ABOUT FIRST READ

First Read is an analysis of the day's political news, from the NBC News political unit. First Read is updated throughout the day, so check back often.

Chuck Todd, NBC Political Director

Mark Murray, NBC Deputy Political Director

Domenico Montanaro, NBC News Political Reporter



Clinton: Taxation with representation

Posted: Monday, February 11, 2008 10:07 AM by Domenico Montanaro

From NBC/NJ's Athena Jones    
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- With one day to go before voters in Maryland, Virginia and the nation's capital hit the polls, Hillary Clinton began the morning with an event billed as "coffee and conversation with DC supporters" at the National Council of Negro Women.
 
She used the occasion to comment on the possibility of a pause in troop withdrawals from Iraq and to tout her belief city should have full voting rights.

"DC really deserves much more attention and support from the federal government," she said, before going on to talk about all the ways she tried to be involved in the lives of the people here.

"I would like to go even further and have full voting rights for the District of Columbia.  I think this is, as you do, long overdue. It is wrong that we disenfranchise the people who live and work in this city, and it is one of the major planks of my campaign to do everything that I can," the senator said to applause. "I hope I will have the great honor, as president, of signing that into law."

The "conversation" part of the brief event did not take place within earshot of the press, which were hustled out to the bus -- in order to be in place to depart in the motorcade as soon as the senator was ready -- as Clinton chatted with audience members after speaking for about 15 minutes.

The Clinton campaign has largely discounted Tuesday's Chesapeake Primary, arguing rival Barack Obama has advantages in the area that will likely push him to victory, but before today's event began, reporters were given a two-and-a-half page list of members of the senator's "Washington, DC for Hillary Steering Committee."

Clinton hailed the NCNW, calling it "an extraordinary organization" and listing projects in Africa she had visited that the organization supported. She talked about working with Texas Cong. Sheila Jackson Lee -- one of her supporters -- "to finally remedy another injustice and that is to have an African-American woman represented in the capitol Statuary Hall" and thanked the group for helping her to get a congressional gold medal for the NCNW's chair and president emerita Dorothy Height.

The NCNW was founded by the educator and political leader Mary McLeod Bethune in 1935 to represent the interests of women of African descent. Black support has gone overwhelmingly to Obama in recent contests, but the Clinton campaign has consistently said it would not concede the votes of anyone and the senator herself has said she sees people as individuals not as members of a group. The audience at the event was mixed and gave the senator a warm reception.

After about 10 minutes, Clinton went on to the rest of her stump, pointing out -- as she has often since the Los Angeles debate -- the historic nature of her and Obama's candidacies and arguing she is the best choice to lead the country. She said being on stage in LA was like an "out of body" experience and that she and Obama represented the progress the country had made.

She criticized Obama on healthcare, calling it a "defining issue" of this campaign. "It is so disappointing to me that Sen. Obama will not support universal healthcare," she said. "If we don't stand for universal healthcare as Democrats, I don't know what we stand for."

Clinton also mentioned today's news that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has said he could back Gen. David Petraeus' proposal for a pause in the withdrawal of US forces from Iraq this summer due to a shaky security situation there.

"I woke up to the news today that Secretary Gates has said that perhaps we won't be withdrawing as many of our troops from Iraq as originally promised. I can't say I'm surprised, because I don't think this president wants to end the war that he started," she said. "So we've got to be even more committed to withdrawing our troops and making it clear that when I am president we will bring our troops home safely and responsibly."

Clinton ended by talking about her ability to "go toe-to-toe" with presumptive Republican nominee Sen. John McCain and asking people to help get out the vote over the next 24 hours.

"I hope you'll spend whatever time you can today and tomorrow talking to as many people, encouraging them to come out to vote. Asking them to look at what's at stake in this election," she said. "We're going to be successful. We're going to win this nomination and then we're going to go on to victory in November."

She was set to visit a GM plant in Baltimore, hold a rally in Charlottesville, Va., and have an interview with Politico in Rosslyn, Va., today.

*** UPDATE *** The RNC responds this way: “Senator Clinton has no credibility on the issue of Iraq," spokesman Alex Conant writes. "Her position changes depending on her status in the polls -- not our troops’ status in Iraq.”

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

Jack, I had, and still have, this problem with Mrs.Clinton.

Why didn't she run in 2004 when Bush was ruining America with runnaway spending, Iraq war, etc. and ruining the world with Global Warming (G.W.), War of destruction, arrogance, etc.  ??

I always thought that the Clintons are a good friend, or even a close friend, of the Bushs more than any of us may be willing to admit.

In my opinion, Mrs.Clinton did not run in 2004 because (1) she cared more about herself than the country or the Democratic party; and (2) Mrs.Clinton did not want to ruin Bush's friendship by running against him.

Did anybody think WHY in the world she did not run in 2004???
The way Senator Clinton talks about universal coverage sounds almost like she is offering free healthcare to all people as a favor. At the end of the day, people will pay who can afford it and people who can't afford it will still pay along with a subsidy. So nothing is free here.

So if someone at the age of 22 or 23 decides to pay her college tuition instead of buying health insurance as a priority, the Clinton plan would mandate a way to take the money from her. She would not be allowed to make that choice about the best way to invest her money in her future. Is that really how government should work? Obama makes it voluntary relying on the notion that if healthcare is affordable and accessible, most people will buy it because it's a good idea. They don't have it now not because government is not forcing them to buy it but they can't afford it. So Obama is not 'leaving' anyone without coverage. He is creating a situation where everyone can afford it. If a 22 year old decides to pay for tuition instead of buying health insurance (which might be the right priority if he is healthy and at his physical prime), Obama's plan allows him to stay on his parents' plan until 25. It's much more practical. The idea of garnishing wage to force people to pay for healthcare they're extremely unlikely to need is not a good one. Government's job is to make it easier and affordable for people to live, but ultimately people are responsible for their own lives. Government can't play nanny or baby sitter for grown-up citizens. If this plan were a style that future programs were built off of, where would it lead? Will Clinton offer mortgages from the federal government, force people to become homeowners and garnish wages for their mortgage payment? Will Hillary force kids to go to college and garnish wage of the parents to pay for the student loan? These are last century ideas. The idea that that the government has to force people to protect their families with healthcare coverage is dangerous.

Anyone can come up with an idea that sounds nice in theory and on paper. But is this something she would be willing to push through Congress to implement based on consensus? I don't think so. Yes, it might be a "democratic idea" but unless Hillary wins with a landslide (and right now v. McCain, polls have her tying -not winning), unless Democrats have a clear majority in house and senate, she cannot impose a democratic idea on the entire nation that's almost half divided. So it's prudent to plan for what can be achieved, what's practical, and what also requires citizens to behave responsibly for their own lives instead of bunch of empty rhetoric about mandates and "universal" coverage.

(DISCLAIMER: The bulk of this comment was gleaned re-edited from a post by Arshad, Newburgh, NY.  Thanks for such an excellent framing of this issue, Arshad!)
Taxes without representation?  First, DC residences
are entitled to congressional reps.  Anything omit of
this is engineered goverment vice American form of gov.  Second - both side (Dem and GOP) make political
parties pay both state and fed income taxes on amounts
of money and benefits otherwise they receive.  Why
should a Democrats franchise my support for mostly
GOP candidates and vice versa should GOP supporters
franchise Democrats party office seekers?  A political
partty is not a charity in any sense and unless your
a kool-aid drinker from either side you will not
define political parties or political office seekers
as being merits of tax exemptions on money they raise.
Its a "business" stupidnodifferent from any other
business - its designed to take revenue from one sourceand give the money to the benefit of anyother source.  Nothing to do with God, country, apple pie.
The American Flag is just the candy wrapper that
politicans market their sweet tooth finger bowl
give aways with.  Nother to do with make America better or anything like that.  Its all about gathering
of power so one goupe an use power to take money from
one segment of society and give it to other segments.
The only question for voters between Hillary,Obama,
McCain, the Tin Man Sponge Bob Whoever is the decision
as to what band of political power robber barrons you
want to become a gang-member of?
One thing to keep in mind.  The perfect candidate would not run because you are just asking to get beat up on regardless of your answers to all the tough questions.  If you had all the right answers, then you would be a fashion disaster or something of the like!!
I wish I had 5 million to loan my business. Must be nice Hillary. Not because your husband was president that qualifies you to be president. We need a leader with good judgment and Hillary does not have good judgment. Being in Washington for X amount of years does not make you a good president. I would seriously argue its the opposite.
To you Obama supporters,this guy is an Idiot with full of hot air..He fails to understand that hes running for president of a Super power and not some damn third world country..Besides talking from his mouth and backside at the same time he has no substance.All of you who are buying his load of crap have been inhaling the second hand smoke from the crack he smoked in his younger days..Only Hillary can take on the Republican scum machine and beat them back...If obama is the nominee he will be torn to pieces by the Republicans and then where will all you idiots put your faces..Maybe you folks hate Hillary and thats too bad because she is one smart woman and will definitely do a lot of good for our country..Get over the smoke n mirors of Obama n you will see how he is nothing but a lot of hype...Go Hillary dont pay attention to these bunch of hate monger nazis.
Obama is poised to win the nomination so I have to switch parties..he is spending way too much money is weak on terrorism and he is too inexperience to lead the country. So I am going to vote for the moderate McCain and take my chances with the Gop. I think Many more like me will do the same and McCain is going to do very well on the Notheast winning New York and New Jersey. Also Florida is a cake walk and maybe even Michigan..so The GOP to the white house thank god for McCain ....
To: betty LHC Az (Sent Monday, February 11, 2008 10:28 AM)

You are stupid!  
Obama wins the Flip Flopper trophy on the Iraq War!

He opposed it when he couldn't vote.
Then voted with Republicans for 2 years to fund a war he "opposed."
Entered the prez race "opposing" the war - and cast his first vote last May against war funding during the surge.

Obama's "opposition" to the war is a fairy tale.
When the Republicans trounce empty suit Oblahma - the Indys will scatter to McCain.
Obama owes his success to the Corporate Owned Media that has given him a pass from the gitgo!


Hillary makes promises that she and Bill perhaps could have, but just didn't deliver on during that 8 year administration in the 90's.

McCain has been around in the Senate for ages, and represents Washington insider politics as much or more than anyone, but at least he swims upstream against the party line some of the time.

Obama, as pointed out by some posters, if a very new Senator with little record (the argument against John Roberts) to really know where he stands.  Frankly, it's not his lack of experience, but rather that we don't know what this guy is all about that should make us cautious.

There you go.  None of the choices are really ideal - BUT, we have seen what happens when 1 political party controls Washington.  It's a mess.  The Dems balanced out Reagan & Bush I.  The Reps balanced out Clinton in the 90's.  And then there was no balance with W.

America, we need a centrist political party in the worst way.  Vote McCain in November to balance out the Dem Congress and remember that he's not a radical Rep.
I went back and looked and through all 8 years of the first Clinton administration, I never saw any stories where Bill Clinton did anything for the people of Washington D.C.

All I found was how he kept the eateries from going broke with all the money he spent there eating...
Obama didn't vote "no" to the war because he wasn't in office. If he had a vote, would he have voted present or voted "no"? With the WMD info we had at the time and the groundswell of emotion after the towers fell added to the mix, would he have really voted no, I think NOT. Hinesite is 20/20.
They complain that Hillary hasn't changed D.C.'s voting issues (lack of) ,however has Obama?
Note: go to openpolitics.org if you want to know where the contributions come from.
If you were in office and Bush lied to you about WMD's in Iraq, AND his agencies did the same, how would you vote? I SAY "IMPEACH BUSH!"
I believe Hillary is the only one for the average person. We need a balanced budget. Take social security out of the general fund! NO More I.O.U's
We need health insurance! Not "Smoke a Rock with Barak"
As for McCain, he has been in Washington forever, has he changed anything?
Hillary For President!!!!
WARNING - THE HILL-BILLERY CLINTONS -ARE THEY HONEST -I FEAR NOT -WHERE DID THIS 100 MILLION DONATION FOR THE CLINTON FOUNDATION COME FROM AND WHAT WILL IT BE USED FOR,HEY AT THIS TIME AND BILLS 40MILLION IN SPEAKING ENGAGEMENTS -THIS SMELLS BIG TIME,ALSO HOW THEY MANAGED TO RID RUSH OFF TV-CONTROL OF THE MEDIA BY THEM(CLINTONS)-WAKE-UP AMERICA TO THESE TWO HILL-BILLERIES.WE KNOW WHAT HAPPEN IN GERMANY BEFORE THE CORPRAL TOOK OVER.
I am tired of everyone blaming GWB for the war.  When Bill had Osama ready to be given to him.  There might not have been another Twin Towers which had already been bombed when billery was in office.  start at the beginning and look ahead to see what was left for us.  also JFK had Cuba dumped in his lap from the previous administration.  I say he did alright  I will be writing in Mitt. for president because noone strikes my fancy
There will be a lot of Democrats vote Repulican if Obama wins the Nomnination. He his a con man with no supstanace.
I am a republican, but I would seriously take into consideration Obama for 4 years in the WH. I can't however, even SLIGHTLY think for 1 second that I would want Hillary to run our beautiful country. Having Obama in would, in my opinion, do "great things" for the way the rest of the world precieves us. They might not any longer look at our country as being all catering to rich, white men (which, seeing as I am a 26 yr old caucasian male making on avg $75-$85k a yr....i fall in that category according to the gvmt) and caring nothing about others opinions. I honestly dont think that any decisions he would make would "ruin" all my future prospects or our nations in the terms of what Dems/Republicans want to have done. His impact on the world society as just being a US Pres with "color" would trump ANY accomplishments/setbacks he might make/cause....at least, knowing that we have an 80% of a Dem as president, this is what Im hoping for if we must have a Dem!
The universal health care debate has been cast so simplistically.  Billary would "mandate" coverage -- that means she would force people to buy insurance (how, she hasn't fessed up to.)  Obama's approach is to make it affordable enough so that almost everyone will choose to have coverage; those who don't choose and end up in the emergency room will then be forced to pay back premiums. But what no one talks about is that "universal" coverage will mean the most basic care.  No one owns up to the fact that more complicated/expensive/specialized care will have to be rationed.  The country simply can't afford to give a liver transplant to everyone who might benefit from it, or perform open-heart surgery, or deliver chemotherapy treatment to all in need.  Who's going to make those rationing decisions???  Why no discussion about that??
Bottom Line:

It looks like you got some vote fraud hankypanky, and selling of votes going on in the democratic caucuses. Obama seems to be doing disproportionately well in the caucuses where it is easier to commit vote fraud, and sell votes. Obama has not been doing as well in the non caucus primary's where you can't cheat the vote as easily.

I smell a pole cat. I smell the Karl Rove vote fraud machine at work. This looks like past presidential elections where most voters leaving the poles said they voted for the other guy. But Bush still won. No wonder Obama thinks the republicans have some good ideas. Apparently a lot of republicans are voting for Obama in the democratic caucuses.

The insurance companies, and medical industry that have been ripping you off, and killing you are determined to keep you, the American people from having good universal health care. So it seems they are supporting Obama. Along with the republican vote fraud machine.

This looks like a great story for a team of aggressive investigative reporters. Or maybe some good documentary film makers like Michael Moore, or Oliver Stone.

If I were the Clinton's, I would focus like a laser bean on what has been going on in the democratic caucuses. No wonder the Republicans like Obama so much. Looks like he's their man in the democratic caucuses.

I'm absolutely convinced now that Hillary Clinton is your best choice for good universal health care coverage. And HR 676  (Medicare For All). "Single payer, Tax Supported, Not For Profit, True Universal Health Care" free for all as a right. Like every other developed country in the world has. See:  http://www.house.gov/conyers/news_hr676.htm

“HR 676:
For church goers: less money to insur. companies and more to the church- lots more.
Srs on Medicare: save way over $100/wk. Because no more medigap, long term care & dental insur. needed. No more drug bills.”

They really think you are all stupid, inattentive cash cows... It may be time to bring back Bad Bill.


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=654975

First Read e-mail alerts


Sign up for First Read alerts
The first place for key political news and analysis

Syndicate This Site

Add First Read to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google