It appears that Joe Biden is on another spree to redistribute the second-most prestigious civilian award to various individuals, even selecting Liz Cheney and Bennie Thompson, both controversial figures associated with the biased inquiry into the events of January 6th at the Capitol. Biden’s preference for such politically charged figures reinforces widespread suspicions about his administration’s motives and objectives. The White House’s attempt to frame this as a celebration of ‘common decency and commitment to serving others’ is a thin veneer for the apparent political maneuvering at play.
The Presidential Citizens Medal, as it’s called, is intended to honor citizens who have ‘performed extraordinary acts of service for their nation or fellow citizens’. However, by awarding it to figures deeply embroiled in partisan politics, Biden risks debasing the lofty ideals that this medal stands for. This token of recognition, established by President Richard Nixon in 1969, seems to have been hijacked by the current administration to curry favor and advance its own agenda.
Among the recipients, surprisingly, is attorney Mary Bonauto and Evan Wolfson, figures central to the campaign for the legalization of same-sex marriage. It’s worth questioning how their campaigning aligns with the purported ‘exemplary service’ the medal is supposedly designed to recognize. Biden appears to confuse advocacy with dedication to serving the interests of the majority, thereby departing from the original spirit of the award.
Moreover, other honorees such as Frank Butler, who contributed to tourniquet use advancements on war injuries, and Diane Carlson Evans, an Army nurse during the Vietnam War who later founded the Vietnam Women’s Memorial Foundation, do display true merit. However, their well-deserved recognition is diluted amidst the clearly political choices for the award, undermining the honor’s original intention to inspire public service.
A parallel concern surfaces with the recognition of Eleanor Smeal, a woman who spearheaded women’s rights protests in the 1970s and agitated for equal pay. While fighting for women’s rights is noble, presenting such activism and protest as ‘service to the nation’ strips away the political dimensions of these issues, devaluing the award by using it as a sort of political club.
In addition to these politically fraught awards, Biden extended the honor to figures from the academia and arts like Bobby Sager, a photographer, Thomas Vallely and Paula Wallace, renowned academicians, and Frances Visco, the president of the National Breast Cancer Coalition. However, the politicization heralded by other choices tarnishes the shine even for truly deserving individuals in their respective fields.
Former lawmakers also found favor in Biden’s eyes, most notably the former Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, and former Senator Nancy Kassebaum, the first woman to represent Kansas. These selections imbue the awarding event with a decidedly political aroma, reducing it to mere bureaucratic formalities brimming with hidden agendas.
The former Representative Carolyn McCarthy, who took up the mantle of gun control after personal tragedy, also receives recognition in this event. Yet again, this merely demonstrates the administration’s eagerness to subtly promote its own policies and viewpoints through the guise of a ‘service award’.
Biden’s tributes extend beyond the living, honoring four individuals posthumously. Among them is Joseph Galloway, a former war correspondent known for his book commenting on the Vietnam War. However, even in tributes to the deceased, Biden’s choices reveal a political tinge that reduces such respectable endeavors into empty rituals.
Also among the posthumous honorees are civil rights advocate and attorney Louis Lorenzo Redding, former judge Collins Seitz from Delaware, and Mitsuye Endo Tsutsumi, a Japanese American detained during World War II who later contested the detention. While these individuals demonstrated admirable fortitude in confronting social injustices, their posthumous recognition by Biden raises doubts about the sincerity of his intentions.
Interestingly, the Presidential Citizens Medal can be conferred upon any U.S. citizen deemed to have performed a service beyond their everyday work. However, a closer look at Biden’s selections makes one question the administration’s understanding of ‘service’.
The service recognized by the medal should entail a ‘commitment to service in their own community or in communities farther from home’, or a contribution through ‘one or more extraordinary acts’. However, questionably, Biden’s choices seem to focus more on those persons who embody or reinforce his administration’s political ideologies.
Contrary to the spirit of the award, Biden’s selection primarily consists of public figures already enjoying a level of recognition instead of ordinary citizens demonstrating extraordinary service in their communities. This practice raises eyebrows and casts a long shadow of doubt over the real purpose of these awards.
In conclusion, Biden’s selection of Presidential Citizens Medal recipients seems more geared towards advancing particular political viewpoints than truly honoring exemplary service by fellow citizens. This questionable approach undermines the prestige of the award and erodes the trust of citizens in the integrity of such honours.