What Will Happen If Biden Wins?

At RealClearPolitics Sean Trende summarizes VP Joe Biden’s path to election:

When I wrote my 2013 series on demographic shifts, including the Case of the Missing White Voters, I outlined a potential path to electoral victory for Republicans that didn’t involve reaching out to non-white Americans as such. Rather, I suggested that a more economically populist Republican Party that was more skeptical of American intervention abroad, aligned against illegal immigration and skeptical of trade deals — and that, above all else, didn’t nominate a guy with car elevators as its standard-bearer — might be able to gain the enthusiastic backing of enough blue-collar whites to win elections. This incarnation of the GOP might eventually win over some non-white voters, who vote for Democrats more because of their stances on economic issues than their stances on identity issues.

This is more-or-less the path that Trump took. Indeed, he proved a stronger version of the “Missing Whites” approach than I had thought was possible, by alienating large numbers of whites with college degrees, who had previously been the foundation of the Republican Party.

But there are limits to what can be done with whites without college degrees, who constitute a significant portion of the electorate, but not a majority. While Trump has, in fact, made progress with non-whites, his bleeding of support among whites with college degrees, especially women, and (at least according to polls) older white voters more than offsets that.

In other words, at a certain point you just run out of groups that you can afford to alienate from your coalition, and Trump may well have hit that point.

Just for the sake of discussion, let’s assume that Joe Biden is elected. Then what? It has been my observation that every administration, early on, throws a sop to its constituents. I think that will certainly be the case for the Biden Administration. Here’s what I think is likely to happen.

  1. Contrary to many of the (in my opinion irresponsible) speculations about whether Trump will leave the White House willingly, although Trump will not concede he will leave the White House willingly, maybe even eagerly.
  2. There is an element of disorder in every transition in administrations and this one will have more than usual.
  3. Again contrary to what the campaign is putting forward, the Biden Administration will largely do the same things the Trump Administration has been doing WRT COVID-19. If there are any attempts at, for example, making wearing facemasks nationally compulsory, without declaring martial law they will be struck down by the courts.
  4. Biden will not face the difficulties in filling a cabinet that Trump has. If anything there will be a sort of feeding frenzy of Democratic apparatchiks jockeying for positions in the new administration. There are already signs of that.
  5. The first sop the new Biden Administration will throw its base will be adding a public option to Obamacare.
  6. There may also be some moves in the direction of the Green New Deal early on.
  7. I think the Biden Administration will be more hawkish than the Trump Administration has been.
  8. I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a significant, premature increase in illegal border crossings from Mexico immediately following Biden’s election.
  9. Despite the noise about raising taxes, I am unconvinced that the Biden Administration will do that early on. The most I would anticipate is adding a new, higher bracket.

We’ll get around to what will happen if President Trump is re-elected in a future post.

Please add your thoughts on what a Biden Administration would mean in the comments.

31 comments… add one
  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    WRT to taxes I think it’s likely the social security tax will be imposed on incomes above 400000; and capital gains will be treated as income. As a SOP; full deductibility of state taxes will be added. Those were unusually specific pledges and tax changes cannot be filibustered.

    The other one is the various tariffs. Something on the order of 2000 lawsuits on them have been filed in the last month. The most amicable way to solve the lawsuits on a policy Biden hates is to lift the tariffs.

    Police reform are probably on the list as well.

  • I think you’re probably right about the deductability of state and local taxes. It’s a hot button issue. IIRC FICA max is presently $137,700. IMO that needs to be raised considerably but I doubt it will be raised as far as you’re suggesting. If I were doing it, I would by statute peg FICA max to the salary of a Congressman (presently $174,000). I also think that members of Congress should be eligible for no government pension other than Social Security but that’s a different subject.

    I presume that President Biden could lift the tariffs by EO but I wonder if he’ll actually do that. Under the circumstances lifting the tariffs imposed on Chinese goods by executive order very early in his term would unquestionably cause comment.

    What police reforms are within the power of the federal government? Those are primarily state and local matters.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    Biden’s proposal is very specific; create a donut hole from 137k to 400k where one does not pay FICA but all income above 400k is subject to FICA – similar to Medicare. Like Medicare; the 400k floor is not inflation adjusted so the donut hole will close over time.

    It’s easy to lift the tariffs without Biden leaving his direct signature on it. He could (a) have the lawyers argue a terrible case in court and lose the court case (b) appoint judges to the ITC which rule the tariffs exceed the bounds of executive power (c) allow the WTO appellate body to regain quorum, and allow the appellate body give legal effect to lower body rulings that the tariffs violate the WTO agreements.

    A further move that will happen with Biden; a mega stimulus that bails out the states and cities (temporarily). Something on the order of 3 trillion to 4 trillion dollars.

  • Biden’s proposal is very specific; create a donut hole from 137k to 400k where one does not pay FICA but all income above 400k is subject to FICA

    Unless you don’t care about generating revenue, that’s a lousy plan. You can raise rates on the highest income earners but that doesn’t guarantee that you raise revenue. Your most reliable source for additional revenue is individuals who are compensated primarily through wages. Many of those earning more than $400,000 can convert their earnings from wages to some other source, i.e. it won’t be subject to FICA.

  • Something on the order of 3 trillion to 4 trillion dollars.

    3-4 trillion in a year maximizes both the ability to bail out cities and states and the risks of knock-on effects. Unless we increase domestic production there is unlikely to be any multiplier from that subsidy.

    There are ways you could increase the likelihood of some multiplier. For example, you could put conditions on how the funds are used, e.g. state and local governments who increase taxes would not be eligible for funds under the bailout. I don’t believe such conditions will be attached and the likelihood is that whatever adverse effects it has will have no compensating benefits other than to politicians.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    WRT to police powers; has the issue of exceeding the enumerated powers of the Federal Government ever stopped the Federal Government from legislating / regulating what were state and local affairs?

    Besides; I doubt there would be much official pushback to stripping or strictly limiting qualified immunity from police officers

    Here is a sleeper prediction. The results of 2020 census will be annulled or put on pause until another census in several years. The reason is not congressional apportionment (which will be neutral — Loss of population in urban centers balanced by gains in liberal suburbs) or even about whether to count illegal immigrants (they will be counted). But the pandemic fueled population losses in NYC, SF, Chicago and other urban cores will cause those cities to lose a lot of funding based on population. The easiest political solution to the funding hole is to annul the 2020 census and redo the census in a few years in hopes people come back.

  • Besides; I doubt there would be much official pushback to stripping or strictly limiting qualified immunity from police officers

    I guess it depends on what you mean by “official pushback”. I think it would be challenged in the courts by every police officers union in the country.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    “Official pushback” –> should have phrased it as “Political pushback”. i.e. Republicans won’t go all out to block it in Congress. Police may sue — but they won’t win; judges watch TV and read election results like everyone else.

    If I were a member of Congress, I would vote for paring back or stripping QI if it is applied to every person who works in government. (President, Governors, legislators, civil servants).

  • Police may sue — but they won’t win; judges watch TV and read election results like everyone else.

    Unlike steve and, apparently, you I think the law matters and that judges don’t base their rulings solely based on political considerations. It is not that unusual for granting of new powers to the federal government to be ruled unconstitutional.

  • bob sykes Link

    The Democrat Party has moved leftwards and is now a socialist party. If Biden wins, we will see a substantial shift towards a full socialist state: increased taxes, adoption of all of the Green Agenda, a ban on fracking, suppression of fossil fuels and forced electrification of private transport, increased state regulation of businesses, income redistribution, nationalization of health care, suppression of conservative opinion, and an increase in foreign wars.

    The Deep State denizens profit from foreign wars, and many in the Deep State are committed ideologues with strong anti-Russian, anti-Iranian, and anti-Chinese biases. A really big foreign war on the order of Vietnam is likely.

    It is notable that the main advocates of covid lockdowns are all Democrats. We should expect intensification and expansion of the lockdowns, and that would create a near permanent deep recession.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    The law does matter. And I agree judges don’t base their rulings solely on political considerations. But I argue judges do take into account political considerations.

    As a point of observation, the Federal Government is in many ways involved in local and state policing. Whether it is through funding (the arguments about sanctuary policies), or through consent degrees (e.g. Seattle Police department has to have their budget and policy changes reviewed by a federal judge). What would be different for Biden is not the principle of involvement in local policing, but the scope (much more detailed than before) and reach (most instead of a few police departments).

  • But I argue judges do take into account political considerations.

    Mr. Dooley said it more than a century ago: even the Supreme Court Justices read the election returns.

    I think the way federal intervention into local policing would need to work would be through making receiving certain grants or subsidies conditional on particular actions rather than by fiat.

    The courts have the power to impel reforms of local policing but that’s generally in response to a particular suit. I don’t believe that even the Supreme Court has the authority to force reforms on all police departments.

  • Andy Link

    I think a lot depends on if the Democrats take the Senate and hold the House, which both seem pretty likely.

    The political problem for Biden is that he doesn’t really have a “base” except for older black voters and the few moderates that are still around. For just about everyone else he’s a compromise President whose greatest asset is that he’s the major party candidate that is not named Donald Trump.

    But perhaps part of that view is my own (mis) perception. I don’t know anyone that is voting for Biden who is enthusiastic about Biden’s policies or a Biden Presidency. Most don’t seem to have any idea what his actual platform is beyond the usual Democratic staples. People voting for him appear to be Democrats who always vote D or people who are voting against Trump. This latter group may well be his largest “constituency.”

    Once (and if) he wins, this constituency will fracture.

    “WRT to police powers; has the issue of exceeding the enumerated powers of the Federal Government ever stopped the Federal Government from legislating / regulating what were state and local affairs?”

    Colorado, where I live, is a home-rule state. The governor has no control over policing here except the state cops and the fact that officer licensing/certification is run by the state. Things are obviously different in other states, but here the Feds don’t have any actual authority. For example, the governor has issued a mask mandate, but he has no ability to enforce it except by threatening business licenses.

    What the federal government is likely to do is what is done in every other case, which is to make federal funds contingent on states and localities enforcing certain standards and doing certain things. Any police department which gets federal money will have to tow the line, but even that would probably be challenged in court.

  • TarsTarkas Link

    ‘If there are any attempts at, for example, making wearing facemasks nationally compulsory, without declaring martial law they will be struck down by the courts.’

    Not if the judges want to keep their jobs.

    ‘Unlike steve and, apparently, you I think the law matters and that judges don’t base their rulings solely based on political considerations.’

    See above comment. If Biden wins and worse yet, the Democrats get 50 Senate seats, the rule of law will become entirely subjective and selective.

    I don’t think you fully comprehend how much the Democratic party apparatus is now dedicated towards seizing power at any cost and then rigging the game so they never lose it again. To them elections are now merely lipstick they have to apply to the pig in order for the barking seals of the MSM to applaud that it was a ‘fair election’. Look at Pelosi’s reorganization of the House rules after 2018 which have been further enhanced since then to render the minority party effectively newborn kittens mewing in a box. IMO judges who buck the socialist narrative are likely to be impeached or forced from their position by deliberate leaking of tawdry deals of their private lives, some of which may be fabricated. Call me a pessimist but that’s what I believe. The rules are now approaching ‘my side are the good guys and the good guys must win.’

    The first thing Harris will do is try to pack the Supreme Court. If that fails pressure will be put on the conservative justices to force them out of office. Roberts is almost certainly a goner under that scenario. Kavanaugh, Barrett, and Gorsuch may well be impeached as appointees of an illegal President as well as other high crimes and misdemeanors, and they may make another run at Thomas by resurrecting the Anita Hill accusations.

    ‘many in the Deep State are committed ideologues with strong anti-Russian, anti-Iranian, and anti-Chinese biases.’

    Name me one prominent future Harris appointee who is anti-Iranian and anti-Chinese. I sure can’t think of any. They’re all on the OMB side of the government.

    ‘I presume that President Biden could lift the tariffs by EO but I wonder if he’ll actually do that. Under the circumstances lifting the tariffs imposed on Chinese goods by executive order very early in his term would unquestionably cause comment.’

    Why should Harris care who comments and how vitriolic the comments are? Elections have consequences, and THEY WILL HAVE WON. Besides the only people objecting would be those out of power or without a media platform. Losers and Deplorables and Racists, every one.

  • PD Shaw Link

    I listed to a 538 podcast a few days ago about Biden’s Covid plans, and when asked about a mask mandate, the experts pushed back by saying that’s not really what the federal government does. It was amusing that they didn’t couch it in legal terms like I might, but more in terms of how these institutions are set up.

    In any event, the two big changes I heard was that Biden is going to ramp up more PPE, and give money to states/local government for more contact-tracing. The first seems reasonable, the second seems like its fighting yesterday’s battle at best, at worst it will emerge as a political scandal if/when the money flows through political channels for political benefits.

  • My reservation about contact-tracing is to what end? Okay, you’ve identified the contacts. Then what? Hold them in their homes? How? Tell them to be cautious? Fat lot of good that will do.

    And of course some of the money will be siphoned off. That’s just the nature of things. 10%-100%

  • PD Shaw Link

    It seems like contact-tracing is an idea whose time has passed. There was some discussion of money for isolating, but I wasn’t clear if that was Biden’s idea or the “experts.”

    Apparently, CDC just updated guidance making contact-tracing more difficult. If people are in restaurants, bars, schools or work environments in which masked or unmasked they come into contact with people for brief interludes totaling 15 minutes per day, then the new risk assessment they are identifying is largely untraceable.

  • CuriousOnlooker Link

    WRT coronavirus – I read that contact tracers in the US are averaging 2 people per contact trace; 6-7 people per contact in Europe; and about 20-30 in South Korea/Taiwan.

    i.e it is not money – but actual legal powers to overcome the “privacy” barrier. Like under pain of jail to reveal you were with a mistress; buying drugs from a dealer; etc etc. Is Biden or anyone proposing that?

    And yes; even with that there is the isolation part – where the legal powers exist; but no wants to use.

    On the other hand Biden’s response could be better by simply not being Trump. Trump’s style is too aggravating to many (most?). He has a good argument we need to have an approach of “keep calm and carry on”; but he doesn’t model that message in his own behavior.

  • What Australia and New Zealand have both illustrated is that any isolation regime other than a forcible one will inevitably be porous which is to say useless. Besides in the U. S. 90% of those who are told they need to isolate themselves will immediately go and start making arrangements thereby vitiating the effects of isolation.

  • Drew Link

    What will happen?

    Well, apparently we will have a president in charge of foreign policy who takes bribes in return. I understand the politics of trying to whitewash it, obfuscate or recharacterize it as “the Russians,” but this is no anonymous or shady source. Its a Navy Vet and CEO of one or more of the enterprises involved who has signed an affidavit under penalty of purgery. To deny anymore with flimsy, nonsensical excuses is to be every bit as culpable.

    Former Hunter Biden business partner Tony Bobulinski has confirmed that an email published in the New York Post’s bombshell exposé is indeed genuine – something the Biden camp hasn’t disputed, and that the “Big Guy” described in one of those emails is none other than Joe Biden himself. Bobulinski also says Joe Biden was lying when he said he and Hunter never discussed business dealings.

    “My name is Tony Bobulinski. The facts set forth below are true and accurate; they are not any form of domestic or foreign disinformation. Any suggestion to the contrary is false and offensive. I am the recipient of the email published seven days ago by the New York Post, which showed a copy to Hunter Biden and Rob Walker. That email is genuine.’ -New York Post

    Bobulinski issued the statement late Wednesday, affirming that, contrary to Joe Biden’s claims that he never discussed business dealings with Hunter, the former Veep actually profited from his son’s dealings, which were undertaken with the full support of the Biden family.

    Bobulinski claims cash and equity positions and 10% stakes in dealings were set aside for “the big guy,” – aka Joe Biden.

  • Andy Link

    “My reservation about contact-tracing is to what end? Okay, you’ve identified the contacts. Then what? Hold them in their homes? How? Tell them to be cautious? Fat lot of good that will do.”

    At least in an idealized sense, if you know where the infections are coming from, state and local governments can use narrower, tailored policies instead of blanket policies.

    Since Covid is likely to be with us for some time (if not forever), getting better data on where and how outbreaks occur is helpful.

    I can’t speak to other areas, but here in Colorado there is some of this data, but not enough with insufficient fidelity. The worst outbreaks here where we know the source continue to be in correctional facilities, education (primarily colleges and universities), and nursing/assisted living facilities as one would expect. But those are also the places where contact/source tracing is easy. Attending church appears to be relatively safe, while some church functions – like retreats, are riskier. Lots of contact with the public by retail workers doesn’t seem to result in a large number of cases, but it’s hard to tell for sure.

    On the other hand, a CDC study I read this morning indicated that prison guards were highly likely to get covid even when using proper PPE with minimal direct contact with the prison population.

    The point being, if governors have some solid data when cases inevitably spike, then they at least have the opportunity to make more informed responses (whether they use that information properly is another matter of course). Without that, it will be more of the same blanket “lockdown” responses with exceptions that are not based on science but political considerations (ie. declaring that liquor stores, gun ranges, and marijuana stores are “critical” and therefore exempt from most restrictions).

  • On the other hand, a CDC study I read this morning indicated that prison guards were highly likely to get covid even when using proper PPE with minimal direct contact with the prison population.

    Please share a link to the study.

    I wouldn’t be surprised if what the study actually demonstrates is that prison guards lie about their use of PPE and direct contact with the prison population.

  • steve Link

    Hey Drew. I hear Biden is running a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor in DC. You might want to go check that out.

    To clarify, steve thinks that the law matters. The SCOTUS judges think it matters for decisions where ideology is fairly unimportant. When it is, they vote their political beliefs, not the law.

    Public health people in the US have experience with source tracing for food borne infections, sexually transmitted diseases and a few other problems. They have never done it on a large scale. It is potentially pretty useful. So when Dave says ” How? Tell them to be cautious? Fat lot of good that will do.” what we find is that an awful lot of people actually do alter their behavior. A lot of people dont want to risk transmitting the disease to their parents, uncles, grandparents and even other workers. We just arent set up to do this at scale which is a problem.

    Steve

  • what we find is that an awful lot of people actually do alter their behavior

    Leaving aside that I’d like to see that quantified, a lot of people let their children run wild, too. Around here I see packs of kids, some wearing masks, some not, not engaging in any variety of social distancing. I guess the assumption is that kids don’t spread the virus at all. Seems like a pretty strong assumption to me and in need of some pretty serious proof.

  • Andy Link

    It’s a study of one, but it’s interesting:

    https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6943e1.htm

  • Drew Link

    “Hey Drew. I hear Biden is running a child sex ring out of a pizza parlor in DC. You might want to go check that out.”

    I’d rather check this out: (and unlike all the charges about Trump coming from “anonymous sources” and people who changed their tune under oath, this guy has documents and gives sworn testimony)

    Bobulinski stated: “That email is genuine.”

    “What I am outlining is fact. I know it is fact because I lived it. I am the CEO of Sinohawk Holdings which was a partnership between the Chinese operating through CEFC/Chairman Ye and the Biden family,” he added. “I was brought into the company to be the CEO by James Gilliar and Hunter Biden.”

    “The reference to ‘the Big Guy’ in the much publicized May 13, 2017, email is, in fact, a reference to Joe Biden,” he added.

    The CEO says he has “extensive relevant records and communications” to share with the panel.

    “I don’t have a political axe to grind; I just saw behind the Biden curtain and I grew concerned about what I saw,” his statement says. “The Biden family aggressively leveraged the Biden family name to make millions of dollars from foreign entities even though some were from communist controlled China.”

  • Thanks, Andy. I’ll take a look at it.

  • steve Link

    This ought to be good for at least 8 investigations Drew. Maybe you will find something this time. Should be able to keep it going for at least 4 years until the next election.

    Steve

  • Drew Link

    I know you know this is real, steve, because you won’t address the issues.

    https://www.citizenfreepress.com/breaking/watch-live-biden-whistleblower-tony-bobulinksi-holds-press-conference/

    I’ve come to learn that there is minimal financial savvy here. In the video note the funding not to SinoHawk, but to the Bidens personally. That’s not the way capitalization of a firm works. Period, full stop. You don’t give the capital – as a gift – to individuals to then in turn be used to fund SinoHawk. Not a chance.

    Rather, its called a bribe.

  • steve Link

    Maybe, maybe this time there is something real about Republican claims but we have been through so many investigations with nothing being found and now this computer that someone has been sitting on for 10 months and we get info 2-3 weeks before the election? This is BS like every other investigation (remember the latest, unmasking?) until proven otherwise.

    Steve

  • Heltau Link

    I figure that as a country the U.S. will be more screwed over than she is now, if biden wins. The only thing I can do is vote for Mr. Trump and hope the country does not get burned down again after the election.
    Only time will tell.

Leave a Comment