Democrats Divided on Whether Kamala Harris Should Support Lina Khan: Concerns Arise Over Potential Political Costs
The Democratic nominee is neither campaigning alongside the prominent trustbuster nor standing up for Khan in the face of criticism.
TroibNews 
From a competitive Senate race in Arizona to congressional battles in Texas and Illinois, Democratic candidates are rallying around Federal Trade Commission Chair Lina Khan. Yet one prominent figure is distancing herself from Khan: Vice President Kamala Harris. Harris has chosen not to appear alongside Khan or advocate for her vigorous antitrust initiatives — nor has she defended Khan against a chorus of Silicon Valley donors urging her removal, or Khan’s GOP adversaries on Capitol Hill.
Khan's ambitious efforts to dismantle monopolies and reduce market concentration, especially within the tech sector, have elevated her to a level of visibility rarely seen for an FTC chair or other agency leaders. However, her stance is creating divisions within the Democratic Party regarding both principles and strategies as the presidential campaign enters its final stretch.
Wealthy supporters of Harris, such as billionaire tech investor Mark Cuban and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, have launched an intense campaign against Khan, hoping Harris will dismiss her and convey that her administration would adopt a more business-friendly stance than President Joe Biden’s.
Conversely, an expanding faction of progressives views Khan’s battle against corporate dominance as a significant and advantageous issue during this populist period. They caution that Harris’ reluctance to endorse Khan — and by extension, the agenda she represents — could alienate vital voters.
“When she won't defend Biden's record on antitrust, or defend Khan against the attacks by the billionaire donors — guys like Reid Hoffman, who’ve basically been calling for Khan's head — it kind of zaps the life out of the progressive base,” commented Hal Singer, an economist at the University of Utah and director of the Utah Project, an institute focused on antitrust and consumer protection.
“She’s basically performing malpractice,” Singer added.
Republican lawmakers have also taken aim at Khan, demanding documents this week to investigate whether she breached ethics standards by appearing with campaigning Democrats.
While the GOP’s criticisms are not new, the pushback from Democratic donors has alarmed progressive allies who helped support Khan’s ascent and consider her a crucial player in Biden’s ongoing antitrust initiatives. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently warned of an “out and out brawl” if Harris attempted to remove Khan after the election, with progressives now fearing that the vice president's failure to support Khan might jeopardize her own chances in the upcoming election.
“It's an obvious missed opportunity to make some noise in a populist way amidst a populist moment,” remarked Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project, a progressive watchdog. “I think she is ceding that populist energy to [Donald] Trump, and it's an enormous miscalculation.”
The Harris campaign declined to comment on Khan or her potential future, adhering to a policy against discussing personnel in a hypothetical Harris administration. However, a campaign official challenged assertions that Harris’ agenda is not sufficiently robust on corporate issues, highlighting her backing of policies aimed at raising taxes on billionaires, combating price gouging, and increasing housing accessibility.
In contrast, several other Democrats, particularly those facing tight election battles, have no reservations about aligning with Khan. Arizona Senate candidate Ruben Gallego, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and Reps. Greg Casar, Mark Pocan, and Raja Krishnamoorthi have all recently participated in events alongside the FTC chair.
Khan's numerous appearances with campaigning Democrats drew scrutiny from Rep. Jim Jordan and Sen. Mike Lee, who this week suggested that she might be violating federal rules that limit officials from partaking in partisan activities.
FTC spokesperson Douglas Farrar clarified that Khan “only attends official events at the request of members of Congress, abiding by all the rules governing her role as chair.” He stated that Khan is “not focused on the election, but on doing her job to enforce the laws that protect consumers and fair competition.”
Although antitrust issues might not frequently rank high on voters' priority lists, there is evidence suggesting that Khan’s battle against Big Tech and major corporations resonates with the public. A poll conducted by Democratic pollster Lake Research Partners revealed that over 65 percent of voters in key swing states back lawsuits aimed at dismantling monopolies.
Dan Geldon, a former chief of staff for Sen. Elizabeth Warren, shared on X that this poll serves as “another data point that the big donors swarming the Harris operation to shut down antitrust enforcement have been doing a huge disservice to the party at a critical time in its fight against Trump.”
In an interview, Geldon highlighted that both Hoffman and IAC Chair Barry Diller — another Harris donor and vocal critic of Khan — have business interests potentially jeopardized by investigations led by Khan.
Singer noted that the new poll indicates there’s “no popular ground swelling to defend tech.” He echoed the sentiments of other progressives, expressing concern that Harris has “surrounded herself with the wrong personnel” and is receiving poor advice regarding Khan’s record.
Having started her career in San Francisco, Harris has maintained connections with the tech industry; for instance, Karen Dunn, the attorney representing Google in its antitrust legal challenges, assisted Harris in preparing for a presidential debate. Additionally, Harris’ brother-in-law is Tony West, a prominent lawyer at Uber. Furthermore, Lartease Tiffith, a former senior counsel during Harris’s Senate tenure, is currently a leading lobbyist at the Interactive Advertising Bureau, an industry organization that recently sued Khan’s FTC over its new “click to cancel” regulation.
Adam Kovacevich, a former Google executive and head of the tech lobbying group Chamber of Progress, dismissed the idea that voters are clamoring for Khan’s aggressive stance against Big Tech.
“The anti-corporate left overestimates how big its voter support is,” Kovacevich stated. He told that the Biden administration “got sideways with the median voter on the economy,” suggesting that Harris is aiming to appeal to moderates unsettled by Trump who are wary of her being perceived as an economic radical.
“I believe that she's saying these things and doing these things — talking about business in a different way — because that's what swing voters want to hear,” Kovacevich added.
Nevertheless, Harris’ progressive critics mostly agree that her reluctance to embrace Khan is closely related to her ambitious strategy to appeal to “moderate Republicans.” Yet, they worry that her campaign may be misinterpreting the current political atmosphere.
“I don't think that your classic moderate Republican swing voter is pro-monopoly,” Hauser noted. “I don't know that there's a large pro-monopoly constituency, outside of the donor class.”
Despite their criticisms regarding her lack of support for Khan on the campaign trail, progressives anticipate that Harris would retain the FTC chair if she emerges victorious next month. Singer pointed out that a significant portion of Biden’s anti-corporate agenda remains “in Kamala’s written platform,” even if she is “unwilling to talk about it on the trail.” Geldon remarked that “Bidenomics has been extremely successful” and expressed doubt that a new Democratic administration would seek to overturn that legacy.
However, by not aligning herself with Biden’s champion against corporate power, progressives fear that Harris is allowing Trump to seize the populist narrative — a decision that could undermine her bid for the White House and threaten Khan’s position at the FTC.
“Name the villains and explain that your opponent would not go after them because he's in the pocket of the powerful,” Singer advised. “[Harris] can't say that. That's the missed opportunity that I'm upset about.”
Allen M Lee contributed to this report for TROIB News
Khan's ambitious efforts to dismantle monopolies and reduce market concentration, especially within the tech sector, have elevated her to a level of visibility rarely seen for an FTC chair or other agency leaders. However, her stance is creating divisions within the Democratic Party regarding both principles and strategies as the presidential campaign enters its final stretch.
Wealthy supporters of Harris, such as billionaire tech investor Mark Cuban and LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman, have launched an intense campaign against Khan, hoping Harris will dismiss her and convey that her administration would adopt a more business-friendly stance than President Joe Biden’s.
Conversely, an expanding faction of progressives views Khan’s battle against corporate dominance as a significant and advantageous issue during this populist period. They caution that Harris’ reluctance to endorse Khan — and by extension, the agenda she represents — could alienate vital voters.
“When she won't defend Biden's record on antitrust, or defend Khan against the attacks by the billionaire donors — guys like Reid Hoffman, who’ve basically been calling for Khan's head — it kind of zaps the life out of the progressive base,” commented Hal Singer, an economist at the University of Utah and director of the Utah Project, an institute focused on antitrust and consumer protection.
“She’s basically performing malpractice,” Singer added.
Republican lawmakers have also taken aim at Khan, demanding documents this week to investigate whether she breached ethics standards by appearing with campaigning Democrats.
While the GOP’s criticisms are not new, the pushback from Democratic donors has alarmed progressive allies who helped support Khan’s ascent and consider her a crucial player in Biden’s ongoing antitrust initiatives. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez recently warned of an “out and out brawl” if Harris attempted to remove Khan after the election, with progressives now fearing that the vice president's failure to support Khan might jeopardize her own chances in the upcoming election.
“It's an obvious missed opportunity to make some noise in a populist way amidst a populist moment,” remarked Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project, a progressive watchdog. “I think she is ceding that populist energy to [Donald] Trump, and it's an enormous miscalculation.”
The Harris campaign declined to comment on Khan or her potential future, adhering to a policy against discussing personnel in a hypothetical Harris administration. However, a campaign official challenged assertions that Harris’ agenda is not sufficiently robust on corporate issues, highlighting her backing of policies aimed at raising taxes on billionaires, combating price gouging, and increasing housing accessibility.
In contrast, several other Democrats, particularly those facing tight election battles, have no reservations about aligning with Khan. Arizona Senate candidate Ruben Gallego, Sen. Bernie Sanders, and Reps. Greg Casar, Mark Pocan, and Raja Krishnamoorthi have all recently participated in events alongside the FTC chair.
Khan's numerous appearances with campaigning Democrats drew scrutiny from Rep. Jim Jordan and Sen. Mike Lee, who this week suggested that she might be violating federal rules that limit officials from partaking in partisan activities.
FTC spokesperson Douglas Farrar clarified that Khan “only attends official events at the request of members of Congress, abiding by all the rules governing her role as chair.” He stated that Khan is “not focused on the election, but on doing her job to enforce the laws that protect consumers and fair competition.”
Although antitrust issues might not frequently rank high on voters' priority lists, there is evidence suggesting that Khan’s battle against Big Tech and major corporations resonates with the public. A poll conducted by Democratic pollster Lake Research Partners revealed that over 65 percent of voters in key swing states back lawsuits aimed at dismantling monopolies.
Dan Geldon, a former chief of staff for Sen. Elizabeth Warren, shared on X that this poll serves as “another data point that the big donors swarming the Harris operation to shut down antitrust enforcement have been doing a huge disservice to the party at a critical time in its fight against Trump.”
In an interview, Geldon highlighted that both Hoffman and IAC Chair Barry Diller — another Harris donor and vocal critic of Khan — have business interests potentially jeopardized by investigations led by Khan.
Singer noted that the new poll indicates there’s “no popular ground swelling to defend tech.” He echoed the sentiments of other progressives, expressing concern that Harris has “surrounded herself with the wrong personnel” and is receiving poor advice regarding Khan’s record.
Having started her career in San Francisco, Harris has maintained connections with the tech industry; for instance, Karen Dunn, the attorney representing Google in its antitrust legal challenges, assisted Harris in preparing for a presidential debate. Additionally, Harris’ brother-in-law is Tony West, a prominent lawyer at Uber. Furthermore, Lartease Tiffith, a former senior counsel during Harris’s Senate tenure, is currently a leading lobbyist at the Interactive Advertising Bureau, an industry organization that recently sued Khan’s FTC over its new “click to cancel” regulation.
Adam Kovacevich, a former Google executive and head of the tech lobbying group Chamber of Progress, dismissed the idea that voters are clamoring for Khan’s aggressive stance against Big Tech.
“The anti-corporate left overestimates how big its voter support is,” Kovacevich stated. He told that the Biden administration “got sideways with the median voter on the economy,” suggesting that Harris is aiming to appeal to moderates unsettled by Trump who are wary of her being perceived as an economic radical.
“I believe that she's saying these things and doing these things — talking about business in a different way — because that's what swing voters want to hear,” Kovacevich added.
Nevertheless, Harris’ progressive critics mostly agree that her reluctance to embrace Khan is closely related to her ambitious strategy to appeal to “moderate Republicans.” Yet, they worry that her campaign may be misinterpreting the current political atmosphere.
“I don't think that your classic moderate Republican swing voter is pro-monopoly,” Hauser noted. “I don't know that there's a large pro-monopoly constituency, outside of the donor class.”
Despite their criticisms regarding her lack of support for Khan on the campaign trail, progressives anticipate that Harris would retain the FTC chair if she emerges victorious next month. Singer pointed out that a significant portion of Biden’s anti-corporate agenda remains “in Kamala’s written platform,” even if she is “unwilling to talk about it on the trail.” Geldon remarked that “Bidenomics has been extremely successful” and expressed doubt that a new Democratic administration would seek to overturn that legacy.
However, by not aligning herself with Biden’s champion against corporate power, progressives fear that Harris is allowing Trump to seize the populist narrative — a decision that could undermine her bid for the White House and threaten Khan’s position at the FTC.
“Name the villains and explain that your opponent would not go after them because he's in the pocket of the powerful,” Singer advised. “[Harris] can't say that. That's the missed opportunity that I'm upset about.”
Allen M Lee contributed to this report for TROIB News
