why they no longer believe what they really believe.
-----------
Haughey is Senior Advisor of the Texas Republican County Chairman’s Association.