Former President Donald Trump has launched a sharp critique of Vice President Kamala Harris’ proposal for a federal ban on price gouging by grocery stores and food suppliers, labeling it as “Soviet-style” controls. However, Republican state officials across the U.S. have long embraced measures to curb excessive price increases, particularly during emergencies.
Republican Support for Price Gouging Laws
GOP state attorneys general, alongside their Democratic counterparts, have actively worked to prevent companies from exploiting crises to impose exorbitant prices on essential goods. For instance:
- Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued a major egg supplier for a 300% price hike during the 2020 pandemic lockdowns.
- Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach is pursuing legal action against a natural gas supplier for alleged price gouging following a 2021 winter storm.
- Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody enforces a state law that prohibits sharp price increases on essential items during emergencies, particularly during the hurricane season.
Trish Conners, a former chief deputy attorney general of Florida, emphasized the bipartisan nature of state-level price gouging laws. “You don’t see too much difference between AGs in that regard,” she said, highlighting the consensus on protecting consumers in emergencies.
Harris’ Proposal and Its Challenges
While Harris’ plan for a federal price gouging ban resonates with many Americans, it marks a significant expansion of government intervention compared to state-level measures. Currently, 37 states have laws addressing price gouging, but these are typically triggered by specific emergencies and limited to certain goods.
Florida’s AG Ashley Moody criticized Harris’ proposal, arguing that the Biden-Harris administration’s policies are the root cause of rising grocery prices, not price gouging. “There is no comparison between Florida’s price gouging laws… and what Harris is proposing which… appears to be communist-style price control,” Moody stated.
Mixed Economic Reactions
Economists from both sides of the aisle have expressed skepticism about Harris’ proposal, warning against government interference in market-set prices. Critics argue that such a move could lead to broader government control over prices, a concern amplified by the lack of detail in Harris’ plan about what would trigger the proposed price gouging law.
Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute, highlighted the distinction between state-level laws and Harris’ proposal. He noted that state laws are typically “triggered by specific emergencies and limited to certain goods for a limited amount of time,” contrasting them with the potential scope of Harris’ plan.
Energizing the Democratic Base
Despite the criticism, Harris’ proposal has gained traction among Democrats who advocate for stronger action against corporate power. Sen. Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) have been vocal supporters of a federal price gouging ban, with Casey arguing that corporate greed is a significant factor behind rising food prices.
COMMENTS