Kamala Harris’ campaign climate absent for fear of “scaring away some voters,” says expert

François Gemenne, a specialist in environmental geopolitics and migration, points out three major reasons in particular to explain the absence of this subject in the race for the White House.

With fires still out of control in California, scorching temperatures in parts of the American West, and a storm that is causing fears of major flooding in Louisiana… The American weather has been, to say the least, turbulent in recent days. However, despite these major events, the subject of climate remains the great absentee in the race for the White House. For example, during the televised debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris on September 10, climate change only took up 2 minutes 30 seconds of airtime.

“Kamala Harris fears scaring off some voters who might see her as too pro-environmentalist“, says François Gemenne, a specialist in environmental geopolitics and migration, on franceinfo. According to him, Joe Biden’s record is “rather good, even excellent“, according to him, but the candidate believes that the subject “could make him lose votes“, especially in key, more industrial states like North Carolina, Ohio and Pennsylvania. “DIn these states, the climate transition is perceived as a threat to employment“, explains François Gemenne.

franceinfo: Why doesn’t Kamala Harris talk about the environment?

François Gemenne: This is not her topic. She is not known for her pro-environmental positions. It is not a subject that she has been interested in during her career. We can imagine that she is not very comfortable on this subject. The second reason is that she is running a campaign that is generally in the center. She is afraid of scaring away certain voters who might consider her too pro-environmentalist. There is also obviously the memory of Al Gore who had led a very green campaign in 2000 and we know that it probably cost him the election. She does not see it at all as an argument that could bring her votes, but on the contrary as something that could make her lose votes on the side of moderate Republicans. The third reason is that the election will be played out in states that are often industrial states: North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania. In these states, the climate transition is perceived as a threat to employment. She doesn’t want to scare off voters in these key states.

The environment doesn’t speak to the middle classes?

Very few. But it’s the same in Europe. We realize that this is a subject that has somewhat disappeared from political screens in recent months, because it is a subject that is not electorally relevant, that does not bring in votes, particularly because it is widely perceived as a constraint rather than as a project.

“No candidate, obviously, wants to appear with what is perceived as a constraint. It has become an increasingly divisive, increasingly ideological subject.”

Francois Gemenne

to franceinfo

I am struck by how we often focus on symbolic controversies that will divide opinion rather than on the elephant in the room, that is to say the decarbonization of our economies.

Yet Joe Biden’s record is rather positive?

It’s fair to say that Joe Biden’s record on the environment is pretty good, if not excellent. The Inflation Reduction Act is arguably the largest green infrastructure investment plan in the country. Biden will go down as a very green president, on a par with Theodore Roosevelt or Richard Nixon.

Very ecological, but protecting its own industry…

Of course, there is always protectionism. What is simply interesting is that it has been transformed a little into green protectionism, with in particular very high customs duties on Chinese cars, even electric ones. Indeed, his recovery plan is above all a recovery plan for American industry.

Meanwhile, the house is burning…

We know that these fires are huge contributors to global warming. We don’t yet have the figures for the fires in California. But the fires that ravaged Canada a few years ago produced the equivalent of a year’s worth of greenhouse gases in Japan. This is absolutely considerable, because obviously, burning trees will release into the atmosphere all the carbon that they have accumulated in their trunks and branches that they have accumulated over the course of their lives. We must not forget that despite everything, there is a transition that is taking place quietly. Many industries, even today in the United States, have started to decarbonize their industrial processes, and the deployment of renewable energies is in full swing, including in Republican states like Texas. There is indeed a transition that is happening despite everything, but the subject has disappeared from the political radar.