Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

John Edwards offers many big ideas (LA Times/AP)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Sapphire Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 02:07 AM
Original message
John Edwards offers many big ideas (LA Times/AP)
John Edwards offers many big ideas
But the price tags are also large.
From Associated Press

WASHINGTON -- Presidential candidate John Edwards is offering more policy proposals than any other candidate in the primary and his ideas are winning loud applause from Democratic audiences.

The question is whether other voters will cheer when they see the price tag -- more than $125 billion a year.

Edwards is quick to acknowledge his spending on health care, energy and poverty reduction comes at a cost, with more plans to come. On Friday, he proposed an $8 billion college scholarship program, an outgrowth of his "College for Everyone" idea in 2005.

All told, Edwards' proposals would equal more than $1 trillion if he could get them enacted into law and operational during two White House terms.

To put the number in perspective, President Bush has dedicated more than $1.8 trillion to tax cuts. The cost of the Iraq war is nearing $450 billion. And this year's federal budget is about $2.8 trillion.

(snip)

Still, Edwards has been the most forthcoming Democratic candidate when it comes to describing the details of how he would like to run the country. His chief rivals -- Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama -- have offered few hints about their policy proposals.

The ideas are the centerpiece of Edwards' plan to position himself as the party's true progressive in the primary. He hopes the big ideas will attract the liberal Iowa caucus goers, online energy and labor endorsements that he's counting on to propel him to the nomination, said Democratic strategist Chris Lehane.

"If the costs become a real issue, it will be a good problem to have for him because the only folks likely to make a real argument against it would be the Republicans, which means his strategy succeeded and he was the nominee," said Lehane, who worked in the Clinton White House and for Al Gore's candidacy in 2000.


http://www.latimes.com:80/news/politics/la-na-apedwards11may11,0,817675.story?coll=la-headlines-politics



Transformational Change For America And The World - JOHN EDWARDS for PRESIDENT 2008

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

"I'm proposing we set a national goal of eliminating poverty in the next 30 years." - JOHN EDWARDS 08

Silence is Betrayal - JOHN EDWARDS 08

Ending Poverty in America

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. K&R
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sapphire Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Thanks, bobbolink!
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 02:41 AM
Response to Original message
2. Pleased to give this the 2nd Recommendation! Go Edwards!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sapphire Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 10:04 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Thank you, Blackhatjack!
:hi: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sapphire Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
5. "... the party's true progressive in the primary."
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sapphire Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 11:39 PM
Response to Reply #5
18. Kick... for John Edwards, "... the party's true progressive in the primary."!
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KittyWampus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 10:29 AM
Response to Original message
6. Edwards will never be able to address poverty or effect change without addressing the Defense Budget
Edited on Sat May-12-07 10:29 AM by cryingshame
The MIC is a bloated tick.

You can change tax rates to weight them towards the wealthiest, those who've benefitted the most in the last 40 years.

However, that would still be a drop in the bucket when compared to the money we WASTE on "Defense".

And Edwards will NEVER address this reality. EVER.

He will be like Clinton. Always having to prove he's 'strong on defense'. Always giving the Defense Budget more than they ask for.

So whatever policy proposals he has, whatever the price tag, it will be all just talk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sapphire Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. John Edwards addresses poverty quite well:
Transformational Change For America And The World
JOHN EDWARDS 08
Mar 15, 2007

Remarks as prepared for delivery
Manchester, New Hampshire


~ excerpt ~


And you all know that we are not leading the world in a way that lives up to the idea of America – or is good for us here at home.

What we used to call foreign policy has such a profound effect on our everyday lives that there really is no such thing as purely foreign policy anymore. Trade policies affect jobs and wages here and throughout the world. Energy policy affects climate change here and all over the world, and it impacts domestic and foreign security. Poverty is an issue for us here – I could talk about that all day long – but poverty is also an issue directly related to the rise of terrorism and our place in the world economy. A well-known politician from a neighboring state used to say that all politics is local. Today, all policy is local.

We are not going to solve these problems with the usual approaches. These challenges are too big, too connected, and too complicated to be answered with the same old politics of incrementalism. Meeting them requires more than just a new president—it requires an entirely new approach.

(snip)

Our domestic problems are intertwined with our global challenges, and nowhere is this truer than at the nexus of global warming and energy independence.

Global warming is a problem that is here, now, and not going away. The United States must lead – lead smart, lead courageously, and lead by example.

It is time to ask the American people to be patriotic about something other than war. We need investments in renewable energy – more efficient cars and trucks – and a national cap on carbon emissions.

(snip)

When we're serious about moral leadership at home, we have the standing to assert moral leadership in the world.

And I believe we can begin by leading in areas that – at first glance – might not seem directly related to our self-interest. I'm talking about global poverty, primary education. But I believe if you look closely, it's clear that these areas are in fact directly related to our present and future national security.

We know that terrorists thrive in failed states, and in states torn apart by internal conflict and poverty.

And we know that in many African and Muslim countries today, extreme poverty and civil wars have gutted government educational systems.

So what's taking their place? The answer is troubling – but filled with opportunity if we have the courage to seize it.

A great portion of a generation is being educated in madrassas run by militant extremists rather than in public schools. And as a result, thousands and thousands of young people who might once have aspired to be educated in America are being taught to hate America.

When you understand that, it suddenly becomes clear: global poverty is not just a moral issue for the United States – it is a national security issue for the United States. If we tackle it, we will be doing a good and moral thing by helping to improve the lives of billions of people around the world who live on less than $2 per day – but we will also begin to create a world in which the ideologies of radical terrorism are overwhelmed by the ideologies of education, democracy, and opportunity. If we tackle it, we have the chance to change a generation of potential enemies into a generation of friends. Now that would be transformational.

But the challenge is great – generational struggles require generational solutions – so we must meet the challenge with an audacious plan.

As President I would implement a four-point plan to tackle global poverty – and improve the national security of the United States:

First, we would launch a sweeping effort to support primary education in the developing world.

More than 100 million young children have no school at all, denied even a primary education to learn how to read and write. Education is particularly important for young girls; as just one example of the ripple effects, educated mothers have lower rates of infant mortality and are 50 percent more likely to have their children immunized.

As president, I will lead a worldwide effort to extend primary education to millions of children in the developing world by fully funding the Millennium Development Goal of universal primary education by 2015. The U.S. will do its part by bringing education to 23 million children in poor countries, and we will ask our allies to step up and do the rest. It's not just good for our security; it's good for theirs.

Second, we will support preventive health care in the developing world.

Women and children bear the burden of poverty and disease in the developing world. Women in our poorest countries have a 10% chance of dying during childbirth. More than 10 million children die each year from preventable diseases. Many of these diseases are preventable with clean water and basic sanitation or affordable immunizations.

As president, I will convene a worldwide summit on low-cost investments in clean drinking water and sanitation. Under my plan, the U.S. will increase its investment in clean water six-fold.

Third, we can get to the root of global poverty by increasing opportunity, political opportunity and economic opportunity. Democratic rights allow poor citizens to force their countries to create more progressive laws, fight oppression and demand economic stability. Economic initiatives like microfinance and micro-insurance can spark entrepreneurship, allowing people to transform their own lives.

And fourth, I would appoint an individual in the White House, reporting directly to me, with the rank of a Cabinet member, to oversee all of our efforts to fight global poverty. Despite its importance to our national security, the United States still lacks a comprehensive strategy to fight global poverty. We need to embrace the vision of John F. Kennedy, who recognized that "the Nation's interest and the cause of political freedom require" American efforts to lift up the world's poor.

(snip)

Nearly 70 years ago, another generation of Americans faced a world darkened by insecurity.

The storm clouds of fascism and totalitarianism were gathering over Europe and Asia. We were struggling to emerge from the depths of the Great Depression. And it was easy to think then that our problems at home were too big for us to try to tackle the problems mounting abroad.

Yet that generation of Americans saw in the challenges of their day not a cause for despair, but a call to greatness.

And they answered it. Not meekly, not uncertainly. But proudly, confidently, and with conviction. Because they had what we have – the idea of America. It's right here.

And in answering that call, not only secured freedom for the people of Europe and Asia – they laid the foundation for a new American economy that produced the greatest expansion of the middle class and the sharpest reduction of poverty in the history of the world.

They turned the 20th century into the American century.

Now it is our turn – to see the challenges we face with an unblinking eye and once again to answer the call.

Proudly, confidently, and with conviction

It is our responsibility. As Abraham Lincoln once called us, we are still the "last best hope of earth." If America does not lead, who will?

I believe we are up to the task. I am certain of it.

After all, I am an optimist.


http://johnedwards.com/news/speeches/nhip20070315 /



Transformational Change For America And The World - JOHN EDWARDS for PRESIDENT 2008

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

"I'm proposing we set a national goal of eliminating poverty in the next 30 years." - JOHN EDWARDS 08

Silence is Betrayal - JOHN EDWARDS 08

Ending Poverty in America

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blackhatjack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. You could not be more wrong --he is the only candidate saying exactly how he will fund his programs
Put his proposals beside the proposals of any other candidate, Repub or Dem, and ask which candidate explains in their proposal how they will fund it?

I have yet to see any candidate who has been as forthcoming as Edwards on funding of their proposals, and Edwards gives the more specifics than any other candidate.

This gives his critics lots of room to criticize his proposals because there are specifics, but the one thing they never do is explain how another candidate's proposals are more more specific than Edwards' proposals.

BTW you can be 'strong on defense' and not spend more on defense. It is all about proper allocation of resources and cutting wasteful spending which has hit billions per week with this Administration.

IF you want to continue seeing billions wasted on defense, by all means elect a Republican.

If you elect any Democrat, you will see a reduction in the billions wasted.

And if a Democratic candidate(Edwards) has the audacity to say he will raise taxes and explain exactly how he will implement his changes, that is a Democrat who is more likely to be honest with the public and not be beholden to the military-industrial complex.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. I guess you've been taking a walk around inside Edwards' head, huh?
:wtf:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
warren pease Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #6
14. Most people absolutely hate to be swindled, and I'm starting to think...
...that if somebody credible can position DoD spending as a giant con designed to keep the brass and civilian oversight types rich, the weapons industry rolling in cash, average taxpayers screwed and the troops underpaid and ill-provisioned, maybe the case against the traditional blank check for the Pentagon could get some momentum.

For example, I've read that something like $200 billion is budgeted each year to protect Western Europe against an invasion by the Soviet Union, which hasn't existed for about 18 years and has posed zero threat since 1989, and probably at least a decade prior to that. At $200 billion annually for 18 years, that's THREE TRILLION, SIX HUNDRED BILLION US DOLLARS that the taxpayer has been ripped off for. If people could be convinced that this is not only insane, but a sneaky way to pick their pockets yet again, to enrich the same rich bastards yet again, all the while denying them many of the basic services other first world countries provide (universal health care, educational subsidies, etc.), maybe significant numbers of voters might begin to question if their money that's spent on alleged defense might be put to better use.

Of course, that depends on some critical variables: Are the people pissed off enough at BushCo to translate that anger into voting against the GOP? Are they capable of sitting still long enough to digest facts like the one above? Will they ever even hear the message if their only news source is television? Will they personalize this giant rip-off, or just roll their eyes and bitch about the damn useless gummint again? Will they finally get mad at the people who are actually the source of this great DoD con? Will they ever get over that Reagan crap about "nanny government" and how "government handouts" are to be avoided or refused -- unless you're a corporate welfare queen, of course, and depend on price supports, trade protection, subsidies and the rest of the corporate welfare program to stay in business?

Will the GOP find a candidate compelling enough (to those who find the GOP less than utterly repulsive) to drown out populist voices and map the campaign away from positive programs and back to the usual tired garbage about terror, terror everywhere and fight them there instead of here and we need a few hundred billion more for DoD to fight the good fight and... per the usual script? And who will be 2008's version of the Swift Boat liars, and how much damage will they do?

Lots more questions, all of which will determine if the US begins to move away from massive military spending and toward an actual progressive agenda. I'm not even sure if Americans would choose anything progressive if you stood there for half an hour and went over things point by point, telling them exactly how they're getting screwed every single year by the current fiscal priorities, and how they could act in their own self-interests by voting to spend their taxes on themselves instead -- in the form of progressive programs and real government services.

No matter how valid or inane the above is, I still think somebody who can put the DoD scam into practical terms and get people to understand how it's affecting them personally every day of their lives, how it's a complete rip off and betrayal of the public trust, could plant a few seeds and maybe change a few minds.

It would be interesting to watch, at any rate.


wp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mdmc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
10. silence is betrayal
nice to hear him sayin things
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
11. So where's his foreign policy?
Lots of publicity for his domestic agenda, but where's the foreign policy? It like, goes with being President, you know - amazing, isn't it? JE's notion of the world seems to stop at the US border. That isn't good enough in 2007.

Yeah, I know he's for resubmitting the Iraq funding Bill, and that's cool. I want to hear about other stuff too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sapphire Blue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 11:49 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. Have you read this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 12:03 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. A good start
Edited on Sat May-12-07 12:05 PM by dave_p
Thank you, those are useful development objectives, and I hope he doesn't allow it to end there. I hope JE also takes his commitment to economic opportunity beyond the domestic sphere and extends it to countries which have barely set foot on the bottom ring of the ladder. That will require the same sense of justice, extended manyfold.

But I'm particularly concerned at his vision of America's future political relationships. How will an Edwards Presidency address the fundamental issues in the Middle East? How will he conduct US relationships with allies who may see the world from a different viewpoint? What role will he play in the UN and its agencies in restoring international legality and security for all, not just the US and its allies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-13-07 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #11
19. Still waiting ...
... to hear about that other stuff. Is there any?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-13-07 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
20. Even more amazing--all anyone ELSE can talk about is WAAAARRRRRRR
To hell with homeless and hungry people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
waiting for hope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
15. K&R!!!!!
He wants to make this country stronger - this is clincher:

"To put the number in perspective, President Bush has dedicated more than $1.8 trillion to tax cuts. The cost of the Iraq war is nearing $450 billion. And this year's federal budget is about $2.8 trillion."

It can be done.

:kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :kick: :bounce: :thumbsup: :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GreenPartyVoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 02:25 PM
Response to Original message
16. Well, if we shut down our wars it would go a long ways towards
paying for those ideas, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dave_p Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat May-12-07 02:58 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. It's not just about shutting old ones ...
... it's about not starting new ones or allowing the conditions for them to fester, too. And the JE camp seems somewhat quiet on that score.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-14-07 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. Not by a long shot.
There are NO VOICES being raised that would make these issues become important.

The money would just be used for other things, not poverty.

We're no longer of any concern.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 05:37 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC