Kamala Harris Targets High Food and Housing Costs in Economic Policy Push

Vice President Kamala Harris is intensifying her focus on high food and housing costs, a central concern for voters, as she prepares to deliver an economic policy speech in North Carolina. In her speech, Harris is expected to advocate for a federal ban on price gouging in groceries and outline strategies to reduce other living costs, positioning these initiatives as extensions of the current administration’s efforts.

Although inflation has recently hit its lowest point in over three years, food prices remain significantly elevated, with a 21% increase compared to three years ago. Former President Donald Trump, now the Republican presidential nominee, has been critical of the Biden administration’s handling of inflation, making it a key issue in his campaign.

Housing costs, another major contributor to inflation, are also a focal point of Harris’s policy proposals. She plans to leverage federal resources to facilitate the construction of three million new housing units, legislate to curb rent hikes, and offer $25,000 in down-payment assistance to first-time homebuyers if elected. Harris is aligning herself closely with President Joe Biden’s legislative and economic record, framing her plans as continuations of their joint work over the past three and a half years.

The proposed Harris housing plan includes the introduction of a tax credit for builders who develop starter homes aimed at first-time buyers and the expansion of a $20 billion “innovation fund” from the Biden administration to support housing construction. The down-payment assistance plan would also significantly build on Biden’s existing proposal to offer federal aid to first-time homebuyers.

Earlier this week, both Biden and Harris celebrated their administration’s achievements in lowering prescription drug prices at an event in Maryland. This marked Harris’s first joint speaking engagement with Biden since she assumed the lead on the Democratic ticket nearly four weeks ago. During the event, they announced that negotiated drug prices would reduce the costs of ten of Medicare’s most expensive drugs, cutting prices by hundreds or even thousands of dollars. This program, a result of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act focused on health care and climate, was made possible through Harris’s tiebreaking vote in the Senate, which allowed Democrats to overcome unified Republican opposition. As Biden noted, “The tiebreaking vote of Kamala made that possible,” adding his confidence that Harris would be a formidable president.

Biden has also undertaken initiatives to combat rising food prices, including the establishment of a “competition council” aimed at reducing costs by fostering competition within the meat industry. This is part of a broader strategy to demonstrate that his administration is actively working to tackle inflation. When questioned on Thursday about whether he was concerned Harris might distance herself from his economic policies, Biden assured reporters, “She’s not going to.”

Public opinion, however, reveals a mixed response to Harris’s economic capabilities. According to the latest poll from the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, 45% of Americans believe Trump is better suited to handle the economy, while 38% favor Harris. Notably, about one in ten respondents expressed trust in neither candidate regarding economic management.

Speaking at his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, Trump criticized Harris’s proposals, labeling them as “communist price controls” that would exacerbate shortages, hunger, and inflation. As he made these remarks, Trump was flanked by popular grocery items to underscore his point about rising food costs.

Harris’s housing plan also includes measures to address data-sharing and price-setting tools used by landlords to determine rents and the elimination of a tax incentive that has led investment firms to acquire substantial portions of the nation’s housing stock. Harris plans to contrast her approach with Trump’s, referencing a lawsuit brought against him by the Justice Department five decades ago for housing discrimination.

Consumer confidence surveys indicate that high prices continue to frustrate shoppers, especially those in lower-income brackets, despite the overall cooling of inflation. Prices across the board are about 21% higher than they were before the pandemic, although average incomes have risen slightly more, sustaining consumer spending even as many Americans report a pessimistic outlook on the economy.

Certain meat prices have risen even more steeply than overall inflation: beef prices have surged nearly 33% since the pandemic began, chicken by 31%, and pork by 21%, according to government data. Pandemic-related supply chain disruptions played a role in these increases, as many meat processing plants temporarily shut down due to COVID-19 outbreaks among workers.

The Biden administration, however, has argued that corporate consolidation in the meat processing industry has been a more significant factor, enabling a few large companies to hike prices beyond their costs. In late 2021, the White House noted that four major companies control between 55% and 85% of the beef, chicken, and poultry markets, naming Tyson Foods and JBS among the dominant players. These companies have paid out hundreds of millions of dollars to settle price-fixing lawsuits for chicken, beef, and pork, though they have not admitted to any wrongdoing.

Some economists have suggested that large food and consumer goods companies took advantage of pandemic-era disruptions, a phenomenon economist Isabella Weber at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, termed “seller’s inflation.” Others have referred to it as “greedflation.”

Harris’s proposals to curb price gouging come at a time when there is some evidence that this “seller’s inflation” is easing. Consumers are becoming more selective and are opting for lower-cost alternatives over more expensive options. The government reported Wednesday that grocery prices, on average nationwide, have risen just 1.1% in the past year, aligning with pre-pandemic price increases.

The meat industry has long been defending against allegations of price gouging and price-fixing. Major players in the industry dispute claims that their consolidation is responsible for high prices. Glynn Tonsor, an agricultural economist at Kansas State University, explained that the increased costs of raising animals, processing meat, and delivering it to consumers have contributed to higher prices. “Yes, consumers are seeing higher prices, but it doesn’t necessarily mean somebody is gouging them,” Tonsor said.

Julie Anna Potts, President, and CEO of the Meat Institute trade group, echoed this sentiment, arguing that Harris’s proposal would not address the underlying causes of inflation. “Consumers have been impacted by high prices due to inflation on everything from services to rent to automobiles, not just at the grocery store,” Potts said. “A federal ban on price gouging does not address the real causes of inflation.”