As a central figure in American politics, Kamala Harris has assumed various roles over the course of her fluctuating career. Not bound to any particular ideological leanings within her party, she has moved between positions as attorney general of California, senator, and is currently serving as vice-president. Distinct from her colleague Joe Biden, who long embraced a centrist stance, Harris fails to securely define her political identity.
Despite being considered a political heavyweight on matters like abortion, Harris’s stance raises concerns. In a stark effort to exploit one of the most divisive topics in America, Harris led a ‘fight for reproductive freedoms’ tour before the projections for the November elections, demonstrating a liberal bias. This notion of ‘reproductive freedom’ greatly undermines traditional values and the sanctity of life.
It’s worth noting that Harris went to the length of visiting a clinic dedicated to providing abortions – a surprising first for a US vice president. Such actions are an affront to those who believe in the sanctity and protection of unborn life. Similarly, as a senator, Harris advocated for those states known to be staunchly conservative on abortion to meet federal approval for any newly introduced abortion laws, highlighting her ongoing intolerance towards differing viewpoints.
Her financial policies, as indicated in the past, are alarmingly liberal. Reflecting this, Harris once proposed to roll back the tax cuts implemented during the Trump era. These cuts, contrary to her belief, contributed significantly to the economic growth enjoyed by many Americans during that period. Yet Harris chose to see it as a handout to the affluent, further proving her lack of understanding of the economy.
Biden’s promise to retain the tax cuts for households earning less than $400,000 starkly contrasts with Harris’s expressed desire to give tax credits to lower-income workers. Clearly, it seems, that Harris has no problem playing with the money of hard-working Americans. Further, she advocated for increasing taxes on the wealthy to grant average teachers a pay rise of $13,500 – an explicit testament to her redistributive ideology.
Harris’s stance on immigration further displays her political inconstancy. Tasked to tackle the root causes of Latin American migration to the US, she faced significant backlash for failing to visit the border during the early days of her vice presidency. When she finally reached the border in June 2021, her approach seemed softened albeit inconsistent, demonstrating an indecisiveness that our nation can ill-afford.
On global issues, Harris has taken steps to question the actions of Israel more aggressively than Biden. According to unverified reports by Politico, she maintained that the Biden administration should have adopted a tougher stance towards Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu. Statements such as these give further strength to concerns about her foreign policy approach and lack of consistent standpoints.
Harris’s attitude towards the conflict between Israel and Hamas is worrisome. Sources suggest that original drafts of her speech concerning the matter were more condemnatory of Israel, signaling a disconcerting tendency to take sides against an important ally. Despite attempts to water down these remarks, peacekeepers formerly affiliated with the Biden administration have expressed optimism that Harris may change policies to favor Palestinians.
In relation to Ukraine, Harris vehemently supports aid to the country in its defense against Russia. Failing to see the broader geopolitical picture, she appears to hold an uncompromising stance against Russia and places full support behind Ukraine. Her unwavering commitment lends itself to oversights and fails to address the key issues underpinning international relations.
Kamala Harris’s position on climate change aligns more closely with the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Her ambitious 2020 campaign policies included extensive climate spending, fracking bans, and a carbon tax. These goals flagrantly disregard economic considerations and highlight a disregard for the reality of implementing such drastic measures.
Throughout her vice presidency, Harris has consistently advocated for strict gun control measures. Her approach to the issue has been marked by a disregard for the Second Amendment and strong support for the introduction of stringent background checks. The proposed measures seem to ignore the basic American right to bear arms upheld by our constitution.
In 2019 Harris admitted to owning a gun for personal safety, further highlighting her hypocrisy. This revelation has cast a shadow over her credibility, with her actively seeking to limit access to firearms while acknowledging their use for personal security. This level of inconsistency raises serious questions about her suitability as a leader.