The Problem(s) with Kamala Harris

Or, the new "What is to be done" narrative of 2024

It’s Monday, November 7th, 2016. You’ve opened your email, once again, to a flood of pleas from Hillary Clinton, Amy Klobuchar, Nancy Pelosi, and every other high ranking Democratic official, for a sense of “normal”. “Just think of what happens if Trump wins, Ben!”, they cry out, their electronic voice shaking, and it’s all because you donated to one of these people’s campaigns, not because you sincerely thought these Democrats were the final line of defense against the traditional forces of fascism on the ballot box, but because you thought, “Well…who else is there?” You’ve seen your women and queer friends, colleagues, workers, and others in your personal orbit, tears gushing down their face like the final outpour of a dying waterfall, all expressing a commonly held horror at the thought of that “orange baboon” getting into office, and that Bernie, for being as “good as a guy he is”, he can’t win now, and it doesn’t matter what happened during the DNC process, or what Debbie Wasserman Schulz did, or the seeming undemocratic nature of these primaries is.  So, being the good liberal you are, you open yourself up to them, feel their pain in your chest, and vote accordingly. For harm mitigation.

You know how this story ends.

It’s Tuesday, November 3rd, 2020. You’ve elected to follow COVID protocols as much as humanly possible throughout the year (because, let’s face it, your state did hardly anything to actually enforce any of these seemingly “draconian” COVID protocols during this time, so it’s every person for themselves, in typical American fashion), and you’ve seen firsthand the depraved chaos of Trump’s first term; police repression of Black Lives Matter protests, mass mobilizations of neo-Nazis, and the nation’s seeming proclivity towards deregulation and corporate cronyism. Sure, you’ve started to recognize people like Trump don’t just come out of a vacuum, but you still hold that hope, that yearning for electoral reform; surely everyone will come to the ballot box this year and Joe Biden, as old as he is, will be the more sensible option, right? Capitalism may be a flawed system, but so is every other one, right? You’ve got to work within your given conditions, and besides, other progressives like AOC, Ilhan Omar, and even Bernie Sanders (again, after a near defeat that ended almost exactly like his 2016 run) all come out and endorse him. You get the emails again, begging for another donation, another share, another mass call to arms for getting your friends and family registered to vote. Again, these same women and queer friends are ensnared in that same horror, as abortion access and gender affirming care is increasingly under attack and reactionary scrutiny in highly red-states; it doesn’t matter how good Jill Stein’s platform is, or what happened to Bernie (again), or that Joe Biden helped usher in the 1994 crime bill that seemingly every liberal/progressive has come to loathe. None of that matters now. So, being the good progressive you are, you open yourself up to them, moreso than you did last time, and vote accordingly. For harm mitigation. 

You know how this story ends. 

It’s 2024. 8 years have passed since that last seeming new “American nightmare”. You’ve been reading Marx, Derida, Zizek, Lenin, Trotsky, Angela Davis, Emma Goldman, Mark Fisher, Noam Chomsky, and the other greats of leftist theory and political philosophy. You’ve come to grips with the fact that you’ve been lied to and manipulated with this simple premise: we have arrived at the best humanity has to offer. Liberal, capitalist democracy is the highest form of human existence possible, and that all nuances of human suffering, despite how seemingly “preventable” they are (such as poverty, homelessness, blindness, climate apocalypse, etc.), there’s nothing to be done; we simply cannot do away with the profit motive as being the sole motivator for human cooperation and industry building.

You had come to rationalize your vote for Biden beyond harm mitigation by way of his supposed “landmark” progressive agenda: Biden’s promise to increase teacher salaries on a national level? Didn’t happen. Making community college free? Also didn’t happen. Biden’s supposedly more “humane” approach to police reform? Oh yeah, let’s lump in an additional $37 billion for funding police departments across the nation, while also calling for “increased accountability”. Better oversight of Pentagon spending? Well, see, auditing isn’t exactly their strong suit, so let’s heap on the largest Pentagon budget ever seen in military history at a whopping $850 billion, and then continue to increase that spending so long as our vassal states of Ukraine and Israel continue to need it. Oh, and that shiny new set of fines meant to tackle electricity utility companies that don’t make the switch from non-renewable energy sources that Biden kept beating the drum about for his “Build Back Better” initiative? Let’s just call it a neat $320 billion in “clean energy tax credits”, instead of actually punishing the polluters who are, you know, going to fucking kill us all.

But sure. Biden is somehow the most progressive choice we could ever get.

It is with all this bitter political pontification that you come into June 27th, 2024 armed with. The first Presidential debate between Biden and Trump. You have been warning your fellow Democrat friends and colleagues for months, years at this point, that Biden, no matter how much of a “lesser evil” he may be, he’s too fucking old. Aside from the salient criticism that Biden, like Trump and every other neoliberal agent of capital, is not here to fundamentally change the status quo or even provide better living conditions for the nation’s most downtrodden populations (hence the now infamous tagline assigned to him: “Nothing will fundamentally change if I’m elected president”. Perano. Axios), he also regularly stumbles over his own words, trails off mid-sentence, references either people that are not in the room during speeches, refers to people in positions of power that are actually dead, or both. And then…

You know how that story ends.

Biden’s debate performance is a geriatric nightmare, but of course, everytime you begin to mention this fact, there is the flood of, “Well did you hear what Trump had to say?! He lied about his environmental record, Biden’s views on abortion, and practically every other part of his administration!” And, of course, in your usual, measured tone, you respond-

It’s Donald Trump. What else do you expect from the guy at this point? Your outrage at his regular lying is like getting angry at an not-house trained dog shitting the carpet; sure, it’s bad, and shit is everywhere now, but what did you expect to happen? You expect that from a deranged, fascist LARPer like Trump, but you’d hope to not expect your guy supposedly up there to stop him to also trip all over himself.

What follows for days is trickling of news and info that Biden, and practically every other Democratic operator and Biden loyalist, are practicing one of the most prolonged bouts of denial and disguised grieving for an incredibly powerful, ossified corpse. “You can’t call on him to drop out now,” said the half of Dems in Congress who were asked to comment. “Think of the chaos! Think of the confused, angry voters who’ll wonder why they aren’t getting an actual primary!” As if that primary process even mattered in the first place in a truly democratic sense.

And then, the once unthinkable, as all historical developments tend to be, happens: Biden drops out. And he endorses Kamala Harris, his VP, to become the Democratic Party’s next nominee for President.

You know how that part of the story ends. Once loyal Bidenists quickly fall in line; those once ubiquitously beleaguered Biden/Harris signs you saw in the yards, posted on your ultra-liberal friend’s social media pages, swiftly come down, replaced within just a few days by Harris/Walz. Your nominally progressive friends and colleagues jump for joy, not at the prospect of Kamala becoming the next President, but that their once favorite, rheumatism ridden horse, has now “stepped down for the good of the country” (i.e., they saw that Biden didn’t stand a rat’s chance in hell of winning against an actual fascist demagogue).

But within that optimism lies a deep seated Fear: a Fear you have seen time and time and time again. That same fear in 2016, in 2020, and now, it is a smile stretched to the margins by the unimaginable prospects of those same groyper, fascist reactionaries having a renewed understanding of bureaucratic mechanisms to enact their deranged, unhinged fantasies, though it’s nothing new.

You know how this story ends. You know that every liberal, conservative, reactionary seems to stumble back into the same, tired, destructive pattern of thought.

“There is no such thing as public money.”

The Trouble We’re In

Let me be clear about something before I delve into this.

I am not here to belittle typically Democratic voters. I am also not here to provide an easy moral shield for those same voters either. I am here to problematize the seemingly Messianic nature of Kamala Harris, and the national platform of the Democratic party, as well as the entire economic framework of the United States.

If you feel called out by what I am about to say…then I don’t know what to tell you. Reflect on that for a moment before immediately rushing to an incredibly powerful state actor’s defense, one who wields far more power than you.

By this same token, for those readers on the further left-ward side of the American political spectrum, understand this as well: I am not here to demonize individual actors for their participation in the electoral facade we find ourselves in. Regular folks are trying to make some semblance of meaning in their lives, and, by virtue of capitalism’s inherently chaotic proclivities, they must do whatever is necessary to placate this consciousness, because they too know that there is no such thing as ethical consumption under capitalism, and, by extension, they also subconsciously know of the symbiotic relationship between capital and electoral actors under a neo-liberal organization of the economy and of the electoral system itself. These are things that many of my liberal friends and colleagues know of on some level, yet, nonetheless, they, like myself a number of years ago, find themselves whipped into line by way of this great Fear, this Fear of a seemingly Margaret Atwood-esque future, in which reactionaries have finally begun to usher in a true, state sanctioned regression. These are people who raise the battle flag for LGBTQ+ rights, women’s bodily autonomy and, very nominally, admittedly, some level of worker’s rights as well (something I will come to criticize in the coming paragraphs). These are things that, on a social issue level, the larger left agrees on.

Now, hopefully we’ve established some common ground between these relatively disparate ideological pools, let’s list out what should be extremely valid grievances with Kamala Harris and the larger platform of the Democratic party.

The Problems

1. Unwavering Support for Israel (But Now with a Slightly Different Tone!)

   1. You don’t need me, a lowly Substack writer, to regale the various depravities in the ongoing genocide unfolding in Gaza and the greater Palestine area. Nor am I here to recount the brutal, occupying history of Israel in the Gaza strip (there is a wealth of sources on both the Israeli and Palestinian side of the conflict that can readily confirm these notions). What I am here to tell you: in no substantive way has Kamala Harris distanced herself from Biden’s uncritical support of Israel. Supposedly, she has “privately signaled” for a ceasefire, and has been slightly more sympathetic towards the plights of Palestinians. But then there’s this moment that I’m sure you’ve already seen but…

Yeah. Supposedly the last, best bastion of American democracy seem to can’t handle a real, tangible amount of scrutiny. Shocker.

Of course, this criticism is not unique to Kamala Harris, nor is it a criticism meant to be leveraged against the average Democrat voter; for decades, this has simply been the norm of American belief. For decades, Israel has been the “only” safe haven for international Jews, and that it’s in America’s best interests to maintain this tenuous (massive understatement) relationship to ward off “bad actors” in the area. Again, there is a wealth of evidence to suggest that 1. Israel actually makes Jews far less safe on a global level and 2. perhaps the reason there are so many “bad actors” in the area is because the American State Department simply cannot stop themselves from either invading other countries for oil, committing election interference in otherwise formerly stable democracies…or both!

But yet again…this is a potential future President of the United States, who will be likely wielding a massive amount of power on both the domestic and global stage. I am beyond feeling sympathy and crying out about her seeming “lack of power” over an issue like this. The genocide could’ve been ended 10 months ago if both her and Biden had cut off funding to Israel’s genocidal war machine.

And yes. It is that simple.

2. No Universal Health Care, Will Travel

   1. Again, maybe this is one of those points where typical liberal Democrats will divert from this espoused view, but let’s consider for a moment: Harris originally helped co-sponsor Medicare for All legislation in 2017, and then signaled for it again during the initial months of her 2019 run. So, basically less than a decade ago, this “progressive” was calling for something that a majority of Americans want as a policy (57%, as per Gallup), and then backpedaled on as soon as the mood turned sour on the left-flank of the Democratic party during the 2020 election. You know. When shit actually got real. So, for my liberal friends and colleagues, I will ask this question, and I may ask it again: for all of your professed love for “consistency” in politicians, why then are we giving the greenlight for this sort of opportunistic flip-flopping? We love to deride Trump and Vance for their own grifting on issues (that list could go on for hours), yet the moment Harris steps up to plate, we’re supposed to just fawn over her supposedly boldly progressive agenda, even on something that virtually all progressives and left-wing activists agree upon, both inside the Democratic party and outside of it?

3. Immigration: A Tale of Two Reactionaries

   1. In the American political consciousness of today, there isn’t much else in the way of a litmus test for reactionary, right-wing Overton window pushing rhetoric and action than the issue of immigration (specifically at the Southern border), and Kamala Harris (and to a greater extent, Joe Biden) has failed that test. With Biden essentially closing off asylum to those immigrating at the border (in a move almost exactly like Trump’s, by the way, hmmm, funny how that works) and adding an additional 2000 Border Patrol Agents and ICE (on top of the already 15,000 agents hired on for that exact process by the Trump administration), it’s clear that Biden was caving into reactionary, right-wing framing on the issue. Again, without excusing Kamala Harris’s pathetic abetting of this abuse of human rights (oh yeah, by the way, in case you forgot, there are still thousands of caged migrants at the border, with numbers throughout Biden’s presidency reaching the same amounts as Trump’s), she could’ve easily distanced herself from this reactionary, xenophobic framing and at least taken some nominally more progressive/normal stances on this. But instead, she puts out ads like this. And before anyone else comes in here proclaiming the supposed “necessity” of this kind of rhetoric during an election cycle, maybe consider the fact that there are still hundreds, if not thousands, of sexual assaults that go unreported at ICE detention centers at the Southern border (under the “lesser evil” President, nonetheless), and that rhetoric is exactly what fuels anti-immigration hysteria.

4. Environmental Hazard: The Reversal on Banning Fracking

   

   1. Again, as you hopefully shouldn’t be shocked to find now, Harris has another massive reversal: her fracking policy. Specifically, in 2019, during her initial bout in the primaries, she repeatedly espoused a want to ban fracking, undercutting Biden and other centrists’ vastly inadequate and tepid means of tackling global warming and the imminent death that comes with it. And yes, of course when you take on such a bold proclamation, you should expect the forces of oil and venture capital to actively conspire against said campaign; it’s what they do. Yet, during 2020, she once again reversed this policy as soon as the VP selection process began for Biden’s seemingly “unanimous” win for the Democratic nomination, and has since then, as recently as the end of July of this year, has repeatedly gone out of her way to express that fracking is a cornerstone and vital to our economy! I don’t say this to materially discount the role that fracking and other non-renewable energy sources have played in building our country into the (amoral) superpower we are today, but to discount all of that environmentalist pressure and to, once again, cave into the right-wing framing of this issue does nothing but further secure an ecocide that Democrats have been seemingly warning us about, if Trump were to win. It’s unethical, and a cowardly way of tackling such an existential issue and, if you are a liberal and claim to care, you should also be criticizing both her and the Biden admin for refusing to take the actual necessary steps in transforming society away from the thing that is actually killing us: fossil fuels.

5. Weed ‘Em Out: Harris as Prosecutor

   1. Before I delve into Harris’ history as prosecutor, I will clarify something: there is a wide array of disinformation on this particular part of her past. Multiple conservative sources have claimed that all 1,956 of the marijuana misdemeanors that Harris’ office convicted served actual jail time. As per Mercury News and other sources that reported on it, not all of these people ended up serving actual jail sentences. But it still stinks to high heaven of hypocrisy, coming from the party of supposed pro-legalization of marijuana use and reclassification of marijuana, that Harris and co. have the gall to step out on the national stage, saying that “no one should go to jail for marijuana use", and yet still have that number of convictions sitting on her record. Newsflash: just because you’re the prosecutor in a state, and something exists as a state law, that doesn’t mean you have to actually convict said people of said supposed “crime”. As someone with that kind of influence and power, she could have simply made the choice to defer on those cases and not pursued a conviction. But instead, as all agents of capital do, she pursued this legalistic adherence above actual morality, thus, cementing her role as “the top cop of California”. Police reform my fucking ass.

   What Is to Be Done?

   

I ask this question as something of an echo of Lenin’s all-too timely essay What Is To Be Done; similarly to Lenin’s time in which he published the essay, the modern American left, comprised of mostly trade unionists, social democrats, progressives, liberals, and self-proclaimed moderates, and some Marxists in the mix, finds themselves floundering with this question of what comes next. There’s been no shortage of comrades, Palestinian activists, and friends I know personally getting into spirited debate over the issue of not just Kamala Harris' sketchy past as a public servant, but what the direction of these movements should generally look like. Do we continue building class consciousness by way of agitating currently existing state apparatuses, and organizing more strikes and union movement? Do we continue to write in third-party candidates like Jill Stein, Claudia de la Cruz, Cornel West, and others who have explicitly condemned the genocide in Gaza as a Western colonial project, despite knowing they won’t actually win, even though the idea of voting for another Democrat “to save Democracy” is cosmic absurdism at best, and morally repugnant at worst?

Do I even dare to venture on the question that could get a Homeland Security agent sent to my door for “inciting violence”?

I ask these questions, also full well knowing that part of the audience reading these words won’t even fully agree with my conclusion that capitalism is an amoral system, deprived of any actual considerations towards the people that make it operate to begin with: workers. I ask these questions knowing that, depending on who might be reading this, might have some strong, choice words for me on my inopportune posing of these issues, seemingly “distracting” from the very real threat that is the encroaching tide of right-wing, reactionary, anti-LGBTQ, anti-worker fascism.

But I don’t ask these questions out of a purely adolescent need to rail against “the establishment or whatever”; I ask these questions because, at my core, I know you and I deserve better than this.

We don’t deserve to be locked in this existential limbo, trapped in this never ending swell of needing to make pragmatic choices between one war criminal over another, let’s say, somewhat worse, war criminal. We don’t deserve to have to psychically excoriate ourselves and each other for standing up and saying, “Do these candidates actually represent what I want in my day to day life?” We don’t deserve being told that the agitators for a better world are actually, somehow, part of the problem, and that there is any equivalency between Republican operators and leftist, Palestinian activists.

We deserve an economic model and electoral system that gets done what we want done, not acting out of a cynical, overly arcanic set of self-interests. We deserve universal health care, free food, free housing, mass public transit, an end to endless foreign wars and non-humanitarian entanglements, and workers owning the means of production.

But as I say all this, I know now, that somewhere, out there, someone will deride this all as “utopian”, and that it “doesn’t meet the moment”. And that pragmatism that I railed against earlier wants to at least concede that, on some level, maybe they’re right; there is no way that these things will all be somehow miraculously accomplished. Perhaps in a “doomerist” kind of lens, I know that, despite all my own organizing efforts and outreach with other like-minded comrades, there will be only two actual possible victors come November: Kamala Harris, or Donald Trump. A cop who promises to change little to nothing, or a failed businessman with a thin veneer of humanity that will only provide acceleration towards our collective doom.

Much like Artax, the horse belonging to the main character of Wolfgang Petersen’s landmark 1984 film The Never Ending Story, I find myself trudging along, seemingly impervious to the hellscape of conflict, woe, and surrealist nightmare around me, and then…down I go. Sinking into a morass of misery, decay, and self-defeatism that can only be described as “too much, man”.

And what the fuck is that mindset even good for?

It does nothing to actually answer the question, “What is to be done?”. It does nothing to assuage your fellow comrades and activists from the inescapable conclusion that Democrats and, by virtue of their constant championing of said morals, neoliberalism will never save us in the end. It does nothing, besides perhaps providing some negatively nihilistic pandering on the notion that maybe none of this matters at all, which is the exact wrong kind of conclusion to come to at a time like this.

Maybe…

No. You know. It’s not “maybe”. I don’t have the singular, fucking answer.

But what I do have…is hope. A depressed, somewhat cautiously optimistic, and perhaps overly anxiously measured hope.

In Mark Fisher’s Capitalist Realism, Fisher asserts that, in the spiritual, cognitive, and mental malaise of late-stage capitalist development, our political imaginations will be so limited, so much so that it is “far easier to imagine the end of the world than it is to imagine the end of capitalism”.

Yeah. Pretty fucking bleak outlook, I know.

But he has a response to Francis Fukuyama’s The End of History thesis that I think is something that best reflects that similar tinge of hope I described earlier. After all this pontificating on the cultural homogenization and material decay found in late-stage capitalism, and after all the critical thought and dissertation on the complete limiting of political imagination imposed by the seeming inevitability of liberal democracy and business ontology, Fisher has this to say,

“The long, dark night of the end of history has to be grasped as an enormous opportunity. The very oppressive pervasiveness of capitalist realism means that even glimmers of alternative political and economic possibilities can have a disproportionately great effect. The tiniest event can tear a hole in the grey curtain of reaction which has marked the horizons of possibility under capitalist realism. From a situation in which nothing can happen, suddenly anything is possible again.”

I have this hope precisely because of the work I’ve seen done in the past few years; I never would have imagined seeing mass movement for a free Palestine. I never would’ve imagined seeing UAW Union President potentially calling for a general strike by 2026. I never would’ve imagined seeing DSA chapters opening up and having a reinvigorated presence on the national stage. I never would’ve imagined hearing so many of my regular, less politically engaged colleagues and friends expressing a more urgent call for unionization. Hell, tying it back to the title of this whole, rambling essay, I honestly didn’t imagine Joe Biden setting aside his electoral, fragile ego aside for the sake of someone else even slightly more competent than him to run.

Yet, from a situation in which nothing can happen, suddenly anything is possible again.

Like I said earlier, I don’t have the singular answer to this…but that doesn’t stop me from holding multiple things true at once in my mind.

Participating in electoral politics every four years will not absolve this country of its creeping fascist cancers, wholly endemic to capitalist developments, in which people’s sole source of state sponsored meaning and living is derived from work, work, and more work. Yet, by this same token, there are several degrees of influence that a Presidential election can have on your life and material conditions, and, despite our clouded judgement of the Now, we can certainly make some guesses as to who, out of the binary choices we are given right now, will probably be worse on some levels (even if that worse choice (Donald Trump) isn’t all that fundamentally different from the other one (Kamala Harris) ).

And sure. Gladly shouting from the rooftops about Kamala Harris’s candidacy being the perfect cap to “brat summer” may be cringe and, on some level, overly forgiving towards her (many) failures. But for my comrades who are able and willing: practice patience and empathy for these people. They’re not scared; they’re terrified. They are terrified of their lives getting worse, year after year, yet, much like Fisher says, they are “unable to name the thing” that provides them this horror. They lack the class consciousness to decry the source of their suffering, not because they’re necessarily willfully ignorant (most aren’t, I’d venture to say), but because their entire political imagination is rooted in what they see in front of them: that if they consume the right things, if they vote the correct way, everything will be made whole again. These are centuries worth of programming and dogma entrenched into our collective subconscious, and these assumptions are now being regularly lambasted and broiled on social media feeds that, in my humble view, our human minds were not meant to actually be able to consume as often as we do.

But just as I say that, I do not say any of that to endorse voting for Kamala Harris, because, in the name of holding multiple things to be true at once, I also understand that the Presidential elections we hold every 4 years are not as nearly as consequential as local and state elections. Those elections, historically and materially speaking, hold far more sway in what mine and your day to day life is actually like.

So when someone I know comes up to me and says, “I’m voting for Kamala Harris,” as much as I want to shake them by the lapel and shove a copy of State and Revolution into their hands and rail against Harris’s entire worldview (mostly kidding when I say that), I know that doesn’t do anything.

What instead helps, in my deeply humble view, is reaching to tear a hole in that “grey curtain of reaction”, and showing that person, that friend, what might be there on the other side, if we’re brave and willing enough to step through.

As if I haven’t said enough words in this fucking thing, I leave you with what I think best summarizes this moment: Jon Stewart’s first time back as one of the recurring hosts on The Daily Show. (Skip to around the 15:30 mark to get the full set of thoughts at the end, but watching the whole thing is also highly recommended.)

“The work of making this world resemble one that you would prefer to live in is a lunch pail fuckin’ job, day in and day out, where thousands of committed, anonymous, smart and dedicated people bang on closed doors and pick up those that are fallen, and grind away on issues until they get a positive result. And even then, they have to stay on to make sure that result holds.

So the good news is, I’m not saying you don’t have to worry about who wins the election. I’m saying you have to worry about every day before it, and every day after. Forever.”

WORKS CITED

1. Bohrer, Becky. “Judge in Alaska Upholds Biden Administration’s Approval of the Massive Willow Oil-Drilling Project.” AP News, AP News, 13 May 2024, apnews.com/article/alaska-willow-oil-drilling-project-upheld-abf128e53eaf053005bffe771b7af574.

2. Brenan, Megan. “Majority in U.S. Still Say Gov’T Should Ensure Healthcare.” Gallup.Com, Gallup, 7 Feb. 2024, news.gallup.com/poll/468401/majority-say-gov-ensure-healthcare.aspx.

3. Fisher, Mark. Capitalist Realism: Is There No Alternative? Zer0 Books, 2022.

4. Jr, Bernd Debusmann. “How Joe Biden and Donald Trump’s Border Policies Compare.” BBC News, BBC, 4 June 2024, www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65574725.

5. Lenin, Vladimir Ilʹich. What Is to Be Done? Burning Questions of Our Movement; C by V.I. Lenin. International Publishers, 1929.

6. Levy, Marc. “Harris Once Wanted to Ban Fracking. Trump Wants Voters in Energy-Rich Pennsylvania to Remember.” AP News, AP News, 5 Aug. 2024, apnews.com/article/fracking-pennsylvania-president-campaign-donald-trump-kamala-harris-104f3f051df4d28e4645f05051eb6cff.

7. Washington, Jessica. “Kamala Harris’ Record on Marijuana as a Prosecutor Is Back in the Spotlight.” Yahoo! News, Yahoo!, 22 Oct. 2022, www.yahoo.com/news/kamala-harris-record-marijuana-prosecutor-173249390.html.