Kamala Harris is backtracking again, this time on her plan to ban “price gouging.”
Sources close to Harris told The New York Times this week that the plan would now be “narrowly focused on the food and grocery industries” and would “likely only apply in emergency situations, like after a natural disaster or during a pandemic.”
This “clarification” came just days after even the liberal Washington Post criticized Harris’ plan, calling it a “populist gimmick” rather than a real economic solution. Food industry leaders also pointed out that the price increases hurting Americans are due to inflation in their costs, not because they’re trying to make huge profits.
Harris initially proposed this vague plan to make it seem like “corporate greed” was the main reason for inflation. This was an attempt to shift the blame away from the actual causes: the Biden-Harris administration’s continuous spending, policies that slow down the economy, and giveaways to buy votes.
This was a clear example of Democratic misinformation at its worst.
That’s why Harris quickly changed her stance when even moderate liberals started criticizing her. She tried to make the price controls sound less extreme by saying they would only be used in emergencies — meaning they might rarely be applied, if ever.
But even the scaled-back version is a bad idea. Companies set prices based on their costs and what they think customers are willing to pay. They understand this balance better than government officials do.
Also, relying on anonymous sources to backtrack on what seemed like a serious policy announcement from Harris herself is not helpful. How can people trust that this version truly reflects her position?
Harris could easily change her mind again, and without clear communication from her, no one knows what she really means by “emergency” or “rare.”
As a result, the food industry still has to worry that the actual plan might be worse than what’s being suggested, leading them to waste time and resources preparing for it — which isn’t good for businesses or their customers.
This whole situation was likely just a signal to the media to stop discussing Harris’ price-control “plan.” They might go along with it, but that just means Americans will continue to be in the dark about her actual intentions, beyond saying whatever she thinks will help her get elected.
