from Robert Reich re: Martin O'Malley

[elleng]

Today, former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley began his campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination by attacking big banks and giant corporations. “We cannot rebuild the American Dream here at home by catering to the voices of the privileged and the powerful,” he told the crowd gathered at Baltimore’s Federal Hill Park. “They were the ones who turned our economy upside-down in the first place. And they are the only ones who are benefiting from it.” O’Malley called for breaking up the big banks, boosting the minimum wage, passing comprehensive immigration reform, and combating climate change. (Has he been watching our videos?)
He's not just talk. When O'Malley was governor of Maryland the state spent record amounts on education, despite the recession, and also saw steep drops in crime and a substantial increase in people covered by subsidized health care – all made possible by unpopular tax increases.
O’Malley’s populism is good for the Democratic Party, good for Hillary Clinton, and good for America. The 2016 election will be won on turnout, which will depend on enthusiasm, which, in turn, will depend on whether a candidate is perceived to be a real fighter for average people who know the game is rigged against them. Bernie Sanders and Martin O’Malley might together push Hillary Clinton to (1) be tough on Wall Street (including resurrecting Glass-Steagall, busting up the big banks, closing the “carried-interest” loophole, and putting a sales tax on Wall Street transactions); (2) oppose the Trans Pacific Partnership; (3) support a $15 minimum wage; (4) call for a tax increase on the wealthy (including raising the estate tax) in order to finance better schools and free higher education; (5) demand an end to big money in politics (reversing “Citizens United,” requiring full disclosure of all sources of campaign funding, providing public financing of elections, and stopping the revolving door between government and the private sector); (6) support a single-payer healthcare system; (7) suggest saving Social Security and increasing its benefits by eliminating the cap on income subject to Social Security payroll taxes; (8) call for strengthening labor unions; and so on. (See our videos!)
The only thing we can say with any confidence at this juncture is there's hope.

https://www.facebook.com/RBReich?fref=nf

[Thinkingabout]

1. On TPP, it will be handled before the election, who can do something about TPP, Congressional member

This is who should be contacted on TPP, the members in office at the present time. I have respect for Reich but I am surprised he is making this statement about the TPP and Hillary when she is not an elected official.

[Jim Lane]

3. It's still a legitimate subject on which to press candidates.

I'd like to know how each of them, if elected, would deal with the XYZ issue that will erupt in 2018. My problem is that I don't know exactly what it is. I have to make a guess about who's best equipped to handle the unknown issues of that four-year term. One part of the evidence is how each responds to major contemporary issues like TPP -- how Sanders will vote, and what the other candidates say about it. Their past records are also important.

It's not perfect but it's the best I can do.

I will think less of a candidate who supports a bad current proposal, and I will think less of a candidate who waffles on the subject.

[Thinkingabout]

4. Isn't this scheduled to be voted on this year? It isn't going to be affected by how

Hillary feels about TPP, she will not be voting on this. It would be more important for Congressional members to answer this question. It would be more important to learn about a strategy on ISIS. This is a pig problem in the future, TPP is going to be a done deal by the time the debates begin.

[Jim Lane]

5. Hillary could affect the issue right now.

Even without a formal vote, she has influence. The House vote on TPA (to facilitate TPP) is expected to be close. Many Democrats in the House are Clinton supporters as well as Obama supporters. Obama is pressuring them to vote Yea. If Clinton came out unequivocally and emphatically for a Nay vote, she might influence the crucial votes to defeat TPA.

Furthermore, even though TPP will almost certainly be approved or decisively defeated before 2017, the next President will have the option to negotiate other such agreements. Any complex multilateral agreement will have costs and benefits. It's worth knowing what the candidates think of an agreement currently at issue, to get an idea of what each of them would or would not approve as President.

[Thinkingabout]

7. And if she reads the agreement and likes what she reads and comes out for TPP and influences the

Vote, will you be happy?

[Jim Lane]

8. Obviously I'd have mixed feelings.

As it is, I have negative feelings about her based on her evasiveness, and also on my suspicion that the TPP reflects her thinking and exemplifies what she would do as President.

In the scenario you described, I would no longer feel negative about her evasiveness, but my negative feelings about her on the substance would be greater.

[Thinkingabout]

9. There are lots of issues which concerns me, I do not dwell on TPP.

[Jim Lane]

10. Right now I pay the most attention to the issues that divide Democrats

There's not much point in a bunch of DU threads about whether to abolish the EPA. It's an issue that concerns me, because so many Republicans would like to abolish it, and failing that they're continually trying to hobble it. Still, posting about it here would be only for information, to warn people what the RWNJs are up to. DU isn't the place to discuss the pros and cons.

With TPA and TPP, on the other hand, we can have worthwhile discussions.

[TheKentuckian]

6. Hillary is a yes no matter what she says after the fact. If you aren't a yes the time is now and

before.

No now or forever a yes even if you vote no on the floor in a fit of transparent kabuki.

[djean111]

2. Sadly, they will just push Hillary's rhetoric to the left.

And even then, she would carefully waffle.