Kamala Harris is “simply American,” but so much more. She’s a three-fer: Asian American, African-American, and female.
I’n not sure how much Harris’ Asian heritage will help her in her quest for the Democratic nomination, but the other two identities are crucial to that quest. If Harris obtains majority support from African-American and from female Democrats, she’s virtually a shoe-in for the nomination, assuming a decent share of the African-American support comes from males.
Unlike Barack Obama, though, Harris faces black opposition. And unlike Hillary Clinton, she faces female opposition.
If Cory Booker gains traction, he might outdo Harris among African-American Democrats, especially males. So Harris must make sure she’s not outdone among female Democrats.
This may explain why Harris is so determined to prevent anyone from getting to her left on abortion. Jon Schweppe of the American Principles Project shows just how determined Harris has been.
Just a few days after Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed New York’s “40-week bill” legalizing abortion up to the moment of birth, and the same day Del. Kathy Tran introduced a 40-week bill in Virginia, Harris declared: “I’m running to fight for an America. . .where reproductive rights are not just protected by the Constitution of the United States but guaranteed in every state.”
I agree with Schweppe that Harris’ demand that abortion rights be “guaranteed in every state” was “a nod toward her support for the 40-week bill.”
Schweppe finds that “Harris has a radical record of abortion advocacy to go with her rhetoric.”
In 2016, in a stunning conflict of interest while running for U.S. senator and while receiving campaign contributions from Planned Parenthood, then-California Attorney General Harris weaponized the criminal justice system against pro-life activist David Daleiden, even going as far as obtaining a search warrant and seizing his personal property. Daleiden made waves that year when he released a shocking series of undercover videos that showed Planned Parenthood executives discussing the harvesting and sale of baby body parts for profit.
Harris’s record as a senator should keep her abortion industry friends happy as well. She earned a 100 percent voting score from the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League (NARAL) in 2017, mostly due to her opposition of President Trump’s judicial nominees. She has helped vote down two key pro-life bills: the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a bill that would have banned abortion after 20 weeks, and also the No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion and Abortion Insurance Full Disclosure Act, a bill that would have protected Americans from paying for abortion on demand through either their tax dollars or their insurance premiums.
She also signed on to the Women’s Health Protection Act, a euphemistically named bill that would strike down state limitations on abortion and enshrine third-trimester abortions into law.
This week, Sen. Ben Sasse plans to force a floor vote on his Born Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act, a bill that would make it illegal for health care practitioners to fail to “exercise the proper degree of care in the case of a child who survives an abortion or an attempted abortion.” Planned Parenthood opposes this bill.
Schweppe expects Harris duly to oppose it, as well. He’s probably right. Harris can ill afford to alienate Planned Parenthood, its action PAC, and the legion of female Democrats who agree with its abortion absolutism.
To summarize, it seems clear that Harris supports abortion on demand, paid for by the taxpayer, up to the moment of birth. And she will likely vote against a prohibition on infanticide — the murder of live children outside the womb.
These positions are probably essential to Harris’ quest for the Democratic nomination. But how would they play with the larger electorate?