The early reviews are in for the economic plan Vice President Kamala Harris released Friday, and while the soon-to-be-Democratic-nominee has received praise for elements of her agenda, such as plans to boost housing supply and an expansion of key tax credits for families, she has also been widely criticized for her proposal to ban price gouging.
As a reminder, the Harris plan would raise the Child Tax Credit to $3,600 per child and provide $6,000 for middle-income and low-income families with newborns. It also would expand the Earned Income Tax Credit, provide for the cancellation of medical debt, expand the cap on prescription drug costs and create a $25,000 subsidy for first-time homebuyers.
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has used the idea of a ban on price gouging in particular as fodder for continued attacks labeling Harris a radical and “communist.” Many analysts and pundits, meanwhile, have suggested that the idea plays better politically than economically.
Here’s a roundup of some selected commentary on the Harris plan.
Harris has outlined a clear vision: “In Raleigh on Friday, Harris began to put her own stamp on the brand of progressive economics that has come to dominate Democratic politics over the last decade,” Jim Tankersley writes at The New York Times. “That economic thinking embraces the idea that the federal government must act aggressively to foster competition and correct distortions in private markets. … [T]he main thrust of Ms. Harris’s vision is clear: a mixture of government intervention and government assistance, all meant to help Americans climb their way into the middle class.”
She has provided a clear contrast with Trump: University of Michigan economist Justin Wolfers told CNN that there really is no comparison between the speeches on economic policy Trump and Harris made last week. Trump’s speech devolved into a rant about immigrants and tampons, and some data points he provided were false, including the claim that bacon prices have risen by 400% to 500%. As for policies, Trump also said he would ask his cabinet secretaries to give him their best ideas about how to fight inflation. "That's not a policy, that's a process," Wolfers said.
By contrast, Harris referred to actual facts (i.e., bread prices are up by about 50% in the wake of the pandemic) and provided a series of concrete steps she proposed to take to address inflation and high prices. “There are pluses and minuses” to Harris’s plan, Wolfers said, but least “we can all have a look at it and debate it.”
The Harris team has also been hammering Trump’s plans, joining economists in warning that they would send inflation soaring. “As they pledge to give more tax giveaways to the richest Americans and big corporations, their economic agenda will increase costs on everyday items, groceries, prescription drugs, housing, and health care for everyone else,” Brian Nelson, Harris’s senior policy adviser, said in a statement cited by The Hill.
She’s getting two big things right: Price controls have proven problematic in the past and the idea of helping first-time homebuyers to the tune of $25,000 could drive up housing prices. But Harris is getting it right with her calls to build 3 million new housing units over the next four years and expand the Child Tax Credit, writes Bloomberg’s Robert Burgess.
She may be going populist, but she’s no communist: “Well, let’s be clear, I know Kamala Harris believes in the free market,” Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware told Fox News on Sunday. “I don’t think there’s anything communist about wanting to make housing more affordable and prescription drugs more affordable.”
Voters may really like her price-gouging ban: The substance of her platform “likely won’t appeal to many people who actually know about economics. But it’s hard for me to argue with the politics,” Josh Barro says at The Atlantic. “Harris is trying to win a presidential election, and to win elections, you run on popular ideas. And the voters, in their infinite wisdom, strongly favor laws against ‘price gouging.’”
But these are not serious policy ideas: “Unfortunately, instead of delivering a substantial plan, she squandered the moment on populist gimmicks,” says The Washington Post’s editorial board. “Whether the Harris proposal wins over voters remains to be seen, but if sound economic analysis still matters, it won’t.” At least the Harris housing plan “is built on a slightly firmer foundation” in seeking to address insufficient supply, though her proposal for $25,000 in down payment assistance really would threaten to raise prices. Bottom line, the editorial board says: Economic pandering may be nothing new in political campaigns, but Harris’s economic speech was a disappointment nonetheless.
