Kamala is pointing the finger already.
Vice President Kamala Harris has recently turned her focus toward grocery stores, accusing them of contributing to rising living costs. Her criticism comes amidst a backdrop where inflation, which hit its highest levels in 40 years during her tenure as Vice President under Joe Biden, remains a significant concern for voters.
At a recent rally in North Carolina, Harris declared, “As president, I will address the high costs that impact everyday Americans, like the cost of food.” She acknowledged that while the pandemic and subsequent supply chain disruptions drove up prices, the current elevated costs persist despite improved supply chains.
This move has drawn sharp criticism from former President Donald Trump, who has likened Harris’ proposal to Soviet-style price controls. Even some Democrats on Capitol Hill seem skeptical, quietly downplaying the plan’s viability.
The USDA reports a 25% increase in food prices from 2019 to 2023. Additionally, a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) study highlights an 11% increase in food prices from 2021 to 2022, while food retailers saw profits rise by over 6%. Harris’ campaign argues that many major grocery chains have maintained high prices despite stable production costs, contributing to record profits. However, grocery stores generally operate with very thin profit margins of just 1-3%, much slimmer than other retail sectors.
Data from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) reveals that numerous Democratic lawmakers have accepted significant donations from major food companies. For instance, Walmart contributed $441,500 to congressional Democrats this cycle, with Kroger and Albertsons’ PACs adding $185,000 by mid-2024. Despite the large donations, 58% of contributions from Kroger and Albertsons went to Republican campaigns.
Several prominent Democrats, including Senators Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, and Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin, have criticized the grocery industry while also receiving campaign funds from major food companies. Casey, for example, has denounced “greedflation” while accepting donations from PACs associated with Mondelez International and Procter & Gamble.
Critics argue that accepting these donations may influence lawmakers’ positions and actions. Morgan Harper from Fight Corporate Monopolies suggests that such contributions often come with expectations of favorable treatment.
Kroger, the largest grocery chain in the U.S., is currently pursuing a $24.6 billion merger with Albertsons, which is facing legal challenges from the FTC over potential negative impacts on consumers and workers.
As the economy remains a central issue for voters, both Kamala Harris and Republican nominee Donald Trump are offering contrasting solutions. Trump’s economic agenda includes expanding tariffs on foreign goods, which has faced its own set of criticisms.
Harris’ proposal for federal price controls on the grocery sector is seen by some Democrats as more of a symbolic gesture to address voter concerns rather than a practical policy solution. According to Politico, several Democratic insiders view the plan as a means to appease progressive voters and shift blame for inflation from the administration to large corporations.
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer, when asked about Harris’ proposal on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” suggested that any effort to reduce consumer costs is valuable but did not fully endorse the specifics of the plan.
The National Grocers Association has criticized Harris’ proposal as unnecessary, advocating instead for the enforcement of existing antitrust laws. They argue that the proposal is more about political posturing than addressing the underlying issues.
Republican strategist Matt Klink has also weighed in, suggesting that Democrats missed an opportunity to focus directly on lowering prices and that targeting grocery stores may not be an effective strategy. According to Klink, proving price gouging is difficult and rarely substantiated, making Harris’ approach problematic for meaningful economic relief.