Studying Kamala Harris’ candidacy
"Here's the thing: every office I've run for I was the first to win. First person of color. First woman. First woman of color. Every time."
Kamala Harris has been breaking records throughout her political career. After serving as District Attorney of Oakland for six years, she was elected as Attorney General of California, becoming both the first female and first African-American person to do so (Harris is half Indian and half African-American). Then, in 2016, Harris was elected to the U.S. Senate as California's representative, becoming the first Indian-American person to win a seat in the Senate.
If Harris wins the 2020 presidential election, she will be the first woman and first Indian-American to serve as President of the U.S.
Harris is one of the Democratic party’s front-runners, currently positioned at number five out of 17 candidates, just after Pete Buttigieg and before Andrew Yang. According to a recently updated New York Times poll, Harris has the support of four percent of Democratic voters, which is a substantial amount.
Despite critics labelling Harris as “unprogressive” and hypocritical, particularly while serving as a prosecutor, it is undeniable that Harris has built a formidable political career through her strategic moves and political savvy — which might just be what the Democratic Party needs right now.
Harris’ background as a prosecutor has given her a cutting edge in the Democratic primaries — she always has smart, quick-witted responses to questions. While other candidates like Biden often fumble with their words or inexpertly avoid questions, Harris has the ability to answer questions meant to disarm her in a confident manner, not allowing herself to be painted as corrupt or as the villain in recent democratic debates.
Harris demonstrated this ability to stand her ground and strategically respond to criticism when Congresswoman and presidential candidate Tulsi Gabbard tore into Harris’ criminal justice record in the second round of Democratic debates. Gabbard accused Harris of keeping people in prison beyond their prison sentences for cheap prison labor for Califonia and for retaining systems that negatively impact low income people. Harris smoothly responded to Gabbard’s barrage of criticism, saying, “As the elected Attorney General of Calif., I did the work of significantly reforming the criminal justice system in a state of 40 million people, which became the national model for the work that needs to be done. And I am proud of that work.” By owning up to her past as a prosecutor rather than trying to disprove Gabbard’s specific accusations, Harris was able to shift focus to what she had accomplished in a dignified manner. Her signature ease in answering questions has helped her sail through Democratic debates and interviews.
Harris also offers a balance between other Democratic Party presidential candidates. With Sen. Bernie Sanders championing Medicare for All, which critics have labelled “socialist,” and former Vice President Joe Biden supporting private medical insurance, Harris has struck the perfect balance: insured medical care for all, but with the option of private insurance. While Sanders’ plan forbids private insurance after the 10 year transition period, Harris still gives it a place in the American society of the future. Her plan is a compromise, a middle ground that both low-income and high-income voters may be able to agree on and unite behind.
Harris’ fine-tuned ability to discreetly avoid questions in debates and interviews has helped her disguise her questionable past as a prosecutor.
Harris’ track record as Attorney General of Calif. isn’t positive — a recent New York Times article titled “Kamala Harris is not a ‘Progressive Prosecutor,’” claimed Harris isn’t exactly what she claims to be. She has a troubling history of fighting to uphold wrongful convictions, such as when she fought to uphold the court’s ruling when an innocent man was deemed “guilty” for sexually abusing his stepdaughter, who was known to be a pathological liar.
Similarly, while Harris claims to be a champion for people of color, some of her policies and rulings have indirectly negatively impacted lower-income Americans and people of color. She supported the California Truancy Law, which punished parents if their children were found to not be attending school, then received backlash from low-income state residents, especially black citizens, for her hypocrisy on matters of race.
Additionally, when questioned about the legalization of marijuana in an interview in 2014, Harris simply laughed, implying that she did not think legalization was even an option on the table; then in 2018, after public opinion on the topic had turned, she decided to support legalization. Harris is clearly willing to compromise her own beliefs to fit her voter demographic or gain a political advantage. So yes, Harris does support marginalized people and is progressive — when it is politically strategic for her.
Harris may have a controversial past as a prosecutor, but despite her obvious missteps as Attorney General, she has built a formidable political career and made several progressive reforms to the criminal justice system — all while avoiding the spiral of bad press. Harris has been criticized for her “strategicness,” while that same trait is accepted and even expected of male politicians. For example, Biden has changed his stance on several issues and not received as much backlash for being strategic in his campaign. Although all of Harris’ decisions as a prosecutor can’t be justified or overlooked, she deserves the same understanding that male politicians do for making politically calculated decisions.
Harris’ middle ground stance between the Left and Right wing of the Democratic Party and her talent for strategy may just be what unifies the fractured Party— if given a chance.