On Wednesday, Vice President Kamala Harris engaged in an extensive discussion with Fox News anchor Bret Baier regarding immigration during a rare interview with the network.

The Fox News Kamala Interview kicked off  with Bret Baier by inquiring about the number of immigrants who had crossed the southern border under the Biden administration.

As Harris recognized that immigration was “a topic of discussion that people want to rightly have,” Baier interjected to point out that it was estimated at 10 million individuals.

Baier subsequently challenged Harris regarding the Biden administration’s choice to terminate a Trump-era policy that required potential asylum-seekers to remain in Mexico while awaiting the outcomes of their cases in U.S. immigration court.

Harris highlighted that the inaugural piece of legislation introduced by President Biden following his swearing-in was an immigration bill. Baier pointed out that the bill did not reach a vote, even with Democrats in control of both the House and Senate.

“From the very beginning, we understood that — regarding your first question — this is a top priority for our nation and the American people. Our attention has been directed towards addressing this issue,” Harris stated, highlighting the White House’s initiatives to enhance border resources, strengthen penalties for illegal crossings, and manage entry points effectively.

Kamala blames Trump

She attempted to hold former President Trump accountable for his opposition to a bipartisan border security proposal earlier this year, asserting that her opponent would “rather campaign on a problem than work towards a solution, and this election rightfully demands a discussion that the American people are eager to engage in.”

Baier emphasized the tragic cases of Rachel Nungaray, Laken Riley, and Rachel Morin—young women who were reportedly murdered by men who had entered the country unlawfully. “Should you apologize to those families?” Baier inquired.

“These are unfortunate situations.” It’s absolutely clear. It’s absolutely clear. “I cannot fathom the anguish that the families of those victims have endured due to a loss that was entirely preventable,” Harris stated.

“Indeed, that is accurate.” Had a border security bill been enacted nine months ago, we would have already seen an increase in border agents, providing much-needed support for those tirelessly working to maintain safety and prevent future harm.

“In just 20 days, this election will reveal whether we have a president who prioritizes solving issues over political gain,” she remarked, without offering any form of apology to the families.

Border crossing to hit 10 million

As the November election approaches, Trump is launching a vigorous campaign focused on immigration, with projections indicating that migrant crossings at the border could reach 10 million well before the year’s end under the Biden-Harris administration.

Trump has committed to implementing widespread deportations of individuals residing in the country unlawfully if he secures election in November, and he has indicated plans to rescind protected status for specific groups, including Haitian migrants.

He referred to Harris as the “border czar,” highlighting her responsibility in tackling the underlying issues driving migration from Central American countries. Trump has consistently pointed out cases of violent crimes carried out by migrants who have entered the country unlawfully.

A recent Wall Street Journal poll, conducted with 2,100 registered voters across seven key battleground states poised to influence the upcoming November election, revealed that 52 percent believe Trump is more capable of managing immigration and border security, while 36 percent favor Harris on this critical issue.

Related News:

Analyzing the US Election: Kamala Harris Versus Donald Trump

Analyzing the US Election: Kamala Harris Versus Donald Trump

 

(VOR News) – In a statement that was made public on Tuesday, the Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden, made it very plain that Vice President Kamala Harris will “cut her own path” if she were to win the election in 2024.

This assertion was stated by Biden in a manner that was fairly forthright. In this particular instance, Biden made a remark.

The fact that there are only three weeks remaining until the day of the vote was taken into consideration when making this statement, which signaled a shift in focus from the previous declaration.

The Vice President of the United States, Joe Biden, was delivering a speech at the Sheet Metal Workers International Association in Philadelphia.

Joe Biden told the crowd that Senator Harris can offer new insights into the nation’s problems.

When asked about the ideas that former President Donald Trump cherished, Vice President Joe Biden made a fleeting nod to them, calling them “old, failed, and thoroughly dishonest.”

As a parallel to Trump, who has already served as President, he compared her approach to that of Trump. Trump has already held the job of president.

When it comes to the final weeks of the campaign, the statements that Biden has made give the idea that Harris will have more latitude to construct her own political identity within the context of the campaign. In light of the fact that Joe Biden has asserted that she will have increased discretion, this is the reason why this is taking place.

In spite of the fact that Harris has not wavered in her dedication to the president, she has not lost sight of the reality that she is committed to bringing about improvement in the situation.

Therefore, she has opted to proceed in this form, despite the fact that she has been exposed to an increasing degree of pressure to provide clarification regarding the ways in which her views will differ from those of Joe Biden.

There have been more instances in which Harris has declared, “I am not Joe Biden,” but she has not acknowledged any true policy distinctions in a straightforward manner regarding these differences. In addition to that, she has not disclosed any variations in these policies.

“Every president has to cut their own path,” Joe Biden, Vice President of the United States, said in response to a question regarding his own presidency. “Every president has to cut his own path.”

My actions were exactly the same as Joe Biden’s and Kamala’s!

I have successfully done it. I appreciate your involvement in this conversation. He assured the audience of his unwavering confidence in Harris’s ability to undertake the obligations of the future generation when he decided to transfer leadership to her.

This alleviated the anxieties raised by the crowd. Alongside commending Harris’s leadership and expressing faith in her capacity to guide the nation effectively, he also conveyed his assurance in her ability to navigate the country towards the achievement of her objectives.

In addition, Joe Biden took use of the opportunity to attack Trump, expressing his disdain for his refusal to acknowledge the results of the election that took place in 2020 and his willingness to encourage the violence that took place in the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

In response to Trump’s reluctance to acknowledge the results of the election, Vice President Joe Biden voiced his opposition.

He has only made a handful of public appearances in support of his campaign during the length of the years that have gone after Vice President Joe Biden withdrew from the race for the presidency in 2024. These appearances have been made in order to garner support for his campaign.

Having given a performance that was not very impressive during the discussion, he came to the conclusion that he would not be running for the election. Consequently, when he made the decision to withdraw from the campaign, his party put a great amount of pressure on him to give up his presidential candidacy. He declined to do so.

SOURCE: EN

SEE ALSO:

UK Inflation Surprises Allow For a Less Harsh Budget And Reduced Interest Rates.

FEMA Workers Change Some Hurricane-Recovery Efforts In North Carolina After Receiving Threats

 

Washington — With customary bluster, Donald Trump has promised that if voters send him to the White House, “inflation will vanish completely.”

It’s a message aimed at Americans who are still frustrated by the increase in consumer costs that began three and a half years ago.

However, most conventional economists believe Trump’s economic proposals would not eliminate inflation. They’d make things worse. They warn that his proposals to slap massive taxes on imported goods deport millions of migrant workers, and demand a say in the Federal Reserve’s interest rate policy will undoubtedly cause prices to skyrocket.

Sixteen Nobel Prize-winning economists wrote a statement in June expressing concern that Trump’s measures might “reignite” inflation, which has fallen since peaking at 9.1% in 2022 and is virtually back to the Fed’s objective of 2%.

The Nobel economists emphasized that they are not alone in ringing the alarm.

“Nonpartisan researchers,” they explained, “predict that if Donald Trump successfully enacts his agenda, it will increase inflation.”

Last month, the Peterson Institute for International Economics forecasted that Trump’s actions, including deportations, import tariffs, and measures to undermine the Fed’s independence, would drive consumer prices considerably up two years into his second term. According to Peterson’s analysis, if Trump’s economic ideas are implemented, inflation will rise to between 6% and 9.3% in 2026, up from 1.9% currently.

Many experts are dissatisfied with Vice President Kamala Harris’ economic program. They dismiss, for example, her idea to tackle price gouging as ineffectual in combating high supermarket prices. However, they do not see her measures as particularly inflationary.

Trump’s Economic Plans Would Worsen Inflation, Experts Say

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, and two colleagues estimate that Harris’ plans would leave the inflation prognosis mostly intact, even if she had a Democratic majority in both chambers of Congress. In comparison, an unrestrained Trump would raise costs by 1.1 percentage points in 2025 and 0.8 percentage points in 2026, according to their findings.

Trump’s preferred economic policy is import taxes, sometimes known as tariffs. He claims that tariffs safeguard American factory jobs from foreign competition and provide a variety of additional benefits.

While in office, Trump launched a trade war with China, placing steep tariffs on most Chinese goods. He also increased import duties on imported steel, aluminum, washing machines, and solar panels. Trump has even more ambitious intentions for a second term: he wants to slap a 60% tariff on all Chinese imports and a “universal” charge of 10% or 20% on everything else that enters the US.

Trump contends that the burden of taxing imported goods is borne by the foreign countries that produce them. The truth, however, is that tariffs are paid by U.S. importers, who then often pass on the cost to consumers in the form of increased prices, which is how Americans end up absorbing the expense.

Furthermore, when tariffs boost the cost of imports, diminished competition from foreign products allows US firms to raise their own prices.

“There’s no question that tariffs are inflationary,” said Kent Smetters of the University of Pennsylvania’s Penn Wharton Budget Model, which analyzes the costs of government policies. “Exactly how much – that’s where economists can debate it.”

Tariffs’ inflationary impact can be determined by how consumers react to increasing import prices: do they continue to buy more expensive foreign goods, such as a coffeemaker from China, a box of Swiss chocolates, or a Mexican-made car? Or will they switch to an American-made alternative product? Or stop purchasing such items altogether?

Kimberly Clausing and Mary Lovely of the Peterson Institute determined that Trump’s planned 60% tax on Chinese imports, combined with his high-end 20% tariff on everything else, would result in a $2,600 after-tax loss for the average American household each year.

Trump has made some questionable statements about protectionist plans. When asked how he would cut grocery prices, which are a particular pain for many Americans, Trump said the US should limit food imports since American farmers are “being decimated” by foreign competition.

“It’s sort of nonsensical to say that I’m concerned about high food prices, so I want to levy a tax on food imports,” said Clausing, a UCLA economist who specializes in tax policy. “As you tax them, the food in the grocery store absolutely gets more expensive.”

According to Department of Agriculture data, a large majority of food consumed in the United States is imported, accounting for around 60% of fresh fruit and 38% of vegetables. Domestically cultivated bananas account for less than 1% of American consumption. The vast majority is imported. The United States produces less than one percent of the coffee it consumes. It imports around 70% of its seafood.

“Trump is using tariffs as a political tool to signal his strong skepticism toward globalization in general — ‘America First,'” said Zandi of Moody’s Analytics. “Most voters find it difficult to understand that this policy stance is inflationary, especially when they are told otherwise.”

The Trump campaign emphasizes that US inflation stayed low even as Trump actively raised tariffs as president. Consumer prices increased by just 1.9% in 2018, 2.3% in 2019, and 1.4% in 2020. They further point out that, while in office, the Biden-Harris administration preserved the majority of Trump’s tariffs, despite Harris’ criticism of his plans to significantly expand their usage.

“In his first term, President Trump instituted tariffs against China that created jobs, spurred investment, and resulted in no inflation,” Anna Kelly, a Republican National Committee spokesman, stated.

Trump’s Economic Plans Would Worsen Inflation, Experts Say

However, Zandi of Moody’s Analytics observed that the sheer volume of Trump’s fresh tariff proposals has significantly altered the calculations.

“The Trump tariffs in 2018-19 didn’t have as large an impact because the tariffs were only just over $300 billion, mostly on Chinese imports,” he said. “The former president is now discussing tariffs on more than $3 trillion in imported goods from all countries.”

And the inflationary environment was very different during Trump’s first term. The Fed was primarily concerned at the time with rising inflation to its 2% objective, rather than lowering it. The economy’s surprisingly high-octane recovery from the COVID-19 recession of 2020 resulted in significant shortages of parts and labor, resuming inflationary pressures that had been dormant for decades.

Trump would reverse an immigration surge that helps lower inflation.
Trump, who has used fiery rhetoric and promoted misinformation about immigration, has promised the “largest deportation operation in the history of our country.” He claims it will target the millions of illegal immigrants living in the United States.

An increase in immigration, such as what the United States has seen in recent years, makes it easier for firms to acquire employees. As a result, it can assist in moderating inflation by reducing the incentive for companies to boost wages significantly and pass on their higher labor expenses to their customers through price increases.

Trump startled many analysts in August when he stated that he would like to have “a say” in the Fed’s interest rate choices.

The Fed is the government’s primary inflation fighter. It combats high inflation by raising interest rates to limit borrowing and spending, slow the economy, and lower the rate of price increases. In March 2022, the Fed launched an aggressive sequence of rate hikes to confront the worst outbreak of inflation in four decades. Inflation has fallen down to near the Fed’s 2% objective after peaking at 9.1%.

Economic studies have indicated that the Fed and other central banks can only properly manage inflation if they are free of political pressure. That’s because hiking interest rates to combat inflation usually slows the economy and sometimes triggers a recession. Politicians often prefer that the Fed not raise interest rates, which may jeopardize their reelection prospects.

As president, Trump repeatedly pressed Jerome Powell, the Fed chair he had appointed, to decrease interest rates in order to stimulate the economy. Many economists believe Trump’s public pressure on Powell surpassed even Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon’s efforts to persuade past Fed chiefs to keep interest rates low, moves generally regarded for contributing to the late 1960s and 1970s chronic inflation.

“The perception that the central bank was dancing to a president’s preferred tune… would compromise its ability to raise interest rates when it believed it was necessary to combat inflation,” said Samuel Gregg, a political economist at the free-market think tank American Institute of Economic Research.

According to the Peterson Institute analysis, undermining the Fed’s independence would result in a 2 percentage point annual increase in inflation.

“While Trump wants to make foreigners pay,’ ” the researchers concluded in their Peterson study, “our analysis suggests his proposals will end up making Americans pay the most.”

Source | AP