Hype? Let’s talk about “Hype”
By DHonig on February 21, 2008 at 2:25 PM in Barack Obama, Environment, Ground Zero, Hillary Clinton, Soldiers/Veterans, Women and Children, Workers
I originally posted this article last night at MyDD and at DailyKos.
================
Yes, this is a response diary. But it will be long enough to stand on its own. Every on Daily Kos is going crazy for a diary entitled I Refuse to By Into the Obama Hype. It purports to compare Hillary’s Senate record to Obama’s and concludes Obama’s is superior. Why? Two reasons. First, in the diarist’s opinion his bills are better. Second his bills have more sponsors than hers, and that demonstrates “leadership.” Excuse me, but, well bullshit. ”Leadership” doesn’t come from getting people to join you. ”Leadership” comes from getting people to FOLLOW you, to DO things. As in, pass laws. Can we look at what they both actually achieved?
Neither Senator, to date, sponsored legislation that passed into law in the 110th Congress. However, Clinton sponsored the only legislation between the two that passed both houses, and is awaiting signature. That is Senate Bill 694, passed in the House as H.R. 1216, and is a bill to regulate safety of children around cars. There have been a couple of heartfelt diaries about this one, and it was GREAT work. The score for the 110th Congress? Clinton 1, Obama 0.
Okay, on the 109th Congress.
Clinton bills passed as law:
Personally, I have no opinion on that one, knowing nothing about the Puerto Rican national forest.
This is a good bill. It authorizes grants and other funds to people with adults or children in need of respite care. This includes hospice care, chronically ill, mentally retarded, and developmentally disabled children and adults, and allows people to be cared for in their homes, instead of in other facilities.
Okay, Obama’s turn.
S.2125 : A bill to promote relief, security, and democracy in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
It’s a good bill. It authorized money to the Republic of Congo, and authorizes withholding of funds in certain circumstances, both from Congo and from nations around it.
That’s it for the 109th Congress. Excluding ceremonial statutes, the score seems to be 2-1 for Hillary, a fairly inconsequential difference. Obama’s is international, which would seem to cut against the claim that is where he is weakest. Hillary’s is domestic, assisting in one of the difficult and tragic times a family can face. Score it however you want.
Now for the 108th Congress. From here out we can only look at Hillary, because Obama wasn’t there yet.
The title of this one seems pretty self-explanatory, and this bill is a good thing.
That’s it for 108. As the previous diarist noted, it’s actually pretty darned hard to get legislation through both Houses.
107th Congress
Again, self-explanatory, and this was a Senator truly taking care of the heroes and their families in her State.
This is another bill to help New Yorkers after 9/11.
Again, Clinton showed REAL leadership after 9/11, not just play-acting standing on rubble leadership.
What is the conclusion from this? Well, I’m not really sure. Hillary has certainly been in the Senate longer. There can be little doubt she showed REAL leadership after 9/11, something often talked about but rarely seen. It is also pretty clear that Obama really does have some chops in foreign affairs, at least in Africa, and that Hillary really does have serious chops when it comes to our most vulnerable, children and disabled or dying adults. Beyond that, though, any attempt to compare their legislative record based upon co-sponsors or the words of an act becomes an exercise in partisanship. You might think one bill is better because it seems broader, but its broadness to me shows naivete and an inability to focus legislation sufficiently to get it passed. You might think more sponsors shows “leadership,” while I might think it shows weakness and the need for others. Alternatively, I might think it shows a strength, a refusal to back down from principles to make the necessary compromises to get people to join you. STOP! I know you are chomping at the bit to refute that last sentence. If you are, you are missing the point, which is, quite simply, that any such comparisons are, BY DEFINITION, partisan and not, as so many seem to believe, unbiased.
As for bills sponsored but not passed, they both have hundreds, including ceremonial bills. BOTH have ceremonial bills. The diarist in the other diary chose certain bills to compare. I could choose others, and the comparison would go the other way. At least in part, I would question the propriety of using the 110th Congress, rather than the 109th, since both were in full campaign-mode the whole time. But again, that leaks partisanship into the conversation and I am truly trying to avoid that.
Just for fun, here is one such comparison. Do with it what you will. I use it because the previous diarist claimed to be far more impressed with Obama’s health care legislation than Clinton’s.
Obama sponsored A bill to make grants to carry out activities to prevent the incidence of unintended pregnancies and sexually transmitted infections among teens in racial or ethnic minority or immigrant communities, and for other purposes. I got two co-sponsors, and provided grants, but just addressed to black and latino teens. Hillary sponsored A bill to expand access to preventive health care services that help reduce unintended pregnancy, reduce the number of abortions, and improve access to women’s health care. It, too, had two co-sponsors. It was, quite simply, better legislation. It not only addressed pregnancy among ALL teens, it also addressed availability of birth control, assistance in rape emergencies, accuracy in contraceptive information, and equality for women in insurance for prescriptions. Using the same standard as the previous diarist, comprehensiveness of the bill, Clinton’s is far superior. Does it matter? Well, no. Neither passed. Maybe Obama’s was better, because it was more likely to pass, being better focused. Maybe Clinton’s was better because of its breadth. Ultimately, neither one passed, hence neither was demonstrated actual SUCCESS in legislation or leadership. To claim otherwise is to participate in an exercise is partisanship, not an exploration of honesty.
Both Senators have sponsored bills. Both Senators have passed bills. I post this not to attack Obama (and I sincerely hope I have not), but to attempt to inject just a bit of reality into the celebration of Obama that Daily Kos’ front page and Recommended Diaries section has become.
And now, watch it scroll away.
There is a nice write up on Talk Left
WHO IS MORE PROGRESSIVE HILLARY OR OBAMA?
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/21/133518/373
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/2/21/141455/588
Good Diary DHonig ..
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and research with us…Its great to see so many new diarys hwere at NQ..Thanks to Ricardo and Domediagirl too..Its really wonderful to see so many Intelligent and Informed People No Posting here…lots of great Articles to read..Thank you all for cdoming here and thanks as always to Susan and Larry too..
No Rock Unturned…and no Quarter Given..
Wasn’t there a Lugar-Obama bill that passed both house and senate. I heard it touted on Rhandi-Rhodes(which I can barely listen to anymore as she sputs Obama constantly and smears Hillary while pretending to be undecided and fair. The interview was with Bret Buchowski or something like that). To be fair Obama hasn’t had much time to spend on Legislature since 1/3rrd of his time in senate has been used running for president. You didn’t mention the committees and all the work done on them.
Randi Rhodes used to be one of my favorite radio hosts- right behind Sam Seder. First Seder was replaced weekdays by the almost unbearably asinine Lionel, then Randi decided to devote every minute of every show to licking Obama up and down and spreading GOP talking points concerning Hillary Clinton. Repulsive. And so sad.
Correction…Thats “Intelligent and Informed People Now Posting Here.”.All of you make a great Contribution to this blog and make it one of the Must read Blogs on the internet..
Particularly in this Congress, I agree that having more cosponsors on a failed bill isn’t worth much. The number of times my views have been represented by the minority there are too depressing to count.
Good on Obama for the Congo bill. We haven’t paid near enough attention there.
For some reason, none of those Senate bill links is working. I’ve had this problem before when I tried to link there. Just want to note that in case others run into that problem. You can use what is a valid URL, and it won’t work in that system. They really should fix that.
Their entire Web site sucks. None of the committee listings is consistent / it’s hard to find information. There aren’t AUDIO ARCHIVES of hearings — WTF? Let alone transcripts.
It must be because we’re not a first-world country.
I sent their Web people an e-mail with specific complaints but never heard back.
Susan,
WOW! Terrific post. Specifics in language are important. This way there is no way the GWB’s abominational appointment for judeges can ‘misuse’ language to undercut clear specific bills.
For example, either yesterday or the day before, the BROAD language in bills, allowed the supreme court to UNDERCUT individual State Bills on the ground that the Federal Language Bills (BROAD Language) essentially gives corporations a free pass.
Since I heard it on NPR’s All things Considered, where Nina Tottenberg gave the summary, the only one I can reacall is the case of where a man is seriously injured. The catheter, or tube used to go to the heart ,while simultaneous compressing the fat in the blood system, burst. The Supreme Court ruled that the man could not sue in State courts, and that Federal Law, Broadly Written, was ‘intended’ to prevent suit against any company whose products had received FDA approval.
Think of the horror show with breast implants, if these same legal principles had had been stated by the Supreme Court. Those too had received FDA approval, yet the long term consequences to people were a tragic travesty.
The bottom line is that in each of these instances, lack of specific detailed language, ended up in State Laws, being over ridden, and people seriously injured with no recourse in Federal Courts.
I will try to find a link to the audio on NPR and post it here.
Okay, I found the prgram I was referring to above. Oh, and I mis-spelled Nina Totenbergs last name - that’s with One “T”, not two - my bad.
Here is the summary of Nina’s Report on All Things Considered:
The full report was 5 minutes and 9 sec - you can listen to it here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19211099
Check this out: Its on a site called Republicans for obama in texas
Create new accountRequest new password
About Us
Why Obama
Blogs
Forums
State Chapters
Home » Groups » Texas R.F.O. Primary Petition for Obama
E-mail to send to all your Republican friends
Sat, 02/16/2008 - 10:41pm — afnighthawk
Attention All Texas Republicans and Independents!!
On March 4th, Texas Republicans and Independents will have an opportunity to end Hillary Clinton’s (and Bill’s) presidential ambitions once and for all!
Since Texas has on open primary, Republicans and Independents should sign in at their polling place and request a Democratic ballot. They should then vote for Barack Obama. Even James Carville admits that if Hillary loses Texas, “she’s done!” Republicans can help make this a reality!!! Just think, no more Clintons in the White House!
Voting Democratic this one time will have NO effect on your ability to vote in the next Republican primary or obviously on your vote in November. Since John McCain has the Republican nomination locked up, voting for McCain or Huckabee at this point will have no effect on the outcome on the Republican side.
After you vote during early voting or on March 4th, you ARE NOT done! Report back to your regular polling place at 7PM on March 4th to sign the Barack Obama list for caucus delegates. In a little known Texas voting quirk, 67 delegates to the Democratic convention will be seated because of these caucuses. This is a full one-third of the total number of Texas delegates. For Hillary to lose, she has to lose the primary votes AND the caucus votes. I urge you to vote against Hillary Clinton by voting for Barack Obama.
Please forward this e-mail to all your Republican and Independent friends so that we can help ensure the Clinton’s defeat on March 4th!!!
Who is now in Texas…Can you say frog march?
Dollars to frogs on this one.
I know they hide their true campaign affiliation in the same manner they launder money, but, in a case like that, the republicans for Obama, who actually pays for it?
Is it possible for someone to set up a bank account in another’s name, say, to channel money, with “plausible deniability?”
Simon, If I walk up to you with cash and say make it happen, the cash doesn’t care, the banker doesn’t care, and voters don’t know if it from Karl or Karl c/o Obama. Web sites are not that expensive to set up.
Since they are not asking for money, it avoids certain FEC laws I’d think.
The notion that the website http://www.stop-obama.org is racist, is sheer nonsense.
We are a group of five writers, only one of whome is white, and he’s Jewish!
We are multicultural, and we don’t find any appeal from Obama’s nonsense.
Does He use race to his advantage?
Damn right!
Do we have a right to talk about it?
Damn right?
Anyone labeling us racists, has a big problem.
Our research is honest, solid. Tough.
I regret that bloggers at this site question our ethnicity, or racial views.
Its sad. Not only because Obama relies a great deal on his ability to silence debate on the issue, but also because it amounts to a calumny.
Thank you
Jamal McCoy
Mr McCoy; Sorry, I missed something. I saw nothing to indicate a post that would “question our ethnicity, or racial views.” on this thread.
Please clarify if you can.
I see that the DailyObama has determined that Obama IS the democratic candidate and Clinton should quit with the ’scorched earth’ strategy. While I would hesitate in betting money on Clinton being the candidate, it is more than a little too early to be making that proclamation.
I used to spent a lot of time at “Agent Orange” but since they have declared Obama the “inevitable” candidate and the animosity towards anyone criticizing him, I only post in neutral diaries that seem to be fewer. Thanks for this balanced look at Senate records.
What a farce. You’ve left out a tremendous amount of Obama’s substantive legislation (for example, the Lugar-Obama act), including everything he carried out in Illinois (sure, it’s state law but it’s awfully substantial state law). “Hillary showed tremendous leadership after 9/11″? Really? Where? She expedited payments and extended deadlines. That’s nice. Did she mandate providing aid to relief workers? Did she legislate EPA mandates to ensure people weren’t working in dangerous conditions at and around ground zero? Did she do anything more than the minimum a NY senator could do after 9/11? You certainly haven’t provided any evidence of that.