Commentary

Turns Out Biden Reportedly Paid Women Less Than Men Every Single Year He Served as Senator

Combined Shape

Stumbling out of the gate and into the lead in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary after numerous allegations of inappropriate touching, Joe Biden’s campaign has gone to great lengths this year to defend the former vice president’s track record on women’s issues.

Former staffers have come out of the woodwork to defend Biden on those grounds, penning high-profile Op-Eds claiming “he was always a champion for women,” even “when no one was looking.”

Of course, the former vice president has also personally addressed such concerns, flip-flopping on the Hyde Amendment to make inroads with far-left, pro-abortion women and voicing support for the closing of the so-called gender pay gap.

A Wednesday report from The Washington Free Beacon, however, reveals that throughout his 36-year Senate career, Biden paid his average female staffer less than their male counterparts every single year.

Trending:
CNN's Don Lemon Fails to Get Guest to Take 'Bait,' Instead Gets Contradicted on Slavery

According to the outlet, the secretary of the Senate’s first biannual spending report for 1973 reveals Biden was paying his full-time female staffers $5,029 on average during his first year in office.

For reference, that is “about 68 percent of the $7,383 average paid to men during that span,” The Free Beacon noted.

Unsurprisingly, analysis of each subsequent spending report conducted during the remainder of Biden’s lengthy tenure shows this disparity was often even worse in the years that followed.

Do you think Joe Biden is a strong supporter of women?

In 1991, for example — a few short months before the Senate Judiciary Committee, under Biden’s leadership, carried out a brutal character assassination on then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas for alleged misconduct toward his female staff at the Department of Education — Biden paid his female staffers just 45 cents for every dollar a male staffer was paid.

This represented a minuscule change from a few years prior in both 1983 and 1984, when Biden paid his female staffers 44 percent of what male staffers earned.

As Biden was on his way out the door in 2008, his average female staffer was earning 66 percent of what a male employee made. The gap had widened after several years in which female staff saw a trend toward being paid the same as their male co-workers (having earned 98 percent of the average salary of male staffers in 2002).

And for those who might question the validity of this analysis, The Free Beacon went so far as to exclude from each set of calculations the salaries of anyone who was not on staff for the entirety of the six months being analyzed — so as to ensure that those who resigned, were fired or were only temporary staffers did not negatively skew the average salaries.

Now, bear in mind, this is the same man who went for broke in the final years of the Obama administration, claiming equal pay for women was “common sense” and that it was long “overdue” in the American workplace.

Related:
Congress to Waste $6 Billion on Pet Projects Like Michelle Obama Library

“Vice President Biden has fought for women’s rights his whole career,” Biden’s campaign tweeted in August.

Once again, this is a man who one former staffer says did more to support the average American woman “when no one was looking” than most politicians do when the nation’s eyes are on them.

Yet, when the eyes of the Senate’s very own auditors were on him, Biden’s actions told a different story.

And it leads one to wonder: How many other empty promises is Biden peddling for the sake of secure a more diverse voting base?

Better yet, why are Democrats always given a pass on this kind of blatant hypocrisy with regard to the so-called marginalized communities they claim to champion?

The number of empty promises made to female and non-white voters by the Democratic Party over the years is staggering, and the impacts of those promises even more so.

But perhaps that’s why so many liberals are jumping ship — because you can only talk down your nose at, or downright lie to, your constituents for so long before they catch on.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →






We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Tags:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Andrew J. Sciascia is the supervising editor of features at The Western Journal. Having joined up as a regular contributor of opinion in 2018, he went on to cover the Barrett confirmation and 2020 presidential election for the outlet, regularly co-hosting its video podcast, "WJ Live," as well.
Andrew J. Sciascia is the supervising editor of features at The Western Journal and regularly co-hosts the outlet's video podcast, "WJ Live."

Sciascia first joined up with The Western Journal as a regular contributor of opinion in 2018, before graduating with a degree in criminal justice and political science from the University of Massachusetts Lowell, where he served as editor-in-chief of the student newspaper and worked briefly as a political operative with the Massachusetts Republican Party.

He has since covered the Barrett confirmation and 2020 presidential election for The Western Journal, and now focuses his reporting on Congress and the national campaign trail. His work has also appeared in The Daily Caller.




Conversation