This is a repost from an old diary of mine. I reposted it because I felt that it needed weekday as well as weekend eyes. I am also hoping this does not devolve again into a discussion about the AUMF. We all know who voted which way when so can we not rehash it?. Thanks
I am going to start by listing the various issues I see and then addressing them individually.
Issue One: Insincerity.
Edwards is viewed by some an insincere or pandering because of several things. His voting record, his wealth, his investing in and working for Fortress and just that he seems to be all words no action.
Issue Two: Inability to lead or get his ideas passed in Congress if elected.
Often I see the statement made that Edwards never got any of his bills passed in Senate, that he cannot build consensus, and that he would never accomplish any of what he wants as President because Congress won't let him.
Issue Three: Edwards is not electable.
I still have yet to understand why people think he is not electable but I will address this too.
Issue Four: Lack of Experience.
Another concern is that because he has little legislative experience this means he would not be a good president.
These are the main issues I see people raise about Edwards so let's start at the top.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue One Sincerity:
Edwards has spent years donating to charity, working for the poor, working for economic and educational equality. Let's look back shall we?
From CNN.com in 2004
Democratic vice presidential candidate John Edwards and his wife made almost $39 million in the past decade, about 80 percent of it before he was elected to the Senate in 1998, according to tax returns released Friday.
They paid nearly 35 percent of that income to the Internal Revenue Service, the returns show.
In contrast, Dick Cheney in 2000, the year before he became vice president, reported more than $36 million in income and paid more than $14 million in taxes. He served as chief executive of Halliburton Co. until August 2000.
The couple said they donated about 8.6 percent of their income to charity, more than $3.3 million over the 10 years.
Here are the year-by-year numbers on their federal taxes and total income:
- $1,998,066 in federal taxes on $5,214,005 of income.
- $2,023,430 in federal taxes on $5,357,717 of income.
- $1,539,879 in federal taxes on $4,278,210 of income.
- $3,186,339 in federal taxes on $11,426,875 of income.
- $2,157,760 in federal taxes on $5,893,302 of income.
- $623,047 in federal taxes on $1,704,495 of income.
- $654,716 in federal taxes on $1,821,273 of income.
- $584,852 in federal taxes on $1,720,104 of income.
- $361,396 in federal taxes on $1,221,953 of income.
- $22,233 in federal taxes on $305,922 of income
The higher amounts are when he received his percentage of awards he won for his clients. Clients like the 6 year old girl who got her intestines yanked out by a po0l drain. So Edwards, although well off indeed has given plenty back over 8% was given to charity. This shows that Edwards has had a long standing tradition of helping those less fortunate.
I finally found the website for the College for Everyone program that Edwards founded in Greene County.
Here is the link
They are in the second year of the program and they have helped 200 kids who would probably never have a chance to go to college get to college. This was Edwards' idea from the beginning and the test program is working perfectly.
The President of Acorn also speaks of Edwards' ongoing committment to help out unions and the poor:
Link
As ACORN’s president, I can personally attest that Senator Edwards has been a steadfast ally in this struggle – from raising wages to rebuilding the Gulf Coast.
One of the best ways to end poverty is to pay workers fair wages. In the summer of 2005, I traveled with Senator Edwards to cities and states across the country, launching ballot initiative campaigns to raise the minimum wage above the shamefully low $5.15 an hour.
While Senator Edwards could have chosen to do anything else with his time, he chose to spend it on the road with low-wage workers and their allies who were fighting to lift workers out of poverty. Edwards worked directly with grassroots community-faith-labor coalitions on the ground, leading rallies and press conferences to galvanize public support and working outside the spotlight to help organize support and raise funds to bring wage increase proposals to the ballot.
Last November, voters rewarded the efforts of Edwards, ACORN and our allies by resoundingly approving six state ballot measures to raise the minimum wage. As a result, more than 1.5 million of the country’s lowest-paid workers will get a raise. The ballot measures were just the most high-profile victories in a year that saw an unprecedented 17 states raise their minimum wage – many for the first time – including Edwards’ home state of North Carolina.
This movement in the states helped create the public pressure for a long-overdue increase in the federal minimum wage, which was passed last month and will help another 12.5 million low-income workers make ends meet. In addition to his work to raise wages, Senator Edwards has made an ongoing commitment to work with ACORN and others in the struggle to rebuild the Gulf Coast and help Katrina Survivors return home.
We also know that John and Elizabeth opened up learning labs in honor of their son who was killed, that John has frequently walked picket lines as well as probably his biggest achievement with the Poverty Center to bring attention and study poverty and how to end it.
So Edwards has obviously been concerned about poverty for many years.
Now to his voting record which has it's ups and downs for sure. There is the stupid co-sponsoring of the AUMF and some other things that have been addressed. Let's remember a few things about that time period first. From Wikipedia
In the 1996 and 1998 elections, Republicans lost Congressional seats but still retained control of the House and, more narrowly, the Senate. After the 2000 election, the Senate was divided evenly between the parties, with Republicans retaining the right to organize the Senate due to the election of Dick Cheney as Vice President and ex officio presiding officer of the Senate. The Senate shifted to control by the Democrats after GOP senator Jim Jeffords changed party registration to "Independent" in June 2001, but later returned to Republican control after the November 2002 elections
Now Edwards was in the Senate from 98 to 04 when the Repubs were running the joint. Not many Dem or Progressive bills were making much headway during the wonderful years of Repub obstructism, secret votes and new rule making. Did he make some bad votes, probably. Were there things in those bills that he chose to vote against because they were wrong probably. However, let's look at what he tried to pass to see where his intentions were. He did sponsor the Patient Bill of Rights, the Fragile X research bill, he advocated for rolling back taxcuts, voted against the $87 billion supplemental, Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act among others.
The bankruptcy bill he voted yes on also included the following:
Requires credit card companies to include information regarding interest rates, repayment plans, and fees on monthly statements
- Increases the minimum wage from $5.15 to $6.15 per hour over the next three years
- Provides $18.5 billion in tax cuts for small business
So perhaps it was one of those nasty tradeoff choices legislatures have to make. Edwards has always been dedicated to raising minimum wage and perhaps he felt that was important to pass.
From Project Vote Smart:
Labor
(Back to top)
2003 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers considered to be the most important in 2003, Edwards voted their preferred position 90 percent of the time.
2003 Edwards supported the interests of the Transportation Communications Union 100 percent in 2003.
2003 Edwards supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 75 percent in 2003. Those who supported or provided other assistance in connection with a UAW organizing drive are given an extra 10% bonus.
2003 Edwards supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2003.
2003 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers considered to be the most important in 2003, Edwards voted their preferred position 83 percent of the time.
2003 On the votes that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker considered to be the most important in 2003, Edwards voted their preferred position 50 percent of the time.
2003 On the votes that the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers considered to be the most important in 2003, Edwards voted their preferred position 67 percent of the time.
2003 Edwards supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 91 percent in 2003.
2003 Edwards supported the interests of the Workplace Fairness 60 percent in 2003.
2002 Edwards supported the interests of the American Federation of Government Employees 100 percent in 2002.
2002 Edwards supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 100 percent in 2002.
2002 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers considered to be the most important in 2002, Edwards voted their preferred position 75 percent of the time.
2002 Edwards supported the interests of the Transportation Communications Union 90 percent in 2002.
2002 Edwards supported the interests of the Communications Workers of America 100 percent in 2002.
2002 On the votes that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker considered to be the most important in 2002, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
2002 On the votes that the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers considered to be the most important in 2002, Edwards voted their preferred position 72 percent of the time.
2002 Edwards supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2002.
2002 Edwards supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 92 percent in 2002.
2002 On the votes that the Service Employees International Union considered to be the most important in 2002, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
2002 On the votes that the Pennsylvania State Nurses Association considered to be the most important in 2002, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
2001-2002 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers considered to be the most important in 2001-2002, Edwards voted their preferred position 83 percent of the time.
2001-2002 Edwards supported the interests of the American Postal Workers Union 90 percent in 2001-2002.
2001 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers considered to be the most important in 2001, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
2001 Edwards supported the interests of the Transportation Communications Union 100 percent in 2001.
2001 On the votes that the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers considered to be the most important in 2001, Edwards voted their preferred position 72 percent of the time.
2001 Edwards supported the interests of the American Federation of Government Employees 100 percent in 2001.
2001 On the votes that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker considered to be the most important in 2001, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
2001 Edwards supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 93 percent in 2001.
2001 Edwards supported the interests of the United Food & Commercial Workers 100 percent in 2001.
2001 On the votes that the Service Employees International Union considered to be the most important in 2001, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
2001 Edwards supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 100 percent in 2001.
2001 Edwards supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 100 percent in 2001.
2000 Edwards supported the interests of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 85 percent in 2000.
2000 On the votes that the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Worker considered to be the most important in 2000, Edwards voted their preferred position 0 percent of the time.
2000 Edwards supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 75 percent in 2000.
2000 Edwards supported the interests of the American Federation of Government Employees 92 percent in 2000.
2000 Edwards supported the interests of the United Auto Workers 92 percent in 2000.
2000 Edwards supported the interests of the Communications Workers of America 100 percent in 2000.
2000 On the votes that the United Electrical Radio and Machine Workers considered to be the most important in 2000, Edwards voted their preferred position 57 percent of the time.
2000 On the votes that the Service Employees International Union considered to be the most important in 2000, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
1999-2000 Edwards supported the interests of the International Association of Fire Fighters 100 percent in 1999-2000.
1999 Edwards supported the interests of the Transportation Communications Union 100 percent in 1999.
1999 Edwards supported the interests of the Communications Workers of America 100 percent in 1999.
1999 On the votes that the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers considered to be the most important in 1999, Edwards voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.
Apparently the labor unions seem to feel he was sincere and consistent in supporting their needs throughout his time in Senate. Seeing as how his main theme for the election is dealing with poverty and helping unions I would see this as consistency and sincerity.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue Two: Leadership.
Well first we have to define what a leader is. A leader is usually understood to mean someone who inspires others, who builds and directs groups of people to acheive an end. A leader also can lead by example or lead by taking the less popular but perhaps the more correct stance on an issue. Edwards managed to inspire enough people in the primarily Red State of NC to vote for him over a Republican incumbent in his bid for senatorial election. Edwards inspired Kerry enough that Kerry tapped this unknown as VP. Edwards also inspired individuals to come together and donate money to the College for Everyone Program which is still privately funded. Edwards inspires, led and built a coalition of experts, people notoriously hard to lead, to come together and work for the shared goal of ending poverty.
In the Senate Edwards introduced bills like the following:
Senator John Edwards on Wednesday introduced legislation that would bring `state-of`-`the-art` health care to underserved rural and urban areas.
"Everyone, no matter where they live, deserves good health care," Senator Edwards said.
A recent study found that 36 million Americans, including 1.7 million North Carolinians, live in areas without enough doctors. Many in the medical community see the expansion of health programs using the Internet and other technologies, known as telehealth, as the key to providing adequate health care for Americans in all parts of the country
With surprisingly little fanfare, the U.S. Treasury Department earlier this year gutted states' ability to protect their citizens from financial scams. Consumer advocates call the implications "`earth-shaking`" -- and they're right....
Several weeks ago, I introduced legislation to strike down the new rules. My bills would use the accelerated process under the Congressional Review Act to rein in runaway agencies. They would restore states' ability to protect their citizens from financial scams.
I'm gratified by the support my legislation has received from a broad range of consumer and civil rights groups. We need a strong national law to fight predatory lending. We don't need to replace strong state laws with weak national ones.
SENATOR EDWARDS INTRODUCES BILL TO FIGHT HIGH PRESCRIPTION DRUG PRICES
May 19, 2004
WASHINGTON – Senator John Edwards on Wednesday introduced a bill that would help lower skyrocketing costs of prescription drugs by curbing deceptive pharmaceutical advertisements.
"By tackling wasteful and misleading consumer advertising we will be able to lower drug costs for all Americans," Senator Edwards said.
North Carolina Senator John Edwards today called on the Senate to help American farmers compete fairly with imported meat products by supporting implementation this year of `country-of`-origin labeling rules that were included in the 2002 farm bill. An amendment to require the Agriculture Department to devise regulations so that the rules can be implemented was defeated in the House yesterday by a `208-193` vote, and a similar amendment will be considered in the Senate Appropriations Committee today
This links to a diary I did that has the link for all these in it
So not only was he fighting back then for things that were badly needed but ignored, but he is fighting FOR THE EXACT same things now. He led on those issues by introducing them but could get nowhere with them because of how Congress was split at the time. As a result he is deciding to run for President to LEAD the country and implement these issues with a more willing Congress. I am sure we will pick up enough seats to have an easy majority in Congress these time.
Now do I think Edwards will get every single one of his great ideas implemented exactly the way he says it? No. However a leader sets the tone to achieve the goal and by putting out concrete ideas gives everyone a starting point to work from. So I think Edwards has shown plenty of leadership abilities in private and public life. After all he ran his own law firm, and that requires a strong leader as well.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue number 3. Electability.
What is that magic thing that makes electability, I don't know for sure especially after Bush has been elected (stolen or not he still got a hell of a lot of votes). I would like to think that it is an ability to represent the country's interest, to lead, to connect with the "common" man and to have a lot of charisma as well as intelligence. Edwards' connects with the common person because he is one. He came from very little, worked his way through public college, was employed in a law firm, opened his own law firm and was wildly successful at it. The dream of anyone in any country is to get ahead and achieve. Edwards has done that. He can represent the country's interest well, has a hell of a lot of charisma and is very intelligent. I would gather that he is electable. Now whether the MSM views him electable is different but he is definitly able to get the votes if given a chance to get his message across.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Issue number 4: Experience.
In skimming through the history of our past presidents most were lawyers or had studied law, or they were military , they spent at least one term as a Congressman or Rep and then got elected. Edwards has similar experience so in terms of history he is similar in background to many prior presidents.
Foreign Policy: Edwards has served on the Select Committee on Intelligence. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Edwards, along with former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Jack Kemp, chair a task force on U.S.-Russia relations. In the Fall of 2006, he visited Uganda with the International Rescue Committee. So he has some foreign policy experience. Maybe not a ton, but he has traveled and worked on foreign policy. Here is an excellent speech he made in 06 at the Brussels Forum: Transatlantic Challenges in a Global Era, Brussels.
Link
Let me begin by talking about the issue of the spread of weapons of mass destruction. Nearly everyone agrees about this threat. We know that many of these weapons and bomb-making materials are not secure, especially in Russia and the other states of the former Soviet Union. We know that those who wish us harm want access to them yet we are still, knowing that, not doing enough to stop it.
The international community needs new tools to fight proliferation. Instead of accepting the weaknesses of the global non-proliferation regime we ought to work to fix it. For example, I believe that we should create a new global nuclear compact to reinforce the NPT. This compact would be a new international agreement to close the loophole that allows civilian nuclear programs to go military. The new nuclear deal with India, in fact, is an opportunity to embark on a wider international effort.
The United States should work with Europe to take the lead. We need a global ban on the production of material for nuclear weapons and we have to establish global standards to safeguard this material.
Now for years I've argued that my government has not been doing enough to deal with the Iranian threat. While they talk that talk of the dangers of nuclear terrorism, they largely stood on the sidelines as Iran marched forward and this problem got worse. The EU3 deserve credit for its work and its leadership in this area. But American disengagement is not the right way to deal with such an extraordinary threat.
Iran's recent actions, beginning with the reprocessing and enrichment of uranium and its refusal to cooperate with international inspections in open defiance of the UN Security Council make clear that it intends to secure nuclear weapons. And the Iranian president's statements such as his despicable description of the holocaust as a myth or his ugly pledge to wipe Israel off the map, illustrates the seriousness of the threat.
When he says things like this we should take him at his word. The international community must confront Iran with a clear choice, give up your nuclear ambitions or suffer the consequences. Right now this means UN Security Council actions to impose sanctions.
But we have more options than doing nothing or using force. That's a false choice. We have many more diplomatic tools to use and we already use every single one of them. For the United States, this means more active and creative diplomacy, including a willingness to engage the Iranian leadership directly. For the Europeans, it means standing strong to confront Iran in the Security Council with meaningful sanctions, and a willingness to implement those sanctions. A common effort to stop the proliferation, to stop proliferation is important. But, cooperation cannot end there. Also need to be finding new ways to help end conflicts and create stability. A key place to start would be to continue to reform critical organizations like NATO.
I also believe we should be exploring ways to upgrade Israel's relationship with NATO. This could mean a closer strategic and operational relationship; it could mean more exchanges and planning cooperation. It could even someday mean membership. But, we need to do more than reform NATO; the United States must embrace a stronger role for the European Union. Even a new and improved NATO will prove too narrow to deal with a full range of global challenges. That's why America needs the EU as a strong partner and welcomes the efforts to build and strengthen its capabilities in foreign and defense policy. This is not something we, America, should be ambivalent about. A more united Europe, and a more effective EU is good for the United States; in fact, it's good for the world.
For too long many feared that a closer U.S.-EU relationship would undercut NATO or Europe's own project, but given the new challenges we face we have to cast this kind of old thinking aside. We need an EU-U.S. relationship that is as close and durable as NATO was during the Cold War. It should focus on a different set of issues and be a compliment to the alliance.
It should take the lead to coordinate our homeland security strategies just as we coordinated on a common defense against the Soviet threat. That includes joint efforts to deal with everything from terrorists using WMD to the outbreak of diseases like avian flu. We ought to deeper our cooperation on counter-terrorism, too, and we should do more to develop a common U.S.-EU approach from a range of issues from fighting poverty to supporting democracy
So as you can see he has done a lot of work with other countries and has foreign policy experience.
In conclusion I would like to state that anyone who states Edwards does not have sufficient experience is overlooking the amount of experience past Presidents have had. Anyone who states that Edwards does not have foreign policy experience is perhaps unaware of the different groups he has been on. If they believe he lacks leadership it is perhaps because they fail to realize how much he has led on.
If you don't want to vote for Edwards because you do not like him fine. However before you judge him as unfit for the job look around and see what he has done. He is just as fit as Clinton or Obama are.
I am sorry this diary is a bit long but I wanted to get this all out at once.
Thanks for reading to the end,
Chaoslillith