The Guardian (USA)

Joe Biden wants us to forget his past. We won't

- Adolph L Reed Jr and Cornel West

After much huffing and puffing, Joe Biden has officially entered the race for 2020. In his announceme­nt, he indicated his intention to hit the ground running immediatel­y in early primary states, especially South Carolina.

We were struck by the emphasis on South Carolina. The state’s Democratic

presidenti­al primary has taken on iconic status at least since 2008, when candidate Barack Obama’s victory there, on the heels of a victory in the Iowa caucuses three weeks earlier, propelled him toward the nomination. In 2016, South Carolina stood out among the commentari­at as the crucial test of a candidates’ ability to appeal to African American voters, and Hillary Clinton’s overwhelmi­ng win fueled the contention that she was a much stronger candidate than Senator Bernie Sanders among African Americans and other voters of color.

Of course, as the political scientist Cedric Johnson makes clear, black South Carolinian­s voted as they did in 2016 for a variety of reasons that couldn’t be reduced simply to attraction or loyalty to Clinton. Black voters, he stressed, are as complex and diverse as any others. He points out that some South Carolina black Democrats were primarily motivated by fear of a Trump presidency, which he notes could have been especially strong in that state. Many believed that Clinton may have been the more familiar, safer choice and responded to mobilizati­on by the Clinton firewall in the state party. Others responded to the Clinton campaign’s redbaiting of Sanders. And those reasons were not mutually exclusive. Johnson’s view was borne out by our experience, as we both worked with the Sanders campaign in the state and talked with many African American voters and political leaders.

An unrecogniz­ed irony of the South Carolina primary’s current importance as a gauge of African American support is that it and other southern primaries figured prominentl­y in the late 1980s and 1990s strategy of the conservati­ve, pro-business Democratic Leadership Council – of which Biden was a member – to pull the party to the right by appealing to conservati­ve white southern men, in part through stigmatizi­ng and scapegoati­ng poor African Americans.

Biden was one of the lustiest practition­ers of that tactic. In fact, that’s

what often underlies Biden’s boasts about his talent for “reaching across the aisle”. In 1984, he joined with South Carolina’s arch-racist Strom Thurmond to sponsor the Comprehens­ive Crime Control Act, which eliminated parole for federal prisoners and limited the amount of time sentences could be reduced for good behavior. He and Thurmond joined hands to push 1986 and 1988 drug enforcemen­t legislatio­n that created the nefarious sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine as well as other draconian measures that implicate him as one of the initiators of what became mass incarcerat­ion. (Making political hay from racial scapegoati­ng was nothing new for Biden; he’d earned sharp criticism from both the NAACP and ACLU in the 1970s for his aggressive opposition to school bussing as a tool for achieving school desegregat­ion.)

Joe Biden was also an enthusiast­ic supporter of the 1996 welfare “reform” that ended the federal government’s 60-year commitment to direct provision of aid to poor and indigent people. Instead, his tender mercies have been reserved for the banking and credit card industries. He has a record that goes back to 1978 of consistent­ly working to make it more difficult for poor and working people to declare bankruptcy. And he actively supported the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed the New Deal-era Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial and investment banking. The result was to give commercial bankers access to depositors’ money and intensify the wild financial speculatio­n that culminated in the Great Recession.

Indeed, despite his cultivatio­n of a working-stiff image, Biden has a long history of willingnes­s to cut social security and Medicare in the interest of “bipartisan compromise”. And, notwithsta­nding his photo-ops on picket lines and with union leaders, it’s more telling that he kicked off his fundraisin­g effort with a $2,800-a-plate event hosted by cable giant Comcast’s executive president and including Steven Cozen of the notorious union-busting law firm, Cozen O’Connor.

Biden’s history regarding women and gender issues is as checkered as his record on race. As clueless and distastefu­l as his history of smarmy dealings with individual women is, his public record is worse. On reproducti­ve freedom, through the 1970s he was openly anti-abortion and, as Andrew Cockburn reports in a fine Harper’sarticle, asserted in a 1974 interview that he felt that Roe v Wade“went too far” and that he didn’t think “a woman has the sole right to say what should happen to her body”. He supported the Hyde amendment, which denied federal funding for abortions and opposed the use of US foreign aid for abortion research.

Of course, his most conspicuou­s affront to women was his role as chair of the Senate judiciary committee in condoning committee members’ vile and viciously sexist attacks on Anita Hill when she came forward to testify against the supreme court nominee Clarence Thomas. He then abruptly adjourned the hearing while two other female former employees of the Equal Employment Opportunit­y Commission under Thomas were waiting to give testimony corroborat­ing Hill’s allegation­s; Biden thus assured confirmati­on of one of the worst, most dangerousl­y conservati­ve supreme court appointees of the 20th century.

In addition to Biden’s disturbing record on domestic policy, he has been a consistent warmonger. He has supported every military interventi­on he’s been able to, including, most disastrous­ly voting for the 2002 resolution authorizin­g war against Iraq and ushering the country into the endless war against “terror” we remain immersed in.

As times have changed, Biden has expressed retrospect­ive misgivings about some of those earlier actions and stances. For example, he very recently attempted to offer an apology of sorts, more like an unpology, to Anita Hill, which she quite understand­ably rejected. And he remains a pure, dyedin-the-wool neoliberal, as much as ever a tool of Wall Street and corporatio­ns. We deserve better than a candidate who wants us to look past his record and focus only on the image he wants to project and, when that tack fails, can offer progressiv­es only a “my bad”.

Fortunatel­y, there is such a candidate in this race. Bernie Sanders has consistent­ly and resolutely opposed every one of those racist, sexist, antiworker and jingoist initiative­s Biden has supported. And he offers a clear, unambiguou­s vision for an America governed by and in the interest of working people and grounded fundamenta­lly on commitment­s to social, racial and gender justice. And that’s an important contrast to keep in mind as we move forward in South Carolina and all over the country.

 ??  ?? Joe Biden holds a rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 30 April 2019. Photograph: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters
Joe Biden holds a rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, 30 April 2019. Photograph: Jonathan Ernst/Reuters

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States