Why is HRC Stooping So Low?

I'm becoming increasingly concerned about the stridency and inaccuracy of charges in Iowa -- especially coming from my old friend. While I'm as hard-boiled as they come about what's said in campaigns, I just don't think Dems should stoop to this. First, HRC attacked O's plan for keep Social Security solvent. Social Security doesn't need a whole lot to keep it going -- it's in far better shape than Medicare -- but everyone who's looked at it agrees it will need bolstering (I was a trustee of the Social Security Trust Fund 10 years ago, and I can vouch for this). Obama wants to do it by lifting the cap on the percent of income subject to Social Security payroll taxes, which strikes me as sensible. That cap is now close to $98,000 (it's indexed), and the result is highly regressive. (Bill Gates satisfies his yearly Social Security obligations a few minutes past midnight on January 1 every year.) The cap doesn't have to be lifted all that much to keep Social Security solvent -- maybe to $115,00. That's a progressive solution to the problem. HRC wants to refer Social Security to a commission. That's avoiding the issue, and it's irresponsible: a commission will likely call either for raising the retirement age (that's what Greenspan's Social Security commission came up with in the 1980s) or increasing the payroll tax on all Americans. So when HRC charges that Obama's plan would "raise taxes" and her plan wouldn't, she's simply not telling the truth.

I'm equally concerned about her attack on his health care plan. She says his would insure fewer people than hers. I've compared the two plans in detail. Both of them are big advances over what we have now. But in my view Obama's would insure more people, not fewer, than HRC's. That's because Obama's puts more money up front and contains sufficient subsidies to insure everyone who's likely to need help -- including all children and young adults up to 25 years old. Hers requires that everyone insure themselves. Yet we know from experience with mandated auto insurance -- and we're learning from what's happening in Massachusetts where health insurance is now being mandated -- that mandates still leave out a lot of people at the lower end who can't afford to insure themselves even when they're required to do so. HRC doesn't indicate how she'd enforce her mandate, and I can't find enough money in HRC's plan to help all those who won't be able to afford to buy it. I'm also impressed by the up-front investments in information technology in O's plan, and the reinsurance mechanism for coping with the costs of catastrophic illness. HRC is far less specific on both counts. In short: They're both advances, but O's is the better of the two. HRC has no grounds for alleging that O's would leave out 15 million people.

Yesterday, HRC suggested O lacks courage. "There's a big difference between our courage and our convictions, what we believe and what we're willing to fight for," she told reporters in Iowa, saying Iowa voters will have a choice "between someone who talks the talk, and somebody who's walked the walk." Then asked whether she intended to raise questions about O's character, she said: "It's beginning to look a lot like that."

I just don't get it. If there's anyone in the race whose history shows unique courage and character, it's Barack Obama. HRC's campaign, by contrast, is singularly lacking in conviction about anything. Her pollster, Mark Penn, has advised her to take no bold positions and continuously seek the political center, which is exactly what she's been doing.

All is fair in love, war, and politics. But this series of slurs doesn't serve HRC well. It will turn off voters in Iowa, as in the rest of the country. If she's worried her polls are dropping, this is not the way to build them back up.

This post first appeared on Robert Reich's blog.

Comments

[therealredstateblues]

Notice how the HRC campaign and their supporters and shills are all using the republican play book - smear and fear, questioning of loyalties of those who disagree or point out problems, obfusaction, non sequitor linking of unrelated issues, shout downs,character assasinations, demanding of blind loyaty and lockstep voting etc.

Sad day when democrats have to stoop to that level, and one of the primary reasons I can not support a Hillary candidacy (in addition to her iran and Iraq drumbeats, "free" trade and other voting record problems)

If this is whats it is going to be all aboiut - allthe more reason for me to consider going third party for the first time in my voting life

[avergejoe]

Great post!

[Qbear]

I found this over on Obama for President site, in the LGBT sub section under people section.
It concerns World's AIDS Day.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post_group/LGBTBlog/CRJZ#comments
I wrote:

"Is there a single gay/lesbian staffer still around here?
You might want to clue in the rest of the campaign that AIDS should be discussed on the African American section and the Latino section, and the women section, and the student section.
Only discussing it in the LGBT section is OFFENSIVE, especially to me who is a PWA since 85, and lost most of those I loved in the 80's and 90's.


btw. mine was the ONLY post, the previous LGBT thread 2 weeks ago had 3 posts, but the two threads before and after the McClurkin FIASCO had 168 posts and 158 posts.
yeah, keep telling themselves they didn't flush away their LGBT votes!

[Qbear]

Maybe it's just me, but somehow when I imagined either the first Black or first woman president....I thought I'd be happier.

[MagisterLudi]

I have enormous respect for Robert Reich. His kinds of constructive criticism is what Hillary Clinton needs at this junction.
Having said that, American politician are notoriously liberal with their election promises and scandalously inconsistent with the delivery on those promises. I still recall Bush Junior's attacks on Gore for "nation building" efforts in Balkans. Accordingly, the proposals by all camps are simply wonky (if not shameless) exercises in propaganda having little to no chance of ever being implemented.
We only could wish that Mr. Reich will accept a Cabinet post in the next Democratic administration.

[klondiker]

Sorry, I just don't buy the idea that we can get to universal healthcare without mandates. See Paul Krugman on this issue.

[sweetuniverse]

Thank you for speaking out like this.

[2Truthy]

Mr. Reich,

The Democratic party has already "stooped so low" with pandering to corporate elites while the middle class gets screwed. Feign outrage all you want, but Obama is the twin of Hillary when it comes to selling out American white collar jobs. You're still OK with that, right?

Weren't you Labor Secretary
under Bill Clinton in TRIPLING the number of H-1B visas? In 2003 you were quoted in the
Washington Post saying: "Makes no sense for us to try to protect or preserve high-tech jobs in America or block efforts by American companies to outsource."

U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., last week unveiled a plan to boost
the number of H-1B visa to "skilled" cheap foreign labor here. Didn't you attend freshman AZ Rep Gabrielle Giffords wedding ceremony?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/02/fashion/weddings/02vows.html?_r=1&ex=13542
> 51600&en=fd98cff46ae294bb&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin

[lamarguerite]

Thank you for your article, Mr. Reich. Your analysis gives me one more reason to be disappointed with HRC.

Assuming Obama does get nominated, my big fear is that America is not yet ready for a black leader. I do hope that I am wrong there, as I believe he is the only one with the intelligence, vision, and charisma to take us out of the political, environmental, and economic mess we are in.

http://lamarguerite.wordpress.com
'It's All About Green Psychology'

[ChristopherLib]

Thanks Mr. Reich. You have endorsed Obama, we get that. That's fine, but please don't claim you don't have a bias here. You clearly do. That was the most ass kissing of Obama I have ever read on this site, and it's run by a very pro-Obama crowd.

[srmorris]

Thanks for the blog.

The $98,000 cap is something everyone should know about.

[cseper]

I have nothing bad to say about Obama.
If Obama wins - whoever wins the Democratic nomination, I'm behind him/her all the way.

[Hattie]

"Tom Harkin, a real tried and true populist liberal, knows of what he speaks when he supports Hillary."

I just love the idea of a woman being a big, big player. Think what this could mean for that 1/2+ of the human race, how such a victory would legitimize our concerns!

[NotProvenGuilty]

I love how HuffPost bloggers bring information from such diverse sources, allowing me to appreciated sides of an argument about which I was ignorant. What a public service (seriously)!
On this one, my impression over the past several months is that HRC is fundamentally damaged. From non-position positions (drivers licenses) to hypocritical, ill-informed opportunistic attacks (Obama's PAC's donations to state Democrats), she is living up to the worst stereotypes of herself. Reich's piece piles on other examples, and who could be a more credible source?
We may not like everything about Obama, but Hillary is a razor's edge from losing my vote. If she faces off against a Republican in the general election, I'll have no choice (I don't find it worth the risk of more right wingers in the white house to cast a third party vote) but to pull the lever for her. But I hope it's someone else on that Democratic ticket. I have so little faith in her right now. What a shame, considering the good things she's done (for critics of her career choices, I don't see anything wrong with coupling good works with lucrative work. It's clear where her heart was -- money was a means, not an end -- and compare her life to Dubya's.)

[daveny]

SensibleAmerican -- although I know you're one of the HRC staffers assigned to monitor/respond on blogs, I think its worth pointing this out:

-After gradating from Harvard Law, as the first black editor of the Review, with every option in the legal world open and waiting for him... Obama goes and works as a civil rights lawyer on the south side of chicago.

-After graduating as a leader of her class at Wellesley, and with sparkling credentials from Yale Law, HRC goes and... defends polluters, poisoners, and corporations that exploited workers... all at a highly profitable salary, and making the sort of contacts that would later land her on the Wal-Mart board.

I think THAT says a lot about their character, and "courage."