#Breaking Black: Hillary Clinton, the big left and black America

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share via Email
• Copy Link

  Link Copied

In his book No One Left to Lie To, the late Christopher Hitchens aimed a Klieg light on the Clinton presidency. Once in office, Hitchens wrote Clinton “began enacting welfare reform and anti-crime legislation that surpassed the ambitions of all but the most ideologically loyal Republicans–and routinely plundered the GOP platform for other policy ideas as well.”  Hitchens issued a damning indictment on Bill Clinton’s proclivity towards racially divisive politics when it suited his purposes.

The price paid by black America, by its fabled “first black president,” continues to exact a hefty toll on the communities that can least afford it. The social safety net, presumed protected in the hands on a democratic administration, lay tattered and frayed in the wake of so-called “welfare reform” even before the first Bush was sworn in.  Giving states more autonomy, effectively localizing the War on Poverty, came with disastrous effects, as the gaps in the safety net grew larger—a fact complicated further when the economy faltered and failed. Income inequality soared, a dividend we are still paying the tax on today.

Fewer people who truly needed help could actually get it. Disproportionate poverty in African-American communities, especially in the wake of the housing market bust when so many middle-class families lost their homes (and the wealth tied up in them), grew. The black middle class, once the pride of a nation and tied principally to home ownership, was eviscerated. Looking back, Clinton-era policies that promoted home ownership, advanced by President George W. Bush, were met with gladness at the time. Though for many, those policies proved to be a ticking time bomb as Wall Street swooped in with the remote trigger device known as credit default swaps. Meanwhile, states were (and still are) slashing cash benefits, reducing time limits and imposing strict work requirements on welfare applicants—in a time when there were no jobs to be had.

What’s more, Clinton-Gore once proudly announced the “lowest crime rates in a generation.” The 1994 anti-crime bill, touted as Clinton’s “top priority,” was met with open arms by republicans of that day. Then-California attorney general Dan Lungren said prisons and police are “the first line of defense” against crime, and “incarceration works,” according to a Los Angeles Times story. “So now, when we hear the [p]resident and many of his colleagues begin voicing eager support for the tough medicine Republicans have advocated for decades, we say: ‘Welcome aboard.’”

Among other elements, like the mythical lure of midnight basketball, the anti-crime legislation pushed for and signed by President Clinton was the new Federal “three strikes” law. “The overwhelming support for the measure touched off a nationwide get-tough-on-crime movement…” Matt Taibbi wrote in a 2013 Rolling Stone article. “…embraced especially by third-way-style Democrats, who seized upon the policy idea as a powerful weapon in their efforts to throw off their party’s bleeding-heart image and recapture the political center.”

The column, entitled “Cruel and Unusual Punishment: The Shame of Three Strikes Laws,” visits the impacts of a law that sends thousands to prison for life over crimes as trivial as stealing socks and is well worth the read. It notes with irony that Wall Street bankers never served a day in jail for their participation in causing the implosion of the housing market. There is ample blame to spread across multiple administrations—including the current one– but as Senator Warren said, nobody went to jail over credit default swaps.

It is also no coincidence that the term “super-predator” was popularized in the early ’90s. “Fear of super-predators and sensationalized media coverage led the federal government to increase its involvement in juvenile crime matters and promote grossly inappropriate sentencing guidelines for youthful offenders,” wrote Steve Drizin, a clinical law professor at Northwestern University School of Law.

Long before the prevalence of “stop-and-frisk” policing policies in urban economic centers, the men and boys incarcerated under “three strikes” and deemed “super-predators” were disproportionately black and brown.

Undaunted by any blowback from those policy decisions and outcomes, the Clintons set out in 2008 to recapture the White House. Importantly, Hillary Clinton fought hard to prove that she was indeed her own woman. Though, even as the scars had largely healed, Bill Clinton seemed to spend every waking moment ripping off the scabs. The unnecessary bloodletting was nothing short of cringe worthy for those of us who had come to respect the post-presidency work he had done in distressed communities around the globe.

From the outset, especially after then-candidate Obama stormed Iowa and solidified his own viability, Mr. Clinton seemed to have a difficult time reconciling the notion that a no-name, less-than-half-term U.S. Senator was winning the hearts of voters. He was pocketing endorsements and donations that once and most assuredly belonged to Hillary Clinton. Once skeptical, African-American voters defied their elected leaders in congress and black clergy who backed Clinton and turned out for Obama in droves in the wake of his Iowa caucus victory. For them, the dream of electing the nation’s first black president suddenly seemed real. For the first time, we could see Dr. King’s “mountaintop.”

The former president was not amused. The Obama campaign was “the biggest fairy tale I’ve ever seen,” he said.

It was a curious posture for a man who had been universally beloved in the black community. It may not have been so tragic, if he had stopped there. He didn’t.

“It was unbelievable down here in 2007 and 2008,” said Bridget Tripp, a Democratic organizer from Lexington, South Carolina who supported Obama in that year’s primary told CNN. “Bill Clinton was going through downtown Columbia calling Barack Obama a racist.”

Black voters, who once greeted both Clintons with admiration, soured. They accounted for more than half of the South Carolina primary voters. Obama won almost 80% of them.

“The loss was a stinging defeat for the Clintons,” wrote CNN’s Peter Hamby. “[The Clinton’s were] a Southern power couple who viewed their longstanding friendships in the African-American community as crucial bulwark against any Democratic foe.”

Hillary Clinton never recovered and many are still blaming her husband for the loss in South Carolina.

Without a doubt, should she decide to run again, Hillary Clinton will capture the lion’s share of the black vote no matter who her primary (or general election) opponent is. The real question will be enthusiasm and, by extension, turnout. “… There are some lingering questions, if not antipathy, towards them,” said the Rev. Al Sharpton who is among President Obama’s staunchest supporters. Clinton 2016 will have to do more than repair old wounds; they’ll need to all but erase them.

Do I think it possible? Absolutely. Nobody forgives quite like black voters and there is no more skilled political figure than Hillary Clinton.

Her proficiency and leadership on issues, both foreign and domestic, will be tough for any opponent to effectively assail. It will be rough rowing but, in the coming months, a Clinton candidacy means she will begin spelling out key positions in an attempt to cure fractures on the left. Furthermore, no one knows the Clinton narrative better than the Clintons themselves, and no one is better situated to re-write that history.

However, in my estimation, the third challenge is the most crucial and defining. Firing up black voters may prove to be the most difficult to surmount. The ’90s are ancient history for most, and many voters weren’t even born then. By all accounts, the Clintons have rectified fissures with President Obama himself—even if acrimony persists between their respective teams. After all, the president nominated her to lead the State Department and has reportedly even began taking counsel from the former president—who he affectionately called the “Explainer-In-Chief.” Leaving Bill alone at the microphone with the presidential seal behind him is one thing, but that doesn’t mean black America has forgotten. I am betting they haven’t. Somebody, somewhere is collecting videotape from the 2008 campaign trail.

The highlight reel could be damning.

Bill Clinton famously described President Obama as “luckier than a dog with two di**s” in facing a challenger like Mitt Romney in 2012. Hillary will have to be thrice as lucky.

Author and filmmaker Goldie Taylor is a former political consultant and MSNBC contributor. Her column #BreakingBlack appears on theGrio.com every Monday. You can follow Goldie on Twitter @goldietaylor.