vox--2020-08-12--Joe Biden’s criminal justice reform plan, explained

Former Vice President Joe Biden spent decades in the Senate implementing many of the “ tough on crime ” policies increasingly criticized by the left , libertarians , and racial justice activists , especially in the wake of Black Lives Matter protests .
But now Biden is running to dismantle much of that legacy with a sweeping , progressive criminal justice reform plan .
Biden ’ s plan was released before he became the Democratic nominee and before the Minneapolis police killing of George Floyd triggered a national reckoning over race and policing .
But the plan , which Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his core criminal justice platform , nonetheless addresses many of the concerns raised by protesters not just about police but the criminal justice system more broadly — in a serious effort by Biden to align his views with a shift in crime politics , particularly among Democrats , over the past three decades .
Most relevant to the Black Lives Matter protests , police reforms — boosting funds for federal efforts to incentivize police reforms at the local and state level while taking steps to hold local and state police more accountable for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It also includes many other ambitious goals : decriminalize marijuana , eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent crimes , end the death penalty , abolish private prisons , get rid of cash bail , and discourage the incarceration of children .
It even seeks to end policies that Biden previously backed — most notably , a sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine offenses that contributed to racial disparities in federal incarceration .
It ’ s largely aimed at reducing incarceration and fixing “ the racial , gender , and income-based disparities in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s campaign .
Biden would also create a new $ 20 billion grant program that encourages states to reduce incarceration and crime .
And he ’ d direct the savings from less incarceration at the federal level along with additional federal money to boost spending on education ( including universal pre-K ) , mental health care , addiction treatment , and other social services .
Altogether , it ’ s an incredibly progressive plan — going much further than President Donald Trump , who has no criminal justice reform plan .
Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as Democratic candidates competed to prove their progressive credentials on criminal justice issues .
But the plan has only gained relevance since then , as Black Lives Matter protests have taken off across the US this year and after Biden named Sen. Kamala Harris ( D-CA ) — another lawmaker with a mixed record on criminal justice issues — as his running mate .
For Biden , though , the topic is of particular interest because his long record in the Senate goes against many of the preferences of today ’ s Democratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a member and head of the Senate Judiciary Committee , he wrote and was the key leader in passing policies that helped develop today ’ s punitive criminal justice system — escalating mass incarceration , the war on drugs , and more aggressive policing .
That ’ s made Biden a consistent target for criminal justice reformers for years , going back to his time in President Barack Obama ’ s administration .
“ There ’ s a tendency now to talk about Joe Biden as the sort of affable if inappropriate uncle @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Naomi Murakawa , author of The First Civil Right : How Liberals Built Prison America , told the Marshall Project in 2015 .
“ But he ’ s actually done really deeply disturbing , dangerous reforms that have made the criminal justice system more lethal and just bigger.
” Biden ’ s criminal justice plan , then , isn ’ t just a chance to line up with the preferences of most Democratic voters .
It ’ s also an opportunity to make up for the mistakes of his past .
There are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s plan will be in reversing the war on drugs and mass incarceration , given that much of criminal justice policy is driven not at the federal level but at state and local levels .
Biden ’ s plan , at least , is a genuinely decent start at reforming a system that ’ s made the US the world ’ s leader in incarceration and led to high-profile examples of police abuses and killings over the past several years .
Biden ’ s plan is quite comprehensive , and you can read @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s website .
But to get a sense of what Biden is trying to do , here are several notable pieces : • A $ 20 billion grant program to encourage states to reduce incarceration and crime : Modeled after the Brennan Center for Justice ’ s proposal , this would encourage states to reduce their use of prison by pushing them to , for example , eliminate mandatory minimums for nonviolent crimes .
As it stands , nearly 88 percent of prison inmates are held at the state level , so this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s plan at having a really broad impact on overall levels of incarceration .
( Although similar efforts have failed before , and there ’ s the question of what to do with people in for violent crimes who make up the majority of state inmates . )
• Use the president ’ s clemency powers to reduce incarceration : The president has broad powers to pardon or reduce people ’ s prison sentences .
Biden vows to use these powers , much like President Barack Obama did , to reduce “ unduly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offenses .
• Eliminate the death penalty : Biden would push for legislation that ends the death penalty at the federal level and encourages states to do the same .
• Reel back punitive drug laws : There are several ways that Biden seeks to accomplish this .
He would move to end federal mandatory minimum sentences .
He ’ d push to decriminalize marijuana use at the federal level and allow states to legalize marijuana without the threat of federal interference .
He ’ d end the sentencing disparity between crack and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disparities in prison sentences .
He ’ d direct people who use drugs to drug courts and treatment instead of incarceration .
• Reform the police : Biden commits $ 300 million to the Community Oriented Policing Services ( COPS ) program , which has historically had mixed success in reforming police departments but , he argues , was never properly funded .
He ’ d also try to empower the US Department of Justice to hold police departments accountable for abuses — something Trump ’ s administration has worked against .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , there ’ s a question about just how effective federal interventions would be in these areas , given that most policing is done at state and local levels . )
• Create checks on prosecutorial power : Prosecutors are some of the most powerful actors in America ’ s criminal justice system , operating with few if any checks on their decisions .
Biden would aim to chip away at that , pushing to let the Justice Department investigate prosecutorial misconduct and establishing a task force , outside the Justice Department , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discrimination and other problems in our justice system that result from arrest and charging decisions ” by prosecutors .
He ’ d also move to expand resources for public defenders , who are the ones often facing prosecutors in court .
• Tackle various root causes of crime : Biden promises to boost spending on education , housing , mental health care , addiction treatment , after-school programs , and other social services .
Some programs will be offered within prison and to the formerly incarcerated , too , to help with rehabilitation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ experts and activists characterize as the root causes of crime , which , if successfully addressed , should lead to less crime — and incarceration — in the long term .
The plan goes beyond these examples .
But together , these provisions exemplify the kind of comprehensive approach that Biden is going for : one that tackles every major aspect of the criminal justice system in some form .
One big question for Biden ’ s plan is whether Congress would go along with any of this .
There are some parts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do on his own as president — most notably , clemency .
But he ’ d need Congress ’ s approval for the majority of his proposals , from the $ 20 billion grant program to ending mandatory minimums to tackling the root causes of crime .
Given that Congress took years to pass a fairly mild form of criminal justice reform with the First Step Act , it ’ s unclear if federal lawmakers are truly ready for more ambitious proposals .
Still , the plan indicates that Biden , at least @ @ @ @ @ @ @ criminal justice reform .
Biden has a long record of supporting “ tough on crime ” policies Since he announced his run for president , Biden has been dogged by questions about his criminal justice record .
Throughout decades in the Senate , Biden spent much of his time pushing for policies that led to more incarceration and a harsher war on drugs .
Here are just a few examples : • Comprehensive Control Act : This 1984 law , spearheaded by Biden and Sen. Strom Thurmond ( R-SC ) , expanded federal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which allows police to seize and absorb someone ’ s property — whether cash , cars , guns , or something else — without proving the person is guilty of a crime .
• Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 : This law , sponsored and partly written by Biden , ratcheted up penalties for drug crimes .
It also created a big sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine ; even though the drugs are pharmacologically similar , the law made it so someone would need to possess 100 times the amount @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the same mandatory minimum sentence for crack .
Since crack is more commonly used by Black Americans , the sentencing disparity contributed to racial disparities in incarceration .
• Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 : This law , co-sponsored by Biden , strengthened prison sentences for drug possession , enhanced penalties for transporting drugs , and established the Office of National Drug Control Policy , which coordinates and leads federal anti-drug efforts .
• Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act : The 1994 law , partly written by Biden , imposed tougher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contributing to the growth of the US prison population from the 1990s through the 2000s — a trend that ’ s only begun to reverse in the past few years .
It also included other measures , such as the Violence Against Women Act that helped crack down on domestic violence and rape , a 10-year ban on assault weapons , funding for firearm background checks , and grant programs for local and state police .
( For more , read Vox ’ s explainer on the law . )
Biden was explicit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ goals with these measures .
In 1989 , at the height of punitive anti-drug and mass incarceration politics , Biden even went on national television to criticize a plan from President George H.W .
Bush to escalate the war on drugs .
The plan , Biden said , didn ’ t go far enough .
“ Quite frankly , the president ’ s plan is not tough enough , bold enough , or imaginative enough to meet the crisis at hand , ” he said .
He called not just for harsher punishments @ @ @ @ @ @ @ every drug user accountable.
” Bush ’ s plan , Biden added , “ doesn ’ t include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs , not enough prosecutors to convict them , not enough judges to sentence them , and not enough prison cells to put them away for a long time ” — a direct call for more incarceration .
Later on , when the 1994 crime law passed , Biden boasted that “ the liberal wing of the Democratic Party ” was for “ 60 new death penalties , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ 100,000 cops , ” and “ 125,000 new state prison cells.
” All of this reflected a broader movement in the Democratic Party to both address the growing issue of crime and overcome successful Republican attacks about how Democrats are “ soft on crime.
” This helps explain not just why Biden said and did all these things but also why Bill Clinton signed the 1994 crime law and ran on its “ tough on crime ” provisions — including his support for the “ death penalty for drug kingpins ” — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden has offered a mea culpa of sorts for some of his past , acknowledging that creating extra punitive penalties for crack was “ a big mistake , ” and supporting efforts to reel back those penalties .
“ I haven ’ t always been right , ” Biden said in 2019 , speaking specifically to criminal justice issues .
“ I know we haven ’ t always gotten things right , but I ’ ve always tried.
” At the same time , Biden has walked a line in response to Black @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calls to reform the police , which Biden backs , and abolishing the police , which he doesn ’ t support .
It ’ s a balancing act for Biden , as he moves to the left but aims to avoid alienating the majority of voters .
“ While I do not believe federal dollars should go to police departments violating people ’ s rights or turning to violence as the first resort , I do not support defunding police , ” Biden wrote in June .
“ The better answer is to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to implement meaningful reforms , and to condition other federal dollars on completing those reforms.
” A remaining worry in the criminal justice reform space is what would happen if , say , the crime rate started to rise once again .
If that were to happen , there could be pressure on lawmakers — and it ’ d at least be easier for them — to go back to “ tough on crime ” views , framing more aggressive policing and higher incarceration rates in a favorable way .
Given that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are racist and , based on the research , ineffective for fighting crime in the first place , any potential for backsliding in this area once it becomes politically convenient is very alarming .
The concern , then , is what would happen if crime started to rise under President Biden : Would he fall back on old “ tough on crime ” instincts , calling for harsh prison sentences once again ?
“ [ E ] ven if Biden has subsequently learned the error of his ways , ” Branko Marcetic wrote @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and callousness involved in his two-decade-long championing of carceral policies should be more than enough to give anyone pause about his qualities as a leader , let alone a progressive one.
” Biden ’ s plan can only go so far For all the concern about Biden ’ s record , it ’ s unclear how effective any president can be on criminal justice issues .
Consider the statistics : In the US , federal prisons house about 12 percent of the overall prison population .
That is , to be sure , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ system .
But it ’ s relatively small in the grand scheme of things , as this chart from the Prison Policy Initiative shows : One way to think about this is what would happen if President Biden used his pardon powers to their maximum potential — meaning he pardoned every single person in federal prison right now .
That would push down America ’ s overall incarcerated population from about 2.1 million to about 1.9 million .
That would be a hefty reduction .
But it also wouldn ’ t undo mass @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lead all but one country in incarceration : With an incarceration rate of around 600 per 100,000 people , only the small country of El Salvador would come ahead .
Similarly , almost all police work is done at the local and state level .
There are about 18,000 law enforcement agencies in America — only a dozen or so of which are federal agencies .
Biden ’ s plan acknowledges this by including provisions that ask the states to reform their criminal justice systems and reduce incarceration .
At the same time @ @ @ @ @ @ @ encourage states to adopt criminal justice policies with federal funding incentives , including the 1994 crime law , had little impact ; by and large , cities and states embrace federal incentives on criminal justice issues only if they actually want to adopt the policies being encouraged .
Criminal justice reform , then , is going to fall almost wholly to cities , counties , and states .
Notably , too , those local and state reforms will require at least some focus on reducing punishments for violent crimes , because the majority @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offenders .
But Biden ’ s plan , like most criminal justice reform proposals , focuses largely on nonviolent and drug offenses .
All of that raises questions about how effective Biden ’ s plan would be for truly reversing incarceration .
At the very least , though , the plan would begin to rework the federal system — which is still the largest in the country .
And it tries to signal to criminal justice reformers that , after years to the contrary , Biden has moved to their side .
Will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

Former Vice President Joe Biden spent decades in the Senate implementing many of the “tough on crime” policies increasingly criticized by the left, libertarians, and racial justice activists, especially in the wake of Black Lives Matter protests. But now Biden is running to dismantle much of that legacy with a sweeping, progressive criminal justice reform plan.
Biden’s plan was released before he became the Democratic nominee and before the Minneapolis police killing of George Floyd triggered a national reckoning over race and policing. But the plan, which Biden’s team told me is still his core criminal justice platform, nonetheless addresses many of the concerns raised by protesters not just about police but the criminal justice system more broadly — in a serious effort by Biden to align his views with a shift in crime politics, particularly among Democrats, over the past three decades.
Most relevant to the Black Lives Matter protests, police reforms — boosting funds for federal efforts to incentivize police reforms at the local and state level while taking steps to hold local and state police more accountable for abuses—are in Biden’s plan.
It also includes many other ambitious goals: decriminalize marijuana, eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for nonviolent crimes, end the death penalty, abolish private prisons, get rid of cash bail, and discourage the incarceration of children. It even seeks to end policies that Biden previously backed — most notably, a sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine offenses that contributed to racial disparities in federal incarceration. It’s largely aimed at reducing incarceration and fixing “the racial, gender, and income-based disparities in the system,” according to Biden’s campaign.
Biden would also create a new $20 billion grant program that encourages states to reduce incarceration and crime. And he’d direct the savings from less incarceration at the federal level along with additional federal money to boost spending on education (including universal pre-K), mental health care, addiction treatment, and other social services.
Altogether, it’s an incredibly progressive plan — going much further than President Donald Trump, who has no criminal justice reform plan.
Biden introduced the plan during the primary, as Democratic candidates competed to prove their progressive credentials on criminal justice issues. But the plan has only gained relevance since then, as Black Lives Matter protests have taken off across the US this year and after Biden named Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) — another lawmaker with a mixed record on criminal justice issues — as his running mate.
For Biden, though, the topic is of particular interest because his long record in the Senate goes against many of the preferences of today’s Democratic voters on criminal justice issues. As a member and head of the Senate Judiciary Committee, he wrote and was the key leader in passing policies that helped develop today’s punitive criminal justice system — escalating mass incarceration, the war on drugs, and more aggressive policing.
That’s made Biden a consistent target for criminal justice reformers for years, going back to his time in President Barack Obama’s administration.
“There’s a tendency now to talk about Joe Biden as the sort of affable if inappropriate uncle, as loudmouth and silly,” Naomi Murakawa, author of The First Civil Right: How Liberals Built Prison America, told the Marshall Project in 2015. “But he’s actually done really deeply disturbing, dangerous reforms that have made the criminal justice system more lethal and just bigger.”
Biden’s criminal justice plan, then, isn’t just a chance to line up with the preferences of most Democratic voters. It’s also an opportunity to make up for the mistakes of his past.
There are major questions about how effective Biden’s plan will be in reversing the war on drugs and mass incarceration, given that much of criminal justice policy is driven not at the federal level but at state and local levels. Biden’s plan, at least, is a genuinely decent start at reforming a system that’s made the US the world’s leader in incarceration and led to high-profile examples of police abuses and killings over the past several years.
What Biden’s criminal justice reform plan does
Biden’s plan is quite comprehensive, and you can read it in full at his campaign’s website. But to get a sense of what Biden is trying to do, here are several notable pieces:
The plan goes beyond these examples. But together, these provisions exemplify the kind of comprehensive approach that Biden is going for: one that tackles every major aspect of the criminal justice system in some form.
One big question for Biden’s plan is whether Congress would go along with any of this. There are some parts of Biden’s plan he could do on his own as president — most notably, clemency. But he’d need Congress’s approval for the majority of his proposals, from the $20 billion grant program to ending mandatory minimums to tackling the root causes of crime. Given that Congress took years to pass a fairly mild form of criminal justice reform with the First Step Act, it’s unclear if federal lawmakers are truly ready for more ambitious proposals.
Still, the plan indicates that Biden, at least, is ready to go bigger on criminal justice reform.
Biden has a long record of supporting “tough on crime” policies
Since he announced his run for president, Biden has been dogged by questions about his criminal justice record. Throughout decades in the Senate, Biden spent much of his time pushing for policies that led to more incarceration and a harsher war on drugs. Here are just a few examples:
Comprehensive Control Act: This 1984 law, spearheaded by Biden and Sen. Strom Thurmond (R-SC), expanded federal drug trafficking penalties and civil asset forfeiture, which allows police to seize and absorb someone’s property — whether cash, cars, guns, or something else — without proving the person is guilty of a crime.
Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986: This law, sponsored and partly written by Biden, ratcheted up penalties for drug crimes. It also created a big sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine; even though the drugs are pharmacologically similar, the law made it so someone would need to possess 100 times the amount of powder cocaine to be eligible for the same mandatory minimum sentence for crack. Since crack is more commonly used by Black Americans, the sentencing disparity contributed to racial disparities in incarceration.
Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988: This law, co-sponsored by Biden, strengthened prison sentences for drug possession, enhanced penalties for transporting drugs, and established the Office of National Drug Control Policy, which coordinates and leads federal anti-drug efforts.
This law, co-sponsored by Biden, strengthened prison sentences for drug possession, enhanced penalties for transporting drugs, and established the Office of National Drug Control Policy, which coordinates and leads federal anti-drug efforts. Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act: The 1994 law, partly written by Biden, imposed tougher sentences and increased funding for prisons, contributing to the growth of the US prison population from the 1990s through the 2000s — a trend that’s only begun to reverse in the past few years. It also included other measures, such as the Violence Against Women Act that helped crack down on domestic violence and rape, a 10-year ban on assault weapons, funding for firearm background checks, and grant programs for local and state police. (For more, read Vox’s explainer on the law.)
Biden was explicit about his “tough on crime” goals with these measures. In 1989, at the height of punitive anti-drug and mass incarceration politics, Biden even went on national television to criticize a plan from President George H.W. Bush to escalate the war on drugs. The plan, Biden said, didn’t go far enough.
“Quite frankly, the president’s plan is not tough enough, bold enough, or imaginative enough to meet the crisis at hand,” he said. He called not just for harsher punishments for drug dealers but to “hold every drug user accountable.” Bush’s plan, Biden added, “doesn’t include enough police officers to catch the violent thugs, not enough prosecutors to convict them, not enough judges to sentence them, and not enough prison cells to put them away for a long time” — a direct call for more incarceration.
Later on, when the 1994 crime law passed, Biden boasted that “the liberal wing of the Democratic Party” was for “60 new death penalties,” “70 enhanced penalties,” “100,000 cops,” and “125,000 new state prison cells.”
All of this reflected a broader movement in the Democratic Party to both address the growing issue of crime and overcome successful Republican attacks about how Democrats are “soft on crime.” This helps explain not just why Biden said and did all these things but also why Bill Clinton signed the 1994 crime law and ran on its “tough on crime” provisions — including his support for the “death penalty for drug kingpins” — during his reelection bid in 1996.
Biden has offered a mea culpa of sorts for some of his past, acknowledging that creating extra punitive penalties for crack was “a big mistake,” and supporting efforts to reel back those penalties. “I haven’t always been right,” Biden said in 2019, speaking specifically to criminal justice issues. “I know we haven’t always gotten things right, but I’ve always tried.”
At the same time, Biden has walked a line in response to Black Lives Matter protests, trying to balance calls to reform the police, which Biden backs, and abolishing the police, which he doesn’t support. It’s a balancing act for Biden, as he moves to the left but aims to avoid alienating the majority of voters.
“While I do not believe federal dollars should go to police departments violating people’s rights or turning to violence as the first resort, I do not support defunding police,” Biden wrote in June. “The better answer is to give police departments the resources they need to implement meaningful reforms, and to condition other federal dollars on completing those reforms.”
A remaining worry in the criminal justice reform space is what would happen if, say, the crime rate started to rise once again. If that were to happen, there could be pressure on lawmakers — and it’d at least be easier for them — to go back to “tough on crime” views, framing more aggressive policing and higher incarceration rates in a favorable way.
Given that the central progressive claim is that these policies are racist and, based on the research, ineffective for fighting crime in the first place, any potential for backsliding in this area once it becomes politically convenient is very alarming.
The concern, then, is what would happen if crime started to rise under President Biden: Would he fall back on old “tough on crime” instincts, calling for harsh prison sentences once again?
“[E]ven if Biden has subsequently learned the error of his ways,” Branko Marcetic wrote for Jacobin, “the rank cynicism and callousness involved in his two-decade-long championing of carceral policies should be more than enough to give anyone pause about his qualities as a leader, let alone a progressive one.”
Biden’s plan can only go so far
For all the concern about Biden’s record, it’s unclear how effective any president can be on criminal justice issues.
Consider the statistics: In the US, federal prisons house about 12 percent of the overall prison population. That is, to be sure, a significant number in such a big system. But it’s relatively small in the grand scheme of things, as this chart from the Prison Policy Initiative shows:
One way to think about this is what would happen if President Biden used his pardon powers to their maximum potential — meaning he pardoned every single person in federal prison right now. That would push down America’s overall incarcerated population from about 2.1 million to about 1.9 million.
That would be a hefty reduction. But it also wouldn’t undo mass incarceration, as the US would still lead all but one country in incarceration: With an incarceration rate of around 600 per 100,000 people, only the small country of El Salvador would come ahead.
Similarly, almost all police work is done at the local and state level. There are about 18,000 law enforcement agencies in America — only a dozen or so of which are federal agencies.
Biden’s plan acknowledges this by including provisions that ask the states to reform their criminal justice systems and reduce incarceration. At the same time, studies show that previous efforts to encourage states to adopt criminal justice policies with federal funding incentives, including the 1994 crime law, had little impact; by and large, cities and states embrace federal incentives on criminal justice issues only if they actually want to adopt the policies being encouraged.
Criminal justice reform, then, is going to fall almost wholly to cities, counties, and states.
Notably, too, those local and state reforms will require at least some focus on reducing punishments for violent crimes, because the majority of people in state prisons are violent offenders. But Biden’s plan, like most criminal justice reform proposals, focuses largely on nonviolent and drug offenses.
All of that raises questions about how effective Biden’s plan would be for truly reversing incarceration.
At the very least, though, the plan would begin to rework the federal system — which is still the largest in the country. And it tries to signal to criminal justice reformers that, after years to the contrary, Biden has moved to their side.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-12--Why people are volunteering to get Covid-19

With thousands of people dying of Covid-19 every day , the sooner a vaccine can be deemed safe and effective , the better .
But vaccine development is a lengthy process that isn ’ t easy to rush .
In part , that ’ s because of the final step in testing any vaccine : the phase III trial .
Phase III trials require tens of thousands of volunteers , each of whom get either a placebo or an experimental vaccine .
Then vaccine developers have to wait until a statistically significant number of them , going about their lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ This step alone can often take years .
When it comes to Phase III trials for a Covid-19 vaccine specifically , there are extra concerns relating to the reality of fluctuating infection rates throughout the world , making it difficult to set up a successful trial where participants are likely to get naturally infected .
The Oxford University vaccine researchers have already had to change the location of their Phase III trial from the UK — where , in June , rates of infection had fallen — to Brazil and South Africa , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A team in China did something similar , changing the location of their Phase III trial from mainland China to the United Arab Emirates .
In light of those concerns , some epidemiologists and scientists are calling for something called a human challenge trial .
Instead of chasing the moving target of infection rates and waiting for participants to get sick naturally , a human challenge trial involves a small group of young , healthy participants becoming deliberately infected in a lab setting .
The challenge study alone could take as little as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to happen after a trial to determine the correct dosing of a virus , and before a larger scale safety study .
But all of that could still be faster than a typical Phase III trial .
This isn ’ t a new concept .
Human challenge trials have been used to develop vaccines or treatments for lots of diseases , like cholera , typhoid , malaria , influenza , and common cold viruses .
But what sets Covid-19 apart from those diseases is that it currently has no effective treatment .
Because @ @ @ @ @ @ @ also aren ’ t fully aware of its long-term health effects .
Unlike other human challenge trials , a Covid-19 challenge trial would entail a risk of serious illness — and even death .
It ’ s because of those risks that a Covid-19 challenge trial would be limited to the young and healthy , who would be at the lowest risk of harm .
But there are questions beyond the ethics .
Would artificially infecting someone in a lab setting provide useful information on how to prevent natural infection ?
“ I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the challenge model ... is that it ’ s an unnatural inoculation , ” said Dr. Ronald Turner of the University of Virginia , who has been doing challenge studies for common cold viruses since the 1980s .
Turner says that determining an accurate viral dose and route of infection to replicate a natural infection could pose scientific problems .
“ That raises issues about the ability to extrapolate your result into the natural setting .
And so I think those technical issues , together with the ethical issues associated with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ issues.
” Other questions regarding human challenge studies involve whether data derived from a group of only young and healthy people would be valuable in developing a vaccine that works for everyone .
But advocates for human challenge studies say that a vaccine that protects that group would still help slow the spread of the virus .
“ If we could protect young , healthy people with a good vaccine , especially one that blocked transmission and infection , that would hugely help our ability to get back to normal because they would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ be able to work and be able to go to school and other things , ” said epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch , who co-authored an article in March advocating for preparing for possible human challenge studies .
Another question is whether we will actually need to resort to this ethically questionable form of clinical trial , given that a handful of vaccines are already in Phase III trials .
It ’ s possible those Phase III trials will be quick and successful , especially given high rates of infection at clinical trial locations , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and Brazil .
Even though no Covid-19 human challenge trials are currently planned , more than 30,000 people from nearly 150 countries have already said they would volunteer for one if the opportunity presented itself , through the grassroots movement 1DaySooner .
The question is , should we let them ?
You can find this video and all of Vox ’ s videos on YouTube .
And if you ’ re interested in supporting our video journalism , you can become a member of the Vox Video Lab on YouTube .
Will @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

With thousands of people dying of Covid-19 every day, the sooner a vaccine can be deemed safe and effective, the better. But vaccine development is a lengthy process that isn’t easy to rush. In part, that’s because of the final step in testing any vaccine: the phase III trial.
Phase III trials require tens of thousands of volunteers, each of whom get either a placebo or an experimental vaccine. Then vaccine developers have to wait until a statistically significant number of them, going about their lives normally, eventually get naturally infected. This step alone can often take years.
When it comes to Phase III trials for a Covid-19 vaccine specifically, there are extra concerns relating to the reality of fluctuating infection rates throughout the world, making it difficult to set up a successful trial where participants are likely to get naturally infected.
The Oxford University vaccine researchers have already had to change the location of their Phase III trial from the UK — where, in June, rates of infection had fallen — to Brazil and South Africa, where rates had started to surge. A team in China did something similar, changing the location of their Phase III trial from mainland China to the United Arab Emirates.
In light of those concerns, some epidemiologists and scientists are calling for something called a human challenge trial. Instead of chasing the moving target of infection rates and waiting for participants to get sick naturally, a human challenge trial involves a small group of young, healthy participants becoming deliberately infected in a lab setting. The challenge study alone could take as little as a month, but it would need to happen after a trial to determine the correct dosing of a virus, and before a larger scale safety study. But all of that could still be faster than a typical Phase III trial.
This isn’t a new concept. Human challenge trials have been used to develop vaccines or treatments for lots of diseases, like cholera, typhoid, malaria, influenza, and common cold viruses. But what sets Covid-19 apart from those diseases is that it currently has no effective treatment. Because it’s so new, we also aren’t fully aware of its long-term health effects. Unlike other human challenge trials, a Covid-19 challenge trial would entail a risk of serious illness — and even death.
It’s because of those risks that a Covid-19 challenge trial would be limited to the young and healthy, who would be at the lowest risk of harm. But there are questions beyond the ethics. Would artificially infecting someone in a lab setting provide useful information on how to prevent natural infection?
“I should say that one of the problems with the challenge model ... is that it’s an unnatural inoculation,” said Dr. Ronald Turner of the University of Virginia, who has been doing challenge studies for common cold viruses since the 1980s. Turner says that determining an accurate viral dose and route of infection to replicate a natural infection could pose scientific problems. “That raises issues about the ability to extrapolate your result into the natural setting. And so I think those technical issues, together with the ethical issues associated with a potentially lethal challenge, pose some real issues.”
Other questions regarding human challenge studies involve whether data derived from a group of only young and healthy people would be valuable in developing a vaccine that works for everyone. But advocates for human challenge studies say that a vaccine that protects that group would still help slow the spread of the virus.
“If we could protect young, healthy people with a good vaccine, especially one that blocked transmission and infection, that would hugely help our ability to get back to normal because they would be out of the transmission loop and be able to work and be able to go to school and other things,” said epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch, who co-authored an article in March advocating for preparing for possible human challenge studies.
Another question is whether we will actually need to resort to this ethically questionable form of clinical trial, given that a handful of vaccines are already in Phase III trials. It’s possible those Phase III trials will be quick and successful, especially given high rates of infection at clinical trial locations, like in the US, South Africa, and Brazil.
Even though no Covid-19 human challenge trials are currently planned, more than 30,000 people from nearly 150 countries have already said they would volunteer for one if the opportunity presented itself, through the grassroots movement 1DaySooner.
The question is, should we let them?
You can find this video and all of Vox’s videos on YouTube. And if you’re interested in supporting our video journalism, you can become a member of the Vox Video Lab on YouTube.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.


vox--2020-08-12--The 2020 election calendar

The 2020 election calendar

The 2020 presidential election is ramping into high gear .
This week , presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden ( finally ) announced his chosen running mate : California Sen. Kamala Harris .
Next week , the Democrats will hold their virtual convention ; the week after that will bring the Republican one ( the Democratic convention was rescheduled from July ) .
Biden and President Donald Trump will accept their parties ’ official nominations for president , and the fall campaign season will be upon us .
Technically , the party conventions are set to take place in potential swing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ running high across the US , they will be almost entirely virtual , with Biden delivering a speech from his Wilmington , Delaware , home , and Trump considering either the White House or Gettysburg , Pennsylvania , as a venue .
The presidential debates will also begin in late September and run through October , though Trump continues to push for changes to the debate schedule .
Election Day itself , of course , will fall on Tuesday , November 3 , now less than 90 days away .
Read on for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the 2020 election cycle and bookmark this page to refer back to .
You can also add it to your Google Calendar by clicking the plus sign on the bottom right of this page , or subscribe through a calendar app of your choice .
This page and the calendar subscriptions will be updated as dates and information change .
Read our preview of the Democratic convention here .
• First presidential debate in Cleveland , Ohio , at the Case Western Reserve/Cleveland Clinic joint campus • Vice presidential debate in Salt Lake @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of Utah • Third presidential debate in Nashville , Tennessee , at Belmont University Read all of our coverage from the June debates here .
Read all of our coverage from the July debates here .
Read all of our coverage of the September debate here .
• Second town hall on climate change on MSNBC Read all of our coverage from the October debate here .
Read all of our coverage from the November debate here .
Read all of our coverage from the December debate here .
Read all of our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Read all of our coverage from the New Hampshire primaries here .
Read all of our coverage from the South Carolina primary here .
Read all of our coverage from Super Tuesday here .
Read all of our coverage from the March 10 primaries here .
Read all of our coverage from the March 17 primaries here .
• Wisconsin primaries ( D , R ; April 7 is the election date and mail-in vote postmark deadline following court rulings , as of 8 pm ET on April 6 ) • Alaska primary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will be available no later than 11:59 pm on April 11 ) • Hawaii primary ( D ; vote-by-mail only ; results will be available “ late May , ” according to interim Hawaii Democratic Party Chair Kate Stanley ) Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in .
The reason @ @ @ @ @ @ @ told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

Share All sharing options for: The 2020 election calendar
Vox answers your biggest questions about the 2020 US presidential election .
This story is part of a group of stories called
The 2020 presidential election is ramping into high gear.
Joe Biden announced his running mate, California Sen. Kamala Harris, and Democrats and Republicans held their first virtual conventions this summer. Biden and President Donald Trump accepted their parties’ official nominations for president, and the fall campaign season is upon us.
The presidential debates began September 29 and run through October, including the vice presidential debate on October 7. The second presidential debate, scheduled for October 15, was canceled after Trump tested positive for Covid-19, then refused to agree to debate virtually. One more debate is scheduled for October 22.
Election Day itself, of course, will fall on Tuesday, November 3.
Read on for the important events of the 2020 election cycle and bookmark this page to refer back to. You can also add it to your Google Calendar by clicking the plus sign on the bottom right of this page, or subscribe through a calendar app of your choice. This page and the calendar subscriptions will be updated as dates and information change.
And check out our guides on how to vote early and by mail.
September 2020
September 29
Presidential debate in Cleveland, Ohio, at the Case Western Reserve/Cleveland Clinic joint campus
October 2020
October 7
Vice presidential debate in Salt Lake City at the University of Utah
October 22
Presidential debate in Nashville, Tennessee, at Belmont University
November 2020
November 3
Election Day
Past 2020 election coverage
June 2019
June 26-27
Read all of our coverage from the June debates here.
July 2019
July 30-31
Read all of our coverage from the July debates here.
September 2019
September 4
September 12
Read all of our coverage of the September debate here.
September 19-20
October 2019
October 15
Read all of our coverage from the October debate here.
November 2019
November 20
Read all of our coverage from the November debate here.
December 2019
December 19
Read all of our coverage from the December debate here.
January 2020
January 14
February 2020
February 3
Iowa caucuses
Read all of our coverage from the Iowa caucuses here.
February 7
February 11
New Hampshire primaries
Read all of our coverage from the New Hampshire primaries here.
February 19
February 22
Nevada caucuses
February 25
February 29
South Carolina primary
Read all of our coverage from the South Carolina primary here.
March 2020
March 3 (Super Tuesday)
Alabama primaries (D, R)
American Samoa caucuses (D)
Arkansas primaries (D, R)
California primaries (D, R)
Colorado primaries (D, R)
Maine primaries (D, R)
Massachusetts primaries (D, R)
Minnesota primaries (D, R)
North Carolina primaries (D, R)
Oklahoma primaries (D, R)
Tennessee primaries (D, R)
Texas primaries (D, R)
Utah primaries (D, R)
Vermont primaries (D, R)
Virginia primary (D)
Democrats Abroad primary (through March 10)
Read all of our coverage from Super Tuesday here.
March 10
Idaho primaries (D, R)
Michigan primaries (D, R)
Mississippi primaries (D, R)
Missouri primaries (D, R)
North Dakota caucuses (D)
Washington primaries (D, R)
Read all of our coverage from the March 10 primaries here.
March 12
Virgin Islands caucuses
March 14
Guam caucuses (R)
Northern Marianas convention (D)
March 15
March 17
Arizona primary (D)
Florida primaries (D, R)
Illinois primaries (D, R)
Northern Marianas convention (R)
Read all of our coverage from the March 17 primaries here.
March 24
American Samoa caucuses (R)
April 2020
April 7
Wisconsin primaries (D, R; April 7 is the election date and mail-in vote postmark deadline following court rulings, as of 8 pm ET on April 6)
April 10
Alaska primary (D; vote-by-mail only; results will be available no later than 11:59 pm on April 11)
April 17
Wyoming caucuses (D; vote-by-mail only)
April 28
Ohio primaries (D, R; vote-by-mail only)
May 2020
May 2
Kansas primary (D)
Guam caucuses (D)
May 7-9
Wyoming state convention (R)
May 12
Nebraska primaries (D, R)
May 19
Oregon primaries (D, R)
June 2020
June 2
Delaware primaries (D, R)
District of Columbia primaries (D, R)
Indiana primaries (D, R)
Maryland primaries (D, R)
Montana primaries (D, R)
New Mexico primaries (D, R)
Pennsylvania primaries (D, R)
Rhode Island primaries (D, R)
South Dakota primaries (D, R)
June 6
Virgin Islands caucuses (D)
June 7
Puerto Rico primary (R)
June 9
Georgia primaries (D, R)
West Virginia primaries (D, R)
June 23
Kentucky primaries (D, R)
New York primaries (D, R)
July 2020
July 7
New Jersey primaries (D, R)
July 11
Louisiana primaries (D, R)
August 2020
August 11
Connecticut primaries (D, R)
August 17-20
Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Read our coverage of the Democratic convention here.
August 24-27
Republican National Convention in Charlotte, North Carolina
Read our coverage of the Republican convention here.


vox--2020-08-12--Most candidates run to the center in the general election. Biden is moving left.

In 2016 , Hillary Clinton tapped Tim Kaine to be her vice president .
In 2008 , Barack Obama chose Joe Biden .
In 2004 , John Kerry named John Edwards .
In 2000 , Al Gore ran with Joe Lieberman .
What did all these picks have in common ?
They were all to the right of the candidate atop the ticket — each of them was meant , at least in part , to mollify voters uncomfortable with either the ideology or the identity of the Democratic nominee .
Biden ’ s decision to run alongside Sen. Kamala @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by any measure , to Biden ’ s left .
The New York Times describes her as “ a pragmatic moderate.
” But according to the DW-NOMINATE system , which measures the ideology of members of Congress by tracking what they vote for and whom they vote with , Harris has been one of the most liberal members of the Senate since arriving in 2017 , sitting reliably alongside Sens .
Elizabeth Warren , Bernie Sanders , and Cory Booker atop the rankings .
In Biden ’ s final term in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ liberal member — and the Democratic Party was significantly more conservative then .
It is conventional wisdom that Democrats run to the left during primaries and the center during general elections .
Biden is bucking that cliché .
He ran to the center in the primary , but he ’ s been steadily shifting his policies and personnel left ever since .
Harris is , it should be said , a liberal , not a leftist .
Her record as a prosecutor angered many on the left ( I highly recommend reading German @ @ @ @ @ @ @ record ) , she ’ s close to big donors in Silicon Valley , and her decision to back away from Sanders ’ s Medicare-for-all bill during the primary deepened the mistrust .
But Harris ’ s record as a prosecutor is far more liberal than Biden ’ s record on criminal justice issues , and her ultimate health care plan , which obliterated employer-based insurance entirely , was the most ambitious proposal put forth besides Medicare-for-all — and was , again , well to Biden ’ s left , as were most @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crucially , filibuster reform , where she ’ s said she ’ d end the rule to pass climate change legislation ) .
Alongside Sens .
Sanders and Jeff Merkley ( D-OR ) , Harris introduced a coronavirus relief bill that would issue monthly checks of up to $ 2,000 to Americans making less than $ 120,000 for the duration of the crisis .
She also introduced legislation banning evictions and foreclosures for a year .
Both proposals are to the left of Biden ’ s current offerings , and as the Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ declined to say whether he would back them .
Harris is also the first woman of color ever on a major presidential ticket .
She would be the first woman , full stop , to serve as vice president .
Within the complex narrative that governs campaign politics , Harris came to be seen as the “ safe ” choice for Biden .
But that says more about how American politics has changed than it does about who she is and what she believes .
At the turn of the century , a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the most liberal voting records in the Senate wouldn ’ t have been priced in by pundits as the safe pick .
But adding Harris to the ticket fits Biden ’ s strategy more generally .
Rather than declaring victory for the grand forces of moderation after beating Sanders , Biden spun up a series of unity task forces charged with finding common ground between the two campaigns across six issue areas .
The process pushed Biden ’ s agenda left , most notably on climate change .
In a less high-profile @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Biden transition team — the team that will do the work of staffing his administration if he wins — was stocked with staffers with deep ties to the more left-leaning , diverse wings of the Democratic Party , like Gautam Raghavan , chief of staff to Rep. Pramila Jayapal , the co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus ; Angela Ramirez , the executive director of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus ; and Julie Siegel , a senior adviser to Warren on economic policy .
Quietly , Biden is pushing his own agenda and potential @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nominees , Bill Clinton , Al Gore , John Kerry , Barack Obama , and Hillary Clinton did not make a major effort to appoint progressives , ” says Waleed Shahid , communications director for the left-leaning Justice Democrats .
Biden ’ s been different , and there are a few reasons for it .
Biden ’ s long profile in American politics has given his campaign cover .
“ They feel they have room because Biden is seen as a moderate , ” says David Axelrod , who served as Obama ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that up : 26 percent of voters see Biden as moderate , while only 15 percent say the same about President Trump .
Biden isn ’ t seen as a radical , a socialist , or even a particularly progressive politician .
That arguably cost him some excitement in the Democratic primary , where candidates with sharper ideological profiles dominated social media and got the loudest applause at debates .
But in the general election , it ’ s given him room to get a bit more radical , to build bridges to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and to normalize a more progressive agenda , without fearing some of the backlash that other candidates might receive .
More importantly , Biden is changing because the country is changing .
In 2018 , for the first time , a majority of Americans under age 15 were nonwhite .
Decades of economic failures have radicalized younger voters against the economic consensus that Biden himself helped buttress .
The Movement for Black Lives has forced an overdue reckoning with systemic racism in America .
Covid-19 has led to Depression-era levels of unemployment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because he discovered Gramsci in his 70s .
He ’ s moving left because that ’ s necessary to keep up with the politics and needs of the moment .
None of this is to say Biden is as far left as leftists would prefer .
Nor that Harris is the pick they wanted — though she was the most popular pick among Democrats and independents .
But Biden and Harris are politicians skilled at reading the room and sensing the moment .
In recent decades , national Democratic politicians have read the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ if the pressure in American politics came from whiter , more Southern , and more conservative voters .
Now they ’ re shifting left , feeling pressure from a rising , diverse generation of voters furious with the failures of the past , and looking for something different in the future .
“ Both Biden and Kamala Harris have somewhat floating ideologies , like a balloon tied to a rock where the rock is the Democratic Party consensus , ” says Shahid .
“ Harris being to Biden ’ s left , as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ progressives and social movements have moved that rock substantially since the Obama era.
” Biden has always said he intends to be a “ transition candidate , ” and it ’ s increasingly clear that he understands that transition as leading to a more diverse , liberal America .
Will you become our 20,000th supporter ?
When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions , we weren ’ t sure how it would go .
Today , we ’ re humbled to say that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The reason is both lovely and surprising : Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it , too .
We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy .
That ’ s never been more important than today , during a public health crisis , racial justice protests , a recession , and a presidential election .
But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive , and advertising alone won ’ t let us keep creating it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ requires .
Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation , but it will help keep Vox free for all .
Contribute today from as little as $ 3 .

In 2016, Hillary Clinton tapped Tim Kaine to be her vice president. In 2008, Barack Obama chose Joe Biden. In 2004, John Kerry named John Edwards. In 2000, Al Gore ran with Joe Lieberman. What did all these picks have in common? They were all to the right of the candidate atop the ticket — each of them was meant, at least in part, to mollify voters uncomfortable with either the ideology or the identity of the Democratic nominee.
Biden’s decision to run alongside Sen. Kamala Harris breaks the trend. Harris is, by any measure, to Biden’s left. The New York Times describes her as “a pragmatic moderate.” But according to the DW-NOMINATE system, which measures the ideology of members of Congress by tracking what they vote for and whom they vote with, Harris has been one of the most liberal members of the Senate since arriving in 2017, sitting reliably alongside Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and Cory Booker atop the rankings. In Biden’s final term in the Senate, he was the 26th most liberal member — and the Democratic Party was significantly more conservative then.
It is conventional wisdom that Democrats run to the left during primaries and the center during general elections. Biden is bucking that cliché. He ran to the center in the primary, but he’s been steadily shifting his policies and personnel left ever since.
Harris is, it should be said, a liberal, not a leftist. Her record as a prosecutor angered many on the left (I highly recommend reading German Lopez’s deep dive on that record), she’s close to big donors in Silicon Valley, and her decision to back away from Sanders’s Medicare-for-all bill during the primary deepened the mistrust. But Harris’s record as a prosecutor is far more liberal than Biden’s record on criminal justice issues, and her ultimate health care plan, which obliterated employer-based insurance entirely, was the most ambitious proposal put forth besides Medicare-for-all — and was, again, well to Biden’s left, as were most of her other policies (including, crucially, filibuster reform, where she’s said she’d end the rule to pass climate change legislation).
Alongside Sens. Sanders and Ed Markey (D-MA), Harris introduced a coronavirus relief bill that would issue monthly checks of up to $2,000 to Americans making less than $120,000 for the duration of the crisis. She also introduced legislation banning evictions and foreclosures for a year. Both proposals are to the left of Biden’s current offerings, and as the Washington Post reports, the Biden campaign has declined to say whether he would back them.
Harris is also the first woman of color ever on a major presidential ticket. She would be the first woman, full stop, to serve as vice president. Within the complex narrative that governs campaign politics, Harris came to be seen as the “safe” choice for Biden. But that says more about how American politics has changed than it does about who she is and what she believes. At the turn of the century, a Black, Indian American woman with one of the most liberal voting records in the Senate wouldn’t have been priced in by pundits as the safe pick.
But adding Harris to the ticket fits Biden’s strategy more generally. Rather than declaring victory for the grand forces of moderation after beating Sanders, Biden spun up a series of unity task forces charged with finding common ground between the two campaigns across six issue areas. The process pushed Biden’s agenda left, most notably on climate change.
In a less high-profile but just as consequential announcement, the Biden transition team — the team that will do the work of staffing his administration if he wins — was stocked with staffers with deep ties to the more left-leaning, diverse wings of the Democratic Party, like Gautam Raghavan, chief of staff to Rep. Pramila Jayapal, the co-chair of the House Progressive Caucus; Angela Ramirez, the executive director of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus; and Julie Siegel, a senior adviser to Warren on economic policy.
Quietly, Biden is pushing his own agenda and potential administration left. “As the Democratic nominees, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, Barack Obama, and Hillary Clinton did not make a major effort to appoint progressives,” says Waleed Shahid, communications director for the left-leaning Justice Democrats. Biden’s been different, and there are a few reasons for it.
Biden’s long profile in American politics has given his campaign cover. “They feel they have room because Biden is seen as a moderate,” says David Axelrod, who served as Obama’s chief strategist. And polls back that up: 26 percent of voters see Biden as moderate, while only 15 percent say the same about President Trump.
Biden isn’t seen as a radical, a socialist, or even a particularly progressive politician. That arguably cost him some excitement in the Democratic primary, where candidates with sharper ideological profiles dominated social media and got the loudest applause at debates. But in the general election, it’s given him room to get a bit more radical, to build bridges to the more socialist wing of the party, and to normalize a more progressive agenda, without fearing some of the backlash that other candidates might receive.
More importantly, Biden is changing because the country is changing. In 2018, for the first time, a majority of Americans under age 15 were nonwhite. Decades of economic failures have radicalized younger voters against the economic consensus that Biden himself helped buttress. The Movement for Black Lives has forced an overdue reckoning with systemic racism in America. Covid-19 has led to Depression-era levels of unemployment. Biden isn’t moving left because he discovered Gramsci in his 70s. He’s moving left because that’s necessary to keep up with the politics and needs of the moment.
None of this is to say Biden is as far left as leftists would prefer. Nor that Harris is the pick they wanted — though she was the most popular pick among Democrats and independents. But Biden and Harris are politicians skilled at reading the room and sensing the moment. In recent decades, national Democratic politicians have read the room and shifted right, acting as if the pressure in American politics came from whiter, more Southern, and more conservative voters. Now they’re shifting left, feeling pressure from a rising, diverse generation of voters furious with the failures of the past, and looking for something different in the future.
“Both Biden and Kamala Harris have somewhat floating ideologies, like a balloon tied to a rock where the rock is the Democratic Party consensus,” says Shahid. “Harris being to Biden’s left, as senator and 2020 candidate, means that progressives and social movements have moved that rock substantially since the Obama era.”
Biden has always said he intends to be a “transition candidate,” and it’s increasingly clear that he understands that transition as leading to a more diverse, liberal America.
Will you become our 20,000th supporter? When the economy took a downturn in the spring and we started asking readers for financial contributions, we weren’t sure how it would go. Today, we’re humbled to say that nearly 20,000 people have chipped in. The reason is both lovely and surprising: Readers told us that they contribute both because they value explanation and because they value that other people can access it, too. We have always believed that explanatory journalism is vital for a functioning democracy. That’s never been more important than today, during a public health crisis, racial justice protests, a recession, and a presidential election. But our distinctive explanatory journalism is expensive, and advertising alone won’t let us keep creating it at the quality and volume this moment requires. Your financial contribution will not constitute a donation, but it will help keep Vox free for all. Contribute today from as little as $3.