Elizabeth Warren Clashes with CNBC Anchor on Harris Price-Gouging Plan

During a heated interview on CNBC, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and host Joe Kernen engaged in a spirited debate regarding Vice President Kamala Harris’s recent proposal aimed at banning price gouging. This proposal, critical ahead of the upcoming elections, is intended to empower the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to scrutinize companies that raise prices during times of increased inflation.

The discussion erupted after Warren described Harris’s initiative as “just another tool in the toolbox.” Kernen quickly interrupted, questioning, “Senator … when did companies learn how to do this?” Warren, visibly frustrated, replied, “I let you finish your argument. Did you invite me on here just to lecture to me?”

Continuing her point, Warren expressed that the FTC’s role is to create more competitive markets. She stated, “That’s the job of the FTC. That’s something state attorneys general work on.” The senator highlighted the concern that some CEOs view inflation as an opportunity to inflate their prices, saying, “We just want to put one more tool in the toolbox when CEOs are going on the phone saying, ‘Boy, inflation is great because it gives us a chance to raise our prices.’”

Kernen, critical of Harris’s proposal, labeled it a “fool’s errand” and suggested that it distracts voters from the actual causes of inflation, which he attributed to supply chain disruptions and increased demand from stimulus measures like the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. He added, “Is it not about diverting the attention away from the real issues that might actually help the middle class, that you always talk about helping?”

This proposal comes as Democrats face scrutiny on inflation, especially as grocery prices surged over 20 percent during President Biden’s tenure, largely due to pandemic-related supply chain issues. The initiative is part of a broader plan to alleviate grocery costs amidst rising inflation, which peaked at 9 percent in June 2022 before falling below 3 percent in August 2023.

Throughout the interview, Kernen asserted that there is “little evidence” linking price gouging to inflation spikes since the pandemic and pressed Warren for data to support the vice president’s claims. In defense, Warren pointed to a recent earnings call with CEOs who acknowledged that the pandemic allowed for price increases. She has previously criticized companies such as Tyson, Kroger, and Chipotle for taking advantage of inflationary pressures.

Additionally, Warren referenced a report from the progressive advocacy group Groundwork Collaborative, which indicated that a considerable portion of inflation is fueled by corporate price hikes. Kernen dismissed this report as originating from a “liberal think tank,” prompting Warren to retort, “If you don’t want to pay attention to the numbers, you can ignore them. You can ignore the calls, but the reality is the American people know what’s happening in pricing.”

Kernen further questioned the necessity of the proposal, arguing that prices appear to be trending down. Warren countered by stating that many companies, particularly in concentrated industries, are maintaining elevated profit margins despite declining prices.

Economists have varied opinions on the efficacy of Harris’s proposal. Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s, contended that exploitative pricing practices rank low among the reasons for high inflation.

In response to the controversy regarding Harris’s plan, former President Trump and other Republican figures have criticized it, claiming it introduces “socialist price controls.” The Trump campaign released a statement stating, “Kamala Harris is a Trojan horse for nation-destroying spending, communist price controls and open borders.”

Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman provided a counter-narrative, refuting claims that Harris’s proposal constitutes price controls. In a column for The New York Times, he wrote, “I’ve been amazed at how many credulous commentators, and not just on the right, have asserted that Harris is calling for price controls.” He added that the proposal serves as a “populist political gesture” to address concerns over rising food prices, suggesting that popularity doesn’t inherently equate to ineffectiveness.

As the political landscape evolves ahead of the elections, the implications of Harris’s proposal on price gouging will continue to be a focal point in discussions about the economy and the Democratic party’s strategy to tackle inflationary concerns.

Source: Nexstar Media, Inc.