Biden and Trump offer worlds-apart contrasts on issues in 2024’s rare contest between two presidents

1 / 2
President Joe Biden talks with the US Border Patrol and local officials, as he looks over the southern border, on Feb. 29, 2024, in Brownsville, Texas, along the Rio Grande. (AP)
2 / 2
Republican presidential candidate and former US President Donald Trump greets supporters as he attends a rally in Schnecksville, Pennsylvania, on April 13, 2024. (REUTERS/File)
Short Url
Updated 05 May 2024
Follow

Biden and Trump offer worlds-apart contrasts on issues in 2024’s rare contest between two presidents

  • Their track records and plans leave no doubt that the man voters choose in November will seek to shape the landscape of American life in ways wholly distinct from the other

WASHINGTON: Joe Biden and Donald Trump are two presidents with unfinished business and an itch to get it done.

Their track records and plans on abortion, immigration, taxes, wars abroad — you name it — leave no doubt that the man voters choose in November will seek to shape the landscape of American life in ways wholly distinct from the other.
The choices, if the winner gets his way, are sharply defined. The onward march of regulation and incentives to restrain climate change, or a slow walk if not an about-face. Higher taxes on the super rich, or not. Abortion rights reaffirmed, or left to states to restrict or allow as each decides. Another attempt to legislate border security and orderly entry into the country, or massive deportations. A commitment to stand with Ukraine or let go.
At no time in living memory have two presidents, current and former, competed for the office. Not since Presidents Teddy Roosevelt and William Howard Taft, both Republicans, in 1912, and that didn’t work out for either of them — Democrat Woodrow Wilson won that three-way race.
More than a century later, voters again get to judge two presidents on their records alongside their promises for the next four years. Here’s where they stand on 10 of the top issues:
Abortion
BIDEN: The president has called for Congress to send him legislation that would codify in federal law the right to an abortion, which stood for nearly 50 years before being overturned by the Supreme Court. He has also criticized statewide bans on abortion in Republican states and says he will veto any potential nationwide ban should one come to his desk. In the absence of legislation, his administration has taken narrower actions, such as proposals that would protect women who travel to obtain abortions and limit how law enforcement collects medical records.
TRUMP: The former president often brags about appointing the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade, ending the constitutional right to an abortion. After dodging questions about when in pregnancy he believes the procedure should be restricted, Trump announced in April that decisions on access and cutoffs should be left to the states. He said he would not sign a national abortion ban into law. But he’s declined to say whether he would try to limit access to the abortion pill mifepristone. He told Time magazine in recent interviews that it should also be left up to states to determine whether to prosecute women for abortions or to monitor their pregnancies.
Climate/Energy
BIDEN: In a second term, Biden could be expected to continue his focus on implementing the climate provisions of his Inflation Reduction Act, which provided nearly $375 billion for things like financial incentives for electric cars and clean energy projects. Biden is also enlisting more than 20,000 young people in a national “Climate Corps,” a Peace Corps-like program to promote conservation through tasks such as weatherizing homes and repairing wetlands. Biden wants to triple the group’s size this decade. Despite all this, it’s unlikely that the US will be on track to meet Biden’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by half by 2030.
TRUMP: His mantra for one of his top priorities: “DRILL, BABY, DRILL.” Trump, who in the past cast climate change as a “hoax” and harbors a particular disdain for wind power, says it’s his goal for the US to have the cheapest energy and electricity in the world. He’d increase oil drilling on public lands, offer tax breaks to oil, gas and coal producers, speed the approval of natural gas pipelines and roll back the Biden administration’s aggressive efforts to get people to switch to electric cars, which he argues have a place but shouldn’t be forced on consumers. He has also pledged to re-exit the Paris Climate Accords, end wind subsidies and eliminate regulations imposed and proposed by the Biden administration targeting energy-inefficient kinds of lightbulbs, stoves, dishwashers and shower heads.
Democracy/Rule of law
BIDEN: Protecting democracy has been the raison d’etre behind Biden’s decision to run for reelection. In a symbolic nod to the Revolutionary War, Biden delivered his first campaign speech of 2024 near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania, where he spoke of George Washington’s decision to step down as the leader of the Continental Army after American independence was won. During the Jan. 5 speech, Biden said this year’s presidential contest is “all about” whether US democracy will survive and he regularly condemns Trump’s denial that he lost the 2020 general election. Biden has called the Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the Capitol a “day that we nearly lost America — lost it all.”
TRUMP: The former president, who famously refused to accept his loss to Biden in 2020, has not committed to accepting the results this time. “If everything’s honest, I’ll gladly accept the results,” Trump recently told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. “If it’s not, you have to fight for the right of the country.” He has said he will pardon the Jan. 6 defendants jailed for assaulting police officers and other crimes during the attack on the Capitol. He vows to overhaul the Justice Department and FBI “from the ground up,” aggrieved by the criminal charges the department has brought against him. He also promises to deploy the National Guard to cities such as Chicago that are struggling with violent crime, and in response to protests, and has also vowed to appoint a special prosecutor to go after Biden.
Federal government
BIDEN: The Biden administration is already taking steps to make it harder for any mass firings of civil servants to occur. In April, the Office of Personnel Management issued a new rule that would ban federal workers from being reclassified as political appointees or other at-will employees, which makes them easier to dismiss. That was in response to Schedule F, a 2020 executive order from Trump that reclassified tens of thousands of federal workers so they could be fired more easily.
TRUMP: The former president vows an overhaul of the federal bureaucracy, which he has long blamed for stymying his first term agenda: “I will totally obliterate the deep state.” He plans to reissue the Schedule F order stripping civil service protections. He’d then move to fire “rogue bureaucrats,” including those who ”weaponized our justice system,” and the “warmongers and America-Last globalists in the Deep State, the Pentagon, the State Department, and the national security industrial complex.” He’s pledged to terminate the Education Department and wants to curtail the independence of regulatory agencies like the Federal Communications Commission.
Immigration
BIDEN: The president continues to advocate for the comprehensive immigration bill he introduced on his first day in office, which would grant an eight-year pathway to citizenship for immigrants in the US without legal status, with a faster track for young immigrants living in the country illegally who were brought here as children. That legislation went nowhere in Congress. This year, the president backed a Senate compromise that included tougher asylum standards and billions more in federal dollars to hire more border agents, immigration judges and asylum officers. That deal collapsed on Capitol Hill due to Trump’s opposition. Biden is currently considering executive action on the border, particularly if the number of illegal crossings increases later this year.
TRUMP: The former president promises to mount the largest domestic deportation in US history — an operation that could include detention camps and the National Guard. He’d bring back policies he put in place during his first term, like the Remain in Mexico program and Title 42, which placed curbs on migrants on public health grounds. And he’d revive and expand the travel ban that originally targeted citizens from seven Muslim-majority countries. After the Oct. 7 Hamas attack on Israel, he pledged new “ideological screening” for immigrants to bar “dangerous lunatics, haters, bigots, and maniacs.” He’d also try to deport people who are in the US legally but harbor “jihadist sympathies.” He’d seek to end birthright citizenship for people born in the US whose parents are both in the country illegally.
Israel/Gaza
BIDEN: The war in Gaza, far more so than other national security considerations, has defined Biden’s foreign policy this year, with significant political implications. He has offered full-throated support for Israel since Hamas militants launched a surprise deadly assault on Oct. 7. But as the death toll in Gaza continues to climb, Biden has faced massive backlash at home. His administration is working to broker a temporary ceasefire that would release some hostages held by Hamas, which would also allow for more humanitarian aid to enter the war-torn region. Biden also calls for a two-state solution, which would have Israel existing alongside an independent Palestinian state.
TRUMP: The former president has expressed support for Israel’s efforts to “destroy” Hamas but he’s also been critical of some of Israel’s tactics. He says the country must finish the job quickly and get back to peace. He has called for more aggressive responses to pro-Palestinian protests at college campuses and applauded police efforts to clear encampments. Trump also proposes to revoke the student visas of those who espouse antisemitic or anti-American views.
LGBTQ Issues
BIDEN: The president and White House officials regularly denounce discrimination and attacks against the LGBTQ community. Shortly after he took office, Biden reversed an executive order from Trump that had largely banned transgender people from military service, and his Education Department completed a rule in April that says Title IX, the 1972 law that was passed to protect women’s rights, also bars discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity. The new rule was silent on the issue of transgender athletes.
TRUMP: The former president has pledged to keep transgender women out of women’s sports and says he will ask Congress to pass a bill establishing that “only two genders,” as determined at birth, are recognized by the United States. He promises to “defeat the toxic poison of gender ideology.” As part of his crackdown on gender-affirming care, he would declare that any health care provider that participates in the “chemical or physical mutilation of minor youth” no longer meets federal health and safety standards and won’t get federal money. He’d take similarly punitive steps in schools against any teacher or school official who “suggests to a child that they could be trapped in the wrong body.” Trump would support a national prohibition of hormonal or surgical intervention for transgender minors and bar transgender people from military service.
NATO/Ukraine
BIDEN: The president has spent much of his time rebuilding alliances unraveled by Trump, particularly NATO, a critical bulwark against Russian aggression. Since the onset of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Biden has pledged unceasing support to Kyiv and he made an unannounced visit there in February 2023 in a show of solidarity. His administration and Congress have sent tens of billions of dollars in military and other aid to Ukraine. The latest tranche of aid totaled $61 billion in weapons, ammunition and other assistance and is expected to last through this year. Continued US assistance is critical, Biden says, because he argues that Russian leader Vladimir Putin will not stop at invading Ukraine.
TRUMP: The former president has repeatedly taken issue with US aid to Ukraine and says he will continue to “fundamentally reevaluate” the mission and purpose of the NATO alliance if he returns to office. He has claimed, without explanation, that he will be able to end the war before his inauguration by bringing both sides to the negotiating table. (His approach seems to hinge on Ukraine giving up at least some of its Russian-occupied territory in exchange for a ceasefire.) On NATO, he has assailed member nations for years for failing to hit agreed-upon military spending targets. Trump drew alarms this year when he said that, as president, he had warned leaders that he would not only refuse to defend nations that don’t hit those targets, but “would encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to countries that are “delinquent.”
Tariffs/trade
BIDEN: This is where Biden and his protectionist tendencies — in a continued appeal to working-class voters — have some similarities with Trump. Biden is calling for a tripling of tariffs on Chinese steel, a move that would shield US producers from cheaper imports. The current tariff rate is 7.5 percent for both steel and aluminum but Biden wants that to go to 25 percent. Biden has also said he opposes the proposed acquisition of US Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel, because it is “vital for it to remain an American steel company that is domestically owned and operated.”
TRUMP: The former president wants a dramatic expansion of tariffs, proposing a levy of perhaps 10 percent on nearly all imported foreign goods. Penalties would increase if trade partners manipulate their currencies or engage in other unfair trading practices. He would also urge Congress to pass legislation giving the president authority to impose a reciprocal tariff on any country that imposes one on the US Much of his trade agenda has focused on China. Trump has proposed phasing out Chinese imports of essential goods including electronics, steel and pharmaceuticals and wants to ban Chinese companies from owning US infrastructure in sectors such as energy, technology and farmland. Whether higher tariffs come from a Biden administration or a Trump one, they are likely to raise prices for consumers who have already faced higher costs from inflation.
Taxes
BIDEN: In his State of the Union address, Biden proposed raising the corporate tax rate to 28 percent and the corporate minimum tax to 21 percent as a matter of “fundamental fairness” that will bring in more money to invest in Americans. The current corporate rate is 21 percent and the corporate minimum, raised under the Inflation Reduction Act, is at 15 percent for companies making more than $1 billion a year. Biden also wants to require billionaires to pay at least 25 percent of their income in taxes and to restore the child tax credit that was enacted under his 2021 COVID-19 relief package, but has since expired.
TRUMP: The former president has promised to extend the tax cuts he signed into law in 2017 and that are due to sunset at the end of 2025. That package cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent and roughly doubled the standard deduction and child tax credit.


EU needs to keep up dialogue with Israel, Dutch foreign minister says on Borrell proposal

Updated 55 min 57 sec ago
Follow

EU needs to keep up dialogue with Israel, Dutch foreign minister says on Borrell proposal

  • Disagreeing with the EU’s top diplomat who proposed to pause the dialogue with the country

PARIS: The European Union needs to continue its diplomatic dialogue with Israel amid tensions in the Middle East, Dutch foreign Caspar Veldkamp said on Monday, disagreeing with the EU’s top diplomat who proposed to pause the dialogue with the country.
European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell last week proposed that the bloc suspend its political dialogue with Israel, citing possible human rights violations in the war in Gaza, according to four diplomats and a letter seen by Reuters.


Pakistan’s top cleric says use of VPNs is against Islamic laws as the government seeks to ban them

Updated 57 min 51 sec ago
Follow

Pakistan’s top cleric says use of VPNs is against Islamic laws as the government seeks to ban them

  • VPNs are legal in most countries, however they are outlawed or restricted in places where authorities control Internet access
  • Million of Pakistanis have been unable to access the X social media platform since February 2023

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s top body of clerics has declared the use of virtual private networks, or VPNs, against Islamic laws, officials said Monday, as the Ministry of Interior sought a ban on the service that helps people evade censorship in countries with tight Internet controls.
Raghib Naeemi, the chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology, which advises the government on religious issues, said that Shariah allows the government to prevent actions that lead to the “spread of evil.” He added that any platform used for posting content that is controversial, blasphemous, or against national integrity “should be stopped immediately.”
Million of Pakistanis have been unable to access the X social media platform since February 2023, when the government blocked it ahead of parliamentary elections, except via VPN — a service that hides online activity from anyone else on the Internet
Authorities say they are seeking to ban the use of VPNs to curb militancy. However, critics say the proposed ban is part of curbs on freedom of expression.
VPNs are legal in most countries, however they are outlawed or restricted in places where authorities control Internet access or carry out online surveillance and censorship.
Among users of VPNs in Pakistan are supporters of the country’s imprisoned former Prime Minister Imran Khan, who have called for a march on Islamabad on Sunday to pressure the government for his release.
Pakistan often suspends mobile phone service during rallies of Khan’s supporters. But Naeemi’s weekend declaration that the use of VPNs is against Shariah has stunned many.
Naeemi’s edict came after the Ministry of Interior wrote a letter to the Ministry of Information and Technology asking for the VPN ban on the grounds that the service is being used by insurgents to propagate their agenda.
It said that “VPNs are increasingly being exploited by terrorists to facilitate violent activities.” The ministry also wants to deny access to “pornographic” and blasphemous content.
Last week, authorities had also asked the Internet users to register VPNs with Pakistan’s media regulator, a move which will allow increased surveillance on the users of Internet.
Pakistan is currently battling militants who have stepped up attacks in recent months.
On Friday, a separatist Baloch Liberation Army group attacked troops in Kalat, a district in Balochistan province, triggering an intense shootout in which seven soldiers and six insurgents were killed, according to police and the military. The BLA claimed the attack in a statement.


Masked men break into UK’s Windsor Castle estate

Updated 47 min 54 sec ago
Follow

Masked men break into UK’s Windsor Castle estate

  • Prince William and his family were believed to be at Adelaide Cottage, part of the Windsor Castle estate

LONDON: Two masked men broke into Britain’s royal Windsor Castle estate last month and stole two vehicles from a barn, the Sun newspaper reported on Monday.
King Charles and his wife Camilla were not in the estate at the time of the incident but Prince William and his family were believed to be at Adelaide Cottage, part of the Windsor Castle estate, the Sun reported.
The men used a stolen truck to break through a security gate at night and then scaled a six-foot fence, the paper said.
Local police said officers were called to a report of a burglary on Crown Estate land in Windsor, west of London, just before midnight on Oct. 13.
“Offenders entered a farm building and made off with a black Isuzu pick-up and a red quad bike. They then made off toward the Old Windsor/Datchet area,” Thames Valley Police told the newspaper. “No arrests have been made at this stage and an investigation is ongoing.”
Windsor Castle previously faced a security scare in 2021 when authorities arrested a man with a crossbow in the grounds of the castle who said he had wanted to kill Queen Elizabeth.


Disgraced Singapore oil tycoon sentenced to nearly 18 years for fraud

Updated 18 November 2024
Follow

Disgraced Singapore oil tycoon sentenced to nearly 18 years for fraud

  • Lim Oon Kuin was convicted in May in a case that dented the city-state’s reputation as a top Asian oil trading hub
  • His firm was among Asia’s biggest oil trading companies before its sudden and dramatic collapse in 2020

SINGAPORE: The founder of a failed Singapore oil trading company was sentenced Monday to nearly 18 years in jail for cheating banking giant HSBC out of millions of dollars in one of the country’s most serious cases of fraud.
Lim Oon Kuin, 82, better known as O.K. Lim, was convicted in May in a case that dented the city-state’s reputation as a top Asian oil trading hub.
His firm, Hin Leong Trading, was among Asia’s biggest oil trading companies before its sudden and dramatic collapse in 2020.
Sentencing him to 17 and a half years in jail, State Courts judge Toh Han Li said he agreed with the prosecution that the offenses had the potential to undermine confidence in Singapore’s oil trading industry.
The amount involved “stood at the top-tier of cheating cases” in the city-state, a global financial hub, he said.
The judge shaved off a year due to Lim’s age but did not give any sentencing discount on account of his health, saying the Singapore Prison Service has adequate medical facilities.
Lim, however, remained free on bail after his lawyers said they would file an appeal before the High Court.
State prosecutors had sought a 20-year jail term, saying “this is one of the most serious cases of trade financing fraud that has ever been prosecuted in Singapore.”
The defense had argued for seven years imprisonment, playing down the harm caused by Lim’s offenses and citing his age and poor health.
The businessman faced a total of 130 criminal charges involving hundreds of millions of dollars, but prosecutors tried and convicted him on just three – two of cheating HSBC, and a third of encouraging a Hin Leong executive to forge documents.
Prosecutors said he tricked HSBC into disbursing nearly $112 million by telling the bank that his firm had entered into oil sales contracts with two companies.
The transactions were, in fact, “complete fabrications, concocted on the accused’s directions,” prosecutors said, adding that his actions “tarnished Singapore’s hard-earned reputation as Asia’s leading oil trading hub.”
Lim built Hin Leong from a single delivery truck shortly before Singapore became independent in 1965.
It grew into a major supplier of fuel used by ships, and its rise in some ways mirrored Singapore’s growth from a gritty port to an affluent financial hub.
The firm played a key role in helping the city-state become the world’s top ship refueling port, observers say, and it expanded into ship chartering and management with a subsidiary that has a fleet of more than 150 vessels.
But it came crashing down in 2020 when the coronavirus pandemic plunged oil markets into unprecedented turmoil, exposing Hin Leong’s financial troubles, and Lim sought court protection from creditors.
In a bombshell affidavit seen by AFP in 2020, Lim revealed the oil trader had “in truth... not been making profits in the last few years” – despite having officially reported a healthy balance sheet in 2019.
He admitted that the firm he founded after emigrating from China had hidden $800 million in losses over the years, while it also owed almost $4 billion to banks.
Lim took responsibility for ordering the company not to report the losses and confessed it had sold off inventories that were supposed to backstop loans.


Climate talks in Azerbaijan head into their second week, coinciding with G20 in Rio

Updated 18 November 2024
Follow

Climate talks in Azerbaijan head into their second week, coinciding with G20 in Rio

  • Talks in Baku are focused on getting more climate cash for developing countries to transition away from fossil fuels
  • Several experts put the sum needed at around $1 trillion

BAKU: United Nations talks on getting money to curb and adapt to climate change resumed Monday with tempered hope that negotiators and ministers can work through disagreements and hammer out a deal after slow progress last week.
That hope comes from the arrival of the climate and environment ministers from around the world this week in Baku, Azerbaijan, for the COP29 talks. They’ll give their teams instructions on ways forward.
“We are in a difficult place,” said Melanie Robinson, economics and finance program director of global climate at the World Resources Institute. “The discussion has not yet moved to the political level — when it does I think ministers will do what they can to make a deal.”
Talks in Baku are focused on getting more climate cash for developing countries to transition away from fossil fuels, adapt to climate change and pay for damages caused by extreme weather. But countries are far apart on how much money that will require. Several experts put the sum needed at around $1 trillion.
“One trillion is going to look like a bargain five, 10 years from now,” said Rachel Cleetus from the Union of Concerned Scientists, citing a multitude of costly recent extreme weather events from flooding in Spain to hurricanes Helene and Milton in the United States. “We’re going to wonder why we didn’t take that and run with it.”
Meanwhile, the world’s biggest decision makers are halfway around the world as another major summit convenes. Brazil is hosting the Group of 20 summit, which runs Nov. 18-19, bringing together many of the world’s largest economies. Climate change — among other major topics like rising global tensions and poverty — will be on the agenda.
Harjeet Singh, global engagement director for the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative, said G20 nations “cannot turn their backs on the reality of their historical emissions and the responsibility that comes with it.”
“They must commit to trillions in public finance,” he said.
In a written statement on Friday, United Nations Climate Change’s executive secretary Simon Stiell said “the global climate crisis should be order of business Number One” at the G20 meetings.
Stiell noted that progress on stopping more warming should happen both in and out of climate talks, calling the G20’s role “mission-critical.”