Here's a headline from the Washington Post today:
"Some say" indeed. But I suppose that some do indeed say this. The problem, as usual with stories like this, is that there's no suggestion of what more they'd like Biden to do. The closest we get is this, from Fletcher Smith, a former South Carolina state legislator and one of a group of informal and mostly Black Biden advisers who call themselves “the Bidenites”:
“You’re in the 21st century, and you mean to tell me you can’t convince two Democrats to do a carveout on the filibuster in order to pass voting rights,” Smith said, speaking of Sens. Joe Manchin III (D-W. V.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), who have both said they will not support filibuster reform, even for voting rights.
“Black folks, they’re too sophisticated in the 21st century to fall for that,” Smith added. “We don’t want platitudes and people and appealing to us because we just happen to be black. We want results.”
This is nuts. Sinema is something of a mystery to me, but Biden had zero leverage over Manchin and both men knew it. It's a miracle that a Democrat represents West Virginia, and that makes any threat against Manchin laughable. So if Manchin is dead set against killing the filibuster, then that's that.
Beyond that, there's a distinctly limited number of things a president can do that are directed concretely at the Black community. Partly this is for legal reasons. Partly it's for political reasons. And partly it's because the most salient issue right now—police violence against people of color—is almost entirely a local issue.
So what can Biden do? The American Prospect, in its "Day One Agenda," identified dozens of executive actions Biden could take, a few of which are directly targeted at helping the Black community:
- Restart the Obama-era “pattern or practice” investigations into police departments, and broaden the practice to look at prosecutors and other criminal justice actors. DONE.
- Restore the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule. DONE.
- Re-elevate the CFPB's Office of Fair Lending back into the bureau’s enforcement division. IN PROGRESS.
- Reverse Donald Trump's ban on worker training around systemic racism for federal contract workers. DONE.
- Direct the Department of Justice to collect public data on police use of force.
The Biden administration has done all of these except the last, which has been a problem ever since it was mandated in the 1994 crime bill. The problem is that it relies on voluntary reporting from local police agencies, and most of them don't feel like volunteering. It's unclear what Biden can do about that.
What else? At the risk of opening an age-old wound, the best answer is probably means-tested social welfare programs. Here is the Urban Institute's estimate of where safety net spending goes:
General safety net programs are aimed not at racial minorities, but at low-income workers. However, the reality is that they help three times more Black families than white families. That's a real difference.
I have long supported class-based rather than race-based affirmative action. This is not because class-based affirmative action is just as good. It isn't. But it's close, and it has enormous benefits. First, it's entirely legal. Second, it has much greater public support. And third, it's politically superior because it brings together lots of constituencies who can help get things passed.
None of this means the end of programs aimed at specific nonwhite groups. Native Americans will continue to have specific issues based on treaty rights. Hispanic groups will watch immigration policies carefully. The Black community will continue to be disproportionately affected by voter suppression laws.
And then there's the biggest racial issue of all: education. As regular readers know, I consider this to be the most potent form of racial discrimination in America today. It's primarily a local issue, which means Joe Biden has a limited scope to deal with it, but there's nothing else that comes close to the damage it does. Until we decide to educate Black kids as well as we educate white kids, we will never make more than halting and modest improvements in racial oppression.
Just to be clear: Biden had immense leverage over Manchin but has chosen not to use out, apparently out of a misguided sense of senatorial bonhomie. Manchin’s personal wealth is entirely a byproduct of his political power. The money he derives from utilities being forced to buy his stuff, the contracts for his family’s companies, even the jobs for his children are a form of politically coerced tribute
If Biden kicked Manchin out of the Democratic Party and turned lose the FBI, IRS, and EPA (who have all apparently been longing to get at him), he’d be finished. The Democrats might not win his seat in 2024 but Manchin would be out of politics and vulnerable to a myriad of legal problems.
Nope. He has no leverage. You need your ear drum burst for this dumb post.
Cut Manchin and Sinema loose now. There will be pain be it can't be worse than what's happening now.
What does that even mean? Cut them loose from what? The Senate? You can't. The party? You can't do that either, and in any case, what would be the point of giving McConnell a death grip on judges again? Why don't you just shoot yourself in the face with a shotgun instead? It'll be less painful for everybody.
You apparently learned absolutely nothing from 2016-2020 to make the statement "can't be worse than what's happening now."
A statement so utterly foolish as to defy logic.
I agree there’s only no leverage because no one has ever made it costly for senators to make choices like this on the D side. Even if they succeed like Murkowski, it’s still a cost.
>A statement so utterly foolish as to defy logic.
And yet loads of people like this will stay home in November and give the House and Senate back to the fascist-wannabes.
His daughter is shady. I am baffled why she is not being investigated. It's not politically motivated to investigate someone because they did something wrong!
From everything I've read, she's not being investigated because of fear of reprisals. The way that he derailed Neera Tanden's nomination because she criticized his daughter is exactly what I'm talking about. He is using his power as a senator to protect his family's activities. You can be sure that people in politics, law enforcement, and regulatory agencies got the message that Joe Manchin was sending loud and clear.
But the flip side of this is equally clear and it's exactly my point. If Biden and the party's leadership support a primary opponent and make it clear that they'd rather see a Republican in that seat than Joe Manchin, it's an implicit reminder that his daughter and he have significant areas of vulnerability if he's not in office and doesn't have politically powerful friends. And therein lies Biden's leverage.
https://www.newsweek.com/neera-tanden-criticized-joe-manchin-daughter-heather-bresch-1571531
Pretty sure hating Neera Tanden is part of what is keeping Manchin safe from #OurRevolution reprisals.
No, but making an example of her probably is. "Kill one, terrify a thousand"
There couldn't possibly be any negative consequences for throwing away Democratic control of the Senate. Who needs judges? And there is nothing unethical about a president commanding law enforcement to investigate his political enemies.
I think it’s a matter of perspective. Biden has certainly been more aggressive than Obama at getting Democrats onto lower court benches and that’s very much to be applauded. But those judges come at a very high price.
Biden has now wasted the first year of his presidency. The dominant narrative that has emerged is one of weakness and supplication to renegades, Manchin in particular. It’s like that the Biden agenda is dead, the Democrats will almost certainly lose the Congress in 2022, and the White House in 2024.
Unlike the Democrats, you may be certain that the GOP will once again leverage their congressional investigations to do maximum political damage to the remnants of the Democrats.
It is unlikely that there will ever be another Democratic president. If one manages to win an election and is somehow permitted to take office, it’s certain that he or she will not be permitted to govern or to name a justice to the Supreme Court.
Politically, Biden’s adrift. The Republicans have basically egged on Sinema and Manchin but basically they’ve been bystanders to the destruction of Biden’s presidency. What can the Democrats say in 2022 to the people they’ve disappointed and alienated? Vote harder! Your leaders are good, it’s the base of the party that’s at fault! What can Biden run on in 2024 when he can’t achieve his agenda, protect voting rights, or eliminate the filibuster?
What Biden and the leader needs to do is to make it clear that they’re going to endorse challengers in the primaries and spend what it takes and do what it takes to toss the assholes out of the party.
As for directing the executive branch to go after Manchin, that’s not what I’ll advocating. From everything that I’ve been able to learn about him, the source of his wealth and impunity is that he’s a powerful politician with even more powerful friends. That naturally makes law enforcement and agencies like the EPA more than a little hesitant. But if you remove Manchin from public office and make it clear that he’s the most friendless man in America today, it seems quite likely that the people he’s thumbed his nose at will want to have their day without the slightest prompting. Biden should just whisper that in Manchin’s ear and I think he’d be much easier to get along with.
Manchin in particular. It’s like that the Biden agenda is dead, the Democrats will almost certainly lose the Congress in 2022, and the White House in 2024.
Why do you constantly allow your (justified) skepticism to go off into lala land? While the odds are heavily stacked against them in this year's midterms (no argument there), it's far too early to state Democrats will "almost certainly" lose the presidential election in 2024.
Mind you, it's obviously a possibility; but "almost certainly?" That makes no sense. The current expansion is about 18 months old. The average expansion since WW2 has lasted something like 60 months. And the last four (going back to the 1980s) have lasted something like 90 months. Sure, anything's possible, but odds are Biden will face the electorate about 54 months into an expansion against a backdrop of 3% unemployment. And, current angst to the contrary, the covid situation is likely to have substantially subsided.
Again, there are no guarantees—and I'm well aware of the possibility of Republican elections nullification*. So we'll see. But I like Joe's odds.
*Ruling after ruling of late regarding the 1/6 inquiry's efforts suggests to me that the Republican Supreme Court isn't a big fan of the Trumps. This is heartening news, and frankly isn't much of a mystery. And that's because traditional Movement Conservatives and their big money backers don't share the MAGA movement's "policy" goals.
The problem for Biden is that unless he gets a move on, he’s going to drift into 2024 after having been impeached three times and basically done nothing for his entire presidency. He can’t really run against the Republicans because the opposition to his agenda is technically bipartisan—even if he gets re-elected renegades in his own party will only all him to increase defense spending and pass a highway bill.
Even on his supposed big issue of defeating Covid-19 Biden isn’t acting aggressively. He deferred to “experts” on boosters even though they were making political or policy decisions. He’s deferred to Republican governors. And his supposed superpower of attracting support from “moderates” turns out to have been a dud.
And the economy is a mixed blessing. There’s going to be constant pressure from Republicans and “moderates” to tank the economy to help Trump in 2024. Biden’s going to be preoccupied with his constant impeachment trials, outrageous congressional hearings, and demands to he appoint additional special prosecutors loyal to Trump.
Biden needs to steady the ship of state and demonstrate strength. If he can find a way to do that, maybe you’re right. But otherwise, the only hope is the Republicans overplay their hand and scare the crap out of everyone.
Biden isn't running in 2024. Nor are all his policy goals popular. Your such a ignorant hack.
This isn't 1964 and Joe Biden isn't Lyndon Johnson and Thank God for it.
It’s true. It’s undeniably true: This isn’t 1964 and Joe Biden isn’t LBJ. But why you think that turning back the clock and undoing all of the good done by the Civil Rights Acts and the Voting Rights Act is something you’d thank god for is a mystery to me.
He said thank God it isn’t 1964.
And, of course, he’s right. It is isn’t 1964 because congress is gutting the Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act instead of passing them.
Two assholes have more power to block voting rights and destroy civil rights than Strom Thurmond and his Dixiecrats ever had. Why in the wide-wide world of sports would anyone on the side of the angels be thankful that Joe Biden can’t get the job done on civil right?
LBJ had much larger Democratic majorities (2/3 of both Houses elected in1964!), and in those ancient times roamed creatures known as liberal and moderate Republicans. If LBJ were President today, he couldn’t get BBB passed, either, and we would still have troops in Afghanistan. Probably many more of them.
I agree about Afghanistan and I agree that times have changed. The committee system in congress has changed and the leadership has less power. But it seems to me that a part of the problem is that both Schumer and Biden are more “courtly” than LBJ. More committed to placing personal friendships above anything else. They seem to consider anything more than cajoling, pleading, and the offering of tribute to be simply unthinkable.
People didn’t cross LBJ because they knew there would be consequences. Al Capone had a saying which I think Joe Biden should take to heart. He said:
DON'T MISTAKE MY KINDNESS
FOR WEAKNESS,
I AM KIND TO EVERYONE,
BUT WHEN SOMEONE IS
UNKIND TO ME,
WEAK IS NOT
WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO
REMEMBER ABOUT ME!
These are words to live by. Bonhomie is nice if you can afford it. If Manchin didn’t think Biden’s weak, he’d have second thoughts about pissing on his presidency. Biden needs to remind Manchin that all he’s gained has been through being a powerful politician with powerful friends and that Biden can take it all away and leave him at the mercy of the lifetime of enemies he’d made in West Virginia.
The problem is your magical thinking and inability to do basic maths.
What one can do with a huge parliamentary or congressional majority in votes is radically differant than what one can achieve with a 50/50 situation.
Basic parliamentary maths.
Unless of course you wish to go full authoritarian (which is invoked in silly ignorance in your absurd first post, which of course if it were Trump actions would result in howling and wailing about the death of democracy, and not without some reason). But then that rather makes the Democratic objections to Trump rather hollow.
As Pres. Biden has acknowledged, the Democratic Party has an adequate majority to enact its entire program. What is lacking is not adequate numbers but rather adequate party discipline. The party has devolved to a point where, essentially, every Democratic senator is essentially the president. But the filibuster isn’t a constitutional requirement and the Democratic Party could abolish it tomorrow if it could successfully enforce party discipline.
As I’ve been doing for some time now, I’m raising the question of how the ostensible “majority” party has come to find itself in this fix. I believe that a part of the problem (going back decades) is that the party’s leadership does not view itself as implementing a particular political vision so much as managing a group of, ideally, center-right elected officials whose office-holding is a bizarre derivative of divine right. Thus, the overwhelming focus on personal friendships (particularly in the senate) and on offering “carrots” but never the “stick”.
For example, the party’s leadership feels itself constrained by the rulings of the Senate’s Parliamentarian even though they are not technically binding. And also by the “wrath” of the “referees”. When the Republicans faced a similar problem, they acted to simply replace the Parliamentarian with someone who ruled the way they wanted. There’s nothing stopping Chuck Schumer from doing that except for fear of being attacked by the sabbath gasbags.
The argument which I made in my comment was that the two renegade assholes were in fact subject to considerable leverage by the leadership and the Biden administration. But it appears that the party leadership and the president forewent their leverage in favor of a yearlong campaign of flattery and public kowtowing which resulted in Biden’s latest public humiliation. I have argued that Manchin, in particular, is likely vulnerable to persuasion that relies less on bonhomie and more on the reality that the man’s personal wealth and wellbeing is largely dependent on his power as an elected official. Without it, he cannot extract tribute from the state, he cannot protect himself from his many enemies in West Virginia, and he cannot protect himself from federal law enforcement and regulatory agencies (the EPA, particular) who I suspect are being kept at bay by fear of reprisals from Manchin’s politically powerful friends.
If my assumptions are correct, then it’s wrong to say, as Kevin does, that Biden has no leverage over Manchin. I believe it would have been possible (and might still be possible) to move Manchin’s political calculus by quietly pointing out that he’s very much dependent upon the Democratic establishment’s good will and that he benefits tremendously from the friendships which he is jeopardizing by being an asshole. There’s nothing authoritarian about pointing out that Manchin’s wealth and wellbeing are dependent upon his continuing as a powerful politician with power protectors.
Let's remember that "repeal Obamacare" was an animating cause for the GOP as soon as it passed, but they failed to achieve it with a larger majority than Dems have now.
Getting enough senators on the same page can be tough for either party.
That’s certainly true. And the six year terms are a problem. And, yes, it’s worth remembering that we no longer live in the world or the congressional system that made FDR and LBJ . But it’s telling that the most personally vulnerable senator spent a year strutting and preening rather than being leaned on.
I have argued that Manchin, in particular, is likely vulnerable
Your argument is BS. Biden threatens Manchin and Manchin says "Go ahead. I'll caucus with the Republicans." who will never investigate his financial dealings.
Manchin can become a Republican from now until 2024 but, of course, that would end his political career. He cannot win a Republican primary in West Virginia and he cannot be elected or re-elected to anything as a democrat without the unified support of the Democrats in West Virginia and wouldn’t have that if he caucuses with the GOP whiskey remaining notationally a Democrat.
To keep what he’s got Manchin has to remain a democrat and he has to remain a Democratic elected politician. Remember, Joe Biden has three and possibly seven more years to ruin Manchin’s life and Manchin knows it. He just doesn’t believe his pals would do it to him.
So, if Biden did a number of things that are not legal under US law (and essentially quasi-totalitarian) or nonsensical under US party structure (or non-structure, since you have no 'party cards'), you think Biden would have leverage... by taking actions either non-legal (and rather taking more than a few months) or non-existant...
What a weird combination of magical thinking and irrationality.
I’m not clear exactly what illegalities you think I’m advocating. Based upon everything that I’ve read about Manchin, he is essentially a corrupt politician who, over many years, has exploited his power for significant personal financial gain. There’s nothing illegal about telling Manchin, who apparently depends upon his holding political office and upon the power of his friends in Washington, that if he keeps being an asshole he won’t have any friends left to him.
My belief is that he has been able to do this, in large measure, because he’s seen as having powerful allies in the Democratic Party who would act to harm the careers of those political enemies who acted to stop tribute flowing to him from the West Virginia government or others in the state who feel the need to give him beneficial deals.
If the Democratic president and the rest of the party’s establishment made it clear that their friendship and protection were withdrawn, it seems likely that Manchin’s enemies in West Virginia would understand that they are now free to act against him without fear of reprisals from his powerful protectors in Washington, D.C. There’s nothing illegal or authoritarian from letting Manchin’s enemies in West Virginia know that they have a free hand and nothing to fear from any Democrat.
It also seems highly likely that there are many in law enforcement and regulatory agencies based in West Virginia who believe that, in the absence of a smoking gun it’s too risky career-wise to move against Manchin’s probable violations. Again, letting these people know that he no longer enjoys the friendship and protection of people like Joe Biden is nothing more than telling them that they are free to enforce the law and agency regulations without fear or favor.
I think if Biden and the Democrats in the Senate had made this clear early in the president’s term rather than allowing Manchin to strut and preen while they flattered him, this might have caused some improvements in this thinking. Perhaps it’s not too late to give it a try.
Nope. Biden has gotten everything he wants except for bbb.....that is coming. Your out of touch.
My belief is that he has been able to do this, in large measure, because he’s seen as having powerful allies in the Democratic Party who would act to harm the careers of those political enemies
This argument is so ridiculous that I'm concerned you have a concussion. What could his so-called allies do to his political enemies? There is no Democratic machine in WVa that could oppose him and those are the only ones who could endanger his office.
I don’t understand why Manchin can only have enemies in the Democratic Party. From everything I’ve read about the man, he likely has a wide variety of enemies of all political affiliations. The people that he’s obviously most worried about, however, are mostly within federal government bureaucracies such as the FBI and the US attorneys office and the EPA. All of which contain careerists or people with families worried about holding on to their jobs.
Black activists are greedy morons. Most are just seeking handouts and special privileges. They ignore black racism and it's toxicity. It's alienated the Brown working class.
Democrats need to dump them and work a "northern strategy" with swing states. Get the white working class vote by improving their turnout and swing voters into consistent voters. They despise the southern white working class. Despise them. Turn that for your advantage. Break a deal with the browns in the southwest triangulating Contards and Niggers: court neutrality, onshoring, anti-immigration, traditional democrats populism aka Bryan. Yeah, we learned a lot from 2020.
So good to see that nobody is feeding the racist troll.
Your the racist troll.
Class base engenders less opposition, so is the way to go.
But I'd prefer everything be available for everyone in the form of refundable tax credits--paid for by progressive tax rates. Devil, as always, in the details.
Improving education for all? As you suggested before, massive de-leading of older housing stock. Stable housing and food security still are issues. Improvement of facilities and access to broadband. Childcare so older kids can go away for college. And realistic goals for all students--meaning if they do well enough to go to college, we need to be able to enable that. Tuition free--but $10K or $20K for room and board is a non-starter for many.
Ha!
Somebody in all sincerity told me this one yesterday and insisted it was going on at a local high school, --not in Michigan, --because they'd heard it from high school kids,
Trump-loving GOP chair pushes unhinged conspiracy about schools supplying 'litter boxes’ for student ‘furries’,
https://www.rawstory.com/michigan-2656456919/
Sounds like the kind of thing that used to be called an “urban legend” only weaponized for political purposes.
It sounds like something that ought to be true because it fits right into their Imagination Land sense of reality.
There are entire tv channels whose entire profit depends on the proposition that there is always someone out there who has only just now heard of Bigfoot.
It's exactly the same thing.
If the biggest problem facing the so called black community is aggressive police then withdraw the police from black communities. But we all know that’s not the biggest or even a major problem today. Biden would save the black community by attacking the black criminal class with the same intensity he has for Muslim terrorists or Russians.
But he won’t do that. The black community will suffer from this wave of violence because it would be inconvenient to admit that this problem exists. The first step is admitting you have a problem. They are nowhere close to doing that.
This is just not true, Justin. Every poll I have seen on policing shows that a majority Black Americans don’t want less policing in their communities, they want better, respectful, just and fair policing. Every community deserves that.
Policing vs occupation
The point I was trying to make is the policing isn’t the main problem, crime is the problem. For example, two police killed in NYC yesterday. What were they supposed to do? How could they have prevented this?
After reading Kevin's posts over the years I've come to sympathize with the education first sentiment. It is a massive obstacle to try to overcome a decade or more of under education when entering the work force. Some institutions can reverse it...such as the military...but that is because they don't give folks a way out of masking deficiencies...at least early in the pipeline. However, one thing Kevin seems to avoid is that part of the problem is that kids arrive to school, daily, ill prepared and teachers have limited ability to discipline students and enforce codes of conduct. Moreover, if all the role models reside in the schools...ground is lost every time the student goes out the door. You can't pay meager wages and expect them to correct socioeconomic problems they have no control over.
One thing to do, which Kevin pushes, is pre-K for all and this means down to age 3. The fact that it would also help low income parents (since it saves on childcare) is a great side effect.
Would probably help....although if implemented, I'd want to see data.
Florida has free VPK. There’s still a huge achievement gap. The home life that so many black kids have is not conducive to high academic achievement.
Why do you equate lower academic achievements to “under education”? There’s many factors why black kids are underachieving. The educational opportunities are probably a minor part of it if it exists at all.
Speaking as a teacher of many years experience, one of the most effective reforms I can imagine would be booting problem kids out of class. You don't want to learn. Fine. Your choice. But you won't be allowed to disrupt the class or disrespect the people doing the instructing; you're outta here.
Simple. Easy. Cheap. And very, very effective.
Agreed. My wife is a teacher and my mother and aunt were both teachers. That’s the impression I get from listening to them as well. Of course, then you have to do some thing with those kids which creates problems in and of itself.
Where do they go? And how do you assure that those "problem kids" aren't a problem because they're black?
"... Until we decide to educate Black kids as well as we educate white kids, .."
This is ridiculous. Nobody has any idea of how to do that (other than not educating white kids). You might as well say until we decide to abolish death.
If black kids really receive the same educational opportunities as white kids, white parents wouldn’t have been fleeing schools after they get “too many” black kids since the 1950s. They still flee those schools today, as seen in places where black kids in large numbers have been able to choose to attend schools outside their home district, such as in Macomb County, MI.
As long as “white flight” remains a thing, it’s hard to argue that black kids get equal educational opportunities to white kids.
Sorry, but this post is bunk. Blacks think that education is white and uncool to their racism. Your out dated thinking and misunderstanding of "education" , you look at a 20th century phenomenon as a excuse. A nostril rip and detachment would serve you well. Ignorance should not tolerated
They flee them because the way many of the black kids are brought up. Their behavior at school is indicative of their home life. In many cases this differs greatly between white kids and black kids.
"As long as “white flight” remains a thing, it’s hard to argue that black kids get equal educational opportunities to white kids."
It is obviously impossible for all black children to attend schools that are say 95% white. And even it it was it wouldn't help much, black children in largely white schools don't perform that much better than black children in mostly black schools.
The reputed teen gang member and budding rap star who allegedly accidentally shot an NYPD officer is using cash from a recent record deal to try to get himself out of jail, law-enforcement sources told The Post on Friday.
Camrin Williams, 16, recently inked a deal with Interscope Records, and his advance, worth several hundred thousand dollars, was used to secure a $200,000 bond from celebrity bondsman Ira Judelson, sources said.
It’s the culture of violence.
This whole country is a culture of firearms fueled violence. Your link the other day to the story of the politician in Florida getting killed in a road rage incident wherein both drivers were armed is evidence of that.
Yes - the culture of violence infects every group. From grumpy old men to teenage rappers. If you own a gun, you are a creep and I don’t want to know you. nor do I care what happens to you.
This is snark right? Your limping in responsible gun owners with the thug that shot the cop?
Until we decide to educate Black kids as well as we educate white kids, we will never make more than halting and modest improvements in racial oppression.
Is this really just a matter of "deciding" to improve education for Black kids? I'm maximally skeptical any public policy can substantially reduce education outcome variance driven by gaps in socioeconomic status (save a massive reduction in poverty and economic inequality; and these obviously aren't "policies" but "goals").
In short, if we want to achieve substantive improvements in education outcomes for Black children, we need to achieve substantive improvements in their economic circumstances. Right?
Got it in one.
"The problem is that it relies on voluntary reporting from local police agencies, and most of them don't feel like volunteering. It's unclear what Biden can do about that."
Suspend their ability to buy cheap fucking tanks and RPGs?
Childish comment.
Let's remember that "repeal Obamacare" was an animating cause for the GOP as soon as it passed, but they failed to achieve it with a larger majority than Dems have now.
Getting enough senators on the same page can be tough for either party.
What makes Kevin think we’re not educating black kids as well as white kids? True, there is a big achievement gap but there are lots of factors that likely lead to that.
There is something to be said for class based affirmative action. If nothing else, it is legal. Education spending is wildly variable. Why not allow colleges and others to adjust for it in admissions? I'm sure someone can come up with an Educational Efficiency Rating (EER) that is the ratio of SAT scores and grades per so many dollars spent on education. Getting a 600 on an SAT with a $6K a year education indicates a higher efficiency than getting a 600 on an SAT with a $12K a year education. One would expect the former student to get more benefit for any given opportunity. Why not make an adjustment that has nothing to do with race or ethnicity?
The premise to this post is a trick question, because as Kevin pointed out Biden has done all the things Dayen's "list' and for the DO MORE/NOT ENOUGH crowd that still wouldn't satisfy them because the simple nature of being an "activist" is believing everything awful because nobody is going to notice you if they believe everything is hunky-dory. So it's a doom loop that's impossible to break and that's what Biden, just like every other Democrat has to deal with.
Hell, if I running for office and some "group" would ask me what I would do for them I would say "I promise you nothing. You're just going to have to trust me that I have the people's best interests at heart and judge by the results and call it good." At least then one can't say "You broke your promises!" if you never made any