Kamala Harris’ newly proposed policies are in question.

Kamala Harris has finally shared some policy positions on an “Issues” page on her website — however, they appear to lack substance.

In the introduction, Harris talks about “building up the middle class,” creating an “Opportunity Economy where everyone has a chance to compete and a chance to succeed” and “bringing together organized labor and workers, small business owners, entrepreneurs, and American companies to create good paying jobs.”

In future updates, it wouldn’t be surprising if she declares her support for apple pie, cute kittens, and adorable puppies.

When she’s not speaking in generalities, Harris is promoting more vague ideas and questionable strategies.

To address the high costs of basic goods impacting American families, she plans to “crack down on anti-competitive practices that let big corporations jack up prices” and implement “a federal ban on corporate price gouging on food and groceries.”

Rather than addressing the root cause of recent inflation, which many attribute to the reckless spending after COVID, Harris shifts blame to corporations for price increases after the Democrats gained power.

Furthermore, Harris continues to propose freebies as a means of gaining votes, which could result in further inflation.

Her plans include addressing student loan debt, offering assistance to first-time homebuyers, providing tax cuts to families with newborn children, and ensuring that those earning less than $400,000 a year won’t pay more in taxes.

However, the financing for these proposals seems questionable, as she aims to fund them by taxing the rich.

Her strategy to “strengthen Social Security and Medicare” involves making “millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share in taxes,” despite the fact that the top 1% of earners already contribute 45.8% of income taxes to the government.

She also plans to “lower energy costs” by adhering to the Biden “climate action” agenda, which has actually led to increased energy costs.

Other bold positions include advocating for “safety and justice for all” and stating that “no one is above the law,” despite her previous support for defunding the police and bailing out race-rioters.

Her border policies involve asylum law liberalization and creating an “earned pathway to citizenship,” which she claims wouldn’t attract more illegal migrants.

Perhaps she will reveal the details of how these proposals will be implemented after the election.

Lastly, Harris attempts to strengthen her agenda by comparing it to a misleading summary of “Trump’s Project 2025 Agenda,” despite the fact that Trump has disavowed any involvement with that project.

It took the Harris campaign weeks to develop this superficial platform, raising questions about whether they have put any real effort into outlining her potential actions as president.

It begs the question: Is Harris delaying the tough work of defining her actual stance on key issues until after the election?