Skip to main content

View Diary: It’s Time To Pick A President (168 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  (CONT'D - my ratings of those accomplishments) (0+ / 0-)

    * Helped pass legislation that encouraged investment to create jobs in struggling communities through the Renewal Communities program.

    )))))) 1. I am sure this is something tangible, but it sounds like Standard Listing of Obvious Actions. "Invest in jobs" sounds like "tough on crime", "affordable healthcare", "responsible foreign policy". I would have to see something innovative and of great consequence in the specific application of ideas to solve chronic problems if I were to rate this as anything remotely significant.

    * Has championed legislation to bring broadband Internet access to rural America (important in today's information economy).

    ))))) 3. Well it IS important, but I never hear her talk about this, or how else she would help generate new jobs and stimulate the economy by making broadband infrastructure available to rural areas. Thus, this item is neutralized out. It's a no-brainer and anyone who voted against it would be labeled an idiot. I also don't know what "championed" means. Has anything actually passed? If so, good, what did she do specifically? If not, big deal. I can champion having an effective Democratic Congress, but if they don't act, my championing is meaningless.

    * Worked to expand quality affordable health care to more Americans. Strengthed the Children's Health Insurance Program, which increased coverage for children in low income and working families.

    ))))) 2.  This is too ambiguous and generalized. SCHIP did not pass, correct? What did she do, if anything, to use her capacity as leading Presidential candidate to influence undecideds or Againsts to see the merits and change their votes. Unless she actually DELIVERS something, it isn;t worth citing here. But same for Obama, Edwards, Dodd, all of them. I want to see actual results, not "tried to" or "helped" or "pushed for". Anyone can get behind good intentions. If she's being marketed to me here as the best Presidential candidate, a higher standard applies: what have you accomplished, made happen, that has directly improved the lives of ordinary Americans?

    * Authored legislation that has been enacted to improve quality and lower the cost of prescription drugs and to protect our food supply from bioterrorism.

    )))))) 5, until I see the tangible outcomes. Enacted? That's first-stage tangible, but now what are the outcomes? (I don't, by the way, expect you yo have answers for any of these. I am merely reacting to what sound like good bullet points vs RESULTS. If someone does not have a RESULTS list, they are no more, no less qualified to be president than anyone. The tangible I am looking for is: what was the quality before, and what is it now, after legislation? What was the cost before? what is it now? is it a significant improvement that helps people's lives improve, or is it window dressing?

    re bioterrorism and food supply: I rate this part of the asnwer as a "1" out of 10 in relevant accomplishment. It's too huge a category to lump in with medicines. I would have to see what she specifically did to tangibly affect our food supply before I ranked her contribution to America on this subject.

    (continued below)

    ______________
    -----> My latest vlog entry: on getting a webcam

    by rhfactor on Thu Dec 27, 2007 at 12:41:30 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  record, pt 2 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rhfactor

      )))))) 1. I am sure ...remotely significant.

      $5.6 billion in tax credits is significant for many communities:
      http://www.hud.gov/...

      ))))) 3. Well it IS important, but I never hear her talk about this...my championing is meaningless.

      She has researched it, stumped for it, and proposed a bill (which has not passed, but that is a matter for the committee and the entire Congress to take up).

      Your championing is only meaningless because you have less money and name recognition than Sen. Clinton, and perhaps less experience. However, it does not follow that your views and activities would be irrelevant if you were running for President.

      The landscape might change, however, whether or not the Rural Development program is re-authorized by Congress. At last July's meeting of the Democratic Steering & Outreach Committee of the U.S. Senate, Dr. Alan Shark. executive director of the Rural Broadband Coalition (RBC), told an audience of eight senators that rural America faces 10 major challenges when it comes to broadband opportunities. He also offered seven policy recommendations for Congress to consider.
      ...
      Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) was among those hearing Shark's words. Earlier, Clinton and Rep. John McHugh (D-NY) had sent a letter to the head of RUS, asking him to rejuvenate the RUS Broadband Loan and Loan Guarantee Program, which, the lawmakers said had cooled significantly due to the long loan processing time, the cost and complexity of the application process, and the fact that more loans had been turned down than processed.
      ...
      Apparently Clinton was ready to take steps beyond writing a letter. On September 29, 2006, she introduced a groundbreaking bill, the Rural Broadband Initiative Act of 2006. "The legislation would establish a revamped strategy for broadband deployment to rural areas," said Wayne Archer of the Democratic Steering & Outreach Committee. "And it would create the Rural Broadband Innovation Fund, which would fund experimental and cutting-edge applications to deliver broadband service to rural areas," said Archer.

      http://www.ffva.com/...

      http://www.dailywireless.org/...

      ))))) 2.  This is too ambiguous and generalized. SCHIP did not pass, correct? ... what have you accomplished, made happen, that has directly improved the lives of ordinary Americans?

      An expansion of SCHIP was vetoed by President Bush. The original SCHIP program however, did pass; it helped stem a decades-long increase in the percentage of American children without health insurance, and Sen. Clinton was one of the prime movers in originating it:

      Before Hillary Clinton’s Health Care Task Force floundered in 1994, it developed a fallback plan, described in its documents as "Kids First," to achieve government controlled universal health care "phased in by population, beginning with children. Kids First is really a precursor to the new system."

      In 1997, "Kids First" became SCHIP, as President Clinton the First persuaded enough Republicans (led by Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch) to join Democrats like Sen. Ted Kennedy in creating the program. The initials stand for "State Children’s Health Insurance Program,"
      ...Today, of 78 million children in America, 29.5 million get health care from Medicaid, and another 6.5 million get it from SCHIP.

      )))))) 5, until I see the tangible outcomes. Enacted? ...tangibly affect our food supply before I ranked her contribution to America on this subject.

      Not sure if passed. However she has substantial thoughts on food supply safety, mostly the executive branch's responsibility; in which she agrees with fmr Sen. Edwards

      http://www.politifact.com/...

      Here are her proposals:

      The Bush Administration has allowed our food safety situation to deteriorate and Hillary has a plan to repair this dysfunctional situation. She will create a single food safety agency, increase funds for inspection of imported food, and create a new system of preventive controls and standards of care that food processes have to follow.

      •  Can you please be made the DailyKos Ombudsman? (0+ / 0-)

        In 5 years' time here I have never prior come across someone who does actual due diligence in relation to relies to questions. Not only are you an amazing exception, but your tone is professional and respectful and neutral -- (unlike my own, for example :(    )

        In all these years I have come to never expect the kind of substantive and on-point replies that you have posted. So, major kudos and THIS represents the kind of process I would love to see be the standard. I would gladly see a 5000-post per month reduction at DailyKos, eliminate 50% of the daily threads which provide no substance, and replace all of that with CURATED threads that pass through a human filter --- much like the Rescue Rangers do.

        You, along with a small handful of others, could dramatically improve the quality of discussion at DK by a magnitude of about 1000% . It's never been important for me that people agree with one another. But it has really been discouraging to me as a "First-netroots-election Dean Progressive activist" who used these online tools to really advance the process of transparency and bottom-up participation... to now see all these tools polluted as grossly as the San Francisco Bay after that recent oil spill by people turning a progressive site into a tabloid marketing medium.

        Nightly Edwards threads, Obama threads, Hillary threads do nothing at all here but add propoganda. they are not about what's best for America. they are all about campaigning to elect person X. And that is a shame to see these tools disintegrate into that DailyKrap.

        Thus, when you answered my questions about tangible accomplishments, that was the most thoughtful reply I have ever seen on a "candidate diary".... and a true anamoly. I appreciate further your followups and clarifications. I'm sure you can tell I am not a fan of the candidate you support, but the more I can have all the marketing crap filtered out (such as the actual diary here), and instead see this kind of articulation of results, it opens my receptivity in ways no one else here has been able to do. I simply applaud your substantiated method of Q & A.

        Thank you very much.

        rhfactor

        ______________
        -----> My latest vlog entry: on getting a webcam

        by rhfactor on Fri Dec 28, 2007 at 03:05:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site