Some Democrats running for the White House in 2020 have made it clear they support some form of program to make amends to black Americans for more than 200 years of slavery.
But there’s one word nearly of them are dodging: “Reparations.”
Sen. Kamala Harris of California first opened the door to a discussion about reparations this month. She was asked on a radio show what her position is on the controversial issue and indicated she supports some action.
“America has a history of 200 years of slavery,” she said. “We had Jim Crow. We had legal segregation in America for a very long time. We’ve got to recognize back to that earlier point, people aren’t starting out on the same base, recognize that, give people a lift up.”
When asked directly if she’s for some kind of reparations, she said, “Yes I am.” But she never used the word herself.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts also indicated she favors some sort of action without describing this as “reparations.”
Instead, she talked about the need to “talk about the right way to address it and make change.” When asked about reparations for Native Americans, she said that should also be “part of the conversation.”
And on Monday night, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont was asked about reparations on CNN and whether it was on purpose or not, he also declined to use the word.
“What do they mean?” Sanders said when asked about other candidates’ positions on reparations. “I’m not sure that anyone is very clear. What I just said is that I think that we must do everything that we can to address the massive level of disparity that exists in this country.”
When asked again if he supports reparations, Sanders said, “Read what she [Warren] said. What does that mean? She means, I think, I don’t want to put words in her mouth, is what I said, OK?”
There was one exception. After initially avoiding the word “reparations” last week, former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julian Castro, perhaps in a slip, finally used it in an MSNBC interview Monday night.
“I have long believed that this country should resolve its original sin of slavery, and that one of the ways we should consider doing that is through reparations for people who are the descendants of slaves,” he said.
Campaign spokespeople for Harris, Warren, and Sanders declined to explain if the candidates are making a conscious decision to avoid saying the word “reparations.” But one reason they might be shying away from it is how unpopular the idea has been in recent years.
Political consultants often advise candidates to avoid a term that could have negative connotations or to serve up a soundbite that could be exploited by opponents.
A 2016 poll showed 68 percent of U.S. adults oppose paying reparations to the descendants of slaves. Just 26 percent said those payments should be made. Another reason may be uncertainty over the definition of reparations, which could be changing in this election cycle. The term has been generally understood to mean direct cash payments to descendants of slaves.
But some candidates have indicated alternatives, such as government programs that might be seen as a form of reparations.
Harris, for example, said as part of her answer about reparations that one solution could be her LIFT Act, which would give tax credits to families who earn less than $100,000 a year.
Warren has talked about her housing bill in the context of reparations. “I have a housing bill that talks about more recent forms of discrimination which we also need to address head-on,” she said.
Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., indicated last year that his idea to give everyone born in the U.S. a $1,000 “opportunity account” could be seen as a form of reparations.
Whatever the reason, most candidates seem to willing to talk about the concept as part of a left-wing agenda, without naming it. When asked to clarify her position on reparations over the weekend in the context of Native Americans, Warren talked about “responsibilities” and healing “injustices,” but never used the “R” word.
“I fully support the federal government doing far more to live up to its existing trust and treaty responsibilities, and that includes a robust discussion about historical injustices against Native people,” she said.
