It is, perhaps, an accomplishment of the Joe Biden administration that I am able to squabble about policy differences rather than worrying about him, say, trying to overthrow a democratic election. And squabbling is what I aim to do. In fairness, bipartisan negotiations are occurring, and compromise on big initiatives is still possible. The ideological trajectory of the Biden presidency is not fixed. But we are just one week into his presidency, and Biden has reminded me why I have never voted for a Democrat for president in a general election.
Let’s start with Biden’s decision to revoke the permit granted to the Keystone-XL pipeline. Honestly, I feel like we’ve been talking about this project for my whole career as a commentator. In case you’ve forgotten, Obama supported it before he was against it.
He even went to Oklahoma in 2012 (when gas prices were high) and declared, “Now, right now, a company called TransCanada has applied to build a new pipeline to speed more oil from Cushing to state-of-the-art refineries down on the Gulf Coast. And today, I’m directing my administration to cut through the red tape, break through the bureaucratic hurdles, and make this project a priority, to go ahead and get it done.” Then, in 2014, Obama’s state department concluded the pipeline wouldn’t substantially increase carbon pollution.
ADVERTISEMENT
This should have been obvious, considering a) the oil would be extracted from Alberta irrespective of a pipeline, and b) shipping or hauling oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico would release more carbon than would using a pipeline. It should be clear that opposition to the pipeline is about politics, not environmental policy.
Aside from the benefits of not relying on Middle East oil, Biden’s move may strain relations with our Canadian ally and also cost us thousands of construction jobs. So why did Obama (then) and Biden (now) turn against something that was a net positive? Because the pipeline has become symbolic, and anyone who wants to claim the “pro-environment” label must oppose it, despite the fact that the opposition is counterproductive.
I feel similarly about Biden’s decision to re-enter the Paris Agreement. This always struck me as a bad deal for America because there are no consistent standards for participation. Countries unilaterally decided what voluntary and non-binding (its status as “non-binding” is presumably the reason the agreement doesn’t need to be ratified as a treaty by the U.S. Senate) commitment they wanted to pledge, and the U.S. set much more rigorous goals than other nations.
We can argue about how much it will really help reduce the temperature or how many millions of jobs it will cost America (and how many will eventually be offset by new “clean tech” jobs), but I think there are better ways to address climate change. And regardless of the details, it seems pretty clear that we are talking about seriously impacting lots of American workers in the short term.
Speaking of costing jobs, I’m also concerned with Biden’s plans to double the minimum wage to $15 per hour. Like killing the Keystone-XL, raising the minimum wage is a long-standing progressive goal. It also sounds like a great (and compassionate) idea.
But is making labor more expensive a smart way to respond to an economic crisis where small businesses are already struggling to stay afloat? A 2019 Congressional Budget Office report estimated this tactic would cost about 1.3 million people their jobs (while also lifting the people who kept their jobs out of poverty); but imagine how much worse that impact would be during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Biden’s climate and economic policies aren’t my only concern. He also pleased Russia this week by extending the START treaty: an ironic move that may increase his popularity with today’s pro-Putin Republicans. Biden is also stoking the existing culture wars. He is expected to soon overturn the “Mexico City policy,” which would then allow funding of foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that perform abortions. In fairness, every Democratic president does that, I admit.
But every Democratic president doesn’t do this: He also halted deportations and curtailed arrests of undocumented immigrants, and his much-heralded immigration plan reportedly “omits the traditional trade-off of dramatically enhanced border security that’s helped attract some GOP support in the past…” I would love to see a pathway to citizenship that also secures the border, but (for now, at least) his plan forgoes the latter.
While most of my concerns have to do with policy differences, I’m also concerned that the Biden administration a) lied about not receiving a vaccine plan from the Trump administration and b) violated their own executive order about wearing masks on federal property (Biden was “celebrating”). Republicans who supported Trump are in no position to call him out for this hypocrisy. Luckily, I never supported Trump.
Aside from reminding me why I couldn’t vote for Biden in 2020, these examples should also concern people hoping Biden would govern as a centrist who calms the culture wars, as well as people hoping he could avoid a mid-term electoral collapse. Biden’s environmental policies and his support for doubling the minimum wage could potentially cost tens of thousands of jobs—many of which would disproportionately affect working-class Americans.
Ultimately, Biden will own this economy, which is to say that he will pay the price if these progressive policies have the negative effect I suspect they will. On top of that, his moves on things like abortion and immigration will only fuel the fire lit by Trump and the right-wing media.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m definitely more relaxed this week with Trump gone. On the other hand, I can hardly view Biden’s actions as those of a man who is focused on healing and unifying. He’s not Trump. But rather than moving forward, it feels like we are moving backward... to the Obama era. And one big problem with that is that it gave us the Trump era. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss?
