Will “Tough on Crime” Still be the Only Choice?

This is not intended as a partisan assessment, but rather one based on the hard reality that when it comes to criminal law issues, neither major party is willing to give up the appeal of being “tough on crime” to suck votes out of that vast group of “undecided” voters. 

The rhetoric from the presidential candidates has offered little beyond crass appeal, to the point where there is no honest perspective that can believe that they aren’t pandering for votes despite whatever beliefs they may personally hold.  What else is new?

But the choice of Joe Biden as the Democratic VP candidate is different.  With 36 years in the Senate, he has a long track record on criminal justice issues.  While Barak Obama can say anything (or nothing) about his position on crime and punishment, Biden comes with baggage.  What does this mean?

Doug Berman has begun to explore this issue, as has Jeralyn at TalkLeft.  Jeralyn has already laid her cards on the table:

So there you have it. Obama and Biden are going to run a tired, decades-old but tried and true “tough on crime” campaign. I expected it with Obama, as his views on crime were never particularly progressive, but now with Biden, it’s enshrined in cement.

I understand and appreciate that not all voters — and not even all readers of this site — agree with me that America, Prison Nation, is one of the worst failures of our Government and our democracy. It’s regressive and an embarrassment.

Since exposing injustices is the reason this site exists, you can hardly expect me to cheer for this duo. In 2004, I said I wouldn’t vote for Joe Biden as dog-catcher.

There is some tinge, perhaps, that this harsh assessment has its roots in bitterness over Hillary, but writing that she wouldn’t vote for Biden as dog-catcher is a very strong statement.  Is the man that evil?  Doug found this position to be over-the-top as well:


I found these comments from Jeralyn a bit jarring now because Jeralyn has not consistently criticize the Clintons on this front, and because Senator Biden strikes me as just playing the old Clintonian “let’s not be accused of being soft” game in the arena of crime and punishment.  Still, I think Jeralyn is right to lament that the crime and punishment arena is just another in which Senator Biden does not represent a new kind of politics.

What remains clear in this election is that there is no perceived majority of American voters prepared to put aside their blood-lust for retributive justice in favor of “smart on crime.”  The best we can hope for is a platform of “we’re a little less harsh than the other guys,” hardly something to get all worked up about.

To many, this position is not only understandable, but quite acceptable.  The argument that someone first has to get elected, and should thus be freed from speaking the truth and given full authority to pander, is just the way the game of politics is played.  A wag might question how this squares with “a new kind of politics,” but the true believer can forgive anything.

There are many other issues on the table this election, from economy to Iraq, and the perpetual “moral” issues that divide this country between those who want to be left alone and those who want to impose their moral values on the heathens.  And the flip-side of a harsh position like Jeralyn’s is whether this hatred for Biden means that four more years of Republican rule would be preferable.

As Doug points out, Biden has done some decent things in the Senate on criminal justice issues, ranging from the Second Chance Act and the Justice Integrity Act.  Nothing earth-shattering, but better than nothing.  Of course, he also voted for the USA Patriot Act, but he voted against the disgraceful expanded FISA bill that gave immunity to the telecoms, though he signed on as an author of the original FISA bill in 1978.

The Daily Kos has taken a more optimistic view of Biden’s record on civil liberty.  This view appears unduly rosy and ignores much of Biden’s history in favor of a few sound-bites that are standard fare in politics.

Bottom line is that I agree with Doug’s assessment that Biden will play the Clintonian game of not appearing soft because that’s what gets people elected in America.  Obama is already well down the road on this one, having long since made clear that his “new kind of politics” is old-style “tough on crime” pandering. 

On the civil liberties front, don’t expect much this time around.  Apparently, the polls show that America isn’t yet ready for the Constitution.

Discover more from Simple Justice

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

9 thoughts on “Will “Tough on Crime” Still be the Only Choice?”

  1. Joel Rosenberg

    The late Molly Ivins used to characterize most Texas elections as “fry-offs”, with politicians competing in their eagerness to see murderers executed. Nothing in that seems to have changed, except — in a general way — it’s gone national.

    (I’ve been tempted, from time to time, to do an essay on the career of “Bob War”; most Texas politicians claim to be “as tough as Bob War”. Must have been some anticrime politician.)

    I like the “Smart on Crime” label, by the way; wish it would work. But there is no national politician I know of who is in favor of decriminalizing the sorts of things that both Obama and the President admit to having done in their youth.

  2. Windypundit

    Joe Biden did a lot of the early work to get us where we are. He helped expand the use of RICO and asset forfeiture, he helped create the Drug Czar’s office, he sponsored the RAVE act. He never met a crime he didn’t want to federalize—I think he’s even talked about a federal smoking ban.

    You know, I’d swear that when I was growing up, liberals were opposed to heavy-handed law enforcement. I guess that’s because they weren’t in charge of it.

  3. Joel Rosenberg

    Carry permit holders, not entirely coincidentally, tend to (with some exceptions; the badglicker set) tend to be very strongly against heavy-handed law enforcement.

    It’s kind of like those old jokes:

    “What do you call a liberal who has been mugged? A conservative.”

    “What’s a civil libertarian? A conservative who has been indicted.”

    And, just for laughs, “What do you say to a good ol’ boy in a three-piece suit? ‘Will the defendant please rise . . . ‘”

  6. Daniel

    It’s one thing to criticize Joe Biden’s policy and political opinions. It’s another thing to criticize Obama’s decision to pick him. Regrettably, the focus in both the press and on blogs has been to focus on the first and not the latter. How many people are willing to say that picking Biden was a mistake for Obama. I haven’t see any, including John McCain. In fact, McCain seems to love Biden. When an enemy praises one of my decisions, I begin to wonder what I did wrong. I wonder if Obama will too.

Comments are closed.