Even the party’s left wing is beginning to see divisions with Vice President Kamala Harris.
Regarding numerous contentious matters, Harris has managed to maintain a low profile. Progressives had hoped she would go farther than Joe Biden, but in the brief time it took her to secure the party’s presidential nomination, she has already taken stands on two crucial issues: climate change and abortion legislation.
The left is pressuring Harris to continue or even increase Biden’s regulatory assault on “corporate greed” and antitrust rules, while moderate Democrats and business organizations are calling for a more lenient stance on all economic matters, including Bitcoin.
After weeks of bickering over Biden’s destiny, Democrats are desperate to keep this disagreement out of the public eye, and it will likely factor into their calculations for choosing a running mate in the coming days.
The policy dilemma Harris finds herself in is highlighted by these initial disagreements with the left. After being given a lot of power to mold Biden’s economic agenda, her attitude could decide how much influence progressives have.
Harris’ capacity to adopt a moderate stance on certain matters demonstrates how rapidly she is establishing support as the party’s new leader, despite her mountain of campaign funds, great popularity among Democrats, and endorsement from the largest left-wing companies.
A Harris campaign spokesperson said in a statement that the vice president “believes real leadership means bringing all sides together to build consensus.”
The spokesperson emphasized that the Biden-Harris administration was able to accomplish bipartisan victories in various areas, including infrastructure and gun violence prevention, due to their strategy. “In her role as president, she will maintain her consistent pragmatic approach, prioritizing commonsense solutions in order to advance the country.”
Problems like these are beginning to drive a breach between Harris and liberals:
Having an abortion
Although many abortion rights activists had hoped for more, Harris is echoing Biden’s campaign stance and asking for the restoration of Roe v. Wade.
Even though the majority of abortion rights organizations are behind Harris’s bid for office, there are many who are dissatisfied with the current situation because Roe v. Wade only extended protections for abortion up until the fetus is viable, which is usually approximately 22 weeks into the pregnancy.
Reproductive Freedom for All’s president and CEO Mini Timmaraju, who is a huge Harris fan, stated that the vice president’s stance demonstrates that “we have more to do as a movement.”
According to her, “Our job, ultimately, as advocates, is to do two things: push for the most expansive and progressive legislation we can get — and in an ideal world that does go beyond Roe — but also elect a Congress that will send her the most expansive version of legislation to codify a federal right to abortion,” she stated confidently.
Other pro-choice advocates deemed Harris’s stance as “unacceptable,” claiming that patients suffered because Roe v. Wade allowed states to outlaw abortions performed later in the pregnancy and impose regulations like waiting periods and regulations that caused many clinics to close their doors in the last several decades.
Medical Students for Choice’s executive director Pamela Merritt emphasized the importance of avoiding past mistakes and focusing on the future when discussing the Roe v. Wade decision.
Merritt’s organization is one of several that have endorsed a package of measures they’re referring to as Abortion Justice Now. These measures would provide extensive federal protections for the operation.
Merritt noted that for 49 years, the government has been positioned defensively to safeguard Roe. „However, come 2024, it will clearly not provide the necessary framework.“
Climate
Reversing her stance from her 2019 presidential campaign, Harris’s campaign just stated that she would not prohibit fracking.
They are allowing her some leeway on a topic that has changed since five years ago, according to environmental groups. Battleground Pennsylvania views fracking—a method of extracting fossil fuels that has contributed to the United States’ record-breaking production of oil and natural gas—as a critical issue since it sustains a large number of employment in the state.
Following Republicans’ exploitation of the post-pandemic economic rebound and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a stick to beat Democrats, the politics of such a ban shifted. Additionally, it has come to light that in order to put an end to fracking, it will be necessary for both the executive and legislative branches to work together.
Environmentalists and climate change deniers are still waiting for Harris to do something about the irreversible but steady decline in fossil fuel output, which is both an economic engine for the United States and a leading cause of global warming.
“We can do a managed decline while we ramp up clean energy,” stated Jane Kleeb, progressive chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party, who helped drive the fight to the Keystone XL oil pipeline. Kleeb acknowledged that fossil fuels cannot be completely banned. Therein is the strategy of Vice President Harris, as is evident to all of us.
Despite harsh criticism of Biden for his handling of domestic oil production and the approval of large oil projects in Alaska, environmental groups are currently attempting to be patient with Harris’ climate initiatives. Groups that see Harris as their greatest bet for a robust climate program are now trying to increase Biden’s reputation among progressives by highlighting his track record of investing in clean energy.
Speaking on the matter, Alexandra Adams, a senior adviser at the NRDC Action Fund, stated that the Biden-Harris administration had implemented stringent regulations to decrease emissions of methane from oil and gas operations. “Those regulations need to be put into place and strictly enforced, not removed, as Trump has promised.”