Harris and Trump on the Policy Podium

Mason Kim • November 4, 2024

With the 2024 United States presidential election rapidly approaching, it is anyone’s guess as to who will forge the nation’s policies for the years to come. In the national polls, current Vice President Kamala Harris is virtually tied with former President Donald Trump (The New York Times). That number fluctuates often — from President Joe Biden’s withdrawal to two assassination attempts on Trump in the span of two months, American voters have been taken for a wild ride through a notably polarized political landscape. But beyond flashy headlines and oppositional slander, the candidates’ policies are what truly sway the American populace — after all, more than 67.1 million Americans tuned in to watch Trump and Harris’ first and only presidential debate against each other on Sept. 10 (AP News). They were sparring on thin ice, forcing them to dodge questions, take nebulous stances and leave the American public at least partially in the dark. Taking a certain position could risk alienating the undecided voters needed to tip the election, or worse, anger their existing supporters. Knowing this, Trump and Harris took turns calling each other out for their less than spotless records on certain issues during the debate. Despite the candidates’ best efforts to paint their divisions as black and white, Harris’ reversal on immigration, Trump’s vagueness on abortion and their shared economic proposals have formed more of a clouded gray.

Immigration is commonly viewed as one of the most polarizing issues in American politics, with 61% of voters calling it an important factor in their vote (Pew Research Center). After witnessing nearly 10 million illegal entry encounters during the Biden administration, a majority of Democrat and Republican voters are now united in calling for stronger border security. However, deep divides arise over how to handle the two million unauthorized immigrants who managed to evade Customs and Border Patrol (ABC News). Conservative Republicans favor mass deportations, reflecting frequent and long-standing promises by Trump to remove millions of unauthorized immigrants during his administration. However, Trump’s administration never passed 350,000 deportations, not only falling short of previous promises but also falling behind Obama’s record high of 432,000 (AP News). Eight years later, Trump’s stance has remained as scathing as ever, exemplified by claims of illegal immigrants tampering with the election, eating pets in Springfield, Missouri and “poisoning the blood of our country” (NBC News). For his second term, Trump plans on invoking the 18th-century Alien Enemies Act, which would mobilize the National Guard in border states to carry out mass deportations on an unprecedented scale (AP News). While noticeably more quiet on immigration, Harris has repeatedly criticized Trump’s zero-tolerance policies as too harsh. Democrats have taken a more lenient approach to the issue, focusing on improving pathways for immigrants to gain citizenship and enter the country legally. Labeled a “border czar” by Republicans for her oversight of immigration reform, Harris has often been linked to criticism of the Biden administration’s border policies. For her second term, Harris plans on reviving a bipartisan border security bill that she blames Trump for killing. The bill would grant greater authority to the president to shut down the border and close legal loopholes for asylum (The Washington Post). While Harris supports more pathways to earned citizenship, her new plan represents a shift away from her more moderate policies in 2019 (Los Angeles Times). When asked about Harris’ shift away from support for decriminalizing border crossings and her changed stances on other contentious issues, Trump was quick to call Harris out.

“She gave all that stuff up, very wrongly, very horribly,” Trump said. “And everybody is laughing at it, okay? They are all laughing at it. She gave up at least 12 and probably 14 or 15 different policies” (ABC News).

On the other hand, Harris is not alone in her struggle to strike a middle ground. Trump has touted his role in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, a Supreme Court case that previously ensured a constitutional right to abortion, by the Supreme Court in 2022. He even called himself the most “pro-life president” in history (The Washington Post). Yet when asked during the debate whether he would sign a national abortion ban, Trump refrained from giving a concrete answer. Instead, he opted for neutrality, reiterating that he supports states having jurisdiction over abortion laws. This choice reflects Trump’s past attempts to find a middle ground between pro-life voters who support him and pro-choice voters who are undecided. In August earlier this year, for example, Trump voted to preserve Florida’s six-week ban on abortion just a day after calling six weeks “too short.” The sudden reversal came after a wave of backlash by his pro-life supporters, signaling Trump had crossed the line (BBC News). Conversely, Harris has proudly stood by a return to the standard set in Roe v. Wade (The Washington Post). Concerning access to abortion, junior Molly Le expresses the value of Harris’ commitment.

“Abortion has become a big concern for a lot of undecided voters. [It] could swing the election,” Le said. “[It] is important that [candidates] stand by their parties and supporters. Even if [Harris needed] the votes, she should stay uncompromising on what her followers expect of her.”

Another pertinent point of division for Trump and Harris is the economy. In spite of cooling inflation, consistently high prices have kept many voters paying close attention to both parties’ economic plans (U.S. News). Yet neither Trump nor Harris has promised reductions in fiscal spending nor increases in taxes, policies that many economists traditionally associate as anti-inflationary (ABC News). The reason why lies with the politically contentious nature of said policies, another instance where the candidates are walking on eggshells. Instead, Trump has emphasized closing America’s “strategic vulnerability” to China through increased tariffs, in addition to tax cuts for the wealthy. Harris, on the other hand, has acclaimed her “Opportunity Economy” as an appeal to the lower and middle classes, promising targeted tax cuts and price controls for groceries and rent. Critiquing both proposals, senior Mike Li predicts these policies may fall short of resolving inflation at its core.

“[When] demand outpaces supply, prices rise,” Li said. “When you cut taxes, you are increasing demand. Tariffs would also suck. Companies will [likely] pass the costs onto consumers, raising prices in the long run.”

In addition to these plans, both candidates have made promises targeted at specific voting groups. In a bid for Nevada’s large service sector, Trump promised to eliminate taxes on tips in June. When Harris followed two months later, Trump was notably irked, calling her a “copycat” and a “flip-flopper” (The New York Times). Yet targeted promises can only go so far in remediating broader economic woes, reflecting the candidates’ focus on the numbers at the polls rather than the ones on the grocery receipts of American families.

With all the shifting policies and convoluted political rivalries, keeping up with politics can feel like a daunting task. That is especially true for students, who lack the life experience, voting eligibility and sometimes even interest to spend time becoming politically informed. However, voting ineligibility does not excuse ignorance, nor does it mean the remedial efforts would go unrewarded. Whether it means being able to draw on outside evidence for essays during AP exams or engaging in discussion with teachers, peers or relatives, students can apply their political knowledge on a daily basis. More pressing is the undeniable fact that the younger generation has the largest stake in the future, making it their job to learn how to lead it. Considering the potential utility of being informed, senior Roman Munro advises that even if not benefiting now, students should stay educated to benefit in the future.

“It’s important for young people to be politically informed so we can vote for people who truly align with what we [believe in],” Munro remarked. “[Future voters like us are] at the core of government officials’ power, leaving us with the responsibility [of] empowering [leaders] who will actually [honor their promises]. By extension, that [makes our] country and world a better place.”