Here's where 2020 Democrats stand on slavery reparations
By Megan Henney
Published June 20, 2019
Election
FOXBusiness

Democrats ramp up reparations rhetoric on campaign trail
Conservative author David hαɾɾιs Jr. and former Hillary Clinton campaign adviser Antjuan Seawright discuss whether the list of 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls are moving further to the left of the political scale.

As the 2020 race Opens a New Window.  begins to heat up – 23 Democrats have already filed to run for president with the Federal Election Commission – some of the biggest talking points and policy debates are beginning to come into focus.

That includes the discussion of reparations for the descendants of slaves in the U.S., a policy that’s been addressed by several Democratic presidential hopefuls – a marked turn from previous election cycles. Both Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic nominee, and former President Barack Obama opposed reparations.

The purpose behind reparations is to address racial inequality that’s lingered in the country; for instance, a study by the Pew Research Center in 2017 found that the median income of white households is $171,000 -- 10 times that of black households ($17,100).

Although critics argue that reparations are impractical to calculate how to fairly distribute, a new paper published in the Social Science Quarterly estimated it could cost between $5.9 trillion and $14.2 trillion. The author of the paper calculated that number based on the number of hours all slaves worked in the U.S. from when the country was officially established in 1776.

On Wednesday, as the policy begins to gain traction ahead of the presidential election, the House held its first discussion in a decade on reparations for the descendants of slaves, debating H.R. 40, which calls for a commission to “study and consider a national apology and proposal for reparations for the institution of slavery, its subsequent de jure and de facto racial and economic discrimination against African-Americans.”

Testimony in favor of reparations came from several witnesses, including actor Danny Glover and writer Ta-Nehisi Coates, the author of “The Case for Reparations Opens a New Window. ” and Sen. Cory Booker -- a Democratic presidential candidate.

Here’s a closer look at what the New Jersey Democrat and some of the top Democratic presidential candidates have said about reparations.

Cory Booker: Booker supports reparations, and during the hearing on Wednesday, laid out his reasoning in a passionate testimony, questioning whether the U.S. was “truly free from the historically rooted and hideous legacy of slavery.”

“I believe right now, today, we have a historic opportunity to break the silence, to speak to the ugly past and talk constructively about how we will move this nation forward,” he said.

Booker also introduced a Senate companion to H.R. 40, according to his website Opens a New Window. , garnering 12 co-sponsors from his colleagues.

Elizabeth Warren: The Massachusetts senator was one of the 12 co-sponsors of Booker’s Senate bill (which calls for a study of reparations -- not reparations). To be sure, however, Warren has said she supports the federal government issuing reparations to black Americans who were affected by slavery.

“We must confront the dark history of slavery and government-sanctioned discrimination in this country that has had many consequences including undermining the ability of Black families to build wealth in America for generations,” Warren, said in a statement to Reuters Opens a New Window. in February.

Bernie Sanders: Sen. Sanders, like Warren, also co-sponsored Booker’s bill. But he’s also hesitated publicly about whether to back reparations. In March, during an interview with ABC’s "The View," the Vermont independent shied away from pledging his full support.

“I think what we have got to do is pay attention to distressed communities: black communities, Latino communities, and white communities, and as president, I pledge to do that,” Sanders said when asked about the issue.

@atrupar
Bernie Sanders on reparations on The View: "I think that right now our job is to address the crises facing the American people in our communities, and I think there are better ways to do that than just writing out a check."

“I think that right now, our job is to address the crises facing the American people and our communities, and I think there are better ways to do that than just writing out a check,” he said in response to a question about whether he supported reparations in the form of money.

Kamala hαɾɾιs: In April, Sen. hαɾɾιs, D-Calif., said she supports a study on reparations (and, along with Sanders and Warren, co-signed Booker’s bill). However, she has been non-committal about whether she ultimately supports payments.

“When you are talking about the years and years and years of trauma that were experienced because of slavery, because of Jim Crow and because of all that we have seen in terms of institutional and legal discrimination and racism, this is very real and it needs to be studied,” she said during a CNN town hall in April. “And we need to look at exactly how the response should be played out.”

Joe Biden: The former vice president remains an outlier among the top, progressive Democratic candidates as he has not voiced support for reparations, nor has he endorsed H.R. 40.

“[Biden] believes that we should gather the data necessary to have an informed conversation about reparations, but he has not endorsed a specific bill,” a spokesperson told Vice this week.

Julian Castro: Former Housing and Urban Development Secretary and San Antonio Mayor Julián Castro was one of the first presidential candidates to say he would consider reparations for black people in the U.S.

“I’ve long believed the country should consider reparations because of the atrocity of slavery,” Castro said in March. “I also believe that we’re never going to fully heal as a country from the racial divide until we’ve addressed the tremendous wrong that was done with slavery.”

If president, Castro said that he would create a commission or task force to determine the best course of action for reparations.

Yes, slavery was bad in the US. No, reparations for something bad that happened 150 years ago is not a good idea. 

Reparations for ANY large-scale tragedy are a bad idea. In France, the survivors of the "h0Ɩ0cαųst" are getting free money for simply existing when that money could be used towards other, more valuable things. 

The first slaves in USA were About 100 Irish children.  

So we have an anonymous troll/coward downthumbing a post that is completely conservative and traditional Catholic. Every response in this thread has been positive.

I guess there must be some agents among us. Maybe they even put on a good, traditional face to better mask their purpose. 

Maybe Booker should make reparations.  

[color=var(--sc)]OCTOBER 21, 2018[/color]
[color=var(--atc)]Cory Booker accused of sɛҳuąƖ assault ... by a man?[/color]
By Monica Showalter
Sen. Spartacus Booker of New Jersey is shaping to be quite a piece of work.
After grandstanding through the Senate confirmation hearings about the evils of sɛҳuąƖ harassment as he sat there in high-eyed judgment on the blameless Judge Brett Kavanaugh, calling himself 'Spartacus' for his feigned moral courage, he found himself exposed as a hypocrite as word of his 1992 first-person essay about how he sɛҳuąƖly harassing a woman made its way back to print, in that Internet-is-forever reality. 
Not much moral authority over Kavanaugh, pal.
Now it's gotten even worse: Some man has come out and said Booker sɛҳuąƖly assaulted him, in 2014.
According to GatewayPundit, which has a four-page written statement from the still-anonymous victim:

[color=var(--sc)]An anonymous gαy male stepped forward today and released a shocking description on how he was sɛҳuąƖly assaulted by Senator Cory Booker back in 2014.
The man claims Booker came to his workplace to speak, met him as he was coming out of the men’s room, and then pulled him back into the restroom and sɛҳuąƖly assaulted him.
The young man is a gαy man and Democrat. The man tells a very detailed analysis on what took place at his work.
American Thinker[/color]

Okay, reparations for slavery but that money is taken from the Israel defense aid package. How do Republicans defend billions to Israel but laugh at reparations? 

That said, we do this and it won't be the end of reparations. All the other minorities will want their piece of the pie, too. 

The first slaves in USA were About 100 Irish children.  

Yes, and then there were many more fleeing the forced starvation in Ireland by the English, who came as indentured servants.

It's been too long, too many Americans today weren't involved (neither were ANY of their ancestors), the whole thing is impossible to implement.

Plus the whole premise is ridiculous. The premise is given at the beginning of the article: that there is a huge "wage gap" for blacks which Leftists choose to blame completely on good-old white supremacy, Jim Crow, blatant discrimination against Blacks by a bunch of good-old-boys with thick southern drawls who apparently run every company in the US.

They hire a white guy to be a computer programmer, they pay him $90,000 a year. They also hire a black guy to do the same job (I'm trying to keep a straight face here...hey, this is just a hypothetical) and they give him $20,000 a year.

Like I said: ridiculous.

Do you REALLY THINK that's how Google, Microsoft, and other major corporations operate today? I don't think we have 1920's era KKK members (who were Democrats, by the way!) from Alabama at the heads of most large corporations in America. Somehow I doubt it. First of all most corporations are headquartered in places outside the Deep South!

I also don't think they could get away with something like that today. The culture is simply NOT supportive of such blatant discrimination based on color (or sex, for that matter).