In a scathing editorial, the Washington Post, known for its left-leaning stance, criticized Vice President Kamala Harris' plan to implement price controls on groceries. The newspaper, owned by billionaire Jeff Bezos, slammed Harris for offering "populist gimmicks" instead of a legitimate plan to address inflation caused by price gouging.

During a rally in North Carolina, Harris unveiled her economic policies for her first 100 days as president, which included enforcing government price controls on groceries. However, the Washington Post argued that Harris failed to level with voters on the reasons behind the inflation spike in 2021, pointing out that the pandemic's disruptions in supply chains and the Federal Reserve's policies were major factors.

The newspaper also highlighted the potential impact of Harris' proposed policy on Bezos' businesses, such as Amazon and Whole Food Market. By having the Federal Trade Commission enforce a federal ban on price gouging and imposing hefty penalties on companies with exorbitantly high prices, Harris' plan would target companies deemed to make "excessive" profits, although the editorial board questioned the vagueness of this criteria.

Additionally, the Washington Post criticized Harris' proposal to provide $25,000 for first-time homeowners' down payments, expressing concerns that it could put upward pressure on prices. The editorial board drew parallels to President Richard M. Nixon's failed price controls in the 1970s and emphasized the need for sound economic analysis when evaluating Harris' proposal.

However, the newspaper expressed a slightly more favorable opinion towards Harris' housing plan, acknowledging its slightly firmer foundation and calling her tax incentives "clever." Nonetheless, it highlighted the need for Harris to address other demand-side housing subsidies, such as the mortgage interest deduction, which benefits wealthier Americans but was not mentioned in her plan.

The Washington Post recognized Harris' proposal to increase the child tax credit from $2,000 per child to $3,600 as one of her "firmest ground" proposals, along with other tax breaks. However, overall skepticism remains regarding Harris' plan, especially considering the historical failures of price controls and the need for comprehensive economic analysis.

At the time of writing, the Harris campaign had not responded to requests for comment on the Washington Post's editorial. It remains to be seen whether her proposal will resonate with voters, but the editorial's critical analysis suggests that sound economic analysis may be a significant factor in shaping public opinion on this issue.