Washington Post Editorial Board Slams Harris ‘Disappointment’ Of An Economic Rollout: ‘Squandered The Moment’ With ‘Gimmicks’

AP Photo/Kayla Wolf

The Washington Post editorial board issued a rebuke of Vice President Kamala Harris’s Friday speech in which she laid out an economic vision for the country if she is elected in November.

Harris notably vowed a “federal ban” on “price gouging” as she blamed inflation partially on corporate greed. Harris also vowed economic help for 100 million Americans through tax credits as well as down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers.

The Post’ s editorial board was not impressed by the speech and opined Friday night it was a “disappointment” that was laden with “gimmicks” during a time when Americans are in need of serious answers.

“‘Price gouging’ is not causing inflation,” the paper’s board wrote. “So why is the vice president promising to stamp it out?” The board continued :

Vice President Kamala Harris’s speech Friday was an opportunity to get specific with voters about how a Harris presidency would manage an economy that many feel is not working well for them. Unfortunately, instead of delivering a substantial plan, she squandered the moment on populist gimmicks. Americans are clearly still anxious and angry about the high cost of groceries, housing and even $5.29 Big Macs.

While the inflation rate has cooled substantially since the 2022 peak, an ostensible Biden-Harris administration accomplishment, prices remain elevated relative to the Trump years. So it’s a real political issue for Ms. Harris. One way to handle it might be to level with voters, telling them that inflation spiked in 2021 mainly because the pandemic snarled supply chains, and that the Federal Reserve’s policies, which the Biden-Harris administration supported, are working to slow it. The vice president instead opted for a less forthright route: Blaming big business. She vowed to go after “price gouging” by grocery stores, landlords, pharmaceutical companies and other supposed corporate perpetrators by having the Federal Trade Commission enforce a vaguely defined “federal ban on price gouging.”

The board did offer some praise for Harris on her proposals to raise the child tax credit and to make health insurance and prescription drugs more affordable. But the newspaper questioned whether the country could afford her ideas without her offering a clear explanation as to how she would fund them without raising taxes.

The board also wrote:

Never mind that many stores are currently slashing prices in response to renewed consumer bargain hunting. Ms. Harris says she’ll target companies that make “excessive” profits, whatever that means. (It’s hard to see how groceries, a notoriously low-margin business, would qualify.) Thankfully, this gambit by Ms. Harris has been met with almost instant skepticism, with many critics citing President Richard M. Nixon’s failed price controls from the 1970s. Whether the Harris proposal wins over voters remains to be seen, but if sound economic analysis still matters, it won’t.

The Post ‘s board concluded, “To be sure, every campaign makes expensive promises that will never come to pass, especially with a divided Congress. Remember Mr. Biden’s pledge to make community college free? Even adjusted for the pandering standards of campaign economics, however, Ms. Harris’s speech Friday ranks as a disappointment.”