White House tries to clean up Biden’s ‘garbage’ comment as Trump seizes on it
Bloomberg Creative/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The White House and Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign on Wednesday continued to do clean up from President Joe Biden’s “garbage” comment, even as former President Donald Trump seized on it and the controversy dominated the news cycle, distracting from Harris’ “closing argument.”
On Tuesday night, Biden seemed to call Trump supporters as “garbage” during a campaign call hosted by the nonprofit Voto Latino.
“And just the other day, a speaker at his rally called Puerto Rico a ‘floating island of garbage,'” Biden said, according to a video clip from the fundraiser that aired on CNN.
“I don’t — I — I don’t know the Puerto Rican that — that I know — or a Puerto Rico, where I’m fr- — in my home state of Delaware, they’re good, decent, honorable people. The only garbage I see floating out there is his supporters — his — his demonization of Latinos is unconscionable, and it’s un-American. It’s totally contrary to everything we’ve done, everything we’ve been,” Biden said.
His comments quickly drew fire from Republicans and came just as Harris was delivering her closing argument speech nearby on the Ellipse, calling for Americans to turn the page on hateful rhetoric and division in American politics.
At a campaign rally in Mount Rock, North Carolina, on Wednesday, Trump tied Harris to Biden’s comments.
“Now speaking on a call for her campaign last night, Joe Biden finally said what he and Kamala really think of our supporters. He called them garbage. And they mean it,” Trump said.
“Even though without question my supporters are far higher quality than Crooked Joe or Lyin’ Kamala,” Trump said. “My response to Joe and Kamala is very simple: you can’t lead America if you don’t love Americans.”
Biden himself posted a clarification on Tuesday night, saying that his comment was about the comedian who made the joke and “referred to the hateful rhetoric about Puerto Rico spewed by Trump’s supporter at his Madison Square Garden rally as garbage — which is the only word I can think of to describe it.”
“His demonization of Latinos is unconscionable. That’s all I meant to say. The comments at that rally don’t reflect who we are as a nation,” Biden said in the post on X.
At her daily briefing, reporters pressed White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre about Biden’s comments.
“No, he does not view Trump supporters or anybody who supports Trump as garbage,” Jean-Pierre insisted.
“The president has said this for more than three years now, he has said multiple times that he is a president for all. It doesn’t matter if you live in a red state, it doesn’t matter if you live in a blue state.”
When asked whether Biden misspoke or regrets his remarks, Jean-Pierre answered the president “clarified what he said” to ensure it was not “taken out of context.”
“He took the extra step to clarify. And, you know, you don’t see that from many elected officials, you certainly didn’t see that from the former president. And this president wanted to make sure it was not taken out of context,” Jean-Pierre said.
Jean-Pierre said the president spoke to Harris Tuesday night after her speech to congratulate her. She wouldn’t say, though, if Biden had apologized or made any reference to his comment when they spoke.
For her part, Harris tried to distance herself from the comments. In an interview with ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce, Harris was asked how she felt when she heard his “garbage” remark.
“Well, first of all, I think that the president has explained what he meant,” Harris told Bruce. “But I said it earlier, I strongly disagree with any criticism of the people based on who they vote for and I’ve made that clear throughout my career, including my speech last night before I think this all happened, which is I intend to be president for all Americans, and including those who may not vote for me in this election.”
But this incident isn’t the first time the White House and Harris’ campaign has had to play clean up after a Biden gaffe raised eyebrows. Just last week Biden was talking about Trump and said, “We gotta lock him up. Politically lock him up.”
The comments also come as Biden is planning to travel to battleground Pennsylvania twice later this week – for campaign and official events. Jean-Pierre said that for now there are now plans to adjust his schedule.
ABC News’ Kelsey Walsh, Will McDuffie and Alexandra Hurtzler contributed to this report.
(CHICAGO) — Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson is on the defensive after all seven members of the Chicago Board of Education announced their resignations Friday, an unprecedented moment in the city’s history, in protest of a $300 million loan Johnson proposed to fund teachers’ contracts and pensions.
The Chicago City Council called a special meeting for Wednesday afternoon to address the crisis, and to hear testimony from the former school board members who resigned, all of whom were hand-picked by Mayor Johnson just last year.
For months, board members for Chicago Public Schools (CPS) – the country’s fourth-largest public school system – had been under pressure by Johnson to fire CPS CEO Pedro Martinez, who was appointed in 2021 by Johnson’s predecessor, former Mayor Lori Lightfoot, for his objection to Johnson’s proposed $300 million short-term, high-interest loan to pay for the first year of the Chicago Teaches Union’s (CTU) contract. Martinez and the school board pushed back against Johnson, saying the extra borrowing would worsen the city’s already significant debt burden.
In an op-ed in the Chicago Tribune last month, Martinez said Johnson subsequently demanded his resignation, which he also refused, saying it would cause disruption during current union negotiations. Martinez added that the extra borrowing was fiscally irresponsible.
“I remain against exorbitant, short-term borrowing, a past practice that generated negative bond ratings for CPS,” Martinez wrote, in part, adding that repaying the bond and its debt service would “take away dollars from the classroom – all of which means that future generations of Chicago’s children and taxpayers will ultimately pay the price.”
The CPS board ended up passing a school budget without Johnson’s desired pension payment. The school system faces a nearly $1 billion shortfall in 2025, Martinez announced in August .
A former Cook County commissioner, Johnson worked as an organizer for the CTU beginning in 2011 and helped organize the 2012 teachers strike. Illinois State Board of Elections records show that the CTU contributed more than $2.3 million to his 2023 mayoral campaign. Johnson also received nearly $2.2 million from the American Federation of Teachers and nearly $1 million from the Illinois Federation of Teachers.
Alderman Gilbert Villegas accused Johnson of “wanting to take care of his former employer” by forcing the resignations of the board amid contract negotiations with the union. “The mayor was elected to serve the whole city, not serve the CTU,” he said.
“We agree we want to make sure CPS teachers have a fair contract, but we also want to make sure taxpayers have fair contract. Right now, the mayor has the thumb on the scale and it’s not right,” Villegas told ABC News.
Spokespersons for Johnson, the Chicago Teachers Union, and Chicago Public Schools did not respond to ABC News requests for comment.
At a press conference Monday, Johnson attacked his critics, whom he compared to supporters of slavery.
“The so-called fiscally responsible stewards are making the same argument [as] when our people wanted to be liberated and emancipated in this country,” Johnson said. “The argument was you can’t free Black people because it would be too expensive. They said that it would be fiscally irresponsible for this country to liberate Black people.”
Johnson also announced six new appointees to the board Monday, saying he would name a seventh at a later date. Under state law, the appointees aren’t required to be vetted by the city council, although Villegas said that “in the spirit of transparency and collaboration,” councilmembers ought to have the opportunity to ask them questions.
Villegas is a member of the city’s progressive caucus, which initially supported Johnson’s agenda. In an unprecedented show of unity, most of that caucus joined 41 other council members from across the political divide in signing a public letter dated Oct. 5 that said the mass resignations of the Board of Education’s former members bring “further instability to our school district” and are deserving of a public hearing.
Johnson indicated Tuesday that he would not send his new appointees to Wednesday’s meeting, saying in part that “every single mayor in the history of Chicago has had the authority to appoint board members to multiple boards. Guess who still has that authority? This mayor does.”
The CPS funding crisis is also alarming Chicago’s business community. This week, the Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce and the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago released a joint statement saying their concerns over Johnson’s push for extra borrowing and the Board of Education resignations have “escalated” their concerns about Johnson’s actions, and further said that the quality and stability of Chicago Public Schools is directly tied to “the success of Chicago businesses of every size and the long-term economic future of our city.”
The statement also called for the school board to “keep CEO Martinez in his place,” and to “reject the misguided proposal to borrow more money, and work with all parties to bring transparency and long-term fiscal stability and quality education to the school system.”
(WASHINGTON) — Democrats and Republicans have proposed vastly different policies on education – and one key difference highlights a battle that has been happening on the ground in states across the country.
Education Savings Accounts, or ESAs, and school vouchers have spurred debates at the local level for years.
ESA programs allow families to divert a designated amount of per-student public school spending to pay for expenses for private schools, microschools and homeschooling — including tuition, books, tutoring, transportation and more.
School vouchers similarly use public funds to allow students to pay for tuition.
Arizona passed the country’s first ESA program in 2011, and at least eight other states have followed its lead: Arkansas, Florida, Iowa, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Utah and West Virginia.
Former President Donald Trump has expressed support for ESAs and has proposed a plan that will allow parents to spend up to $10,000 a year per child in taxpayer money, “completely tax-free,” on alternative education or homeschooling costs.
The Democratic 2025 platform opposes using private school vouchers and tuition tax credits, opportunity scholarships, “and other schemes that divert taxpayer-funded resources away from public education.”
Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a former public school teacher who is running for vice president on Vice President Kamala Harris’ presidential ticket, has opposed private school vouchers in the past.
In opposition to a school voucher policy proposal from Republicans in his state amid the COVID-19 pandemic in 2021, Walz stated: “We are not going to defund our public schools at this time, when especially those hardest hit need them more than ever,” MPR News reported at the time.
The start of vouchers
Scholars trace the origins of school choice to the Brown v. Board of Education ruling, where the United States Supreme Court ruled that segregating public school students based on race was unconstitutional.
Anti-segregation efforts led to state-funded school voucher programs in some states like Virginia and Georgia, offering financial assistance to white students to attend all-white private academies known as segregation academies.
However, the first modern private school voucher program started in Milwaukee in 1990, as some communities of color saw vouchers as a chance to help low-income students of color attend private schools.
Vouchers also have been geared toward disabled students; however, vouchers often force students with disabilities to forfeit some Individuals with Disabilities Education Act protections because they are considered “parentally placed” in private schools.
These schools are not legally required to provide individualized or “appropriate” education to students and are not held to the same nondiscrimination standards as public schools.
Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, microschools, private schools, and homeschooling have seen a boom — and so has the availability for families to use vouchers or ESAs to fund tuition at these institutions or fund alternative forms of education and their expenses.
According to pro-ESA organization EdChoice, the number of students using ESAs has increased seven-fold between 2022 and 2024 to a total of more than 328,000 students.
As these programs continue to gain momentum, the debate about these policies continues.
Evolution of voucher and ESA programs.
The debate about ‘school choice’
How much ESA programs cost has varied from state to state — in Arizona, the ESA program has been estimated by the state governor’s office to cost the state $943,795,600 for the 2024 fiscal year for roughly 79,728 students. Meanwhile, in West Virginia, it could cost over $10 million for roughly 2,333 applicants to the 2022-2023 academic year of the program, according to the scholarship program report.
This has been one major source of contention around ESAs.
Critics of school choice, including West Virginia Education Association President Dale Lee, say that public schools are already under pressure due to underfunding and poor staffing. Shifting funds away from public schools will make it harder for them to thrive, Lee said.
“Because of the loss of funding, we’ve reduced the opportunities in the curriculum areas that they have,” said Lee, adding that vocational and technical schools have reduced the number of offerings they have and reduce the number of courses that secondary students have available.
In some cases, that includes the arts.
“As a high school teacher myself, the arts are one of the areas that for many students, that’s what drew them into the school, and that’s why they were continuing,” Lee said.
He said public education is supposed to be “the great equalizer” … “if you go back to the system of the haves and have nots, you eliminate that opportunity for students.”
Emily Kirkland, communications director at the Arizona Education Association, slammed some ESA programs for funding controversial purchases. These purchases have been dubbed “welfare for the wealthy” by critics, after a CNN analysis of state and federal data found that wealthy communities are disproportionately benefiting from these programs.
ABC affiliate KNXV-TV in Arizona analyzed ESA data for the 2022-2023 school year and found that some of the money was used for purposes that have been condemned by critics, including ski resort passes, trampoline parks and ninja warrior training centers, aeroponic indoor gardens, pianos and more.
Expenses in some states, like Arizona, are approved by program staffers.
Supporters of school choice, including president and CEO of pro-school choice EdChoice Robert Enlow, applauds the transparency, arguing that its more insight into specific expenditures than is publicly known from public schools. He adds that the expenses allow families to tailor their education to their individual needs.
“You can see in Arizona, every single minute of every single day where every single dollar is going in the ESA program, I challenge you to do that in public schools, right?” said Enlow. “You may not like where the dollars are going. There may be an issue of whether you like it, but the reality is, you know exactly where they’re going.”
Enlow adds that these programs allow students to take an individualized approach, noting that those who may have different needs based on disability, neurodiversity, and other needs can make adjustments based on those needs.
He adds that criticism over spending doesn’t take into account that, in some cases, families are buying what schools would buy: “It’s OK if a government system buys $1,000 per classroom Lego set, but it’s not OK if a family does it?”
It is unclear how successful alternative education like microschooling or homeschooling can be. Rules and regulations dictating microschool and homeschool requirements are determined by each state’s Department of Education. For example, the National Microschooling Center notes that some microschool educators do not need to be licensed teachers and some institutions do not need to follow state academic standards.
Enlow notes that as these kinds of educations become more popular, the question about what regulation should look like and how success is measured is being asked: “You can’t put a one-size-fits-all system of regulation on a system that is meant for families to have individual options and choices.”
“Successes are in children making progress towards what makes them a successful human being, a successful strategy for coping and for living and for being successful right in life,” Enlow said. “We believe, for example, that families want to have knowledge about how their kids are doing on a test, but we don’t think this is the only way to go.”
Critics are concerned about the lack of regulations and accountability about the quality of education, success of the institution and the stability of the institution.
“I called microschools the food trucks of the education industry, because they can open up, go wherever they want, and close down very quickly,” said Josh Cowen, author of “The Privateers: How Billionaires Created a Culture War and Sold School Vouchers.”
Cowen calls alternative education “a predatory environment where private schools and microschools are promising the world to each of these kids,” making it hard for families to know what the truth is because of the lack of oversight and measures of success.
He continued, “It could take months, if not years, for a parent to understand that they’ve gone to a school that has substantially altered their child’s academic trajectory. Or worse, it could take three or four years, and by then, it’s too late. And so that’s where you need oversight.”
In West Virginia, Lee argues that the school choice program has contributed to a teacher shortage, citing poor teacher pay, poor school funding and poor resources that contributes to low moral “when you’re seeing the dollars go to these microschools and learning pods where there’s no accountability.”
Enlow argues that adding more education paths for students could lead to improvements in public schools: “Who’s going to really buy a system where we’re just trying to let it continue the way it is without any kind of challenge?”
(WASHINGTON) — Once dubbed the longest general election ever, the 2024 presidential race has been flipped on its head.
A rapid ticket shuffle in the Democratic Party means what is typically a year of campaigning will be boiled down to just 10 weeks as newly-nominated Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump hit the trail after their party conventions.
Harris will be looking to maintain her momentum and Trump, in turn, will try to blunt any further progress for Democrats after President Joe Biden’s decision to step aside resulted in a significant energy shift.
“What the Harris campaign did was bring polling back to normal, and normal in a polarized age means dead heat races nationally,” Whit Ayres, a Republican pollster, told ABC News. “Now we have what’s clearly a tied race going forward.”
Next up as the race kicks into high gear, Ayres said, will be a laser-focus on the handful of swing states that will determine the electoral college winner — an area where Trump’s generally had the upper hand this cycle.
Harris this week is campaigning with her running mate, Gov. Tim Walz, in Georgia for the first time. Trump is ratcheting up his appearances with stops in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania.
The shorter campaign generally favors Harris, strategists on both sides of the aisle said, but still presents challenges for both candidates.
“The compressed calendar has reduced the surface area of attack for the Trump campaign,” said Kevin Madden, a Republican strategist who worked on Mitt Romney’s 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns. “Having to navigate a 100-day window of scrutiny is preferable to having to endure a year’s worth of attacks from your opponents.”
It also makes it likelier Harris can keep the momentum last until Americans begin casting their ballots, which in some places starts as early as late September.
“They’re peaking at the right time,” Democratic strategist Antjuan Seawright said of the Harris-Walz ticket. “And that’s what you want to do in politics because the worst thing you can do — and Trump may be suffering from this — is peak too soon.”
Still, it means less time for Harris to deliver her message to voters, who may have questions about where she stands on certain policies given her limited agenda rollout since her late entry as the nominee. Trump, meanwhile, has name recognition and legislative positions stretching back nine years.
“It’s harder for the Harris campaign to get her policies out in a short campaign,” said Douglas Herman, who led Barack Obama’s mail strategy in 2008 and 2012. “It’s harder to fill in all of the details in a short campaign.”
“The major objective for the Harris campaign is to continue to put meat on the bones for the voters,” Herman added.
Plus, if any serious blunders are made, there is less time for Harris to bounce back.
Her next big test will be her promised interview since becoming the nominee. No date has been set, though Harris said she would get her team to schedule an interview before the end of the month.
“The real risk of Harris avoiding the media for an extended period of time is first, it can’t go on forever,” said Madden. “And second, it just builds up anticipation for that first interview or press conference and turns it into a major event. That just creates added pressure on the performance.”
Then next month, Harris and Trump will meet for their first debate hosted by ABC News. The showdown, set for Sept. 10., will be held at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia.
There will also undoubtedly be unknown external factors that will impact the campaigns over the next 70 days.
“This race is so close now that I can’t help but believe it’s going to be decided by events that haven’t happened yet,” said Ayres. “When we think back on what’s happened over the last six weeks, it’s a fool’s errand to try to predict what might happen over the next six or 10 weeks.”
