Posted by
Gabrielle Cusumano on Monday, August 25, 2008 1:45:15 PM
"He supports freedom of choice on abortion but opposes federal funding of abortions for poor women... he has supported a crackdown on crime, a line-item veto for the President, an across-the-board freeze in federal spending and the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings automatic deficit-reduction plan." Helen P. Rogers
We are a public policy press established in 1983, based in Carmel, California.
No sooner did Joe Biden have his first political victory under his belt than ...... about a government guarantee encouraging private leaders to make loans-- ...
[...]
The Atlantic Monthly (April 1987) gave a brief rundown of Senator Biden on the issues thus:
He is a leading critic of school busing for purposes of racial integration. He supports freedom of choice on abortion but opposes federal funding of abortions for poor women... he has supported a crackdown on crime, a line-item veto for the President, an across-the-board freeze in federal spending and the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings automatic deficit-reduction plan.
He has come out against a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget and, not surprisingly, is against eliminating federal subsidies for Amtrack. (Few make better use of the railroad then Senator Joe Biden.) He would encourage banks to forgive interest on outstanding loans to Third World countries and to re-negotiate principal payments. As for Social Security, Joe Biden takes a low non-committal profile, in contrast to the fiery stand of ex-Governor Babbitt. Senator Biden rules out any means test for benefits and endorses the status quo of taxing half the benefits of single retirees with incomes over $25,000 and couples whose income exceeds $32,000. True to form, he couches his opinion in moralistic rhetoric, "the best measure of the humaneness of a society is the way in which a society treats its elderly." I'm not kidding. But that's nothing compared to the way he carries on ab carries on about children. "It is the plight of our children that is the moral test of our time." He can't seem to make up his mind!
But writer Laurence Barrett matches Joe Biden when it comes to imagery. Mr. Barrett painted the following masterful portrait of Senator Biden in action in the June 22, 1987,issue of Time magazine:
His handsome features taut, his fist balled in indignation, Biden was in danger of losing his audience by painting a vivid picture of ghetto hopelessness. So totally did he capture his listeners, however, that their approval punctuated the meticulous cadence of his clincher."And these are not someone else's children. They are our children.(Applause begins.) America's children. (More applause.) Blood of our blood. (A louder ripple.) Heart of our soul."
Senator Biden would like to see that every child born into a family at the poverty level receives health care up to age 12. It could turn into one more powerful incentive to remain poor--and under 12!
The Senator claims that only 19 percent of American children live in a two-parent family with a non-working mother and that programs and policies must adjust to that change. He and his colleagues never ask the citizens whether they want to reinforce the changes that have thus far taken place or stop or even reverse them--the silent citizens, not the most vocal. Perhaps there should be some attempt by our self-proclaimed leaders to encourage discussion among all the people as to goals and priorities. We should ask if men, women and children are benefiting from the changes that have occurred in the American family over the past twenty years. If the answer is negative then perhaps we should think twice before setting up programs to ease a path which leads to more people in need of psychiatric help, drug and discipline problems, truancy, illiteracy and unhappiness. Politicians love to cry that America's greatest resources are her human resources. How then could we be thinking of ways to turn the care of children over to day-care centers? Ask Leo Buscaglia, Mario Cuomo, Dick Gephardt and, yes, Joseph Biden--all who profess to come from poor non-college-educated families--if they were loved, nurtured and encouraged by having attentive parents rather than material riches. Which do you think the children of tomorrow would prefer if we were to give them a choice?
Joe Biden proved that he is a flexible speaker with his address to the American Bar Association's annual meeting which was held in San Francisco during August 1987. Imagery and theatrics were out and logic and reasoned persuasion was in. His topic was "The Constitution, the Senate and the Courts" --loosely translated as "Why The Senate Is Justified In Rejecting Robert Bork's Nomination To the Supreme Court."
He began by asking two questions: (1) Should the Senate consider the constitutional views as well as the professional fitness of a nominee to the Supreme Court? and (2) How should a Senator go about forming a judgment in order to carry out his responsibility? He told his audience, consisting mainly of lawyers and judges, that delegates to the Constitutional Convention intended to give the Senate exclusive control over Supreme Court appointments; that only in the closing days did the advise and consent compromise occur (Article II Section 2 of the Constitution). He reported that since 1789, twenty-six Supreme Court nominees have been rejected, withdrawn or never acted upon--in all but one case political or philosophical reasons played a part. Senator Biden referred to stare decisis (the practice of adhering to precedent and not to disturb settled points) claiming that as a Court of Appeals Judge, Robert Bork has been bound by stare decisis. However, the Senator pointed out, the Supreme Court is not so bound--they say what the law is! "As a Justice," Senator Biden continued, "Bork would have an opportunity to change laws." ange laws." If Robert Bork had been on the Supreme Court years ago America would be very different today, according to Joseph Biden. The issue, the Senator claimed, is not whether the Court should change direction--it is about to change--the issue is can the Senate decide on facts beyond the intellectual and moral qualifications of a nominee. The Senator went on to explain that Andrew Jackson had attempted to tilt the Court in the 1830s and succeeded. FDR tried in 1937 and failed. He compared FDR and Ronald Reagan as presidents who intended to shift the balance of the court. Both the Senate and the House repeatedly rejected Mr. Reagan's programs, he said, while FDR's social programs had the support of both Houses. Then showing precedent for what he hopes will be the Judiciary Committee's action in 1987, Senator Biden interjected a bit of drama. In May 1937,he said, the outcome was uncertain in the Senate. The Judiciary Committee was controlled by all New Dealers, but somehow they summoned the courage to condemn their hero's(FDR) court-packing plan. The Executive's attempt to dominate the Judiciary was defeated. (No one applauded but cheers seemed appropriate.) Exhibiting his mastery as a speaker, Joe Biden lightened the atmosphere at this point by injecting a little well-received humor. In FDR's case the balance of the court (voting) shifted on its own. "A switch in time saves nine," he chanted, referring of course to the retention of nine Justices rather than fifteen as FDR had proposed.
The Senator ended his address to the Bar Association:
In case after case (the Senate) has rejected qualified nominees because it perceived those views to clash with the interest of the country. In the future... we'll have to make a judgment whether the case today--50 years after Roosevelt failed--150 years after Jackson succeeded(we) are once again confronted with (a) popular president's determined attempt to bend the Supreme Court to his political ends. No one should dispute his right to try to do that... but also no one should dispute the Senate's duty to respond... Let no one deny our right and our duty as Senators, to consider questions of substance in casting our votes--for the Founders themselves intended no less.
The distinguishing feature of Joe Biden's candidacy is his ability to move people. He sees the president of the United States as a leader not only of government but of society--as a crusader or missionary whose duty it is to motivate and change people's attitudes and lives. That is where Senator Biden leaves me cold--me and possibly a good number of independent, strong-minded Americans who are sick of being told what to do and what is best for them and their neighbors.
In a speech in Philadelphia on May 15, Joe Biden said a president must be able to mobilize America behind new patterns of work and behavior. He said he' d try to persuade business leaders to emulate the example of successful companies such as Ford and Federal Express, to promote day care, to convince schoolchildren to do their homework and skip watching TV. 8
As far as I' m concerned that is not government's role and assuredly not the role of a president. Senator Biden professes to believe the people are disillusioned with government and yet he offers them more!
If political sages are correct, Joe Biden's downfall maybe his reputation for inattention to detail. White House watchers point to the reactions voters have exhibited in the past. They turned from an old popular father figure with a loose rein (Eisenhower) to a young man full of grandiose plans (JFK), from a perceived scoundrel (Nixon) to a perceived missionary (Carter). These soothsayers predict the turn may now be from an old man with little grasp of detail (RR) to a young man who is detail oriented (alas, more like Gore than Biden).
On the other hand, thother hand, the American Association of Political Consultants (who is more savvy in these matters?) in December 1986 voted Joe Biden as the front-runner for the 1988 Democratic presidential nomination.
Notes
1.Figures through the courtesy of the American Productivity Center, Houston, Texas.
2. The Coming of the New Deal, by Arthur Schlessinger, Jr.
3. San Francisco Examiner, December 31, 1986.
4. Los Angeles Times, January 19, 1987.
5. The story of Jesse Jackson's stuttering as a child I heard directly from his lips when he spoke at the International Platform Association in Washington, D.C., immediately following the Democratic National Convention which was held in San Francisco in 1984. I have not come across any mention of his stuttering in the biographies I have read and wonder why not.
6. Current Biography, January 1987.
7. Time, June22, 1987, p.29.
8. New Republic, June 1, 1987, "Ronald BidTE>, June 1, 1987, "Ronald Biden" by Fred Barnes, p. 18.
9. Time, July 27, 1987. "The Duke of Economic Uplift" by Walter Shapiro, p.23.
10. Atlantic Monthly, April 1987. "The Democrats In '88" by William Schneider, p. 49.
11. For a fascinating expose of OBEs (off-budget enterprises) see Underground Government: The Off-Budget Public Sector, by economists James T. Bennett and Thomas J. DiLorenzo. Because OBEs are permitted to issue tax-exempt bonds, they borrow at favorable rates, which crowd private borrowers out of the capital markets. Off-budget spending has increased by more than 30,000 percent in less than a decade.
12. Wall Street Journal, July 15, 1986. "Proposition 21/2 Is MA' Dirty Little 5ecret" by Warren Brookes.
[...] Excerpted from : http://www.wellingtonpublications.com/hpr/elections/tepsec2.htm