Kamala’s “Marxist” Economic Plans

Since Kamala Harris ascended to the top of the Democratic presidential ticket, she has been finding ways to distance herself from President Biden. Because Biden has been nominally a moderate Democrat, that only leaves Harris to move leftward if she is to create a new image for herself.

In recent weeks Harris has faced criticisms for her economic policies. In one of her first moves, she directly copied a plan by President Trump to eliminate taxes on tips for service workers, an idea that he announced just two months prior. Harris also mimicked a plan originating from Sen. JD Vance (R-OH) to raise the child tax credit to $6,000 per child. Just five days prior, Vance recommended raising the credit to $5,000.

Harris then harkened back to a favorite topic of the Biden-Harris administration: supposedly greedy supermarkets. “Price gouging” food suppliers are to blame for exorbitantly high grocery costs, according to Harris, despite grocers having a mere 1.4 percent net profit margin last year.

Kamala Harris advocated for a federal ban on corporate price gouging of groceries, quickly drawing comparisons to similar Soviet-style policies that led to empty food markets and bread lines in the 20th century.

In the Harris campaign’s policy announcement, she did not provide specifics on how the proposed price-gouging ban would be implemented or which corporate actions it would target. She stated that within her first 100 days, she would work to establish a federal ban to ensure “big corporations can’t unfairly exploit consumers to run up excessive corporate profits.”

Many in the left-wing press took offense at Harris’ price control plan. A Washington Post columnist remarked, “It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is,” while The New York Times’ Bret Stephens called it “legislation worthy of Venezuela.”

CNBC host Joe Kernen sparred with Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), who supports Harris’ proposal. Kernen called mandating price controls on food a “fool’s errand” and an effort to distract voters from what he claims are the “real causes of inflation,” such as the increased consumer demand fueled by stimulus packages like the Inflation Reduction Act.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) compared Harris’ plan to former Cuban President Fidel Castro and former Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, while JD Vance remarked, "Giving Kamala Harris control over inflation policy is like Jeffrey Epstein control over human trafficking policy.”

Harris's embrace of a far-left economic policy exemplifies her effort to redefine herself as a distinct leader rather than simply a stand-in for Biden. However, with limited avenues to distinguish herself, she's shifting left to position herself as a bold champion of change.

The former president still holds an eight-point lead over Harris when voters are asked who is better for the economy, though Trump’s lead is significantly down from the over 20-point gap he maintained over Biden.

In the aftermath of Kamala’s price control plan, Trump adopted the nickname “Comrade Kamala” for her and called her a “Marxist,” though voters do not appear convinced that Harris will adopt communist policies. A poll from the end of August found Trump still holding a lead over Harris on the economy — but only by six points. This may be because 60 percent of Americans actually support capping prices on groceries.

Economists generally agree that price controls are dangerous because they distort price signals and ultimately drive up the cost of goods due to artificially increasing demand. In the 1970s, both the US and the UK instituted a wide array of price controls, which ultimately led to more inflation and, in the UK, the infamous "Winter of Discontent" in 1978-1979.

Despite this, Kamala Harris, throughout her career, has supported some of the most progressive economic policies in American politics.

During her 2020 presidential run, she supported an environmental plan that would cost well over $10 trillion over the next two decades to reach “zero emissions,” and during her time in the Senate, she supported the enormously expensive Medicare for All program as championed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

Her running mate, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D), created one of the most left-wing economies in the country in his home state. Walz supported a 10 percent income tax and a $10 billion tax hike despite Minnesota’s $19 billion surplus, while government spending has surged nearly 50 percent during his tenure. Meanwhile, Minnesota's private-sector job growth lags behind that of neighboring states.

The Harris-Walz campaign takes a significantly more left-leaning stance on economic policy compared to Biden's, with plans to implement highly progressive measures if Harris is elected.

While Kamala Harris has largely avoided taking firm policy positions — there is still no policy platform listed on her campaign website — the few economic positions she has taken have been extreme. Politicians and economists across the spectrum generally view food price caps as ineffective, associating them with third-world socialist policies.

Conventional wisdom suggests shifting to the center in the final months of a presidential campaign, but Harris remains committed to her progressive stance. Donald Trump will likely target her left-wing commitments in next week’s debate.