Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign plans to shift its economic message from breadth to depth, articulating some of the policies we could expect from a Harris administration. Now it’s time to explain some details such as how the administration would get her plans through Congress and how her policies would be paid for.
Running the country isn’t cheap. Saving the middle class would be even more expensive than more of the same. History showed us that: Pushing through the New Deal, Franklin D. Roosevelt grew the national debt by more than 1,000 percent.
Even preventing disaster can be expensive, much less aiming for progress. As former President Donald Trump and President Joe Biden tried to navigate the country through the pandemic and the historic global inflation that ensued, the final quarter of 2021 saw the U.S. saddled with a debt-to-GDP ratio of nearly 140 percent. And yet we also remain the strongest economy in the world.
Here’s one certainty: The next Democratic president will have ambitious, expensive plans. Here’s another: No matter what Harris says, conservatives will find fault with it. Not surprising, of course, considering they prefer austerity for those in need and abundance for the rich.
It’s little wonder that the central economic message of Harris’ campaign so far — getting ahead as opposed to just getting by — has been so well received. But the honeymoon phase is going to draw to an end soon.
The work of selling the idea of a Harris administration will succeed or fail depending on what the vice president says about the economy. She needs a message that doesn’t reject the current administration, and she also needs to present a vision for the future that is distinct from Biden’s, a vision that she and Walz will represent.
Senators such as Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have long talked about making the ultra-wealthy and corporations pay their fair share. The problem is that without a significant majority in Congress to provide the votes, it’s just talk.
For achievements such as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, Biden was able to lean on the relationships and expertise he built in his 36 years in the Senate. Having served only four years in that chamber, Harris obviously doesn’t have the same resources to pull from.
Congress can block a president from fulfilling key campaign promises. The infrastructure bill made it across the finish line, but the John Lewis Voting Rights Act did not.
Harris has spent the past three weeks throwing out chunks of red meat to a base in desperate need of sustenance. She has money. And she has the full attention of her opponent, who is so shook that last weekend he claimed AI had generated the images of 15,000 people flocking to support Harris in Detroit.
The images weren’t faked.
The enthusiasm is real.
I was there, as were union members who roared each time Harris talked about helping the middle class. Pricey initiatives such as affordable child care were particularly popular. They always are. Getting the votes, paying for it … those are the reasons they haven’t come to pass.
Can Harris get the congressional support she needs to enact the progressive policies she is promising? The answer to that question begins and ends with how she intends to cover the costs.
LZ Granderson is an Op-Ed columnist for the Los Angeles Times.
