‘We don't want to sabotage her’: Reasons Why Environmental Organizations Are Treading Lightly with Harris
Environmental groups that closely examine Joe Biden's climate initiatives aren't applying the same level of scrutiny to the positions of the Democratic nominee.
TroibNews 
Climate activist groups that have spent over a year protesting President Joe Biden’s energy policies are now adopting a new approach with his potential successor: aim to get Kamala Harris elected first and address concerns afterward.
Instead of demanding detailed policies, green activists are taking a "do-no-harm" strategy towards Harris’ candidacy, downplaying past criticisms, such as her previous opposition to fracking. They believe Harris has galvanized their base in ways Biden never managed, despite his enactment of the most significant climate legislation in U.S. history.
The goal of energizing activism was a major focus for these groups during their campaign to pressure Biden into stronger actions against fossil fuels. With that objective reached, the priority has shifted to preventing Republican nominee Donald Trump from rolling back their progress if he wins in November.
“We have to defeat Donald Trump,” said Brett Hartl, chief political strategist with the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund, a group that has taken legal action against the Biden administration and challenged federal drilling permits. “We don't want to sabotage her campaign for no valid reason.”
Harris’ campaign quickly sought to establish trust with several progressive environmental organizations that had not endorsed Biden’s reelection, starting with a meeting on July 28, just a week after Biden exited the race.
This communication left activists feeling acknowledged, a sentiment they hadn’t often experienced with Biden. As a result, they endorsed Harris three days later. Others noted that the sudden leadership change led them to hold back on traditional pressure tactics, arguing it was unreasonable to expect Harris’ team to fully develop a platform.
“With Harris’ emergence, the enthusiasm was different and palpable,” said Jeff Ordower, U.S. lead for the climate group 350Action, which had criticized Biden for his approval of the controversial Willow oil project in Alaska. “A campaign is not just about policy points.”
“All the activists need to know is Kamala has pledged to take on Big Oil, details TBD,” said R.L. Miller, president of the Climate Hawks Vote PAC.
The progressive silence over Harris’ lack of detailed policies extends beyond climate issues. While Biden faced heavy criticism for his response to the conflict in Gaza, Harris has received less backlash from Palestinian advocates hoping for a different approach from her. Activists have also given her leeway regarding her firm border policies and her previous support for Medicare for All.
However, the greens’ strategy of delaying critiques of Harris and calls for more specific policy details carries inherent risks. To date, Harris has revealed little about her environmental agenda, with only a passing mention of “the climate crisis” and a highlight of the administration's $1.6 trillion climate, energy, and infrastructure initiatives at the Democratic convention.
Moreover, Harris’ campaign abandoned her earlier calls for a fracking ban without providing a reason for the shift, and hasn't outlined plans to take control of mineral supply chains from China or to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in industries such as steel and cement.
In contrast, four years ago, Biden had released a comprehensive climate policy blueprint in response to pressure from green activists, which closely matched the actions he later took as president.
Republicans have capitalized on Harris’ lack of policy specifics, using it to argue that she is unfit for office and predict she will ultimately yield to the demands of environmental groups.
“Kamala Harris has zero policy positions on her website and has yet to sit down for an interview because she’s incapable of defending her dangerously liberal record and flip flops on every single issue,” said Trump campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt in a statement. “Kamala can’t be trusted by anyone.”
Environmentalists are “going to do whatever they can now, let her say whatever she needs to say to get elected,” remarked Neil Chatterjee, former chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission during the Trump administration. “And then once she's elected, I think they feel pretty confident they'll be able to pull her in their direction. So she may say today that she's no longer for a ban on fracking. I think they feel pretty confident they're going to get her there.”
Harris campaign spokesperson Lauren Hitt stated that Harris was “proud to cast the tie-breaking vote” for Biden's climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, which she claims has created 300,000 new energy jobs.
“Vice President Harris is focused on a future where all Americans have clean air, clean water, and affordable, reliable energy while Trump's lies are an obvious attempt to distract from his own plans to enrich oil and gas executives at the expense of the middle class,” she said in a statement.
In the July 28 meeting, members of Harris’ newly formed presidential campaign engaged with frequent critics of Biden in the environmental movement, including the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund, 350Action, and Friends of the Earth Action. Ike Irby, Harris’ longstanding environmental adviser, and Jake Schwartz, a campaign aide for environmental voters, were present on the call.
The meeting was somewhat vague regarding specifics, Hartl noted, with the campaign admitting it was still in its nascent stages. Groups didn't request or expect detailed proposals. However, a source familiar with the campaign's efforts reported that they reiterated Harris would not ban fracking, a move that would require Congress' approval.
Although no specific policy positions are likely to emerge soon, the campaign will focus on Harris’ broader vision and achievements, including advocating for lead pipe removal, promoting electric bus manufacturing, and enhancing resilience to wildfires and drought.
“I would not expect to see, at least in the near term, anything like what folks got used to in 2020 and 2019,” the source said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “We're going to demonstrate and show people kind of the direction she wants to take us.”
“People understand the context of where we are,” the source added.
Environmental groups on the left flank of the movement seek to avoid undermining Harris’ campaign with the aggressive pressure tactics they employed against Biden, which included protests at his campaign headquarters and disrupting appearances by his Cabinet officials. They perceive Harris as a more natural ally for their activist base, which felt distrust towards Biden during the 2020 primary, although they eventually drove him to pursue and enact the most ambitious climate legislation in American history.
The receptiveness of Harris’ campaign was seen as a positive shift, according to these groups.
“The Harris team is far more open to addressing everyone in the room and not just the power broker types,” Miller from Climate Hawks Vote said. “There’s definitely a bigger sense of belonging with the Harris campaign.”
Despite this, climate issues have not taken center stage.
Harris’ campaign recently released a policy document devoid of details on environmental topics and did not mention climate change in her inaugural campaign advertisement. A $55 million advertising initiative supporting Harris, launched by several environmental groups, also failed to reference “climate change.”
Progressive environmental organizations and more mainstream groups expressed contentment with this approach.
In the weeks following Biden’s poor showing in a June debate and prior to his withdrawal from the race, Hartl mentioned his organization had “given up” and began strategizing for a potential Trump presidency. 350Action and Friends of the Earth Action were still deliberating on whether to endorse Biden.
However, Harris’ rise has revitalized the voter base those groups aimed to mobilize with bold climate initiatives, leading them to avoid jeopardizing that momentum.
“In a normal world, we would have pushed her harder. But this is just a crazy time,” Hartl said. “We can have policy debates later.”
These groups are providing Harris with the space to remain vague.
Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, which championed the Green New Deal, described Harris’ pivot on fracking as an effort to present a more moderate stance. Nevertheless, she stopped short of condemning the shift, stating that her group’s role is to demonstrate the political benefits of strong environmental policies.
Shiney-Ajay emphasized that her goal is not merely to hear Harris articulate specific terms like “climate emergency” or “Green New Deal,” but rather to commit to a broader vision that includes promoting affordable housing with energy-efficient measures and expanding renewable energy.
“If I'm looking at the options around the election this November, there's a lot of ways in which Kamala Harris will be immensely easier to pressure and change on that than a Donald Trump presidency would,” she noted in a recent interview.
Stevie O’Hanlon, the spokesperson for the group, indicated that members would begin outreach efforts targeting young people next week to discuss the election's climate stakes and encourage them to support Harris. However, O'Hanlon acknowledged that more specific commitments from Harris would better motivate young voters.
“Sunrise has a high bar for endorsement,” O’Hanlon said. “We frequently campaign for candidates, including Joe Biden in 2020, who we do not formally endorse. And I think, frankly — and this was true in 2020 — we did a lot more to help Joe Biden win than some groups that endorsed, and I think that will be true in 2024 as well.”
Environmental activists have outlined various policies they wish Harris to pursue, including halting international oil and gas development through the U.S. Export-Import Bank, making Biden’s moratorium on new natural gas export approvals permanent, and fully implementing the Inflation Reduction Act — even passing additional legislation to enhance it.
For now, however, they stress the importance of maintaining their momentum. Miller emphasized that the campaign is still in its early days and noted that the Democratic National Convention, where climate change didn’t feature prominently until later on, is focused more on rallying support than articulating policy.
The economy and cost of living are currently dominating the election narrative, according to Pete Maysmith, senior vice president of campaigns for the League of Conservation Voters Victory Fund. Environmental groups aim to link Biden's and Harris' legislative achievements to the larger economic context by highlighting Harris’ role in creating clean energy and manufacturing jobs.
“What we need to do is to get Kamala Harris elected, hopefully climate leadership in charge of the House and the Senate, then continue to move forward with ambitious climate policy,” Maysmith stated. “There'll be a lot of different conversations about what that exactly looks like.”
Not all groups are aligned with this strategy. Collin Rees, political director at Oil Change U.S., which has not backed Harris, cautioned that while she had a robust platform in 2020 and a strong Senate record, that is “ancient history in politics.”
With the world continuing towards potentially catastrophic levels of warming, and the U.S. being the foremost producer of oil and gas — the primary contributors to climate change — Rees warned that Harris’ grace period could end without new commitments, particularly regarding unresolved issues that alienated many progressives, including frustrations over the administration’s response to recent conflicts abroad.
“This is a deeply risky strategy; there's certainly more energy for Harris's campaign at the moment, but young people haven't forgotten about the urgency of ending oil and gas expansion or the bombs we're funding overseas," Rees asserted in an email. “Another consequence is that the Harris campaign seems to be pandering to moderates and tamping down expectations, which carries its own dangers.”
Emily Johnson contributed to this report for TROIB News
Instead of demanding detailed policies, green activists are taking a "do-no-harm" strategy towards Harris’ candidacy, downplaying past criticisms, such as her previous opposition to fracking. They believe Harris has galvanized their base in ways Biden never managed, despite his enactment of the most significant climate legislation in U.S. history.
The goal of energizing activism was a major focus for these groups during their campaign to pressure Biden into stronger actions against fossil fuels. With that objective reached, the priority has shifted to preventing Republican nominee Donald Trump from rolling back their progress if he wins in November.
“We have to defeat Donald Trump,” said Brett Hartl, chief political strategist with the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund, a group that has taken legal action against the Biden administration and challenged federal drilling permits. “We don't want to sabotage her campaign for no valid reason.”
Harris’ campaign quickly sought to establish trust with several progressive environmental organizations that had not endorsed Biden’s reelection, starting with a meeting on July 28, just a week after Biden exited the race.
This communication left activists feeling acknowledged, a sentiment they hadn’t often experienced with Biden. As a result, they endorsed Harris three days later. Others noted that the sudden leadership change led them to hold back on traditional pressure tactics, arguing it was unreasonable to expect Harris’ team to fully develop a platform.
“With Harris’ emergence, the enthusiasm was different and palpable,” said Jeff Ordower, U.S. lead for the climate group 350Action, which had criticized Biden for his approval of the controversial Willow oil project in Alaska. “A campaign is not just about policy points.”
“All the activists need to know is Kamala has pledged to take on Big Oil, details TBD,” said R.L. Miller, president of the Climate Hawks Vote PAC.
The progressive silence over Harris’ lack of detailed policies extends beyond climate issues. While Biden faced heavy criticism for his response to the conflict in Gaza, Harris has received less backlash from Palestinian advocates hoping for a different approach from her. Activists have also given her leeway regarding her firm border policies and her previous support for Medicare for All.
However, the greens’ strategy of delaying critiques of Harris and calls for more specific policy details carries inherent risks. To date, Harris has revealed little about her environmental agenda, with only a passing mention of “the climate crisis” and a highlight of the administration's $1.6 trillion climate, energy, and infrastructure initiatives at the Democratic convention.
Moreover, Harris’ campaign abandoned her earlier calls for a fracking ban without providing a reason for the shift, and hasn't outlined plans to take control of mineral supply chains from China or to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in industries such as steel and cement.
In contrast, four years ago, Biden had released a comprehensive climate policy blueprint in response to pressure from green activists, which closely matched the actions he later took as president.
Republicans have capitalized on Harris’ lack of policy specifics, using it to argue that she is unfit for office and predict she will ultimately yield to the demands of environmental groups.
“Kamala Harris has zero policy positions on her website and has yet to sit down for an interview because she’s incapable of defending her dangerously liberal record and flip flops on every single issue,” said Trump campaign spokesperson Karoline Leavitt in a statement. “Kamala can’t be trusted by anyone.”
Environmentalists are “going to do whatever they can now, let her say whatever she needs to say to get elected,” remarked Neil Chatterjee, former chair of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission during the Trump administration. “And then once she's elected, I think they feel pretty confident they'll be able to pull her in their direction. So she may say today that she's no longer for a ban on fracking. I think they feel pretty confident they're going to get her there.”
Harris campaign spokesperson Lauren Hitt stated that Harris was “proud to cast the tie-breaking vote” for Biden's climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act, which she claims has created 300,000 new energy jobs.
“Vice President Harris is focused on a future where all Americans have clean air, clean water, and affordable, reliable energy while Trump's lies are an obvious attempt to distract from his own plans to enrich oil and gas executives at the expense of the middle class,” she said in a statement.
In the July 28 meeting, members of Harris’ newly formed presidential campaign engaged with frequent critics of Biden in the environmental movement, including the Center for Biological Diversity Action Fund, 350Action, and Friends of the Earth Action. Ike Irby, Harris’ longstanding environmental adviser, and Jake Schwartz, a campaign aide for environmental voters, were present on the call.
The meeting was somewhat vague regarding specifics, Hartl noted, with the campaign admitting it was still in its nascent stages. Groups didn't request or expect detailed proposals. However, a source familiar with the campaign's efforts reported that they reiterated Harris would not ban fracking, a move that would require Congress' approval.
Although no specific policy positions are likely to emerge soon, the campaign will focus on Harris’ broader vision and achievements, including advocating for lead pipe removal, promoting electric bus manufacturing, and enhancing resilience to wildfires and drought.
“I would not expect to see, at least in the near term, anything like what folks got used to in 2020 and 2019,” the source said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. “We're going to demonstrate and show people kind of the direction she wants to take us.”
“People understand the context of where we are,” the source added.
Environmental groups on the left flank of the movement seek to avoid undermining Harris’ campaign with the aggressive pressure tactics they employed against Biden, which included protests at his campaign headquarters and disrupting appearances by his Cabinet officials. They perceive Harris as a more natural ally for their activist base, which felt distrust towards Biden during the 2020 primary, although they eventually drove him to pursue and enact the most ambitious climate legislation in American history.
The receptiveness of Harris’ campaign was seen as a positive shift, according to these groups.
“The Harris team is far more open to addressing everyone in the room and not just the power broker types,” Miller from Climate Hawks Vote said. “There’s definitely a bigger sense of belonging with the Harris campaign.”
Despite this, climate issues have not taken center stage.
Harris’ campaign recently released a policy document devoid of details on environmental topics and did not mention climate change in her inaugural campaign advertisement. A $55 million advertising initiative supporting Harris, launched by several environmental groups, also failed to reference “climate change.”
Progressive environmental organizations and more mainstream groups expressed contentment with this approach.
In the weeks following Biden’s poor showing in a June debate and prior to his withdrawal from the race, Hartl mentioned his organization had “given up” and began strategizing for a potential Trump presidency. 350Action and Friends of the Earth Action were still deliberating on whether to endorse Biden.
However, Harris’ rise has revitalized the voter base those groups aimed to mobilize with bold climate initiatives, leading them to avoid jeopardizing that momentum.
“In a normal world, we would have pushed her harder. But this is just a crazy time,” Hartl said. “We can have policy debates later.”
These groups are providing Harris with the space to remain vague.
Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the youth-led Sunrise Movement, which championed the Green New Deal, described Harris’ pivot on fracking as an effort to present a more moderate stance. Nevertheless, she stopped short of condemning the shift, stating that her group’s role is to demonstrate the political benefits of strong environmental policies.
Shiney-Ajay emphasized that her goal is not merely to hear Harris articulate specific terms like “climate emergency” or “Green New Deal,” but rather to commit to a broader vision that includes promoting affordable housing with energy-efficient measures and expanding renewable energy.
“If I'm looking at the options around the election this November, there's a lot of ways in which Kamala Harris will be immensely easier to pressure and change on that than a Donald Trump presidency would,” she noted in a recent interview.
Stevie O’Hanlon, the spokesperson for the group, indicated that members would begin outreach efforts targeting young people next week to discuss the election's climate stakes and encourage them to support Harris. However, O'Hanlon acknowledged that more specific commitments from Harris would better motivate young voters.
“Sunrise has a high bar for endorsement,” O’Hanlon said. “We frequently campaign for candidates, including Joe Biden in 2020, who we do not formally endorse. And I think, frankly — and this was true in 2020 — we did a lot more to help Joe Biden win than some groups that endorsed, and I think that will be true in 2024 as well.”
Environmental activists have outlined various policies they wish Harris to pursue, including halting international oil and gas development through the U.S. Export-Import Bank, making Biden’s moratorium on new natural gas export approvals permanent, and fully implementing the Inflation Reduction Act — even passing additional legislation to enhance it.
For now, however, they stress the importance of maintaining their momentum. Miller emphasized that the campaign is still in its early days and noted that the Democratic National Convention, where climate change didn’t feature prominently until later on, is focused more on rallying support than articulating policy.
The economy and cost of living are currently dominating the election narrative, according to Pete Maysmith, senior vice president of campaigns for the League of Conservation Voters Victory Fund. Environmental groups aim to link Biden's and Harris' legislative achievements to the larger economic context by highlighting Harris’ role in creating clean energy and manufacturing jobs.
“What we need to do is to get Kamala Harris elected, hopefully climate leadership in charge of the House and the Senate, then continue to move forward with ambitious climate policy,” Maysmith stated. “There'll be a lot of different conversations about what that exactly looks like.”
Not all groups are aligned with this strategy. Collin Rees, political director at Oil Change U.S., which has not backed Harris, cautioned that while she had a robust platform in 2020 and a strong Senate record, that is “ancient history in politics.”
With the world continuing towards potentially catastrophic levels of warming, and the U.S. being the foremost producer of oil and gas — the primary contributors to climate change — Rees warned that Harris’ grace period could end without new commitments, particularly regarding unresolved issues that alienated many progressives, including frustrations over the administration’s response to recent conflicts abroad.
“This is a deeply risky strategy; there's certainly more energy for Harris's campaign at the moment, but young people haven't forgotten about the urgency of ending oil and gas expansion or the bombs we're funding overseas," Rees asserted in an email. “Another consequence is that the Harris campaign seems to be pandering to moderates and tamping down expectations, which carries its own dangers.”
Emily Johnson contributed to this report for TROIB News
