Connect with us

Politics

Column: Biden's legacy, like Jimmy Carter's, is complex — and it's in Donald Trump's hands now

Published

on

Column: Biden's legacy, like Jimmy Carter's, is complex — and it's in Donald Trump's hands now

By the standard President Biden set himself, the core purpose he proclaimed when he ran in 2020, it is impossible to assess his one-term presidency as anything but a failure.

“We are in a battle for the soul of this nation,” Biden said as he began his campaign in 2019. “If we give Donald Trump eight years in the White House, he will forever and fundamentally alter the character of this nation. And I cannot stand by and watch that happen.”

Now Trump has a chance to do precisely what Biden wanted to prevent — to complete eight years in the White House and put his stamp on American politics for decades to come. And there will be little Biden can do beyond stand by and watch.

Biden’s insistence on running for a second term at the age of 81 despite voters’ doubts that he was up to the job, and his disastrous debate performance in June, threw his party into a three-week-long crisis. By the time he dropped out of the race in July, it was too late to stage an orderly competition among potential successors; his vice president, Kamala Harris, had only 103 days to campaign.

But there was far more to Biden’s four years in office than his physical decline and his monumental blunder in trying to run.

Advertisement

The death of former President Carter serves as a reminder that presidents who look like failures on the way out the door are often reassessed more generously a decade or four down the road.

Carter left office in 1981 after a single term as the popular archetype of presidential failure thanks to a stagnant economy, foreign policy crises and a landslide defeat to Ronald Reagan.

Over time, though, historians began to focus on the underappreciated accomplishments of Carter’s tenure: new standards for ethics in government, a focus on human rights in foreign policy, and the first steps toward reducing U.S. dependence on fossil fuels.

So it may also be with the president who leaves office this month.

During his first two years in office, bolstered by Democratic majorities in both houses of Congress, Biden achieved an impressive record of economic legislation: a $1.9-trillion stimulus bill to help the economy recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, a $1.2-trillion infrastructure bill, the $280-billion CHIPS act to promote high-technology manufacturing, and the $2.2-trillion Inflation Reduction Act to promote clean energy.

Advertisement

After a spike of post-pandemic inflation that left grocery and gasoline prices stubbornly high, Biden’s virtuoso acts of congressional deal-making didn’t help his standing with voters as much as he hoped.

But as he noted ruefully in a valedictory speech last month, Americans may recognize the full benefits of those laws only once he’s out of office.

“I know it’s been hard for many Americans to see, and I understand it,” the president said. “They’re just trying to figure out how to put three squares on the table. But I believe it was the right thing to do … [to] set America on a stronger course for the future.”

“In the space of one term, he did a lot,” said historian Julian E. Zelizer of Princeton University, who has already begun work on a book about the Biden presidency. “Those are bills that will reap dividends for years to come.

“At the same time, politics matters,” Zelizer added. “One-term presidents who don’t succeed politically often give way to a successor who moves the country in a very different direction — and that’s part of their legacy, too. … Both things — the successes and failures — can be true at the same time.”

Advertisement

The tragedy of Biden’s presidency is that he once suggested an alternative path — that he might decide to serve only one term as a transitional president.

“I view myself as a bridge, not as anything else,” Biden said during his 2020 campaign. “There’s an entire generation of leaders you saw stand behind me. They are the future of this country.”

But once he was in office, aides said, he never seriously considered passing up a second term.

He saw himself as the only candidate who had proved that he could defeat Trump. And when Democrats did relatively well in the 2022 congressional election, he viewed the result as confirmation that his approach was working.

His 80th birthday came 12 days later — and his age, despite his denials, was beginning to show. By the middle of 2023, 77% of voters said they thought Biden was too old to serve another term, including a stunning 69% of Democrats.

Advertisement

“His decision to run was an act with massive consequences,” Zelizer said. “A younger candidate might have been able to change the course of the election.”

The irony now is that Biden’s legacy now rests in Trump’s hands.

If Trump manages to dismantle most or all of the programs Biden put in place and remakes the political landscape as Reagan did in the 1980s, Biden’s achievements will prove to have been short-lived.

But if Trump fails — if his administration proves chaotic, if Democrats take control of Congress in 2026, and if a next-generation Democrat retakes the White House in 2028 — the Biden legacy may get a second life.

Neither of those scenarios, of course, is one Biden ever sought. But now he is left, as he once feared, to merely stand and watch what happens.

Advertisement

Politics

Playing catchup to Republicans, Democrats launch ‘largest-ever’ partisan national voter registration campaign

Published

on

Playing catchup to Republicans, Democrats launch ‘largest-ever’ partisan national voter registration campaign

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Acknowledging that “we’ve been getting our butts kicked for years now by the Republicans on voter registration,” Democratic National Committee (DNC) Chair Ken Martin on Tuesday announced the DNC will spend millions of dollars to get “back in the game.”

Martin said that the newly created “When We Count” initiative, which he described as the party’s “largest ever voter registration effort … will train hundreds of fellows throughout the country to register tens of thousands of new voters in communities across the country.”

The announcement by the DNC, in what Martin called an “all hands on deck moment,” comes in the wake of massive voter registration gains by Republicans in recent years and ahead of November’s midterms, when Democrats aim to win back majorities in the House and Senate and a whopping 36 states hold elections for governor.

“For too long, Democrats have ceded ground to Republicans on registering voters,” Martin pointed out. “Between 2020 and ’24 alone, our party lost a combined 2.1 million registered voters. Meanwhile, Republicans gained 2.4 million voters.”

Advertisement

GOP OVERTAKES DEMOCRATS ON VOTER ROLLS IN KEY SWING STATE AFTER YEARS OF DEM DOMINANCE

Democratic National Committee chair Ken Martin addresses party members at the DNC’s summer meeting, on Aug. 25, 2025, in Minneapolis, Minnesota. (Paul Steinhauser/Fox News)

The latest example is North Carolina, where new State Board of Elections data indicated that Republicans officially surpassed Democrats in voter registration for the first time in the crucial southeastern battleground state’s history.

Martin said a key reason for the Democrats’ deficit is that “Republicans have invested heavily in targeted partisan registration” to mobilize and grow their base of voters.

TRUMP TOUTS NEW INFLATION NUMBERS AS AFFORDABILITY ISSUE FRONT AND CENTER AHEAD OF MIDTERMS

Advertisement

But he lamented that “on the left” voter registration for decades has largely been led by nonpartisan advocacy organizations and civic “which limits their ability to engage in partisan conversations about registering as a Democrat.”

Martin said the new effort “is going to require everyone,” including the national, state and local parties, as well as outside groups and political campaigns, “participating in this critical work.”

Pointing to the sweeping ballot box successes by President Donald Trump and the GOP in the 2024 elections, when Republicans won back the White House and Senate and held onto their House majority, Martin said “we can’t just assume that certain demographics, whether they be young voters, voters of color or otherwise, will automatically support the Democratic Party. We have to earn every registration so that we can earn every vote.”

The DNC’s seven-figure initiative, which Martin said would kick off in the western battleground states of Arizona and Nevada, “puts our national party and local parties back in the game. When we count, we’ll begin to chip away at the Republican advantage as we prepare to organize everywhere and win everywhere in 2026.”

The Democratic National Committee announced on Tuesday it will spend millions to shift its voter registration strategy ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. (Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images)

Advertisement

The DNC, as it ramps up to this year’s midterm elections, also faces a formidable fundraising deficit compared to the rival Republican National Committee (RNC).

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

RNC Communications Director Zach Parkinson, pointing to the DNC’s campaign cash problems, charged in a statement to Fox News Digital that “Ken Martin has driven the DNC into debt, overseen anemic fundraising.”

“We at the RNC think he’s the perfect person to oversee Democrats voter registration efforts,” Parkinson added, in a shot at the DNC chair.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

House Democrats challenge new Homeland Security order limiting lawmaker visits to immigration facilities

Published

on

House Democrats challenge new Homeland Security order limiting lawmaker visits to immigration facilities

Twelve House Democrats who last year sued the Trump administration over a policy limiting congressional oversight of immigrant detention facilities returned to federal court Monday to challenge a second, new policy imposing further limits on such unannounced visits.

In December, those members of Congress won their lawsuit challenging a Department of Homeland Security policy from June that required a week’s notice from lawmakers before an oversight visit. Now they’re accusing Homeland Security of having “secretly reimposed” the requirement last week.

In a Jan. 8 memorandum, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem wrote that “Facility visit requests must be made a minimum of seven (7) calendar days in advance. Any requests to shorten that time must be approved by me.”

The lawmakers who challenged the policies are led by Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) and include five members from California: Reps. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), Lou Correa (D-Santa Ana), Jimmy Gomez (D-Los Angeles), Raul Ruiz (D-Indio) and Norma Torres (D-Pomona).

Advertisement

Last summer, as immigration raids spread through Los Angeles and other parts of Southern California, many Democrats including those named in the lawsuit were denied entry to local detention facilities. Before then, unannounced inspections had been a common, long-standing practice under congressional oversight powers.

“The duplicate notice policy is a transparent attempt by DHS to again subvert Congress’s will…and this Court’s stay of DHS’s oversight visit policy,” the plaintiffs wrote in a federal court motion Monday requesting an emergency hearing.

On Saturday, three days after Renee Nicole Good was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent, three members of Congress from Minnesota attempted to conduct an oversight visit of an ICE facility near Minneapolis. They were denied access.

Afterward, lawyers for Homeland Security notified the lawmakers and the court of the new policy, according to the court filing.

In a joint statement, the plaintiffs wrote that “rather than complying with the law, the Department of Homeland Security is attempting to get around this order by re-imposing the same unlawful policy.”

Advertisement

“This is unacceptable,” they said. “Oversight is a core responsibility of Members of Congress, and a constitutional duty we do not take lightly. It is not something the executive branch can turn on or off at will.”

Congress has stipulated in yearly appropriations packages since 2020 that funds may not be used to prevent a member of Congress “from entering, for the purpose of conducting oversight, any facility operated by or for the Department of Homeland Security used to detain or otherwise house aliens.”

That language formed the basis of the decision last month by U.S. District Court Judge Jia Cobb in Washington, who found that lawmakers cannot be denied entry for visits “unless and until” the government could show that no appropriations money was being used to operate detention facilities.

In her policy memorandum, Noem wrote that funds from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which supplied roughly $170 billion toward immigration and border enforcement, are not subject to the limitations of the yearly appropriations law.

“ICE must ensure that this policy is implemented and enforced exclusively with money appropriated by OBBBA,” Noem said.

Advertisement

Noem said the new policy is justified because unannounced visits pull ICE officers away from their normal duties. “Moreover, there is an increasing trend of replacing legitimate oversight activities with circus-like publicity stunts, all of which creates a chaotic environment with heightened emotions,” she wrote.

The lawmakers, in the court filing, argued it’s clear that the new policy violates the law.

“It is practically impossible that the development, promulgation, communication, and implementation of this policy has been, and will be, accomplished — as required — without using a single dollar of annually appropriated funds,” they wrote.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

Published

on

Video: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

new video loaded: Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

transcript

transcript

Minnesota and Illinois Sue Trump Administration Over ICE Deployments

Minnesota and Illinois filed federal lawsuits against the Trump administration, claiming that the deployment of immigration agents to the Minneapolis and Chicago areas violated states’ rights.

This is, in essence, a federal invasion of the Twin Cities and Minnesota, and it must stop. We ask the courts to end the D.H.S. unlawful behavior in our state. The intimidation, the threats, the violence. We ask the courts to end the tactics on our places of worship, our schools, our courts, our marketplaces, our hospitals and even funeral homes.

Advertisement
Minnesota and Illinois filed federal lawsuits against the Trump administration, claiming that the deployment of immigration agents to the Minneapolis and Chicago areas violated states’ rights.

By Jackeline Luna

January 12, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending