Biden’s 1st 100 Days: ‘I Welcome Different Ideas’

A few days ago, U.S. President Joe Biden delivered his first speech to a joint session of Congress. Atypical and symbolic due to pandemic restrictions and the presence of two women in power — Vice President Kamala Harris and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi — the event itself is a sign that politics worldwide (and in the United States) are showing an interesting and necessary opening. The traditional meeting, which marks a point of departure for the four-year agenda that Biden described as his will to “bring America back,” was the setting for an overview of his first three months in office. These have been intense times for the government, with some interesting definitions.

First, we must consider that, while in Argentina we are (sadly) used to extreme pendulum shifts and dramatic oscillations (not only when it comes to politics), in the United States changes are subtler, even when high-impact speeches may raise wild expectations in relation to the real implications. There is more continuity than rupture, and sudden changes of direction are rare, as they only occur once Congress approves them, which involves a whole process of negotiation.

Certainly, the success of Biden’s administration regarding his strategy in the fight against COVID-19 has been his greatest asset these days. The change in perception of a society devastated by the virus, with a huge number of reported infections and deaths and no response from the government of his predecessor, Donald Trump, led to the major impact of the new administration, which seeks to boost people’s optimism through economic recovery and job creation. Biden exceeded his election promise of 100 million vaccinations in the first 100 days, delivering 220 million vaccines. The gradual “return to normalcy,” with enviable economic indicators, represents a solid foundation for the changes that the administration plans to introduce. Even after such achievement, he avoided triumphalism and early celebrations. This certainly represents another subtle difference with the ways of Argentina, which celebrates with great fanfare the arrival of an airplane with an insignificant number of vaccination doses that end up in the arms of militants, relatives, friends, escorts and government employees.

Biden proposes a paradigm shift, positing that “big government is a better government.” Having the state as the protagonist and activator of the economy is undoubtedly a risky move that is contrary to the historical tendencies in both political parties to move toward a smaller and less interventionist central government. Declaring that “the very health of our nation is at stake,” the president defended his new and comprehensive government intervention programs.

This represents a great commitment to the middle class, affected by the pandemic, and a clear message to Wall Street. In addition to the 160 million $1,400 relief checks that are already in the pockets of more than 127.5 million citizens, Biden is aiming for a massive $1.8 trillion package, described by some American media as “one of the most progressive agendas of any major party presidential candidate in history.” The American Families Plan, the Immigration Plan (under the leadership of Vice President Harris and with significant investments in Central American nations, especially Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala) and the ambitious American Jobs Plan summarize a strong state intervention in the area of family support, infrastructure, increase in the minimum wage, job creation and consumption. All this goes hand in hand with enthusiastic support and encouragement for the creation of trade unions.

Biden aspires to finance this state outlay by raising the corporate tax rate, which Republicans have cut in recent years, and forcing those earning more than $400,000 a year and multinationals to pay more taxes. Something similar was proposed at a Group of Twenty meeting by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen when she urged the adoption of a minimum tax on global corporate income. The trickle-down theory has failed, and it is time for those at the bottom and in the middle to pressure those who have the most to pay. How delighted Bernie Sanders must be. It smells like socialism.

Biden’s aim involves all this, but it also demands accomplishing unity of the American people, restoring the value of democracy and rebuilding his credibility. Impatient, he is aware that the economic urgency, the dynamics of the pandemic, the end of the “electoral honeymoon” or a sudden mood change in society resulting from the usual social events in the U.S. require quick moves for the approval of a package of key laws. The paths are limited and the Republicans’ willingness to negotiate will be as well. They must recompose themselves after their defeat and begin to work out an opposition path (with or without Trump) for the next elections.

Internationally, the return to multilateralism and the reorientation of his ties with Europe, Japan, South Korea and Australia are encouraging signs. However, except for his accusation that Vladimir Putin’s Russia (which Trump maintained strong ties to) is a new member of the bad guys’ club (China, Iran, North Korea), not much has changed from his predecessor when it comes to international matters. Biden stated that he will stand firm against autocrats who are America’s adversaries. Perhaps that is why China has never been mentioned so many times and with such emphasis during a presidential speech in the first 100 days in office. The Asian power has become a true competitor among equals in the military, technological and economic spheres and is claiming its place. Biden made it clear that he will not tolerate unfair trade practices, intellectual property theft or policies of interference in the West, challenging China even in those areas where it has shown the best performance (electric vehicles, clean energy or the production and distribution of vaccines). Biden aspires to make the U.S. into the “global arsenal” of vaccines against COVID-19. Vaccine diplomacy is no longer the exclusive preserve of the East.

Although still far from the fictional setting posed by James Stavridis and Elliot Ackerman in “2034,” where the U.S. and China engage in open military conflict over Taiwan (which Thomas Friedman analyzed in his recent article in The New York Times), the potential for conflict exists, and China and other countries are rapidly catching up with the U.S. in the technological arena, something that Biden considers “deadly serious.” Developing and mastering the products and technologies of the future will prevent China from becoming the world’s most influential power.

For the time being, Americans seem to approve of what has been done. In economic terms, the forecasts indicate good times and growth (according to the International Monetary Fund, this year the U.S. will grow by 6.4%). The management of his relationship with Republicans and his capacity to make progress on the changes he calls for constitute the main domestic challenges.

Perhaps that is the reason why — and I confess it fills me with a touch of envy — Biden has called for unity of political forces. “I would like to meet with those who have ideas that are different. I welcome those ideas,” he said, referring to his willingness to work with Republicans, although he made it clear that doing nothing is not an option. Nothing could be further from our domestic petty politics.

The author is the former Assistant Secretary of International Relations and Cooperation of the Province of Buenos Aires.