Harris’s Housing Solution

A few days ago on the Bill Maher show Stephanie Ruhle, an MSNBC “journalist” (I put that in quotes because journalists are SUPPOSED to be impartial) said Kamala Harris shouldn’t have to answer questions.

WHAT? A candidate that a few weeks ago was the most unpopular Vice President in history, who has done a 180 on just about every issue she has supported her entire career, shouldn’t have to answer questions? We shouldn’t be the least bit interested in why she changed her mind, especially when she says she hasn’t changed her values? Well, I’m interested.

Coincidentally, a few days later, Stephanie Ruhle had a sit down interview with Harris where she actually did ask her a few questions. Ruhle asked if Harris had a Republican Senate and couldn’t raise corporate taxes how was she going to pay for the housing she was promising. Harris said she has to raise corporate taxes, she just will (no follow up question). Harris said she has to look at housing “holistically” (a word she used three times in two minutes) and “incentivize cities and towns to prioritize affordable housing”.

Let me translate that word salad for you. When she says “holistically” she means the whole country. Never mind states rights. She will “incentivize cities and towns” which means the federal government will use laws or EO’s to force cities and towns to build “affordable housing” regardless of their city or town plans. I suspect her plans will include ending “single family” zoning. She implies she will end local rule and the federal government will tell cities and towns where and what they can build.

Let’s just use the example of what is happening right now in Springfield, Ohio where thousands of “migrants” have been flown in and placed in their town. The 20,000 that were placed in Springfield, with a population of 60,000 have overwhelmed their town. What small town is prepared to handle that? I’m sure Harris will “incentivize” Springfield to build thousands of “affordable houses” regardless of their town plans, zoning laws or the citizens objections.

Thinking of our Prescott Valley and how passionately the citizens want to limit growth and keep it a small town, I’m concerned the Harris administration’s plan don’t take into consideration what we want.

After Stephanie Ruhle’s interview, she went on MSNBC and said although Harris didn’t give clear and direct answers, Ruhle was OK with that because she said there aren’t clear and direct issues.

Again, WHAT? I think how she is going to accomplish her plans if she has a GOP Congress is a “clear and direct issue”. Isn’t an open border with 200,000 crossing monthly a “clear and direct issue”? How about the wars in the Ukraine and Israel? Net Zero (that would end all use of fossil fuels and our way of life)? How about her “mandatory buy back” of guns or that she thinks police could enter your home to make sure you were securing your guns properly. What about price fixing? What about taxing unrealized capital gains?

Biden said on The View that he had given Harris many of his duties so why hasn’t she done any of these things already? Wouldn’t you like answers to those questions?