Why Hillary Clinton Is the Best Choice for Women


This article was written by Martha Burk, Gloria Feldt, Cecelia Fire Thunder, Lulu Flores, Kim Gandy, Ellen Malcolm, Irene Natividad, Ellie Smeal, Gloria Steinem, and Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones.

As women who have spent our careers fighting to protect a woman's right to choose, we recognize that the next president will face serious challenges to safeguard the reproductive health of women. In our opinion, there is one candidate whose leadership on this issue is unparalleled: Hillary Clinton.

Hillary has been an uncompromising leader and loyal ally for each of us in our battles to ensure and protect a woman's right to choose in America and around the world. We know she will lead the fight for women's health and justice because we have worked with her on these issues for so many years.

  • We know Hillary will appoint Supreme Court justices who honor a woman's right to privacy because she not only voted against John Roberts and Sam Alito but also spoke on the Senate floor about the threat they pose to privacy rights and Roe v. Wade in opposing their confirmations.
  • We know Hillary will expand contraceptive options because she waged a successful three-year battle with Senator Patty Murray against the Bush administration to make Plan B emergency contraception available over the counter.
  • We know Hillary will expand fair work-family policies because we worked with her to pass the original Family and Medical Leave Act and then to expand it to cover military families, to provide paid leave, and to improve childcare.
  • We know Hillary will fight for access to family planning services for low-income women because she has fought to increase funding for contraception and family planning through Medicaid and Title X.
  • We know Hillary will work to reduce the number of unplanned pregnancies because as First Lady, Hillary helped found the National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancies and as Senator she spearheaded the Prevention First Act.
  • We know Hillary will be mindful of the challenges that our sisters face abroad and at home because in 1995 she bravely stood before a global audience at the 1995 Women's Conference in Beijing and declared that "women's rights are human rights."

We trust Hillary Clinton because every time we needed her by our side, she has been there.

Let us be clear — the stakes are high in this election. We firmly believe that no one is better situated to confront the challenges awaiting the next president. As a pro-choice president, Hillary Clinton will make Supreme Court appointments and decisions ensuring women's reproductive rights in this country.

We believe that Hillary Clinton is the best choice for president of the United States.

Like this story? Your $10 tax-deductible contribution helps support our research, reporting, and analysis.

To schedule an interview with Gloria Feldt please contact Communications Director Rachel Perrone at rachel@rhrealitycheck.org.

  • invalid-0

    If progressives really care about all these issues Ms. Feldt, as surely we should, then the real test must be who can win in November. This is Party battle to put forward the very best standard barer for our party in the national election.

    There is nothing about the campaign thus far, the Clintons history as polarizing forces, and especially about Super Duper Tuesday’s results that suggest she can beat John McCain who has always done better with independents than he has with the conservative base of the GOP.

    Like it or not, this is not an election that will be won by the baser instinct politics popularized by Karl Rove and the Clintons.

    This election is going to be won by the vast center of this country, more interested in solutions than ideology.

    If women are really interested in protecting Roe, reproductive health, advancing all women’s issues — all progressive issues regardless of identity politics, then the answer is we must nominate someone who can beat John McCain.

    That is not Hillary Clinton. Bill Clinton never got above 50% in the popular vote. She is more polarizing than he in many parts of the country, and has done nothing in this campaign to moderate that — which I hoped she would when she started.

    It’s time Democrats start thinking like cold hard pragmatists and look at the reality of money, electoral votes, swing states, and voter enthusiasm. The best way to undercut the advantages Barack Obama brings to the party in each of these categories is to nominate Clinton, and ensure that McCain, owing a favor to the conservative base, will get to appoint the next three US Supreme Court justices.

    This can’t be about identity politics if the issues we care about are to survive. It’s time to make this party fight about winning. It is clear there is one Democrat who can do that on more than name ID and a history of political favors and debts racked up in the 1990′s.

    Please, if almost half of all women are already supporting Obama (51 C – 46 O on Super Duper Tuesday), doesn’t this tell us something about the Clintons and the fatigue even many women already have with them.

    We cannot afford another John Kerrey establishment Democrat loss. We cannot afford another progressive administration lost to Bill Clinton’s inability to control himself. Let’s learn our lessons and see what real change can accomplish. My bet is women will fare much better if we win in November than if we nominate a woman who can’t. The numbers so far don’t lie.

  • invalid-0

    Thanks for posting this fantastic statement, Gloria!

    It has been disheartening to watch the parade of former women’s rights leaders suddenly announce that a history of fighting for gender equality and reproductive health doesn’t really matter to them when choosing a candidate for president. Your statement of support is based on Hillary’s record of accomplishments, her commitment to the issues, and a deep understanding of the difference a Hillary presidency will make to millions of vulnerable women and girls around the world.

    As you say, the stakes could not be higher, and feminists should be looking at each candidate’s record and her or his proposals to make the world more just. Experience has taught us that vague assurances of support for our issues are often undone when the pressure is on.

    It can’t be easy standing up to the pressure to hop on the Obama bandwagon. It is quite fashionable these days.

    To “No More Bill” – You are wrong. To win, Hillary only needs to win the states that Kerry carried in 2004. Without going into detail, let’s just say that if Kerry could carry them at a time when people had far more favorable opinions of the Republican party, Hillary can carry them in 2008.

    Beyond that, she only needs to win Florida OR Ohio. Ohio is a tough nut to crack, but Hillary did incredibly well in the Florida primary without even campaigning there. Florida has large constituencies of Latino voters and older voters – voters who overwhelmingly support Hillary.

    By contast, Obama is opposing Florida’s quest to have their delegates seated at the Convention. He will have a very difficult time energizing Democratic leaders in Florida if he tells them to “go away” at the Convention. But if he supports them at the Convention, he will not get the nomination. He’s stuck in a catch-22.

    That means he would absolutely have to win Ohio, or he’d have to piece together a passel of Southern states (Alabama, South Carolina, etc) with sizable African-American populations – states that haven’t gone Democratic in decades. For feminists this is significant because Obama would have to move to a more socially conservative message strategy to win over these more conservative, more religious Southern voters.

    So when you actually look at the electoral map, Hillary Clinton is by far the more electable candidate.

    You also forget, “No More Bill,” that Hillary is seen (as reflected in public opinion research) as far more competent than Barack on the issues of the economy, health care, and national security – the top three concerns voters have this election cycle.

    As for putting forward the best candidate the Democratic Party has to offer, I believe that candidate is the one with the health care reform proposal that covers ALL Americans, a detailed economic stimulus plan, and a thorough understanding of foreign policy. In other words, Hillary Clinton.

  • invalid-0

    I am so tired of angry Obama people. They claim that he is the “great unifier” but the party remains fractured despite his Messianic stature. Clinton surpasses him in experience, tenacity, and CONCRETE IDEAS. No one can quarrel with “change” and “hope” but these terms are empty absent a concrete agenda. Hillary Clinton is the person who can bring about these changes and really “walk the walk.” Obama doesn’t walk the walk. He’s just a collection of inspirational speeches that were already made by King and Jackson.

  • invalid-0

    Assuming that Hillary will win all the Kerrey states is like assuming she will win women overwhelmingly — in the Democratic primaries where women are a larger percentage of the voting base than they are in the general, she is only beating Obamma 51-46, and is seeing a steady decline. She does not wear well over the long term. She starts from a place of Clinton fatigue, and people are already tiring of her, even her supposed female base. In addition, Bill, the ultimate X factor, is already facing scandals of global proportion because of his foundation’s dealings with foreign governments, and of course, there are other problems with him that have not gone away. Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves. Imagine she gets the nomination, and one of any number of is scandals pop up.

    As for Latino voters and Florida, or any state, she is winning those votes on name ID, and they break down more along age demographics as all the other breakouts do with older Latinos voting for HRC and younger Latinos for Barack.

    Her pretend victory in Florida is exactly why people are tired of the Clintons, their endless parsing and legalism, changing the rules, as they also tried to in Nevada, once things start going against them.

    The more people know about Obama, the more they like him. Her base has been in steady decline now for about two months, those 25+ point leads and all her inevitability, fundraising advantages, name ID gone. Why? Because people recognize there is a better candidate to face John McCain in the race.

    Is the Supreme Court worth risking?

    Once burned, twice shy.

  • invalid-0

    I’m not angry, if you’re referring to me. The party remains fractured because the Clintons have used all the tricks from their polarizing politics of the past to make it so. They are astute politicians and if they weren’t involved in this, they too would be supporting Obama, he’s their kind of candidate.

    And just because Hillary can’t make a speech to save her life, doesn’t mean you need to run Obama down. There was once a time in this nation when we looked to politics to lift us up, inspire us, remind us that we can be more than just a collection of legalisms.

    Obama has accomplished great things in his public service, and ultimately it is his youth and the fact he hasn’t been completely jaded by the political system that makes him so appealing, especially when compared to HRC, who is actually promoting the fact that she will be better at dividing the country than he will be by harping on her politics of division.

    Lastly, everyone who is actually paying close attention to the policy proposals of both candidates agree that they are both substantive, and have minor differences. So if on substance they are essentially the same, answer me this, why choose the more polarizing, less inspiring candidate who will not be able to draw independents and Republicans away from McCain?

    It makes NO SENSE. People please, set the passion aside and take a look at what it will take to win in November.

  • http://www.barackobama.com invalid-0

    Just as you’re tired of hearing about Obama being the great unifier I’m just as tired of hearing that he does not have any concrete ideas. For starter’s check out his Blueprint for Change (PDF). This lays out the problem and the solution for every major policy initiative he talks about in more detail than most lay people will want to get into.

    In the end both of these candidates would make for an incredible improvement in leadership, ideas and management than the Bush administration and we as Dems will have to unite against the McCain campaign whoever we end up choosing as the nominee. That said I voted for Obama because I want to see lobbyists get kicked out of the White House as the biggest impediment to meaningful policy development is the undue influence of corporations and special interests over the will of the people. Washington was not always run by lobbyists and it can be that way again. And, yes, I do also like Obama’s track record of bringing in independents and even republicans into the kinds of working majorities (often 2/3rds) needed to pass substantial policy changes.

    I, for one, am not concerned about Obama’s stance on women’s issues, especially with a woman like Michelle Obama in his ear. I agree that Hillary has done more for women specifically as a demographic throughout her life than Obama but it can be argued that Obama has done more for the inner city poor than Clinton. In any case this is not an argument that Obama would not fight for women’s rights. He obviously would. He has worked with many women’s groups on many issues and has earned the endorsement of many trusted feminists because he is a feminist himself.

    I can understand voting for Hillary over Obama, I think she’s great, but I can’t understand anyone saying Obama would be a bad choice for women. That’s just plain wrong.

  • invalid-0

    Published on Reproductive Health | RHRealityCheck.org (http://www.rhrealitycheck.org)
    Sen. Barack Obama’s RH Issues Questionnaire
    By Andrea Lynch
    Created Dec 21 2007 – 9:18am
    In October, RH Reality Check developed a questionnaire for the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, designed to help our readers distinguish between the various contenders’ positions on sexual and reproductive health 1 and rights — beyond the sole issue of abortion. Our questions were designed to get under the surface of the candidates’ rhetoric on reproductive rights 2 and clarify how far each one was willing to go to support concrete policy changes to back up his or her stated beliefs. Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign staff answers Andrea Lynch’s questions below.

    Why do you consider Sen. Obama to be the strongest candidate on reproductive health and rights?

    Throughout his career, Senator Obama has consistently championed a woman’s right to choose, earning him 100% ratings from pro-choice groups during his tenure in the Illinois State Senate and the United States Senate. In 2005, he was the honorary chair of Planned Parenthood of Chicago Area’s Roe v. Wade celebration. And he has not shied away from tough battles. In the Illinois State Senate, Obama worked hand-in-hand with advocacy groups to protect women’s reproductive health.

    And just last year, Obama was the only U.S. Senator who supported a fundraising initiative to defeat a proposed abortion ban in South Dakota. And Senator Obama was the only presidential candidate to weigh in on the controversy surrounding the opening of the Planned Parenthood clinic in Aurora.

    What sets Sen. Obama’s platform apart from the other contenders on issues of reproductive health and rights?

    Senator Obama has demonstrated an ability to engage diverse audiences in talking about these issues in an effort to forge consensus. For instance, in December 2006, Obama went to “the political equivalent of the lion’s den” when he told a conservative Christian audience in Southern California that abstinence-only education was not enough and that he “respectfully but unequivocally” disagrees with those who oppose condom distribution to fight the AIDS pandemic.” Obama drew a standing ovation from the 2,072 pastors and others who came from 39 states and 18 nations.

    Similarly, this year at a Planned Parenthood conference, Obama emphasized the need for pro-choice groups to align themselves with religious and community groups that are also working on reducing unintended pregnancy. Obama has also focused on the high teen pregnancy rate. In addition to co-sponsoring the Prevention First Act, Obama has introduced a bill that would devote resources to combating the high teen pregnancy rate in communities of color.

    How does Sen. Obama’s healthcare plan specifically address sexual and reproductive health, family planning 3, pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, and other STDs?

    Senator Obama believes that reproductive health care 4 is basic health care. His health care plan will create a new public plan, which will provide coverage of all essential medical services. Reproductive health care is an essential service – just like mental health care and disease management and other preventive services under his plan.

    And private insurers that want to participate will have to treat reproductive care in the same way.

    Does Sen. Obama support comprehensive sexuality education? Does he believe that the federal government should continue to fund abstinence-only-until marriage programs, despite evidence that they are ineffective at preventing unintended pregnancy and STDs?

    Yes, Senator Obama supports comprehensive sex education 5. He believes that we should not continue to fund abstinence-only programs. Over the last decade, the federal government has spent $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars on “abstinence-only” programs that have not been successful. While abstinence is one approach to reducing unintended pregnancies and STDs, Obama believes we should also support comprehensive and age-appropriate sex education. Obama is an original co-sponsor of the Prevention First Act, which will ensure that all taxpayer-funded federal programs are medically accurate and include information about contraception.

    Does Sen. Obama support adolescents’ access to confidential family planning and reproductive health services, without having to seek permission from their parents? Why or why not?

    Yes. As the father of two daughters, Senator Obama understands that parents do not want to imagine their teenage child might need to seek counsel on reproductive health. He believes, first and foremost, that parents should be the first and primary source of support. But Obama also recognizes that not every child is in a loving home with a parent or trusted adult to turn to in such a situation. For young women in such circumstances, Obama wants to be sure that there is access to a trained health care provider that can provide needed services or help them make good decisions.

    Does Sen. Obama believe that contraception should be covered by private insurance plans and under insurance plans for federal employees? Why or why not?

    Yes.

    Does Sen. Obama agree with the FDA’s decision to make emergency contraception over the counter for people 18 and over? Does he think adolescents should be able to access emergency contraception 6 over the counter as well? Why or why not?

    Senator Obama supports the FDA’s decision to make emergency contraception (EC 7) available over the counter for people 18 and over. Obama recognizes that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and other medical experts have reported that EC use is safe for women of all reproductive age and have called for improved access to EC. Although Obama strongly believes that parents or other trusted adults should be engaged in all reproductive health decisions involving teenagers and adolescents, he also recognizes that not every young women has access to such support. As such, he does believe that teenagers should be able to access EC over the counter. As noted above, he supports the right of adolescents to seek confidential family planning services.

    Does Sen. Obama support any restrictions on abortion, or does he believe it should be entirely up to women?

    Obama supports those restrictions that are consistent with the legal framework outlined by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade.

    Does Sen. Obama support the Hyde amendment? Under what circumstances does he believe that Medicaid should cover abortions (all pregnancies, life- or health-threatening pregnancies, pregnancies that are a result of rape or incest, extreme fetal malformation)?

    Obama does not support the Hyde amendment. He believes that the federal government should not use its dollars to intrude on a poor woman’s decision whether to carry to term or to terminate her pregnancy and selectively withhold benefits because she seeks to exercise her right of reproductive choice in a manner the government disfavors.

    Does Sen. Obama believe adolescents should have the right to choose abortion, or should they be required to seek their parents’ consent? Why or why not? Are there any circumstances that might make a compelling case for waiving the parental consent requirement?

    As a parent, Obama believes that young women, if they become pregnant, should talk to their parents before considering an abortion. But he realizes not all girls can turn to their mother or father in times of trouble, and in those instances, we should want these girls to seek the advice of trusted adults – an aunt, a grandmother, a pastor.

    Unfortunately, instead of encouraging pregnant teens to seek the advice of adults, most parental consent bills that come before Congress or state legislatures criminalize adults who attempt to help a young woman in need and lack judicial bypass and other provisions that would permit exceptions in compelling cases.

    Does Sen. Obama support continuing federal funding for crisis pregnancy centers? Why or why not?

    No.

    If elected president, what specific measures would Sen. Obama support for women who choose to become mothers (prenatal care, maternity leave, childcare, healthcare for children)?

    Under Obama’s health care plan, women will be able to receive coverage of prenatal care under the new public health plan. And participating private insurers will be required to provide the same coverage.

    Obama has proposed a $1.5 billion fund to encourage all fifty states to adopt paid leave programs. Under these programs, women would be entitled to take paid maternity leave.

    Does Sen. Obama believe that gay and lesbian couples should be able to adopt children?

    Yes.

    If elected president, would Sen. Obama overturn the Global Gag Rule or reinstate funding for UNFPA?

    Yes, Senator Obama would overturn the global gag rule and reinstate funding for UNFPA.

    Want More? We’ve Got It!

    Check out Sen. John Edwards 8′s and Sen. Hillary Clinton’s 9 completed questionnaire.
    10

    Read the statement from Sen. Chris Dodd 11′s campaign.

    What about the Democratic contenders who didn’t respond to our questionnaire? We did their homework for them, mining through their previous public statements to find their positions, right here 12.

    And the Republicans? Concrete information on the Republican candidates’ positions and commitments on reproductive health and rights is harder to come by, since their websites generally only include information about the issue of abortion. But here 13′s what we were able to come up with.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Source URL:
    http://www.rhrealitycheck.org//blog/2007/12/21/sen-barack-obamas-reproductive-health-questionnaire
    Links:
    1 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Reproductive+Health
    2 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Reproductive%2520Rights
    3 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Family+Planning
    4 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Reproductive+Health+Care
    5 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Comprehensive+Sex+Education
    6 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Emergency+Contraception
    7 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23EC
    8 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/john-edwardss-reproductive-health-questionnaire
    9 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/01/15/sen-hillary-clintons-rh-issues-questionnaire
    10 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/john-edwardss-reproductive-health-questionnaire
    11 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/sen-chris-dodds-statement-on-reproductive-health-issues
    12 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/other-democratic-contenders-on-reproductive-health
    13 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/republican-presidential-contenders-on-reproductive-health

  • http://www.thelurkingcanary.blogspot.com invalid-0

    The states Kerry won – so-called “blue states” – are states that Democrats have won in several successive presidential elections. Not only that, but they are states where the Democratic nominee has won by a margin of more than 5 points. Short of a Reagan-style second coming, it is a very safe bet that any Democratic nominee will win these states.
    .
    Its also ridiculous to say that Clinton won Florida based on name identification. I live in Washington DC, where neither Hillary nor Barack have campaigned (so far as I know) but I know a lot about both candidates because I read, watch the news, and listen to the radio. Beyond that I have my own experience of living through the Clinton administration, and my own values and judgement.
    .
    People who live in Florida can also read, watch the news, and listen to the radio. Many lived through the Clinton administration, and also have their own values and judgement.
    .
    To date, Clinton has won more individual votes than Obama, despite the ferociously negative press.
    .
    Think.
    .
    http://thelurkingcanary.blogspot.com

  • invalid-0

    Published on Reproductive Health | RHRealityCheck.org (http://www.rhrealitycheck.org)
    Sen. Barack Obama’s RH Issues Questionnaire
    By Andrea Lynch
    Created Dec 21 2007 – 9:18am
    In October, RH Reality Check developed a questionnaire for the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, designed to help our readers distinguish between the various contenders’ positions on sexual and reproductive health 1 and rights — beyond the sole issue of abortion. Our questions were designed to get under the surface of the candidates’ rhetoric on reproductive rights 2 and clarify how far each one was willing to go to support concrete policy changes to back up his or her stated beliefs. Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign staff answers Andrea Lynch’s questions below.

    Why do you consider Sen. Obama to be the strongest candidate on reproductive health and rights?

    Throughout his career, Senator Obama has consistently championed a woman’s right to choose, earning him 100% ratings from pro-choice groups during his tenure in the Illinois State Senate and the United States Senate. In 2005, he was the honorary chair of Planned Parenthood of Chicago Area’s Roe v. Wade celebration. And he has not shied away from tough battles. In the Illinois State Senate, Obama worked hand-in-hand with advocacy groups to protect women’s reproductive health.

    And just last year, Obama was the only U.S. Senator who supported a fundraising initiative to defeat a proposed abortion ban in South Dakota. And Senator Obama was the only presidential candidate to weigh in on the controversy surrounding the opening of the Planned Parenthood clinic in Aurora.

    What sets Sen. Obama’s platform apart from the other contenders on issues of reproductive health and rights?

    Senator Obama has demonstrated an ability to engage diverse audiences in talking about these issues in an effort to forge consensus. For instance, in December 2006, Obama went to “the political equivalent of the lion’s den” when he told a conservative Christian audience in Southern California that abstinence-only education was not enough and that he “respectfully but unequivocally” disagrees with those who oppose condom distribution to fight the AIDS pandemic.” Obama drew a standing ovation from the 2,072 pastors and others who came from 39 states and 18 nations.

    Similarly, this year at a Planned Parenthood conference, Obama emphasized the need for pro-choice groups to align themselves with religious and community groups that are also working on reducing unintended pregnancy. Obama has also focused on the high teen pregnancy rate. In addition to co-sponsoring the Prevention First Act, Obama has introduced a bill that would devote resources to combating the high teen pregnancy rate in communities of color.

    How does Sen. Obama’s healthcare plan specifically address sexual and reproductive health, family planning 3, pregnancy, HIV/AIDS, and other STDs?

    Senator Obama believes that reproductive health care 4 is basic health care. His health care plan will create a new public plan, which will provide coverage of all essential medical services. Reproductive health care is an essential service – just like mental health care and disease management and other preventive services under his plan.

    And private insurers that want to participate will have to treat reproductive care in the same way.

    Does Sen. Obama support comprehensive sexuality education? Does he believe that the federal government should continue to fund abstinence-only-until marriage programs, despite evidence that they are ineffective at preventing unintended pregnancy and STDs?

    Yes, Senator Obama supports comprehensive sex education 5. He believes that we should not continue to fund abstinence-only programs. Over the last decade, the federal government has spent $1.5 billion in taxpayer dollars on “abstinence-only” programs that have not been successful. While abstinence is one approach to reducing unintended pregnancies and STDs, Obama believes we should also support comprehensive and age-appropriate sex education. Obama is an original co-sponsor of the Prevention First Act, which will ensure that all taxpayer-funded federal programs are medically accurate and include information about contraception.

    Does Sen. Obama support adolescents’ access to confidential family planning and reproductive health services, without having to seek permission from their parents? Why or why not?

    Yes. As the father of two daughters, Senator Obama understands that parents do not want to imagine their teenage child might need to seek counsel on reproductive health. He believes, first and foremost, that parents should be the first and primary source of support. But Obama also recognizes that not every child is in a loving home with a parent or trusted adult to turn to in such a situation. For young women in such circumstances, Obama wants to be sure that there is access to a trained health care provider that can provide needed services or help them make good decisions.

    Does Sen. Obama believe that contraception should be covered by private insurance plans and under insurance plans for federal employees? Why or why not?

    Yes.

    Does Sen. Obama agree with the FDA’s decision to make emergency contraception over the counter for people 18 and over? Does he think adolescents should be able to access emergency contraception 6 over the counter as well? Why or why not?

    Senator Obama supports the FDA’s decision to make emergency contraception (EC 7) available over the counter for people 18 and over. Obama recognizes that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and other medical experts have reported that EC use is safe for women of all reproductive age and have called for improved access to EC. Although Obama strongly believes that parents or other trusted adults should be engaged in all reproductive health decisions involving teenagers and adolescents, he also recognizes that not every young women has access to such support. As such, he does believe that teenagers should be able to access EC over the counter. As noted above, he supports the right of adolescents to seek confidential family planning services.

    Does Sen. Obama support any restrictions on abortion, or does he believe it should be entirely up to women?

    Obama supports those restrictions that are consistent with the legal framework outlined by the Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade.

    Does Sen. Obama support the Hyde amendment? Under what circumstances does he believe that Medicaid should cover abortions (all pregnancies, life- or health-threatening pregnancies, pregnancies that are a result of rape or incest, extreme fetal malformation)?

    Obama does not support the Hyde amendment. He believes that the federal government should not use its dollars to intrude on a poor woman’s decision whether to carry to term or to terminate her pregnancy and selectively withhold benefits because she seeks to exercise her right of reproductive choice in a manner the government disfavors.

    Does Sen. Obama believe adolescents should have the right to choose abortion, or should they be required to seek their parents’ consent? Why or why not? Are there any circumstances that might make a compelling case for waiving the parental consent requirement?

    As a parent, Obama believes that young women, if they become pregnant, should talk to their parents before considering an abortion. But he realizes not all girls can turn to their mother or father in times of trouble, and in those instances, we should want these girls to seek the advice of trusted adults – an aunt, a grandmother, a pastor.

    Unfortunately, instead of encouraging pregnant teens to seek the advice of adults, most parental consent bills that come before Congress or state legislatures criminalize adults who attempt to help a young woman in need and lack judicial bypass and other provisions that would permit exceptions in compelling cases.

    Does Sen. Obama support continuing federal funding for crisis pregnancy centers? Why or why not?

    No.

    If elected president, what specific measures would Sen. Obama support for women who choose to become mothers (prenatal care, maternity leave, childcare, healthcare for children)?

    Under Obama’s health care plan, women will be able to receive coverage of prenatal care under the new public health plan. And participating private insurers will be required to provide the same coverage.

    Obama has proposed a $1.5 billion fund to encourage all fifty states to adopt paid leave programs. Under these programs, women would be entitled to take paid maternity leave.

    Does Sen. Obama believe that gay and lesbian couples should be able to adopt children?

    Yes.

    If elected president, would Sen. Obama overturn the Global Gag Rule or reinstate funding for UNFPA?

    Yes, Senator Obama would overturn the global gag rule and reinstate funding for UNFPA.

    Want More? We’ve Got It!

    Check out Sen. John Edwards 8′s and Sen. Hillary Clinton’s 9 completed questionnaire.
    10

    Read the statement from Sen. Chris Dodd 11′s campaign.

    What about the Democratic contenders who didn’t respond to our questionnaire? We did their homework for them, mining through their previous public statements to find their positions, right here 12.

    And the Republicans? Concrete information on the Republican candidates’ positions and commitments on reproductive health and rights is harder to come by, since their websites generally only include information about the issue of abortion. But here 13′s what we were able to come up with.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Source URL:
    http://www.rhrealitycheck.org//blog/2007/12/21/sen-barack-obamas-reproductive-health-questionnaire
    Links:
    1 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Reproductive+Health
    2 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Reproductive%2520Rights
    3 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Family+Planning
    4 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Reproductive+Health+Care
    5 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Comprehensive+Sex+Education
    6 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23Emergency+Contraception
    7 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/glossary%23EC
    8 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/john-edwardss-reproductive-health-questionnaire
    9 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2008/01/15/sen-hillary-clintons-rh-issues-questionnaire
    10 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/john-edwardss-reproductive-health-questionnaire
    11 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/sen-chris-dodds-statement-on-reproductive-health-issues
    12 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/other-democratic-contenders-on-reproductive-health
    13 http://www.rhrealitycheck.org/blog/2007/12/21/republican-presidential-contenders-on-reproductive-health

  • invalid-0

    Hillary’s Scarlett O’Hara Act
    Why some of us aren’t falling for it.
    By Melissa Harris-Lacewell
    TheRoot.com
    Updated: 6:56 PM ET Feb 7, 2008
    Feb. 8, 2008–There’s been a lot of talk about women and their choices since Super Tuesday, when African American women overwhelmingly voted for Sen. Barack Obama, while white women picked Sen. Hillary Clinton. Some pundits automatically concluded that “race trumped gender” among black women. I hate this analysis because it relegates black women to junior-partner status in political struggles. It is not that simple. A lot of people have tried to gently explain the divide, so I’m just going to put this out there: Sister voters have a beef with white women like Clinton that is both racial and gendered. It is not about choosing race; it is about rejecting Hillary’s Scarlett O’Hara act.

    Black women voters are rejecting Hillary Clinton because her ascendance is not a liberating symbol. Her tears are not moving. Her voice does not resonate. Throughout history, privileged white women, attached at the hip to their husband’s power and influence, have been complicit in black women’s oppression. Many African American women are simply refusing to play Mammy to Hillary.

    The loyal Mammy figure, who toiled in the homes of white people, nursing their babies and cleaning and cooking their food, is the most enduring and dishonest representation of black women. She is a uniquely American icon who first emerged as our young country was trying to put itself back together after the Civil War. The romanticism about this period is a bizarre historical anomaly that underscores America’s deep racism: The defeated traitors of the Confederacy have been allowed to reinterpret the war’s battles, fly the flag of secession over state houses, and raise monuments to those who fought to tear down the country. Southern white secessionists were given the power to rewrite history even as America’s newest citizens were relegated to forced agricultural peonage, grinding urban poverty and new forms segregation and racial terror.

    Mammy was a central figure in this mythmaking and she was perfect for the role. The Mammy myth allowed Americans in the North and South to ignore the brutality of slavery by claiming that black women were tied to white families through genuine bonds of affection. Mammy justified past enslavement and continuing oppression.

    Privileged, Southern white women were central in creating and propagating the Mammy myth. In 1923, the United Daughters of the Confederacy were nearly successful in lobbying Congress to erect a statue on federal land to honor “the memory of the faithful colored mammies of the South.” The desire to memorialize Mammy reveals how Southern white women reveled in the subordinate role of their darker peers. These black women were vulnerable to the sexual and labor exploitation of slaveholders and household employers. These women masked their true thoughts and personalities in order to gain a modicum of security for themselves and their families. The Mammy monument was meant to display black women as the faithful, feisty, loyal servants of white domesticity.

    In the face of the Mammy myth, real black women spoke for themselves against the monument. It was substantial, sustained, opposition from organized African American women and the black press that killed the Mammy monument proposal.

    Media have cast the choice in the current election as a simple binary between race and gender. But those who claim that black women are ignoring gender issues by voting for Barack just don’t get it. Hillary cannot have black women’s allegiance for free. Black women will not be relegated to the status of supportive Mammy, easing the way for privileged white women to enter the halls of power.

    Black feminist politics is not simple identity politics. It is not about letting brothers handle the race stuff or about letting white women dominate the gender stuff. The black women’s fight is on all fronts. Sisters resist the ways that black male leaders try to silence women’s issues and squash women’s leadership. At the same time, black women challenge white women who want to claim black women’s allegiance without acknowledging the realities of racism. They will not be drawn into any simple allegiance that refuses to account their full humanity and citizenship.

    Black women want out of the war. Black women need health insurance. Black women need decent schools for their children. Black women need a strong economy that creates jobs. Black women need help caring for their aging parents. Black women want a Democratic win in the fall. Sisters chose Barack on Tuesday because they believe he can deliver these things and that is much more empowering than just having a woman in the White House.

    Melissa Harris-Lacewell is is associate professor of politics and African American studies at Princeton University.

    URL: http://www.theroot.com/id/44696© TheRoot.com

  • invalid-0

    Hillary’s Scarlett O’Hara Act
    Why some of us aren’t falling for it.
    By Melissa Harris-Lacewell
    TheRoot.com
    Updated: 6:56 PM ET Feb 7, 2008
    Feb. 8, 2008–There’s been a lot of talk about women and their choices since Super Tuesday, when African American women overwhelmingly voted for Sen. Barack Obama, while white women picked Sen. Hillary Clinton. Some pundits automatically concluded that “race trumped gender” among black women. I hate this analysis because it relegates black women to junior-partner status in political struggles. It is not that simple. A lot of people have tried to gently explain the divide, so I’m just going to put this out there: Sister voters have a beef with white women like Clinton that is both racial and gendered. It is not about choosing race; it is about rejecting Hillary’s Scarlett O’Hara act.

    Black women voters are rejecting Hillary Clinton because her ascendance is not a liberating symbol. Her tears are not moving. Her voice does not resonate. Throughout history, privileged white women, attached at the hip to their husband’s power and influence, have been complicit in black women’s oppression. Many African American women are simply refusing to play Mammy to Hillary.

    The loyal Mammy figure, who toiled in the homes of white people, nursing their babies and cleaning and cooking their food, is the most enduring and dishonest representation of black women. She is a uniquely American icon who first emerged as our young country was trying to put itself back together after the Civil War. The romanticism about this period is a bizarre historical anomaly that underscores America’s deep racism: The defeated traitors of the Confederacy have been allowed to reinterpret the war’s battles, fly the flag of secession over state houses, and raise monuments to those who fought to tear down the country. Southern white secessionists were given the power to rewrite history even as America’s newest citizens were relegated to forced agricultural peonage, grinding urban poverty and new forms segregation and racial terror.

    Mammy was a central figure in this mythmaking and she was perfect for the role. The Mammy myth allowed Americans in the North and South to ignore the brutality of slavery by claiming that black women were tied to white families through genuine bonds of affection. Mammy justified past enslavement and continuing oppression.

    Privileged, Southern white women were central in creating and propagating the Mammy myth. In 1923, the United Daughters of the Confederacy were nearly successful in lobbying Congress to erect a statue on federal land to honor “the memory of the faithful colored mammies of the South.” The desire to memorialize Mammy reveals how Southern white women reveled in the subordinate role of their darker peers. These black women were vulnerable to the sexual and labor exploitation of slaveholders and household employers. These women masked their true thoughts and personalities in order to gain a modicum of security for themselves and their families. The Mammy monument was meant to display black women as the faithful, feisty, loyal servants of white domesticity.

    In the face of the Mammy myth, real black women spoke for themselves against the monument. It was substantial, sustained, opposition from organized African American women and the black press that killed the Mammy monument proposal.

    Media have cast the choice in the current election as a simple binary between race and gender. But those who claim that black women are ignoring gender issues by voting for Barack just don’t get it. Hillary cannot have black women’s allegiance for free. Black women will not be relegated to the status of supportive Mammy, easing the way for privileged white women to enter the halls of power.

    Black feminist politics is not simple identity politics. It is not about letting brothers handle the race stuff or about letting white women dominate the gender stuff. The black women’s fight is on all fronts. Sisters resist the ways that black male leaders try to silence women’s issues and squash women’s leadership. At the same time, black women challenge white women who want to claim black women’s allegiance without acknowledging the realities of racism. They will not be drawn into any simple allegiance that refuses to account their full humanity and citizenship.

    Black women want out of the war. Black women need health insurance. Black women need decent schools for their children. Black women need a strong economy that creates jobs. Black women need help caring for their aging parents. Black women want a Democratic win in the fall. Sisters chose Barack on Tuesday because they believe he can deliver these things and that is much more empowering than just having a woman in the White House.

    Melissa Harris-Lacewell is is associate professor of politics and African American studies at Princeton University.

    URL: http://www.theroot.com/id/44696© TheRoot.com

  • invalid-0

    You’re understanding of the “numbers” is inaccurate. You use the example of Super Tuesday to reinforce your argument about who is more electable in the general election, but you’ve completely missed the point: Hillary won most of the major states that are essential for a win in the general election (California, NY, NJ, MA, Arizona, and New Mexico), and she had more votes than McCain or Obama in several of these states. It is all about electoral votes, not caucus delegates, or Alabama, Utah, & Idaho–which are redder than red states. This line that is constantly promoted by Obama supporters–that he brings in Republicans and Independents is exaggerated. Hillary gets 76% of the independent vote too, and for both of them, these are left leaning independents. John McCain will easily scoop up right leaning independents, and many independents who do not trust Obama on national security or the economy. Right now, it looks like a huge majority, but as you said, the numbers don’t lie, and almost half the Democrats in this country are supporting Hillary Clinton. The difference in the popular vote is minimal, because she has won by large margins in the biggest states. This whole media hyped sensation is never going to hold up against McCain, and once again, the Democrats are picking a loser. And don’t speak for me–I am a woman and proud to support Hillary Clinton, because she walks the talk for women’s rights. I am not infatuated with the latest fad, but give my support to a proven fighter and pioneer. And all this talk about her being “polarizing” is another media/Republican concoction. She is incredibly popular in New York, because she has been so effective in working across the aisle to enact legislation WITH REPUBLICANS. Solutions over idealogy indeed. Hillary has 3+ decades of documented solutions on her record–what does Obama have to show for all his promises? She gets the job done. Lastly, her core supporters are the bedrock of the Democratic party: women, Hispanics, elderly, working class. These are the real swing voters who decided the last election in favor of Bush, not a handful of independents.

  • invalid-0

    You keep bringing up the women’s vote for him, but you do not recognize that a large percentage of those votes are from African American women who are voting based mostly on identity politics. When interviewed, they say they really like Hillary, and would support her as the nominee. They are not voting “against” Hillary, but for Obama as the first black president. Furthermore all this talk about the Clinton’s “baggage” is so ironic coming from Democrats, because it was a storyline manufactured and constantly promoted by the right (just read David Brock’s book unmasking the reality of the “right wing conspiracy”). Sadly, Democrats are now using the exact same attack lines against Hillary. There is nothing else they can throw at her–she is a known quantity. They haven’t even started with Obama yet, and if you think Mr. Perfect is immune to character assassination you are naive. Look at Gore and Kerry–it doesn’t matter what the “truth” is, they create and market their version. Look how effective they have been at branding Hillary as “polarizing” etc, even though she is so successful working across party lines. And the media has been all too happy to sell this same line. And no one is talking about the rampant sexism in this campaign. 60% of white males regularly vote against her, and instead, vote for a man with entry-level experience. When asked why they don’t like her, they “don’t know, they just don’t.” Gee–I wonder why. So, when a woman is passed over at work and/or given lower wages than an inexperienced man, don’t blame Hillary.

  • invalid-0

    You can use all the academic fancy arguments you want, but it’s baloney. You say that “Black women need health insurance. Black women need decent schools for their children. Black women need a strong economy that creates jobs. Black women need help caring for their aging parents.” And Obama is the one to deliver these things?! Well here’s some news for you: HILLARY HAS ALREADY DELIVERED THESE THINGS FOR ALMOST 4 DECADES! There is not room enough here to detail all of her legislative accomplishments for exactly these issues you mention, and yet, this guy comes along and he is the best advocate for women’s causes? The argument that Hillary has only gotten where she is because of Bill is a lie. She was an accomplished Yale graduate working for children with disabilities when she decided to move to Arkansas with Bill–she could have had an equally impressive career with her educational background, hard work, and brilliance, but she took a different route because she got married. If you research the overwhelming documentation of her work for women’s, children’s and human rights, it is because of her perseverance, intelligence, and courage. It is unbelievably sexist–especially coming from women!–to suggest that it’s “all because of Bill.”

  • invalid-0

    Exit Poll analysis from February 12. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23136915/

    Exit Poll analysis from February 19.
    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5giZDjUrVk9p4HpVouqLhFbdtXTYAD8UTQDR82

    Obama Closing Gap in Ohio and Texas.
    http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/02/18/barack-closing-in-tx-and-oh/8

    Obama Gaining Super Delegates.
    http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/02/20/685846.aspx

    Obama Winning Key Clinton Voting Bloc: The American Public.
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/15/obama-winning-over-key-cl_n_86787.html

    The “solution” is to do something the Clintons never did, win big to establish a governing majority, not just squeak by with a plurality. Both Clinton and Obama start with base blue states, only Obama has a hope of building on that base.

    This is no longer about who is going to win, or even how. It is now about whether or not the party unites, or if ego will continue to divide the party. Sen. Clinton is a brilliant legislator and we are lucky to have her as a party leader. Let us hope she recognizes that something much larger is sweeping the nation, that this is not about her or her opponent, and no one need feel bad about a contest waged positively, that now has a clear outcome.

  • invalid-0

    No More Bill: another completely biased argument. You really see the world through Obama-tinted glasses don’t you? As they say, “facts are stubborn things.” This constant lament about the Clinton’s “dirty tricks” is such crap. While he strikes the pose of piety, on a daily basis Obama has attacked Hillary, distorted her policies and positions, sent out “fear-mongering” (his word for her) and inaccurate mailings regarding her health care plan and radio ads that do the same. The Clintons are political animals, but they don’t pretend otherwise. He is such a hypocrite, and has only gotten away with it because of the adoring media coverage. If anyone challenges his record or inconsistencies, he cries, “old politics!” It’s a gimmick. Furthermore, it’s hilarious that you suggest that their policy differences are so similar. Of course they are–HE STOLE EVERY ONE OF THEM FROM HILLARY! Follow the time lines–she comes up with a detailed and comprehensive health care, economic, global warming (you fill in the issue), and soon after, he announces one as his own that is almost identical. His policies, his words, his manner are all borrowed from others. And all this talk about inspiration is only affecting some Democrats and Independents. There are many of us that find the vapid, repetitious, derivative speeches boring and empty. It’s evident in every debate, when he stutters his way through the actual details. The notion that this novice is prepared to take on foreign policy in a time of war, and a recession with no economic background is dangerous. There is a large, silent majority of Dems & Independents that are discussing what to do if he gets the nomination, because we do not want to vote for someone who has no demonstrated governing accomplishments given the serious challenges we face. And for me–his hypocrisy and false piety is a real turn-off. I would’ve preferred Edwards, Biden, Dodd or Richardson. He was the least impressive candidate in all of the debates.

  • invalid-0

    You are right, I’m biased. I’m biased against risking another election on establishment candidates that have proven tone deaf in this campaign, expected a coronation, and undermined Bill’s second term because he lacked control. I like Sen. Clinton very much but I agree with her when she says the stakes in this election are just too high. I’m supporting the candidate with proven fundraising, organizing, and electoral success who is appealing to a diverse coalition and bringing new people and energy into the political system. Had the Clintons not expected a coronation, they would have had a game plan to win. They didn’t, and as a result they won’t. The only question that remains, and it is a familiar one for the Clintons, is how many people will they take down with them?

  • invalid-0

    I totally agree. No one has even began to ask to the important questions about him. I guess they are afraid of the answers. You know what they say don’t ask the questions unless you can handle the answers. This love affair with him needs to stop. Wake up America. He is woeing you with his eloquent speeches and whispering sweet NOTHINGS in your ear without substance. Asking you to unite with him. Telling you he can deliver what you need… change, security and a new way of doing business. Then comes the honeymoon phase and the rose colored glasses. But when honeymoon is over, disenchantment and reality settles in and slaps you in the face. Who is this person their not exactly what I thought they were… But they sure can sweet talk. We don’t need false hope and empty inspiration…. we need dedication, experience, real leadership not speeches. We need a tangible track record of tackling the issues of today and the issues of tomorrow. We need Hillary!! I have never felt this strongly about an election as I do this one. I agree BO delivers inspirational speeches, he has a strong presence as an orator and has sparked young people to vote. But I do not believe he can deliver the solutions we need to help push our country forward or the experience to put our country back at the helm in positive world perception of us as a nation. He has never laid out a plan for how he will attack the issues that plague our nation and our world today and in the years to come. He only speaks of change he has no history of delivering it.

  • invalid-0

    I believe if you want to talk numbers and who is more electable in a general election you need to read the following:

    http://savagepolitics.com/?p=78

    http://savagepolitics.com/?p=75

    http://savagepolitics.com/?p=86

    http://savagepolitics.com/?p=84

    http://thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

    Your comments demonstrate your ignorance and lack of true understanding on the subject which you have so pompously claimed to have knowledge. You and your Ilk are the true downfall of this country and we ask that you hold your tongue until you truly have a comprehensive understanding of FACTS!!!!

  • invalid-0

    Beverly Leslie (of Will and Grace fame) you must be out drinking with Karen. You are sending Clinton machine flackery to counter data from actual random sample survey polling. Furthermore, like the Clinton campaign, when the facts don’t appear to be n your side, you resort to personal attacks saying that those of us who don’t want to look backwards are ignorant, and the “downfall of this country” and we should just go away. Far from countering my points, you have made them. The Clintons and their supporters expected a coronation. Could there be anything more undemocratic than that?

  • invalid-0

    Bev, what’s up with all the polls showing that Obama beats McCain by 5-7 percent and Clinton loses to him by roughly the same margin? How do you explain that? Are you suggesting that Obama could not hold the traditional blue states?

  • invalid-0

    This is an excellent post from KOS:

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/2/20/201332/807/36/458633

    Which I copy below for those who would rather read it here.

    I Refuse to Buy into the Obama Hype (now a supporter)
    by Grassroots Mom
    Wed Feb 20, 2008 at 05:13:32 PM PST

    The next President is going to have some MAJOR challenges.
    I refuse to buy into the hype, on either side, but especially on that of Obama. However the “empty rhetoric” v. “history of accomplishments” arguments have prompted me to check it out on my own, not relying on any candidate’s website, book, or worst of all supporters’ diaries, like this one.

    I went to the Library of Congress Website. The FACTS of what each did in the Senate last year sure surprised me. I’m sure they will surprise you, too. Whether you love or hate Hillary, you will be surprised. Whether you think Obama is the second coming of JFK or an inexperienced lightweight, you will surprised. Go check out the Library of Congress Website. After spending some time there, it will be clear that there is really only one candidate would is ready to be the next president, even better than Gore. If you don’t want to spend an hour or two doing research, then I’ll tell you what I discovered on the jump.

    * Grassroots Mom’s diary :: ::
    *

    I looked up Obama and looked up Clinton. I looked at the bills that they both authored and introduced. Anyone who has been around politics, and is honest, realizes that there are a lot of reasons why a Senator votes one way or another on bills or misses votes. However an examination of the bills that each of these Senators cared enough about to author and introduce revealed much to me: what they care about, what their priorities are, how they tackle problems. And the list of co-sponsors showed something about how they lead, inspire and work with others. Finally, looking at which bills actually passed is pretty indicative of how effective each would be at getting things done.

    Before I get into the nitty gritty, let’s all be honest here. It is damn hard to get anything through Congress these days. And Obama and Clinton care about the same issues and have obviously worked together on a lot of legislation, whatever Sen. Clinton’s campaign may imply. She is a frequent co-sponsor on his bills, and he on hers. They are both completely competent senators.

    I started with Sen. Clinton.

    I’m not a Hillary Hater, but I certainly didn’t like her much either. I didn’t like her DLC history; her votes on Iraq, Iran or the bankruptcy bill; her characterization of the years she spent as First Lady as “executive experience.” Hillary Clinton is no Eleanor Roosevelt. Perhaps more like Lady Bird Johnson. Hillary claims to have brought us SCHIP (with a little help from Ted Kennedy). Lady Bird brought us Head Start as well as cleaner, nicer highways. Anyone 40 or older probably remembers when the nation’s highways were basically disgusting garbage dumps lined with billboards. But no one thinks Lady Bird should have been president. Might as well argue for Barbara Bush because of her efforts on family literacy, or Nancy Reagan and the War on Drugs.

    Hillary Clinton does have a solid record in the Senate, however.

    I came away from my research really knowing a lot more about what is important to Hillary in her heart: kids and their well being. My research changed my feeling about her significantly. About 40% of her bills dealt with health care and/or kids. As a mom with small kids, I like her passion for children’s issues. But curiously, her big bill to deliver health care to every child, the one she lauds on her website, S.895 : “A bill to amend titles XIX and XXI of the Social Security Act to ensure that every child in the United States has access to affordable, quality health insurance coverage, and for other purposes” had not a single co-sponsor. Not one, according to the Library of Congress. Why is that? Is it a bad bill? Or is she not able to recruit support for her signature issue? Or did she just submit it simply to put in the hopper, so to speak, so she could claim she was working on it. I honestly don’t know the answer, but I find it curious and suspicious that not even Ted Kennedy co-sponsored it. Its sister bill in the house, H.R. 1535, introduced by John Dingell has 42 co-sponsors. It’s just weird. I honestly don’t know what to make of it.

    S.895 was major. But most of her other bills are much smaller in scale and scope — more targeted and more careful.

    For example, she introduced one bill that offered tax credits for building owners who clean up lead paint. Which is a very good thing. And Obama is a co-sponsor. “S.1793 : A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a tax credit for property owners who remove lead-based paint hazards.”

    Obama’s anti-lead bill (S. 1306) directed the Consumer Product Safety Commission to classify certain children’s products containing lead as banned hazardous substances. He had another bill prohibitting the interstate transport of children’s products containing lead. (S.2132) And Hillary co-sponsored each of these.

    In other words, they both care about protecting children from lead.

    The difference is in the scope and the approach.

    Obama’s bill shows how he thinks big: do everything we can to make sure that lead-painted Thomas the Tank Engine toys don’t get into the hands and mouths of millions of toddlers in this country.

    Or Hillary: encourage people by offering tax credits to clean up lead paint in old buildings. People have been talking about lead paint in old buildings hurting kids in living in inner cities, since, well when I was a kid — for decades. If it is still a big problem, is offering tax credits for clean up, i.e. scrape down the walls and repaint, the best way to protect kids from lead?

    How many of you parents have lead paint problems? How many have (or had) toxic Thomas the Tank Engine Toys? They are everywhere. The local bookstore and kid’s shoe store and the doctor’s office and the preschool and the toystore all have train tables. There is nowhere you can go anymore with toddlers that doesn’t have a Thomas the Tank Engine train table covered with toxic toys. But that’s just my feeling.

    Obama’s bills risk pissing off the toy industry and the Chinese. Hillary’s risks nothing.

    A lot of Clinton’s health bills focus on children. Or women. She introduced a billl for research in the causes of gestational diabetes, for more pediatric research (S.895) and a rural agriculture bill to get farm-fresh veggies into schools (S.1031).

    Her bill dealing with the crisis in foreclosure is actually S.2114 : “A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act, to provide for enhanced disclosures to consumers and enhanced regulation of mortgage brokers, and for other purposes.” Again, no co-sponsors. Obama also introduced a bill in the face of the mortgage foreclosure crisis: S.1222 : “A bill to stop mortgage transactions which operate to promote fraud, risk, abuse, and under-development, and for other purposes.” Sponsor: Sen Obama, Barack [IL] (introduced 4/25/2007), co-sponsored by Dick Durbin.

    In her ads and speeches, Clinton claims that she’s fighting to stop foreclosure while implying that Obama is empty rhetoric. Actually, Clinton is calling for “enhanced disclosures to consumers and enhanced regulation”, while Obama’s bill will “stop mortgage transactions which operate to promote fraud, risk, abuse, and under-development.” After looking at the two bills, Obama’s appears to be tougher, more directly addressing the problem.

    Speaking of Obama, here’s a list of some of his proposed legislation.

    Four bills on energy including
    • S.1151 : A bill to provide incentives to the auto industry to accelerate efforts to develop more energy-efficient vehicles to lessen dependence on oil;
    •S.115 : A bill to suspend royalty relief, to repeal certain provisions of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, and to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal certain tax incentives for the oil and gas industry; and •S.133 : A bill to promote the national security and stability of the economy of the United States by reducing the dependence of the United States on oil through the use of alternative fuels and new technology, and for other purposes.

    Clinton had only one bill that I could find that addressed the same issue, S.701 : A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to impose a temporary oil profit fee and to use the proceeds of the fee collected to provide a Strategic Energy Fund and expand certain energy tax incentives, and for other purposes.

    Obama wants to “repeal certain tax incentives for the oil and gas industry”. Clinton sees the answer in a “temporary oil profit fee” and to “expand certain energy tax incentives” for alternative energy. Obama’s alternative energy bill (S.133) was co-sponsored by Harkin, Lugar and Salazar. Clinton’s bill again had no co-sponsors.

    On health care he introduced ten bills/amendments, including one amendment that passed: S.AMDT.1041 to S.1082 To improve the safety and efficacy of genetic tests. Other issues addressed in his proposed health care legislation were AIDS research (S.823 ), hospital report cards (S.692 — the V.A., and S.1824 — Medicare), better emergency care (S.1873), and drug price controls (S.2347).

    Clinton’s health care bills, for the most part, didn’t impress me much, although she introduced many more bills in this area than Obama did:

    S.CON.RES.63 : A concurrent resolution expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the need for additional research into the chronic neurological condition hydrocephalus, and for other purposes.
    S.RES.176 : A resolution recognizing April 30, 2007, as “National Healthy Schools Day”.
    S.RES.222 : A resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month.
    S.201 : A bill to establish a grant program for individuals still suffering health effects as a result of the September 11, 2001, attacks in New York City and at the Pentagon.
    S.907 : A bill to establish an Advisory Committee on Gestational Diabetes, to provide grants to better understand and reduce gestational diabetes, and for other purposes.
    S.993 : A bill to improve pediatric research.
    S.982 : A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for integration of mental health services and mental health treatment outreach teams, and for other purposes.
    S.1065 : A bill to improve the diagnosis and treatment of traumatic brain injury in members and former members of the Armed Forces, to review and expand telehealth and telemental health programs of the Department of Defense and the Department of Veterans Affairs, and for other purposes.
    S.1075 : A bill to amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to expand access to contraceptive services for women and men under the Medicaid program, help low income women and couples prevent unintended pregnancies and reduce abortion, and for other purposes.
    S.1343 : A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act with respect to prevention and treatment of diabetes, and for other purposes.
    S.1712 : A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to improve newborn screening activities, and for other purposes.

    and on and on. Plenty of these have plenty of co-sponsors. Obviously, Hillary Clinton really knows her stuff on the issues of health care. None of them passed, however. On Obama’s side, one of his health care initiatives passed in the Senate, the aforementioned amendment to Kennedy’s S.1082, the FDA Revitalization Act.

    Truth be told, it was very depressing doing this research to see all these great ideas and how little actually gets done. Looking at the legislative history of Kennedy’s bill is a good example. It finally passed but its sister bill in the House, H.R.2900, was the one that was finally enacted, and with it, Obama’s amendment for safe and effective genetic testing. Clinton submitted two amendments to this bill, one of would have eliminated the sunsetting of pediatric data collection; the other would have begin the process to approve generic versions of complex and expensive drugs called biologics or biotech drugs. Neither were adopted.

    Now let’s look more closely at Obama.

    I was blown away as I started going through his record. I’ve already mentioned his bills on health care and energy. In addition he had introduced bills on Iran, voting, veterans, global warming, campaign finance and lobbyists, Blackwater, global poverty, nuclear proliferation, and education.
    On Iran: S.J.RES.23 : A joint resolution clarifying that the use of force against Iran is not authorized by the Authorization for the Use of Military Force Against Iraq, any resolution previously adopted, or any other provision of law.

    On votingPassed out of Committee and now on the Senate Calendar for Feb. 22, 2008
    S.453 : A bill to prohibit deceptive practices in Federal elections Please check this out! This is a great bill. We need this. I can’t believe that this time voter intimidation is not already illegal.

    On veterans and military personnel: S.1084 : A bill to provide housing assistance for very low-income veterans;

    On global warmingS.1324 : A bill to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuel sold in the United States;S.1389 : A bill to authorize the National Science Foundation to establish a Climate Change Education Program; S.AMDT.599 to S.CON.RES.21 To add $200 million for Function 270 (Energy) for the demonstration and monitoring of carbon capture and sequestration technology by the Department of Energy. (This last one passed both the House and the Senate as part of the budget bill.)

    On campaign finance and lobbyists S.2030 : A bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require reporting relating to bundled contributions made by persons other than registered lobbyists; and S.AMDT.41 to S.1 To require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, or political parties for whom they collect or arrange contributions, and the aggregate amount of the contributions collected or arranged.

    On Blackwater S.2044 : A bill to provide procedures for the proper classification of employees and independent contractors, and for other purposes, and S.2147 : A bill to require accountability for contractors and contract personnel under Federal contracts, and for other purposes.

    On global poverty S.2433 : A bill to require the President to develop and implement a comprehensive strategy to further the United States foreign policy objective of promoting the reduction of global poverty, the elimination of extreme global poverty, and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goal of reducing by one-half the proportion of people worldwide, between 1990 and 2015, who live on less than $1 per day.

    On global nuclear proliferation S.1977 : A bill to provide for sustained United States leadership in a cooperative global effort to prevent nuclear terrorism, reduce global nuclear arsenals, stop the spread of nuclear weapons and related material and technology, and support the responsible and peaceful use of nuclear technology.

    I counted nine education bills, but it’s getting late and I’ve got to get my kids ready for bed.

    As I mentioned earlier, Clinton is a frequent co-sponsor on many of Obama’s bills. So is Ted Kennedy. So are a number of Republicans.

    Finally, Obama appears to have a better record last year in the Senate on getting his bills and amendments passed than does Clinton. I’ve listed everything that passed the Senate for each them at the end in boxes. But check out Thomas.loc.gov for yourself. I may have missed something.

    In my eyes Obama is the superior choice in every way. He cares about more of the issues that matter to me. Kids and health care are important but so is the issue of global warming, on which Clinton introduced not a single bill last year.

    Obama is a leader. With bigger majorities in Congress, much of his agenda should sail through. He can inspire this country to change course on so many things, from health care to global warming, where attitudes have to be changed first. I remember Bill Clinton’s endless laundry lists of small, focus group approved initiatives. For those who say Hillary will not govern like Bill did, I respond that the people who were doing the market testing of his proposed policies were Dick Morris, of course, and Mark Penn, who is now running Hillary’s campaign.

    It’s Obama for me! I just sent him $100. My first donation this election.

    Yes, We Can!

    Clinton’s Successes:
    S.694 : A bill to direct the Secretary of Transportation to issue regulations to reduce the incidence of child injury and death occurring inside or outside of light motor vehicles, and for other purposes. (This is currently in conference committee to reconcile difference with the House bill)
    Passed in the Senate:
    S.CON.RES.27 : A concurrent resolution supporting the goals and ideals of “National Purple Heart Recognition Day”.
    S.RES.21 : A resolution recognizing the uncommon valor of Wesley Autrey of New York, New York
    S.RES.92 : A resolution calling for the immediate and unconditional release of soldiers of Israel held captive by Hamas and Hezbollah.
    S.RES.141 : A resolution urging all member countries of the International Commission of the International Tracing Service who have yet to ratify the May 2006 amendments to the 1955 Bonn Accords to expedite the ratification process to allow for open access to the Holocaust archives located at Bad Arolsen, Germany.
    S.RES.222 : A resolution supporting the goals and ideals of Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month.
    S.AMDT.666 to H.R.1591 To link award fees under Department of Homeland Security contracts to successful acquisition outcomes under such contracts.
    S.AMDT.2047 to H.R.1585 To specify additional individuals eligible to transportation for survivors of deceased members of the Armed Forces to attend their burial ceremonies.
    S.AMDT.2108 to H.R.1585 To require a report on the planning and implementation of the policy of the United States toward Darfur.
    S.AMDT.2390 to H.R.2638 To require that all contracts of the Department of Homeland Security that provide award fees link such fees to successful acquisition outcomes.
    S.AMDT.2474 to H.R.2638 To ensure that the Federal Protective Service has adequate personnel.
    S.AMDT.2823 to H.R.3074 To require a report on plans to alleviate congestion and flight delays in the New York/New Jersey/Philadelphia Airspace.
    S.AMDT.2917 to H.R.1585 To extend and enhance the authority for temporary lodging expenses for members of the Armed Forces in areas subject to a major disaster declaration or for installations experiencing a sudden increase in personnel levels.

    Obama’s Success:
    S.AMDT.1041 to S.1082 To improve the safety and efficacy of genetic tests.
    S.AMDT.3073 to H.R.1585 To provide for transparency and accountability in military and security contracting.
    S.AMDT.3078 to H.R.1585 Relating to administrative separations of members of the Armed Forces for personality disorder.
    S.AMDT.41 to S.1 To require lobbyists to disclose the candidates, leadership PACs, or political parties for whom they collect or arrange contributions, and the aggregate amount of the contributions collected or arranged.
    S.AMDT.524 to S.CON.RES.21 To provide $100 million for the Summer Term Education Program supporting summer learning opportunities for low-income students in the early grades to lessen summer learning losses that contribute to the achievement gaps separating low-income students from their middle-class peers.
    S.AMDT.599 to S.CON.RES.21 To add $200 million for Function 270 (Energy) for the demonstration and monitoring of carbon capture and sequestration technology by the Department of Energy.
    S.AMDT.905 to S.761 To require the Director of Mathematics, Science, and Engineering Education to establish a program to recruit and provide mentors for women and underrepresented minorities who are interested in careers in mathematics, science, and engineering.
    S.AMDT.923 to S.761 To expand the pipeline of individuals entering the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics fields to support United States innovation and competitiveness.
    S.AMDT.924 to S.761 To establish summer term education programs.
    S.AMDT.2519 to H.R.2638 To provide that one of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5 million or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee certifies in writing to the agency awarding the contract or grant that the contractor or grantee owes no past due Federal tax liability.
    S.AMDT.2588 to H.R.976 To provide certain employment protections for family members who are caring for members of the Armed Forces recovering from illnesses and injuries incurred on active duty.
    S.AMDT.2658 to H.R.2642 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability.
    S.AMDT.2692 to H.R.2764 To require a comprehensive nuclear threat reduction and security plan.
    S.AMDT.2799 to H.R.3074 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability.
    S.AMDT.3137 to H.R.3222 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability.
    S.AMDT.3234 to H.R.3093 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability.
    S.AMDT.3331 to H.R.3043 To provide that none of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available by this Act may be used to enter into a contract in an amount greater than $5,000,000 or to award a grant in excess of such amount unless the prospective contractor or grantee makes certain certifications regarding Federal tax liability.
    Senate Resolutions Passed:
    S.RES.133 : A resolution celebrating the life of Bishop Gilbert Earl Patterson.
    S.RES.268 : A resolution designating July 12, 2007, as “National Summer Learning Day”.

    Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Library of Congress,

  • http://junctiontrader.com invalid-0

    IN GOD WE TRUST

    Dear FRIENDS,

    This is a hard-fought campaign. You and I both know it. And now the
    Obama campaign has upped the stakes again.

    In just 24 hours, you closed the $1.3 million advertising gap with
    Obama this week. In response, their campaign has bought another $1.9
    million worth of airtime.

    For Hillary to win on March 4, we must close this gap — and we have
    to do it quickly. We cannot let this race be decided by Obama’s
    spending advantage on the air.

    Help Hillary make up the $1.9 million spending gap in 24 hours with
    your contribution today:
    https://contribute.hillaryclinton.com/form.html?sc=1638&utm_source=1638&utm_medium=e&ta=0

    The ads we put on the air matter. The number of phone calls we make
    matters. The rides we give to the polls matter. And most important of
    all, what you do right now matters.

    We have the best candidate with the best ideas — and she’s a fighter.
    She’s knows that you are standing with her every step of the way.

    So let’s show the Obama campaign that they can’t win this race just by
    throwing more money at it.

    Let’s match that $1.9 million ad buy of his and make sure this is a
    race of ideas, because that’s a race that we know Hillary will win.

    Contribute now to help us raise $1.9 million in 24 hours:
    https://contribute.hillaryclinton.com/form.html?sc=1638&utm_source=1638&utm_medium=e&ta=0

    You’ve shown Hillary that you are there for her when she needs you,
    and it means so much to the both of us. Thank you for all you do.

    Sincerely,

    Bill Clinton

    Hillary website: http://www.hillaryclinton.com

    Contribution to Hillary’s Campaign: https://contribute.hillaryclinton.com/form.html?sc=2361

    Hillary Store: http://www.hillarystore.com/

    Hillblazers:http://hillblazers.com/

    Women for Hillary: http://www.hillaryclinton.com/coalitions/womenforhillary/?sc=3

    Just Hillary: http://www.justhillary.com

    We support to Hillary R. Clinton: http://supportingtohillaryclinton.blogspot.com

    Jefferson county for Hillary: http://groups.google.es/group/jeffco4hillary?hl=es&lnk=srg

    Hillary Clinton vote: http://groups.google.es/group/hillary-clinton-vote?hl=es&lnk=srg

    Hillary-in-2008: http://groups.google.es/group/HILLARY-IN-2008?hl=es&lnk=gschg

    Blogs for Hillary: http://groups.google.es/group/BlogsforHillary?hl=es&lnk=gschg

    Hillary for President 2008: http://groups.google.es/group/Hillary-for-President-2008?hl=es&lnk=gschg
    –~–~———~–~—-~————~——-~–~—-~
    You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
    Groups “HILLARY CLINTON VOTE” group.
    To post to this group, send email to hillary-clinton-
    vote@googlegroups.com

    Ann F. Lewis
    Senior Adviser
    Hillary Clinton for President

    Benito García Pedraza
    Páginas personales, proyecto weblog para Google. mailto:
    benito.garci…@terra.es

    M WAHEED JADOON
    WORLD DEMOCRACY MEDIA GROUP
    NEW YORK
    wajadoon@yahoo.com