Joe Biden in The Contenders


On Corporations: OpEd: beholden to corporations because so many based in DE

Like all mainstream candidates, Biden is beholden to corporate interests who support his campaigns or dominate his state; in Biden’s case, he cast a noteworthy vote in favor of the controversial 2005 bankruptcy bill, which was a boon to credit card lenders, many of which are based in Delaware due to lax state regulations. Biden’s biggest single bloc of support is trial lawyers, who like his strong position against tort reform.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.180 Nov 11, 2007

On Crime: Biden Law of 1994 created several new capital offenses

Biden is credited for authoring several significant pieces of legislation in the area of federal law enforcement, including The Violent Crime Control & Law Enforcement Act of 1994, widely known as the Biden Law, which:The law was passed shortly before the Oklahom City bombing, and its provisions were applied to execute Timothy McVeigh. The legislation received bipartisan support, but was reviled by death penalty opponents and civil libertarians. Some believe it broke ground for the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.179 Nov 11, 2007

On Drugs: Took lead on drug policy & narcotics control

Biden has sought to take the lead on drug policy, spearheading creation of a “Drug Czar” and crafting laws to control narcotics--measures that are widely viewed as pretty much of a failure.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.180 Nov 11, 2007

On Energy & Oil: Supports cap-and-trade for greenhouse gases

On climate change Biden occupies what has become the conventional liberal middle-ground, supporting “a ‘cap-and-trade’ approach to regulating emissions and investment in technologies” to reduce greenhouse gasses.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.180 Nov 11, 2007

On Government Reform: As Judiciary Chair, rejected Bork and supported Thomas

Biden became a nationally-recognized face while chairing the Senate Judiciary Committee from 1987 to 1995, when presiding over televised hearings on controversial Supreme Court nominations of Robert Bork--a lone triumphant moment from liberal Democrats--and Clarence Thomas. Many women’s groups complained about what they felt was Biden’s harsh treatment of Anita Hill, and many progressives have never forgiven him for his vote to confirm Thomas.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.178-179 Nov 11, 2007

On Health Care: Modernize, simplify & expand health insurance

His plan for dealing with the healthcare crisis is vague to nonexistent, with references to containing costs by “modernizing” and “simplifying” the system; “expanding” health insurance; and looking at “innovative alternatives” pioneered by the states to “evaluate what works best in providing affordable access to healthcare for all.”
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.180 Nov 11, 2007

On Immigration: Supported Bush plan: both border fence & path to citizenship

Biden supports the Bush immigration plan, with both its “amnesty” for existing undocumented residents and its big border fence to keep new ones out.
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.180 Nov 11, 2007

On Principles & Values: Insulted Indian-Americans in attempt to compliment vibrancy

Biden has made several campaign-killing statements since he declared his candidacy in January 2007. In an apparent effort to compliment Americans of Indian descent, “In Delaware, the largest growth in population is Indian Americans--moving from India. You cannot go to a 7-11 or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I’m not joking.” His office sought to explain the remarks, saying, ‘The point Senator Biden was making is that there has been a vibrant Indian-American community in Delaware for decades. It has primarily been made up of engineers, scientists and physicians, but more recently middle-class families are moving into Delaware and purchasing family-run small businesses.“
Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.184 Nov 11, 2007

On War & Peace: Strong US intervention in trouble spots around the world

What sets Biden apart from other candidates, more than anything, is his take on Iraq--and more generally, on the US role in a post-Cold War world. Repeatedly, over the past 2 decades, Biden has advocated for strong US intervention in trouble spots around the world (including Iraq) in the name of democracy and human rights, a well-intentioned but highly risky stance that has won him devoted support as well as widespread opposition.

On the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he has been chair or ranking minority member since the late 1990s. In recent decades, he has consistently taken an interventionist stance, promoting the idea that the US, as the lone remaining superpower, ought to step in--with the UN, with NATO, or on its own--to prevent genocide, keep the peace, and promote democracy. Under Clinton, he pushed for intervention in Bosnia, and supported NATO’s intervention in Kosovo. More recently, he has argued for an immediate intercession in Darfur, with US troops if need be.

Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.178&181 Nov 11, 2007

On War & Peace: Third way: federalize Iraq; troops home; no chaos behind

Biden favors a phased troop withdrawal down to a “residual” force, but made enemies by voting for the May 2007 supplemental war funding bill, insisting that a no-vote would constitute abandoning the troops. But he also favors a controversial plan that differs from any of the other candidates--as he describes it, a “third way”:

“President Bush does not have a strategy for victory in Iraq. His strategy is to prevent defeat and to hand the problem off to his successor. As a result, more and more Americans understandably want a rapid withdrawal, even at the risk of trading a dictator for chaos and a civil war that could become a regional war. Both are bad alternatives.“

”There is a third way that can achieve the two objectives most Americans share: to bring our troops home, without leaving chaos behind. The idea is to maintain a unified Iraq by federalizing it and giving Kurds, Shiites, and Sunnis breathing room in their own region.“

Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.181-182 Nov 11, 2007

On War & Peace: Post-colonial countries like Iraq need federal system

Biden insists that we have to destroy Iraq in order to save it. He says the only way to solve the bloody mess the US has created is through what amounts to a partition, providing autonomous states for the main ethic and religious groups, with the whole thing monitored by a UN-sponsored Iraq Oversight Group.

A central government would sit atop of this regional setup, responsible for “common interests, like border security and the distribution of oil revenues.” Shared oil resources would most likely restore Iraq to an earlier status: The country, after all, was once a colonial appendage of Britain before World War I, acquired solely for its oil.

Biden said in Feb. 2007, “Any country that comes into being as a consequence of the pen of a diplomat has never been able to be stable except by (a) an imperial power dominating it, (b) a dictator or strongman, or (c) a federal system.” Biden clearly believes in the third of these options, but in practice his plan may well recreate the first.

Source: The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, p.182-3 Nov 11, 2007

The above quotations are from The Contenders, by Laura Flanders, Dean Kuipers, James Ridgeway, Richard Goldstein, and Elizabeth Sanders, published Aug. 2007.
Click here for main summary page.
Click here for a profile of Joe Biden.
Click here for Joe Biden on all issues.
Joe Biden on other issues:
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles/Values
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology/Infrastructure
War/Iraq/Mideast
Welfare/Poverty
Please consider a donation to OnTheIssues.org!
Click for details -- or send donations to:
1770 Mass Ave. #630, Cambridge MA 02140
E-mail: submit@OnTheIssues.org
(We rely on your support!)