Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential campaign has finally released a 23-point policy platform, titled “Issues,” on its website, but it has been met with criticism over its lack of specifics, particularly on immigration. This comes after weeks of pressure for the campaign to unveil its policy platform, a common practice for presidential hopefuls.
One of the most vocal critics is Mark Krikorian, the executive director of the Center for Immigration Studies, a conservative immigration think tank. He argues that the platform fails to provide clarity on Harris’ stance on crucial immigration issues, such as border wall funding and whether she still believes illegal border crossings should be treated as a civil offense rather than a criminal one.
Krikorian points out that the policy platform only mentions a “bipartisan border security bill,” which was drafted by the Biden-Harris administration and aims to codify their existing immigration policies. He argues that this bill is essentially a means to increase illegal immigration.
Republicans have also questioned Harris’ stance on border wall funding, citing her past support for the bipartisan border bill as evidence of a shift in her position. While the Harris campaign insists the bill doesn’t include any new funding for wall construction, critics argue that it simply extends the timeline for spending funds appropriated during the Trump administration, with limitations on how the money can be used.
Lora Ries, director of the Heritage Foundation’s Border Security and Immigration Center, also criticizes Harris’ platform. Ries states that Harris has consistently opposed border wall construction in the past, highlighting that the Biden-Harris administration halted wall construction upon taking office.
Additionally, Harris’ past statements on criminalizing illegal border crossings have come under scrutiny. During her 2019 presidential campaign, Harris clearly stated she would not criminalize illegal border crossings, considering it a civil offense. However, the current policy platform remains silent on this issue, prompting further criticism.
The Harris campaign has not responded to the criticism surrounding the lack of specifics in its new policy platform. While the campaign has defended its stance on border security, the lack of clear and detailed positions on immigration has raised concerns among critics, fueling the debate over Harris’ immigration policies and their implications for the future of US immigration.
