Biden on busing in the 1970s

[StarfishSaver]

To be clear, this is NOT an attack on Biden, whom I like immensely and could very well support in the primaries.

But since there has been so much back and forth about his comments tonight and accusations that Kamala Harris mischaracterized his position on busing, we can use some context.

Biden said tonight that "I did not oppose busing in America. What I opposed is busing ordered by the Department of Education. That’s what I opposed." But is that true?

In the 1970s, he expressed opposition to busing, in general, regardless whether done voluntarily at the local level or through federal mandate.

"Biden attempted to defend his position on the grounds that racially mixed schools were not essential to quality education. Black children could get a high-quality education in an all-black school. In an interview with the black journalist William Raspberry, Biden criticized pro-busing advocates, ‘What they are saying is that your black, curly-haired son has to be in class with my white, straight-haired one before he can get a decent education. I might add that I don’t feel responsible for my father’s sins – only for my sins’. Biden sent his own children to private schools.

"Biden called busing ‘a bankrupt concept’ and argued, ‘The educational system does not have as its primary purpose the integration of society’. His amendment barred the use of federal funds ‘to assign teachers or students by race’. Edward Brooke lamented that the Biden amendment was ‘the greatest symbolic defeat for civil rights’ in years. ‘It’s just a matter of time before we wipe out the civil rights progress of the last decade’. In the end, the Biden amendment was removed in conference committee, but the Delaware Senator had established himself nationally as a leading opponent of busing.

"In 1975, US News & World Report paired Brooke and Biden against each other in parallel interviews: Biden represented the forces opposed to busing, Brooke represented those in favor. Biden vowed, ‘I would eliminate forced busing under any circumstances’, while Brooke argued that racially mixed schools were an essential element in building a healthy, racially integrated democratic society. While Biden had attended an overwhelmingly all-white private school, Brooke had been educated in segregated, all-black public schools in Washington, DC."

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2019/05/16/how-senator-joe-biden-got-it-wrong-on-busing-in-the-1970s/

Biden needs to clean this up or, at the very least, figure out a way to reconcile his past positions with where he stands now. He can do it and I hope he does. Tonight may have been a wakeup call.

I also have to wonder how well his staff prepped him on this. I find it difficult to comprehend that, knowing that his record on busing was an issue, his campaign staff didn't know or brief him on the fact that Kamala Harris had been bused as a child. This should not have been a surprise and he should have had a much better response to this.

[UniteFightBack]

1. She lied about his comments regarding working with segregationists, opening the door for this

bullshit. I just posted you the video TO YOU where she said this and she has said more during this past week.

This was all obviously orchestrated.

[StarfishSaver]

2. She didn't lie. She said he coddled their reputations, which he did

You may not understand the difference, but many people do. And they didn't like what he said.

She really pissed you off, didn't she? You're pretty worked up - maybe you should take a breath and calm down. And, once again, I suggest you find a different way to speak to me if you want to continue discussing this.

[UniteFightBack]

3. You don't like it you can feel free to not reply any old time you like darlin'. nt

[StarfishSaver]

4. How can I miss you if you won't go away?

If you're going to keep telling me you're done, maybe you should stop posting to me.

[tonedevil]

7. I keep telling you day after day. / nt

[treestar]

55. The average voter won't understand this at all

How is this going to help win the swing states?

Are those swing state voters really going to vote against anyone over this? Or for anyone? There's no way they will care about this at all. Biden will look weak always apologizing for every damn thing he says. Harris will look weak for being a victim of Biden's ancient memories.

The Orange Moron will have a fine time. Imagine how hurtful he is going to be. His base are the real racists. Imagine what they are going to say and do. Imagine what the Russians will put out there.

[Celerity]

8. she didn't lie at all

Eastland was a horrid example of someone to work with, because Biden worked with Eastland on anti-bussing

He (Biden) was certainly happy to have the racist Eastland's help and support on a repugnant (repugnant to me) stance and legislation (anti-bussing).

At least one of Biden's spokespeople (Anita Dunn on MSNBC last week) compounded it by claiming Biden always fought against Eastland on anything that was controversial in terms of civil rights and race-related issues. That is simply not true. Dunn obviously either never saw, or was wilfully ignoring this:

http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/04/11/biden.eastland.letter.4.pdf



http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/04/11/biden.eastland.letter.3.pdf



http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/04/11/biden.eastland.letter.2.pdf



http://cdn.cnn.com/cnn/2019/images/04/11/biden.eastland.letter.1.pdf






The other thing I took issue with was Biden's telling Booker, a black man and a US Senator, to apologise to him, a white man, for taking issue with Biden's own words about the despicable Eastland and Talmadge. That is a very problematic look for Biden and totally self-inflicted. IMHO it shows very poor judgement, but, in fairness to Biden, that is indeed just my opinion (as previously stated), albeit it is given by me as a fellow (to Senator Booker) PoC.

[IndyOp]

15. Damn - impressive docs C. Thanks! (nt)

[Celerity]

18. The head fact checker at CNN, Daniel Dale, also had a really interesting Twitter thread

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

here it is unwound

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1144461457624403974.html


Daniel Dale
@ddale8
7 hours ago, 6 tweets, 1 min read

Biden's claim tonight that he only opposed federally mandated busing and did not generally oppose "busing in America" was a flagrant misrepresentation of his position in the '70s and '80s. He'd made crystal clear he opposed busing as a concept, as a matter of principle.

Biden's remarks on busing in the 1970s were generally very unequivocal -- "I oppose busing. It's an asinine concept." "A bankrupt concept." "Busing does not work." He expressed pride for making anti-busing sentiment "respectable" among liberals.

As recently re-reported by WaPo, Biden said things like this about busing: “What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!"

It wasn't just words: working with avowed racists, Biden pushed legislation to make it difficult to run busing programs. There *was* a caveat: he said he would support busing in cases where it'd been proven that a community had been intentionally segregated. But otherwise no.

Biden's campaign says that his position on busing would not have stopped the particular local busing program that Kamala Harris was a part of, since it was voluntarily adopted by the local community. In general, though: she was not mischaracterizing his opposition to busing. Biden campaign’s argument is that him saying in the ‘70s that he opposed busing was understood then to mean he simply opposed federal-mandated busing, not all busing. Like when GOP said under Obama they oppose health reform, was obvious it meant Obamacare, not all health reform.

here is the WaPo article referenced

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/bidens-tough-talk-on-1970s-school-desegregation-plan-could-get-new-scrutiny-in-todays-democratic-party/2019/03/07/9115583e-3eb2-11e9-a0d3-1210e58a94cf_story.html?utm_term=.fda4f19c0134



snip

[IndyOp]

19. Damn. People can change. His 1970's statements indicate a failure

to understand privilege and oppression.

I just finished “Between the World and Me” and “The case for reparations” this past weekend. Coates says Warren met with him after the reparations article was published in 2014 and that - of the pols with whom he’s spoken - she listened and understood the most.

I was hoping Buttigieg would express some understanding of Coates’ message in “Between the World and Me” - the use, abuse, and wanton destruction of the black body over the past 400 years is the wound that is kept wide open everytime an incident of racial violence occurs. The fact that law enforcement is a main actor supporting this social system is the root problem - reducing police violence towards citizens is necessary but not sufficient. Social justice in education and healthcare and identifying and rewriting federal and state and local laws and policies that continue to hold the black (not white) person back - those would constitute a solid start on reparations. I want Pete to go all in on this issue because it is the right thing to do and because he might be able to explain all of the ways in which doing this will benefit us all - a tough, tough task.

[Celerity]

20. Pete just had a very detailed colloquy with Sharpton on Morning Joe, on the whole police thing.

Buttigieg said they are trying so hard to recruit a diverse police force but it is incredibly hard as so many diverse candidates fall off at a certain point. He said they are reaching out to other cities, and also trying to see if the drop-off inflection points are something that can be bypassed due to some (not all) of them possibly being racially biased. Finally, he said it is a self-reinforcing feedback loop, as the minority communities have not trusted the cops for decades, so very few want to join, and many who do are snatched up by far better paying work in the security/law enforcement industry.

It is a systemic nightmare at a societal-wide level (I am NOT talking about something as trivial as one person's campaign, even for POTUS), and hopefully all the cities in the US can work to end it. I do not think Pete can (this time around at least) overcome his racial support gap (as I have stated before, the anti-LGBTQ issues in our communities of colour are still a big issue, unfortunately as well), especially with Harris perhaps poised to explode, but I am sure he will find a way to make South Bend better before his term ends, and I think he still has an amazing future. Would love to see him as VP, or more likely, Sec of State or some other cabinet-level position. He is a truly unique asset to our party and our nation.

[BlueWI]

48. I was impressed with Mayor Pete

including his answer to the gotcha question on conditions in South Bend. No excuses, no evasion - accountability and humility in the face of tragedy and division. Stellar answer.

[Celerity]

22. here is a very detailed site, the South Bend Police Transparency Hub, that Pete was talking about

on Morning Joe. It has a lot of data about the hiring process for minorities, and where they drop off at, etc etc.

South Bend Police Dept. Transparency Hub

http://police-southbend.opendata.arcgis.com/

This is the Open Data Hub for the South Bend Police Department. Use this space to access and analyze raw data as well as to explore interactive visuals that provide context and help you interpret information about your Police Department and our community.

[pnwmom]

52. Right. And this was a long time ago. So all he had to do was say something like

that was a long time ago, and based on learning and experience, I see things differently now.

[Demsrule86]

36. So now we run on reparations? Do we want to lose the election? For the record, I oppose

reparations and believe we need to work on a more equal and just society right now...I see no way any reparations program could work and it would tear the country to pieces.

[Celerity]

38. strawman, plain and simple

I never brought up reparations, and would never support a simple direct cash transfer form of it anyway (which is the simplistic boogeyman phraseology that the RW instantly defaults to when discussing any remotely racially reparative.)

Something does need to be done, via a well thought out and holistic set of programmes to address the incredible racial inequities that pockmark our society from top to bottom, however. To dismiss that all under the catchall rubric of 'reparations' (with its baked-in-cake falsely-attached explosive coding) is simply to deny the reality that sooner or later it is indeed going to have to be addressed if thsi nation is ever to move forward and overcome 400 years of absolutely systemic race-based oppression

That all said,Biden's very problematic wording back in the day (from the WaPo article) could deffo be seen as obliquely attacking (and using what today is clearly seen to be open RW coded language to do so) even something as innocuous as affirmative action.

To bring the entire thing to the current day (literally), last night Biden fell back on a state's right defence in his colloquy with Harris, ffs.

He could have put this all to bed as soon as it happened early last week, but he chose to keep doubling down. He appears to me to still exhibit an unfortunate lack of political instincts at crucial inflections points, the very type of skillsets needed to win the POTUS, especially in today's hyper-paced up news and social media driven environment.

[Demsrule86]

39. I have no interest in 50 year old BS...busing...give me a break. And Harris did herself no

favors with voters...watch the next polls.

[hlthe2b]

59. Daniel Dale excludes any quote or action that counters his narrative such as

It presented a challenge for Biden, who had supported busing during his campaign a few years before. But in 1973 and 1974, Biden had begun to vote for anti-busing measures after feeling pressure from his constituents. However, in two key exceptions, he voted to table two anti-busing measures, killing their chances of moving forward in the Senate by one vote.

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/28/18965923/joe-biden-school-desegregation-busing-democratic-primary

Not good, Dale. This isn't just twitter anymore. You are representing CNN

[hlthe2b]

61. You are being disingeuous and offensive. I am not defending his record, but the complexity

of that record. I don't exonerate him. Your implications toward me are at best disingenuous and at worse something else.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=edit&forum=1287&thread=173788&pid=178419

I actually support Kamala Harris. What you are doing is not helping her.

[Celerity]

62. there is nothing disingenuous in my actions whatsoever, you replied within 30 seconds, so that

is on you. There is literally no way you could have read remotely close to even a small part that I posted rebutting what you put up.

[Celerity]

64. I will take this opportunity to say that I am not having a go personally at you. I apologise if it

came across as such.

[hlthe2b]

65. Thank you for that. I feel that most of us here just really want to know the facts. ALL of them.

[Celerity]

66. hugz

It is a tough time on all of us and we all just want to beat Rump and have a great president again, to stop the rot, and hopefully start to reverse it. I am really trying to focus on the Senate as well, as it so key to getting anything done (or to stop Rump if the fucker somehow get re-elected). I am sending emails to multiple possible candidates (the ones who have so far refused to run) begging them (literally begging, which is SO not in my nature at all, lolol) to reconsider.

Bullock in Montana (he is BY FAR our best hope there)

Hickenlooper (even though I disagree with him on fracking and even if I think we will win CO back without him)

Cindy Axne in Iowa

Abrams in GA (see Montana)

Susan Rice in Maine (see Montana)

Both Anthony Foxx (former U.S. Secretary of Transportation and former mayor of Charlotte) and Josh Stein (North Carolina Attorney General) in NC

Ashley Judd in Kentucky (I think she might have the best shot to give that fucking traitor McTurtle the boot)

Kathleen Sebelius (former Secretary of Health and Human Services, former governor, and former Kansas Insurance Commissioner) in Kansas

Dave Freudenthal (former Governor) in Wyoming

Kendra Horn in OK

Mark Begich (ex US Senator, barely lost in 2014 v the rotter Sullivan) in Alaska

Tim McGraw (yes, the singer, lolol) in Tennessee (he has declined so far, and Alexander is retiring so an open seat, I think he would have a great shot)

Beto in Texas (althogh Cornyn is going to be VERY hard to beat, he is not Ted Cruz)

[Celerity]

63. (re-post due to accidental deletion), it is laughable to say he was not anti-bussing, stop trying to

play dodgy revisionist games,

You take two early votes, that were the exception to the rule for him (especially as the 1970's wore on), and try to use them to completely shade off and negate, try to 'disappear', what he turned into, that being a huge opponent of bussing and also, via corollary, helped (even if unintentionally) to stymie desegregation itself (as evidenced in parts of my post below).

He played de jure (what the South had) vs. de facto (what the North had for the most part) semantic games (even tried it as a water-muddying explanation again in the debate 2 days ago!) as a way to ensure desegregation via the federal government was made much more difficult in the North (and thus Delaware, which mostly had de facto segregation).


Joe Biden called busing a ‘liberal train wreck.’ Now his stance on school integration is an issue.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/joe-biden-called-busing-a-liberal-train-wreck-now-his-stance-on-school-integration-is-an-issue/2019/06/28/557705dc-99b3-11e9-830a-21b9b36b64ad_story.html?utm_term=.7e64c79ab655

snip

During the debate, Biden charged that Harris was mischaracterizing his record. Yet Biden’s opposition to court-ordered busing is one of the most well-documented views of his career. In his 2007 autobiography, “Promises to Keep,” he called busing “a liberal train wreck.”

While Biden ran and won election as a liberal, Delaware voters at the time also elected anti-busing Republicans. Many white parents in the suburbs of Wilmington, the state’s largest city, were not willing to send their children into the city, where the schools were dominated by black students.

During the heat of the battle, in the mid-1970s, Biden called busing “an asinine concept, the utility of which has never been proven to me. I’ve gotten to the point where I think our only recourse to eliminate busing may be a constitutional amendment.”

snip

The following year, Biden told NPR that liberal Democrats for too long had kept quiet about the matter because it would put them in the company of Alabama Gov. George Wallace (D), a leading segregationist.

Speaking to a Delaware weekly called the People Paper, Biden put it starkly: “The new integration plans being offered are really just quota systems to assure a certain number of blacks, Chicanos, or whatever in each school. That, to me, is the most racist concept you can come up with. What it says is, ‘In order for your child with curly black hair, brown eyes, and dark skin to be able to learn anything, he needs to sit next to my blond-haired, blue-eyed son.’ That’s racist!”

Biden, meanwhile, led a faction of Democrats to sponsor legislation that would restrict the ability of federal courts to institute busing orders, according to a 1978 account in the Wilmington Evening Journal. During this period, he worked to sponsor anti-busing legislation with Southern senators with segregationist backgrounds.

That upset Democrats who supported busing, and some of them took Biden aside and asked how and when “the racists had gotten to me,” as Biden told it in his autobiography. An aide to the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. told Biden he was being “duped.”

snip




Biden's track record on busing: In 1977, he called it a 'bankrupt policy'
(video)

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/videos/what-joe-biden-said-about-school-busing-amendment-in-1977/vi-AADz8Hl


CNN Biden letters reveal he resisted this desegregation tactic

Senate Rejects Amendment to Restrict Judge's Authority on School Busing

(Biden was for it)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1978/08/24/senate-rejects-amendment-to-restrict-judges-authority-on-school-busing/6ba7d8ed-d746-46c5-8aa9-51e134ec89bc/?utm_term=.552468cca54f




here admits to making anti-bussing acceptable (if not respectable, then reasonable) for long-standing liberals to oppose bussing, even though at the time civil rights protections were under attack

https://books.google.se/books?id=ZFQE3bLDsS4C&printsec=frontcover&dq=Between+North+and+South:+Delaware,+Desegregation,+and+the+Myth+of+American&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjI3vygyYzjAhXyxcQBHYohDEIQ6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=Between%20North%20and%20South%3A%20Delaware%2C%20Desegregation%2C%20and%20the%20Myth%20of%20American&f=false




He supported a wide-reaching Jesse Helms anti-integration (not just bussing) amendment



How a Young Joe Biden Turned Liberals Against Integration

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/08/joe-biden-integration-school-busing-120968?o=1

snip

Sen. Jesse Helms, a Republican from North Carolina, was the first to strike. On September 17, 1975, when a larger education bill came up for debate, Helms offered a crippling anti-integration amendment. It would prevent the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) from collecting any data about the race of students or teachers. In addition, HEW could not “require any school … to classify teachers or students by race.” Thus, HEW could not withhold funding from school districts that refused to integrate. “This is an antibusing amendment,” Helms explained. “This is an amendment to stop the current regiments of faceless, federal bureaucrats from destroying our schools.”

Biden rose to support Helms’s amendment. “I am sure it comes as a surprise to some of my colleagues … that a senator with a voting record such as mine stands up and supports [the Helms amendment].” Helms replied that he was happy to welcome Biden “to the ranks of the enlightened.” After the laughter died down, Biden launched an anti-busing screed. “I have become convinced that busing is a bankrupt concept.” The Senate should declare busing a failure, and focus instead on “whether or not we are really going to provide a better educational opportunity for blacks and minority groups in this country.” He praised Ed Brooke’s initiatives on housing, job opportunities and voting rights. In one breath, Biden seemed to reject busing in the North and the South, and claimed that he was committed to equal opportunity for African Americans.

A few other senators spoke briefly about the amendment, then Brooke sprung to action. The Helms amendment would eviscerate Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Brooke said, which enabled HEW to cut off funding to school districts that refused to integrate. Brooke asserted that the federal government should attempt other integration remedies before resorting to busing. “But if compliance with the law cannot be achieved without busing, then busing must be one of the available desegregation remedies.” Brooke introduced a motion to table Helms’s amendment. Brooke’s motion passed, 48-43. Biden wouldn’t budge, and voted with Jesse Helms and the anti-bussers.

Brooke had fought this fight before, but he would face a more formidable adversary in Joe Biden. When a southern conservative like Helms led the anti-busing forces, Ed Brooke could still rally his troops. But it would be tougher to combat the anti-busing faction when its messenger was a young liberal from a border state.

Immediately after the Helms amendment was tabled, Biden proposed his own amendment to the $36 billion education bill, stipulating that none of those federal funds could be used by school systems “to assign teachers or students to schools … for reasons of race.” His amendment would prevent “some faceless bureaucrat” from “deciding that any child, black or white, should fit in some predetermined ratio.” He explained, “All the amendment says is that some bureaucrat sitting down there in HEW cannot tell a school district whether it is properly segregated or desegregated, or whether it should or should not have funds.” Finally, Biden called busing “an asinine policy.”

Brooke pointed out that the amendment would do much more than Biden claimed. Like the Helms gambit, it would still gut Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. But this time, a number of liberal senators that had opposed Helms’s amendment now supported Biden: Warren Magnuson and Scoop Jackson of Washington, where Seattle faced impending integration orders; and Thomas Eagleton and Stuart Symington of Missouri, where Kansas City confronted a similar fate. Mike Mansfield, the majority leader from Montana, also jumped on board. Watching his liberal colleagues defect, Republican Jacob Javits of New York mused, “They’re scared to death on busing.” The Senate approved Biden’s amendment. Biden had managed to turn a 48-43 loss for the anti-busing forces into a 50-43 victory.

In a seminal moment, the Senate thus turned against desegregation. The Senate had supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, 1965 Voting Rights Act and 1968 Fair Housing Act. In the early 1970s, as President Richard Nixon and the House of Representatives encouraged the anti-busing movement, the Senate remained the last bastion for those who supported strong integration policies. Biden stormed that bastion, and it seemed to be falling. On September 23, another border-state Democrat moved against busing. Robert Byrd, the West Virginian who had since repudiated his Klan past, offered a perfecting amendment. It would prohibit busing beyond a student’s nearest school. It passed the Senate by a vote of 51-45.

snip


Finally, whilst not about anti-bussing, but simply to show further evidence of a long-standing pattern, here is another example from a long history of very problematic utterances from Biden when it comes to racial issues. It is from the Baltimore Sun, back when Biden was running for the 2008 nomination

Joe Biden releases his inner bubba

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-2006-12-08-0612080143-story.html

snip

Mr. Biden is but the most recent in a long line of pretenders to grits, but he may be the first to invoke slavery for political points. His first reference came during an interview last summer with Chris Wallace on Fox News Sunday. Mr. Wallace asked Mr. Biden how a "Northeastern liberal" could compete in conservative Southern states against someone like former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner (at the time a possible contender).

Mr. Biden replied: "My state was a slave state. My state is a border state. My state has the eighth-largest black population in the country."

Well, yee-haw!

'Course, ever'body knows, Southerners start their days with a bucket o' grits, a gay-bashin' blessin' and a few bars of "Ol' times they ain't fergottin."

Well, maybe five or six do. And they're all apparently employed by some central casting group that rounds up "typical Southerners" whenever TV crews venture outside the Beltway for man-on-the-street interviews out yonder.

Mr. Biden's second testimonial as a born-again Southerner came last week while he was visiting South Carolina.

Speaking before Columbia's mostly Republican Rotary Club, Mr. Biden reminded his audience of his slave-state heritage and hinted that Delaware's alliance with the North was merely an accident of geography. Delaware was a "slave state that fought beside the North," he said. "That's only because we couldn't figure out how to get to the South. There were a couple of states in the way."

Watching politicians play redneck is always embarrassing. Whether it's dropping in on NASCAR, saying "y'all" or confessing one's love for Randy Travis (but not the Dixie Chicks), that dog don't hunt. During the last presidential race, for instance, John Kerry went goose-hunting in Ohio to demonstrate his good ol' boy-ness - but blew the hoped-for effect by wearing brand-new camos. Not done. With Mr. Biden's wince-inducing mention of slavery as a way to establish his Southern bona fides, I think we can safely say that politics has jumped the shark, tipped the point and perfected the storm. Bubba is now a cliche of a cliche of a cliche.


snip

the video of that part of the interview

[BlueWI]

47. Great post as usual. ; )

Of all senators to bring up to burnish your bipartisanship bona fides - James Eastland??? In a Democratic primary? In 2019??

Shooting yourself in the foot happens, but if it happens once, don't reload!!

[democratisphere]

13. Agree.

[Galraedia]

46. She mischaracterized him being able to work with two DEMOCRATIC elected senators

that had past views in favor of segregation, as him being in support of segregation. Biden didn't elect them and said that he disagreed with them on almost everything. Kamala then starts talking about herself being a victim in Berkley, California, when Biden was a senator all the way in Delware, because unlike other African Americans she was lucky enough to be bused out of her local district's school into a better school as part of a system that tried to solve racial division by selecting a few minorities to put into schools with a large percentage of white students. This did nothing to fix the local schools many minorities still had to attend.

[BeyondGeography]

5. It should also be a wake up call about investing heavily in a candidate

whose record stretches back 45-plus years. Along those lines, Cedric Richmond doing a contortionist act while being grilled by Nia-Malika Henderson on CNN about the wisdom (or lack thereof) of the CBC hierarchy backing a candidate who gave a classic state’s rights answer on busing in tonight’s debate was must-see TV.

[StarfishSaver]

6. I missed that

[BeyondGeography]

9. Looks like they have it here

https://www.mediaite.com/election-2020/cnn-panel-rips-biden-for-defending-states-rights-using-i-have-a-black-best-friend-argument-by-name-dropping-obama/

I don’t think this was a great night for the party.

Harris scored points for herself and showed everyone who didn’t know it yet that she is a formidable candidate. But it was at the expense of a fellow Democrat and when we’re talking about busing in a nominating contest for 2020, we’re not winning.

I blame Biden for opening that door with his Eastland comments, but his record was there anyway and Harris could have said the same things she said tonight just by referring to it. Biden could have made it much harder for Harris to take him down if he had apologized as Booker asked two weeks ago, but apologizing is obviously very hard for him to do (ask Anita Hill). Even tonight, if he had shown any capacity for self-reflection or empathy for Harris’ POV at all he could have mitigated the damage. But no.

[pnwmom]

12. We ALL make mistakes. But I am wary of any Presidential candidate

who seems unable to acknowledge mistakes and to apologize when appropriate.

[Demit]

14. And that inability to acknowledge mistakes is a mistake he makes over and over.

It's becoming more & more recognizable as a pattern. His empathy and charm desert him when he is criticized.

[EffieBlack]

21. I'm less troubled by the inability to admit a mistake- a problem- than by tendency to play victim

when his civil rights record is questioned.

And the circling of the wagons and attacks on Harris for bringing it up, while hardly an unusual response to this kind of thing, is just as unfortunate.

[femmedem]

24. I'm most troubled that last night he defended local control as the correct remedy for segregation.

That's basically the old states' rights argument brought down to the municipal level.

I suspect even Harris was surprised that, rather than apologize or say that his thinking had evolved, he doubled down. But she skillfully pointed out the flaw in his current thinking.

Btw, I think Harris came across as strong without being angry, relatable without being weak. Not an easy tightrope to walk for a woman of color disagreeing with her party's front runner.

And I applaud her for bringing it up. I get that we can't eat our own. But we do need to see how our candidates handle tough questions now because we know our eventual nominee will face them in the general.

[EffieBlack]

25. That was really bad

I don't think he really believes that but was off his game and grasped at whatever he could think of - and since that was the argument he and his cohorts used back then, it kicked in like muscle memory.

That was like saying "I'm not opposed to abortion, I just think it should be decided on a state by state basis and the federal government shouldn't get involved."

I don't think he believes in states rights now, but he was scrambling because he was completely unprepared. - which in itself is a problem since he should have expected this to come up and had a response.

[Demit]

27. Well, that just shows that his first instinct is to cover for himself.

[Demsrule86]

32. Busing was deeply unpopular...so a compromise was to allow states to meet desegregation

goals in other ways...Busing was in large part why we had a white flight...it was a bad idea then and still a bad idea.

[femmedem]

37. I would say busing was a response to--more than a cause of--white flight.

White residents left the cities when federally subsidized mortgages in the suburbs were only available to whites while redlining caused property values to stagnate or fall in urban neighborhoods with minority residents.

Money left the cities. Urban school districts didn't have the resources to adequately fund schools. A problem caused by racist housing and economic policies was not likely to be fixed without federal intervention.

An additional factor was that white supremacists conflated the cause with the results, and blamed black Americans for blighted neighborhoods and underperforming schools.

[Demsrule86]

40. You would be wrong...it created the white flight...and all those segregated private schools as well.

My Dad left Chicago and moved to the burbs so my older brothers and sisters would not be bused...the old neighborhood became a ghost town. Busing failed horribly.

[EffieBlack]

43. Busing didn't create white flight.

[StarfishSaver]

56. You have it backwards

The courts had been ordering school districts to desegregate for years
post-Brown. Many complied and desegregated their schools but although they accomplished this without violence or turmoil. Nevertheless, many white parents reacted by moving to the suburbs in order to avoid having their children attend integrated schools.

But while many districts desegregated voluntarily, many dragged their feet and dug in their heels, When they continued to refuse to develop their own desegregation plans that would have been fairly easy to implement without disruption, several feferal judges, such as Garrity in Boston, Rice in Dayton, and Battisti in Cleveland began ordering the recalcitrant districts to develop plans to desegregate their schools in an efficient and effective manner with minimum disruption. When they still refused to agree to any compromise that would integrate the schools or delayed by coming up with plans they knew wouldn't work, the courts began ordering the districts to reassign children on a cross-district basis and, where necessary, to provide bus transportation, just like they always did when a school was more than a certain distance from a student's home. That's when the sh#t hit the fan and the anti-desegregation movement shape-shifted into an "anti-busing" movement.

White flight and finding alternative ways to meet desegregation goals weren't the results of busing. White flight was caused by parents leaving cities to keep their kids from attending integrated schools and began long before busing for integration was a thing.

And busing didn't lead to compromise. It was the response to white school districts' and parents' abject refusal to compromise. Court-ordered busing came about on a larger scale only after black parents, civil rights lawyers and the courts had tried everything else to get school districts to compromise and effectuate desegregation on a voluntary basis.

[Demsrule86]

35. Come on...your anti-Biden posts are numerous...and for many different reasons.

[Demsrule86]

33. I love Joe and believe he is the only one who can rebuild the blue wall...I will support no other

candidate in the primary but will work to GOTV and help in anyway I can in the general...of course I will vote for the nominee...but it is my opinion, we will lose the general with any other candidate besides Biden. I don't see Harris or Warren able to win the rustbelt...and policy positions last night made it less likely. However, I think Biden is likely to be the nominee anyway. We must rebuild the blue wall (MI PA and WI) or we have no I said no yes path to the presidency.

[mr_liberal]

10. Biden's position on both issues will help in the GE. He has to get thru the primaries though. nt

[pnwmom]

11. Nicolle Wallace said that Biden had attended some event before where Harris

talked about being one of the kids bused for desegregation. So she said his staffers should have prepared him for this.

Thanks for digging up this background info, StarfishSaver.

[treestar]

16. This is all too long ago

To be arguing about today. How is it relevant to what to do today and to getting the Dotard out of office?

I recall being in favor of busing as an idealistic high school student. I was in Biden's state, but don't even recall him or his position from that time.

[Demit]

26. What's the cutoff date for what in Biden's record is relevant to talk about, in your view?

[treestar]

42. 2000

Two decades

The 70s and busing are not relevant to today.

Also younger people still kids them can’t prove they’d have done differently, nor can they judge how to handle things in an era they didn’t have to deal with.

[EffieBlack]

44. Maybe they're not relevant to you

But you're in no position to tell anyone else what they should think is relevant to them or the timeframe in which they should be operating.

[treestar]

45. I did not do that. I answered

The question asked. I could try to persuade others, as could any DUer

[marybourg]

29. Because he pointed out his

history of working with extreme segregationists as an example of his ability to forge alliances.

[treestar]

53. They were Senators then

What was to be done? It was also the 1970s, not today.

[marybourg]

58. They were known as extreme segregationist

Senators then.

[BlueWI]

49. Who brought up James Eastland?

A discredited, virulently racist senator who you served with four decades ago shouldn't be your point of reference to show your skills at compromise. Even his campaign staff thinks it's a bad example.

The impact of racial segregation continues. Addressing it thoughtfully is a necessity for future national progress, including interacting with POC who do not mollify the white majority preference for silence on traumatizing conditions. Biden needs to step up, learn to apologize if he needs to, and that will help his campaign.

[treestar]

54. That's really out there

We are supposed to ignore the existence of Eastland or that he was a Senator.

[BlueWI]

67. If you're building your resume for elective office in 2020

your references to James Eastland aren't going to help, unless you're a Republican candidate in Mississippi.

I didn't mean to imply that we completely forget about James Eastland, as his name is a good example of virulent racism in American politics that many, not all, have rejected. If you don't have better examples to show the value of bipartisanship, consult your speechwriter or get a new one.

[IluvPitties]

17. I am black and...

I really don't care about what Biden thought or did way before I was born.

He has a lifetime of service, including being the best VP on my lifetime.

[NYMinute]

23. I like Joe and but he should have been better prepared

I don't think Biden was damaged by the interaction but Kamala will get a boost at Bernie's expense.

[stonecutter357]

28. let's go Joe !

[mcar]

30. I love Joe

He has had a great career as a politician and statesman. He also, unfortunately, has had a career as a politician. He needs to do a better job explaining his votes and some comments.

Harris was right to challenge him. He should have been prepared for it.

[Demsrule86]

31. No he doesn't need to clean up some deeply unpopular issue from the 70's .

He was right and she was wrong...and the entire thing was contrived ...a photo ready to go out-really...any Democrat planning to run on 70's busing should get out of the race now...honestly. Talk about being out of step.

[Goodheart]

34. Last night I thought Biden was trapped, was unprepared for an apology, so instead

resorted to a mealy-mouthed answer.

This morning after reading stuff like you posted it's even worse than that. He simply lied.

I still love Joe Biden but he should have just admitted his mistake. He should have just said that at the time there were even black people, too, opposed to busing.

He took a big body blow, I'm afraid. Harris's prosecutorial mettle was in fine form.

[Historic NY]

41. What has busing wrought...I get what Biden says...

where I live they dumped the neighborhood schools and developed this magnet concept. Why because whites, except for the poor left the city so they figured this would work. Right now there are 4 closed Catholic Schools, and 4 elementary schools. The district now spends 15 million to bus kids all over the area, some with 45+ minute rides to one of the other schools, and now others up to 18 miles away. I get what he said busing in itself was the means to fix the problem. Now the families have to compete for a magnet school slot.
There was an uprising about them deciding to close another racially mixed neighborhood school and the people won out. The district still has its dumping ground (middle) schools, they try to pretend the don't but you hear it from parents. Meanwhile the kids are being taken for a ride and the taxpayers keep being asked to cough up more. The solution seems to keep building more with a dwindling enrollment, another $200 million. Enrollment is down 12% since 2006.... one elementary school is down 16%, another 15%, anther 14% ..the HS is down 9%, middle school down 7% & 5%. Its already projected another 10% by 2026. They seem to be trying the boutique approach to lure people to come enroll their kids here with mega million facilities and a ton of sports facilities. What they seem to forget is the rising housing & cost of living there is in this area. Its driving seniors away and the mortgage crisis still hasn't gotten rid of many bank owned properties.

So was busing just a panacea, perhaps.

[StarfishSaver]

50. Busing didn't cause this

Resistance to integration did

[jberryhill]

51. Yep

[hlthe2b]

57. I don't dispute facts, but that is an opinion piece under the guise of London School of Economics &

the sponsor of the blog: USAPP (American Politics and Policy)-- WHO ARE NOT GIVING IT OFFICIAL SANCTION

Such that they felt necessary to include this qualifier:

(US Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of USAPP – American Politics and Policy, nor the London School of Economics. )

So, when I go through it (and I have not had an opportunity to "fact check" everything but assuming basic facts to be true...) I see a lot of "conclusions" offered as to Biden's views and intent that (pardon my legal interjection, ARE NOT IN EVIDENCE). In fact, this piece appears to cherry pick the most damning partial quotes (sans context) while ignoring part of the record that contradicts their main thesis*.

I am not specifically defending Biden or his positions, but rather against the very biased piece offered as the historical record and that provides misleading or missing context for the period. It ignores his changing positions and reasons/context for it. I personally experienced busing myself in the deep South growing up (I've posted on this) and I was not opposed to it or the experience. Nor were my parents. However, I did witness first hand the conflicts and opposition, including that from parents of African American students being bused more than an hour each way. It was complicated. Those who claim otherwise are being disingenuous.

EXAMPLES from the piece:
One of the leading opponents of these desegregation efforts was Delaware Senator Joe Biden. --> so the implication is he opposed segregation and not busing as the approach? conclusion NOT IN EVIDENCE

Joe Biden had vowed to ‘eliminate forced busing in all circumstances’, seeing it as a step too far to achieve a racially integrated society. --> conclusion NOT IN EVIDENCE


*I note this part of history is dismissed:
It presented a challenge for Biden, who had supported busing during his campaign a few years before. But in 1973 and 1974, Biden had begun to vote for anti-busing measures after feeling pressure from his constituents. However, in two key exceptions, he voted to table two anti-busing measures, killing their chances of moving forward in the Senate by one vote. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/6/28/18965923/joe-biden-school-desegregation-busing-democratic-primary

How about some context for some of the other points?

His constituents were outraged at those latter votes and, facing the looming prospect of a formal busing mandate in Delaware, pushed Biden to take a stronger stance on busing. Biden did so, going on to vote for eliminating policies that would provide federal oversight of busing.

In 1975, shortly after Boston residents protested and rioted over the city’s desegregation order, Biden came out in favor of an amendment introduced by North Carolina Sen. Jesse Helms, an ardent segregationist and white supremacist. Helms’s amendment would bar the then-active Department of Health, Education, and Welfare from collecting data about the race of students or teachers, and also prevented the department from requiring schools “to classify teachers or students by race.” Helms proudly announced that the measure would effectively end any federal oversight or enforcement of busing.

“I have become convinced that busing is a bankrupt concept,” Biden said as he stood to support Helms’s amendment. He added that the Senate should instead focus on “whether or not we are really going to provide a better educational opportunity for blacks and minority groups in this country.”

Again, I am not defending Biden's changing positions on forced busing as a means to achieve desegregation. But is is disingenuous to claim that his positions were always anti-busing and especially pro-segregation. Disingenuous and dishonest. I too am disturbed to read the historical record, but reading further and actually exploring what was going on at the time, it seems clear to me that not all who decided one way or the other were exceptional in their "progressive" views and that everyone who decided differently should be concluded to be pro-segregation, anti-civil rights and equality. That is what pieces like this imply.

I don't know that I will support Biden int he primaries. I have long had Karmala Harris on my short list . She's fighting for the nomination and has the right to do so aggressively. But don't tell me that the mortal wound she sought to deliver was not at least partially designed around putting question in African American minds as to whether or not he is a racist. I'm reminded of this quote: "Nothing someone says before the word 'but' really counts. " While that that came before the "BUT" exclaimed her denial that she was calling or trying to paint him a racist, everything that came afterwards clearly DID. Linguists remark on that as a tactic to tie the themes together and it IS EFFECTIVE.

I hope that there will be more in-depth analysis of the time period and I agree with those who maintain his failure to be prepared for this line of attack is on him. He started the process of addressing it, but has not done so in a sufficiently clear and comprehensive way. He must do so. But, I encourage DUers to look critically at what they see written about the issue. Is it an "opinion piece?" If so, how much of the conclusions are from the author themselves? Does the FULL record support those conclusions? Has the context been actually included?

THat's my 2cents. It was a sad episode in history and nothing that has occurred since has either corrected the harm or gone far enought to correct racial disparities and inequities. On that, we can surely agree