Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama on Poverty Issues

[bigtree]

February 19, 2008

from the Institute for Public Accuracy: http://www.accuracy.org/newsrelease.php?articleId=1651

GWENDOLYN MINK

Co-editor of the two-volume Poverty in the United States: An Encyclopedia of History, Politics and Policy and author of Welfare's End, Mink said today:

"Although Obama insists he is the candidate 'for change,' his record on poverty issues does not offer bold new visions for economic justice. Quite the opposite, in fact: Obama's top anti-poverty commitments repeat the well-worn bromides of Clinton-era welfare reform. Obama supports an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit. Bill Clinton accomplished the first big EITC expansion in the early 1990s. Obama sponsored responsible fatherhood legislation that links poverty reduction to fathers' contributions to families. Hillary Clinton introduced a responsible fatherhood bill several years before Obama, soon after she arrived in the Senate.

"At least on his website, he exclusively links poverty reduction to labor market reforms, and so neglects larger questions of economic justice for caregiving work performed for one's own dependent family members. Notably, Obama gives little attention to the interaction of inequalities in the lives of the poor, especially racial and gender inequality.

"The point is not that Obama is worse than Clinton on poverty -- certainly anyone who has engaged struggles against Temporary Assistance for Needy Families reauthorization knows that Clinton is not necessarily the better ally of the poor. The point is that Obama's record on poverty does not bear out the hype that he personifies change."


DIANA ZUCKERMAN

President of the National Research Center for Women & Families, Zuckerman said today:

"Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both have a strong commitment to reducing poverty compared to most members of Congress, and by any standard are equally progressive on poverty issues. Both have experience on these issues going back for years -- Hillary's at Children's Defense Fund and the impoverished state of Arkansas, Obama's as a community organizer in Chicago. Both have ideas of how to strengthen our safety net programs.

"There isn't a substantial difference in their positions on poverty issues, and I doubt that there is a substantial difference in their ability to persuade Republican members of Congress to support their positions. Hillary takes the lead, however, on two fronts:

* proposing that subsidies be available for low-income women to care for their own infants instead of paying others to care for them;
* understanding how astronomical deficit spending on tax cuts, Iraq, and other expenses drains the Social Security Trust Fund and undermines entitlement programs. Her close-up view of the economic benefits and political costs of balancing the federal budget has apparently taught Hillary the importance of juggling those competing pressures."




about the Institute for Public Accuracy: http://www.accuracy.org/aboutus.php

[Straight Shooter]

1. "The point is that Obama's record on poverty does not bear out the hype ..."

Nor will it in the future. His willingness to "reach across the aisle" is an indication that he's willing to compromise Democratic principles, not that he thinks he can get Repubs to compromise theirs. (Grover Norquist compared Dems to neutered barnyard animals.)

Thank you for posting this.

[TwilightGardener]

3. See the post below, where he reached across the aisle for poverty legislation.

Your theory is disproven.

[TwilightGardener]

2. Link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4600891

"WASHINGTON, D.C. - U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL), Chuck Hagel (R-NE), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) and Congressman Adam Smith (D-WA) today hailed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's passage of the Global Poverty Act (S.2433), which requires the President to develop and implement a comprehensive policy to cut extreme global poverty in half by 2015 through aid, trade, debt relief, and coordination with the international community, businesses and NGOs. This legislation was introduced in December. Smith and Congressman Spencer Bachus (R-AL) sponsored the House version of the bill (H.R. 1302), which passed the House last September."

[bigtree]

4. global poverty

Hillary Clinton Releases Her Global Development Agenda


Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton announced her global development agenda (http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=4437), promising to fight HIV/AIDS, end malaria deaths, continue her leadership on basic education for all, expand women's opportunity and children's health, eliminate poor country debt, and improve U.S. development assistance. Advance market commitments for vaccines and consideration of a cabinet-level poverty and international development agency are also part of her global development agenda.

The Clinton campaign says:

America has a long and proud history of fighting poverty and encouraging economic development around the world. But that commitment has lagged relative to our own wealth, and in comparison with other prosperous nations. We need again to reclaim this great tradition, which is a testament to the kindness, generosity, and wisdom of the American people. America has long represented the ideal of opportunity. We must once again reclaim our leadership in promoting opportunity around the world. We do this first and foremost because it is right. And we do it also because it is smart. Gnawing hunger, poverty, and the absence of economic prospects are a recipe for despair. Globalization is widening the gap between the haves and the have-nots within societies and between them. Today, there are more than two billion people living on less than $2 a day.

Committing to global development because it is right and it is smart are dual rationales echoed in the Center for U.S. Global Engagement's Impact 08 framework, Smart Power: Building a Better, Safer World, ONE Vote 08's campaign, and CGD's own Global Development Matters website.

Other highlights of Clinton's global development agenda include:

1. Investing $50 billion for global HIV/AIDS by 2013 to ensure universal access to treatment, prevention and care.

2. Committing to the goal of ending all deaths from malaria in Africa, beginning with a $1 billion per year investment in addition to U.S. commitments to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria, and encouraging the use of research prizes and advance market commitments to spur innovation to address diseases in poor countries.

3. Continuing Hillary Clinton's leadership in achieving free basic education for all, with a specific focus on girls in poor countries and the opportunities created through secondary as well as primary education.

4. Increasing women's involvement in economic, political, and social sectors around the world as a tool for development and expanding access to health care, reducing maternal mortality and improving access to reproductive health and family planning services.

5. Improving health and opportunity for children through investments in nutrition, vaccines, public health and anti-trafficking.

6. Eliminating debts of the poorest countries including complete debt cancellation for all Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) and expanding HIPC to an additional 20 poor countries.

7. Maximize the impact of U.S. development assistance by spending an additional 1% of the U.S. budget on foreign assistance; reviewing all U.S. foreign assistance efforts, in consultation with field experts, and considering consolidating program authority under a single cabinet-level poverty and international development agency; improving coordination with other donor countries; and better tracking, monitoring and evaluating U.S. funds for development assistance.

. . . did the legislation sponsored by Obama and Hagel become law?

[TwilightGardener]

5. To answer your question: It was passed out of committee last week

and is now blocked from full Senate consideration because of a secret hold by a GOP Senator. It is actually considered controversial (the RW is angry about it), and the GOP might be in a tough spot if it comes to a vote--don't know what will happen with it.

[bigtree]

6. I saw the RW media campaign . . . not much info wading through that crap

. . . their opposition makes me want to like it.