KAMALA HARRIS: REPARATIONS AND A GUARANTEED INCOME
Kamala Harris has been in the presidential race for 44 days. Despite her role as the Vice President of the United States, she has not faced the same level of scrutiny that other major-party candidates typically encounter at this stage. In fact, compared to former President Donald Trump, who has endured extensive examination over the past eight years, Harris’s campaign seems relatively unchallenged.
Harris’s Previous Presidential Campaign
During her initial presidential bid in 2019, which lasted for 11 months—significantly longer than her current campaign—Harris’s positions on critical issues like reparations and universal basic income received limited attention. These topics were pivotal during her first run but have not been thoroughly revisited in her current campaign.
In February 2019, Harris expressed to The Root that she believed some form of reparations was necessary. She assured Rev. Al Sharpton that if elected president, she would advocate for a commission to study reparations and even co-sponsored related legislation in the Senate. While she did not specify what financial reparations might entail or their potential amounts, it was clear that she supported measures aimed at addressing historical injustices faced by Black Americans.
Addressing Historical Injustices
Harris articulated a compelling case regarding America’s history of racial injustice: “We’re looking at more than 200 years of slavery,” she stated. “We’re looking at almost a century of Jim Crow laws and legalized segregation.” She emphasized that there had been no significant intervention to address these deep-rooted issues or their lasting impacts on communities today.
When asked if she’d lead discussions on what reparations could look like as president, Harris affirmed this commitment while highlighting the importance of addressing untreated trauma within affected communities and ensuring resources are allocated effectively for healing and equality.
Current Stance on Reparations
As Harris embarks on another presidential run—following an influential group within the Democratic Party encouraging President Joe Biden to step aside—discussions surrounding reparations have notably diminished from her platform; they have become virtually non-existent from her public statements (as noted by The Washington Post, which recently highlighted advocates’ hopes for renewed momentum under Harris’s leadership).
This raises questions about whether Harris still holds onto her previous beliefs regarding reparations amidst shifting political landscapes concerning taxes, healthcare policies, energy strategies, and other key issues where it appears she’s altered course since 2019.
Guaranteed Income: A Related Discussion
Another significant topic linked with economic equity is Kamala Harris’s stance on guaranteed income—a concept that also deserves further exploration given its relevance today. Just before announcing her candidacy in January 2019, she introduced legislation known as the “LIFT Act” (an acronym for Livable Incomes for Families Today). This proposal aimed to provide monthly payments up to $500 to working married couples earning between $6,000 and $100,000 annually—a sum intended as an addition rather than a replacement for existing government assistance programs.
According to liberal policy outlet Vox, this initiative represented one of the closest proposals resembling universal basic income among candidates during the election cycle; they estimated around 80 million Americans could benefit from such measures—a substantial number though short of true UBI coverage across all citizens.
Linking LIFT Act with Reparative Justice
Throughout her campaign trail in 2019, Harris often connected support for LIFT with discussions about reparative justice without explicitly labeling it as such. She pointed out systemic disparities resulting from centuries-long oppression: “We had over two centuries of slavery…and now we face ongoing discrimination,” emphasizing how these historical injustices necessitate proactive solutions like those proposed through LIFT Act initiatives designed specifically with marginalized communities in mind.
When questioned why LIFT wasn’t exclusively targeted toward African Americans despite its implications benefiting them significantly—the frustration was palpable when responding—that approach aimed instead at maximizing benefits across broader demographics while still prioritizing those most impacted by systemic inequities historically entrenched within society itself.
Interviews conducted during this period revealed some tension between hosts advocating direct reparation policies versus those supporting broader economic reforms like LIFT; many seemed dissatisfied when presented with alternatives lacking explicit acknowledgment towards targeted reparation efforts yet recognizing underlying connections nonetheless present throughout both frameworks discussed extensively by Senator Kamala Harris herself during various media appearances—including notable exchanges featured prominently via platforms such as The Breakfast Club where direct inquiries prompted affirmatives regarding support towards forms akin-to-reparative justice initiatives overall reflected therein throughout dialogue exchanges held publicly thereafter too!
Graduated from University of Denver, Residing in Dallas, Texas. Political observer and a Conservative. Follow on Twitter for more.
