No reasonable person can argue that Hillary Clinton is no better than any of the 16+ or so Republicans who are lining up to face her. Her focus on pocketbook issues is a welcome focus, something that has even tea partiers saying they might vote for her in 2016. When her husband, Bill, was in office, we experienced a period of record job growth and deficit reduction that the Very Important People (TM) said could not be done. All that in the face of an impeachment trial as the GOP sought in vain to reverse the outcome of the 1996 election.
But then the question is, which side is she on? Is she on the side of the working people, or is she on the side of the 1% and the wealthy corporations who SCOTUS Justice John Roberts thinks represent the highest form of good in this country? There are a lot of unanswered questions in that regard. The first involves her stance on the Fight for 15 struggle.
While she recently tweeted a message of support for Fight for 15, she was not specific. She said, "Every American deserves a fair shot at success. Fast food & child care workers shouldn't have to march in streets for living wages." That's great -- but is that a statement of support for Fight for 15?
More significant is her stance on TPP. She has not publicly stated where she stands on that issue. Yet, under the TPP, in the worst-case scenario, corporations could sue the government if they raised the minimum wage to $15/hour, arguing that it affects their bottom line. It would not go before the courts; it would go before the trade commission under the Investor/State Dispute Resolution process. Victories like Seattle's ordinance to raise the wage to $15 over the next several years could be rolled back. Where does she stand on that? Does she believe in the continued sovereignty of the people? Or does she support the sovereignty of corporations over the government, thus ending Constitutional protections?
She can say all she wants on paid sick leave or being a champion of working people, or tweet support for organized labor. That's great. But if she supports TPP, then none of that matters. That is because under it, none of our opinions would matter anymore. These decisions about salaries and workers and regulations would be made in private corporate boardrooms where the only thing that matters is the bottom line. It would be a cumulation of 30+ years of neoliberal thought taking over, starting with Jimmy Carter deregulating the airline, railroad, and trucking industries and continuing with Reagan and future presidents. Sure, we could have free speech and go to whatever churches we want and vote for whatever candidates we want. But they would not have the power to effect change, because we would be playing by the rules of the 1%. And that would accelerate the economic collapse of this planet.