Vice President Kamala Harris' economic strategies have sparked significant backlash from a notoriously left-leaning editorial board.

Harris' economic plan, released last week, was harshly critiqued by the Washington Post as reliant on "populist gimmicks," and has stirred debates about its effectiveness and feasibility in practice, as Fox News reports.

On Friday, the Post published an editorial blasting Harris for her economic proposals. The editorial described her approach as laden with populist strategies that seem more focused on immediate appeal than practical impact.

The criticism primarily centers around Harris' proposal for a federal price-fixing scheme aimed at controlling what her campaign labels "excessive" corporate profits. This particular strategy has drawn unfavorable comparisons to President Richard Nixon's unsuccessful price controls.

Among the contentious elements of Harris' plan is the initiative to regulate prices in sectors such as groceries, where critics and some economists argue that corporate pricing is not the primary driver of current cost increases.

Washington Post Skeptical of Harris' Economic Framework

The editorial board's critique extended to Harris' proposals for housing incentives. While the board acknowledged the creativity of tax incentives, it sharply criticized the proposal of a $25,000 aid for new homeowners, questioning its long-term benefits.

This part of her economic strategy also includes an increase in the child tax credit from $2,000 to $3,600, aiming to alleviate financial pressures on families.

However, despite these measures, the editorial warns that Harris' promise to avoid tax increases on households earning less than $400,000 could lead to significant budget deficits. The campaign itself has projected that these plans would add approximately $1.7 trillion to the federal deficit over ten years.

Critics Question the Viability of No-Tax-Increase Pledge

Financial analysts and the Post editorial board are wary of the Harris campaign's assurance that it can fund expansive economic policies without detailed offsets or increased tax revenues.

"Instead of offering a substantive plan, she squandered the moment on populist gimmicks," the board expressed, signaling deep reservations about the practicality of Harris' economic promises.

The editorial further said: "Ms. Harris says she’ll target companies that make ‘excessive’ profits, whatever that means." This statement captures the board's skepticism about the ambiguity and feasibility of defining and enforcing such profit limits.

Federal Price Controls: A Controversial Proposal

Harris' approach includes empowering the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general to penalize companies perceived to be setting unfairly high prices. However, this proposal has faced criticism for potentially disrupting market dynamics and leading to unintended economic consequences.

Columnist Catherine Rampell added to the chorus of disapproval, stating, "It’s hard to exaggerate how bad this policy is." She criticized the plan for potentially inviting more harm than benefit to the economy.

Rampell also noted, "If your opponent claims you’re a ‘communist,’ maybe don’t start with an economic agenda that can (accurately) be labeled as federal price controls." Her comment highlights the political risks associated with Harris' economic policies.

Responses and Reactions to Economic Strategy

The Harris campaign has remained silent in response to requests for comment from media outlets like Fox News Digital, leaving some of the critical questions about her economic strategy unanswered.

This silence has fueled further speculation and criticism from various corners, suggesting that the campaign may be struggling to defend its economic policies effectively.

Despite the fierce criticism, there are segments of the Democratic base that support Harris' focus on protecting consumers from what they see as corporate greed and ensuring economic fairness.

Economic Plan's Impact on Harris' Political Future

As the debate continues, the effectiveness and popularity of Harris' economic policies could play a critical role in shaping her political future, particularly as she maneuvers within the complex landscape of American politics.

The impact of these policies, if implemented, could have far-reaching consequences for American households and businesses, testing the balance between market freedom and governmental intervention.

In conclusion, Vice President Kamala Harris' economic proposals have ignited a firestorm of criticism and debate. The Washington Post editorial board and other critics have challenged the feasibility of her plans, particularly focusing on her federal price-fixing initiative and housing incentives, amid concerns about increasing the federal deficit without sufficient offsets.