I'm not, maybe I haven't explained clearly, because you've just repeated the 'a ranking as high' bit that I don't understand rather than answering it. Does it refer to her having been a senator, or to now being VP?
From what you're saying, I think it's that she's first female VP and also happens to be black and also happens to have a South Asian background?
I don't have an agenda here, I just didn't understand that paragraph, and, if I'm correct in my understanding above, think it was written in just about the most confusing way possible.
Coming from the outside it might be easier to work forwards to the statement instead of backwards from it:
All vice presidents (2nd highest executive position) and presidents (highest executive position) up until this point have been white males with the exception of former president Barack Obama who was a black male and former vice president Charles Curtis who was native american male. Kamala Harris is a black/asian female who looks to be the next vice president.
> will become the highest-ranking woman ever to serve in government,
that confuses me. Is she to be the first female VP? Or does 'highest ranking woman' refer to her present position in the senate?
I think I understand now that it's the former. It just seems strange to me to lead with the more specific 'firsts'. I would have written something more like:
> Kamala Harris also makes history as the first female Vice President, and, notably at a time when the US faces a reckoning in racial justice, a black woman, and the first of South Asian descent.
(Borrowing phrasing and emphasis from the original nevertheless, since I understand they may be more relevant in the US than they perhaps are to me.)
I just honestly didn't realise from that paragraph originally that she was the first woman entirely. It was sort of there, but so hidden that I thought I was wrong.
It might help to know that the perceived ranking is President >> VP > US Senator. Though a “more honest” ranking would be President > US Senator > VP (since they only ever vote in ties in the senate or sit around until the sitting President can’t serve.)
But if you read the constitution of the US, it’s more like SCOTUS > House Speaker > President > Senate leader > US Senator >> US House Rep. And then there’s the state governments. The ranking of the House Speaker is because that person actually has the power of the pen and can in large part dictate what happens. The genius move is all the rules and political factors make being the House Speaker essentially destroy a politicians political clout, standing - everything. The oddball is that you don’t have to be an elected official to be voted in as House Speaker - you just have to get a majority support in the House and not be otherwise disqualified (I.e. no former 2-term Presidents).
There are kind of these two exceptions (below in links), in addition to the ones noted above. Diversity at the highest level of government isn't exactly a strong suit for the US.
It could also say 'will become the most South Asian woman ever to...', doesn't mean that she has only now become South Asian.
'highest-ranking woman ever to serve in government' just makes it sound like her 'high-ranking' is independent of her serving in government to me. Especially given that it's a bigger more general milestone than the preceding sentences.
From what you're saying, I think it's that she's first female VP and also happens to be black and also happens to have a South Asian background?
I don't have an agenda here, I just didn't understand that paragraph, and, if I'm correct in my understanding above, think it was written in just about the most confusing way possible.