"Ban" is a verb meaning to "officially or legally prohibit" something. If the Biden administration is not approving new fracking permits, how is that not "officially or legally prohibiting" new fracking permits?

The economy is bleeding, and the Biden administration's response is to cripple one of the few industries that has been consistently employing people throughout this crisis.
But, his allies in the media don't want him to take that PR hit, so they run cover and play word games. Biden's exact words were "We are not going to ban fracking. Period." The "Period." there would imply that ANY ban is off the table.
If you are going to prohibit via executive order - which is nothing more than a law passed outside of the normal legislative process - anything, you are "legally" prohibiting it. There are legal consequences to violating that regulation.
So yes, definitionally, Biden has "legally prohibited" fracking in some way, shape, or form, which is the opposite of his campaign statements.

In other words, he lied.
But @GlennKesslerWP would have you believe that "ban" does not mean "ban" in this case, because it is not a complete ban of all fracking. Because Kessler is not actually doing any real fact-checking. He is doing what political hacks do, instead: Twisting words and meanings.
Definitionally, Joe Biden has put a "ban" on fracking. It is not all fracking, but it is a "ban" nonetheless. That is true no matter what type of spin you try to put on it. You may not like that it's being called a lie, but I can't help you. He lied.
And Biden's supporters on the far left are going to be so happy about it. They don't care that he lied. He did it for the right reasons!
But you know who won't be happy about it? The blue-collar workers who depend on jobs like this, and whose jobs depend on energy produced domestically, that Biden lied to in order to get their vote.
Trump won blue-collar workers in 2020 because they were terrified more Democratic policy would kill more of their jobs. The Obama years were exceedingly tough on them. They saw Trump as a way to keep that from happening again.
Trump was not perfect. He wasn't who they wanted, and after four years, they had an opportunity for someone who seemed like a better person, but golly this decent person belonged to the administration who screwed up the job market for them years before!
Biden did all he could to assure them he would not be seeking to destroy their jobs. Not in the energy industry. Not anywhere else. So he said he would not ban fracking. "Period," he added at the end of the statement for emphasis.
Within -days- of taking office, we now know that "Period." did not mean "under any circumstances," as the tone and usage would have implied.
Joe Biden lied. It is that simple. He has banned new fracking on federal land. His administration blocking new permits is definitionally a ban. He lied to blue-collar workers who felt they could identify with them because he wanted their vote.
And from start to finish, the media will do everything they can to cover for Biden because he is a Democrat and they supported him from the get-go. This is petty, partisan hackery coming from the people who say "Democracy dies in darkness" unironically.
The only darkness I see is the Washington Post refusing to shine a light on the lies their preferred candidates spread in order to protect those candidates.
Noted fact-checkers blatantly ignoring this statement that the politician actually LABELED as a fact. https://t.co/aoBXQLfFKz

More from Biden

Biden clearly should not do #1. The problem with #2 is that reconciliation delays the inevitable and creates a tiered system where issues that happen to be ineligible - like civil rights and democracy reform - are relegated to second-class status and left to die by filibuster.


This👇is the danger. By using reconciliation you’re conceding the point that major legislation deserves to pass by majority vote, but only certain kinds for arbitrary reasons. Plus the process itself is opaque and ugly. You risk laying a logistical & political trap for yourself.


All the “here’s what you can do through reconciliation” takes are correct but also look through the wrong end of the telescope. Any of the items mentioned, or a small number of them, would be relatively easy. But putting them all together in one leadership-driven mega package...

... with no committee involvement and no real oversight, enduring tough press for jamming a massive package through a close process and stories about lobbyist giveaways while dodging the adverse parliamentary rulings that are virtually inevitable and still maintaining 50 votes...

It’s possible! Maybe the mega-ness of the package ends up helping hold 50 votes. But the ugliness of the process is being underpriced. And to what end? You’re just delaying the inevitable since you can’t use it for civil rights nor can you allow civil rights to die by filibuster.
U.S. president-elect Joe Biden has indicated plans to cancel the Keystone XL pipeline permit via executive action on his first day in office, sources tell CBC News.

This weekend stakeholders have seen a longer list of Biden’s planned executive actions than what was publicly reported in a memo from incoming chief of staff Ron Klain.

That purported list includes a reference to cancelling Keystone XL on Day 1 — Wednesday.

Here is what the Biden transition team has publicly reported so far. From a memo by his Chief of Staff Ron Klain — that dozens of executive orders are planned in the first few days.
https://t.co/gEi3qHJnD1

The Biden team has publicly /

/ publicly announced its intention to sign climate orders on Day 1 including rejoining the Paris accord

What hasn’t been publicly reported, and it’s apparently something the transition team has indicated in stakeholder briefings, is that an order to kill KXL is coming on Day 1

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney raises the prospect of legal action if Biden cancels KXL.

You May Also Like