Elizabeth Warren on Hillary Clinton's reversal on bankruptcy bill.

[progressoid]

This is from 2004. But it's new to me.

[Agnosticsherbet]

1. This is a good video.

It partly explains why Senator Warren has been generally supportive of Hillary Clinton.

[grahamhgreen]

3. But also shows that Hillary sold her out in the past.

[NorthCarolina]

5. Until the half-way point into the video anyway

Where she drops the bomb that as Senator, Hillary voted FOR the very same bill her husband vetoed because, as Senator, she didn't want to miss out on the payola from Wall St....to the point that she viewed the Credit Industry as a constituent.

[zeemike]

11. It's not payola it's speakers fees.

And it is not sell our it is compromise.

[NorthCarolina]

13. Oh,

of course...SPEAKERS fees. So, in order to be allowed to SPEAK to get those fees, she had no choice BUT to vote in favor of the bankruptcy bill. Makes perfect sense now. Here I thought it was graft and it was really just 'compromise' all along...silly me.

[The Wizard]

23. "Money doesn't talk it swears"

Bob Dylan, " It's All Right Ma, I'm Only Bleeding"

[JDPriestly]

8. Really? I think it shows why Elizabeth Warren is and should be wary of Hillary Clinton.

[karynnj]

25. More interesting than that

On one hand, she shows a Hillary Clinton, who is extremely smart and who understood the complex arguments that underlied Warren's oped. It also showed that she cared enough to push her husband to veto it.

Then, she speaks of the HRC who then, FOR POLITICAL REASONS, voted for the same awful bill in 2001. Given the time of the clip, 2004, it does not include that she voted for the fillibuster of the bill (which unfortunately failed) in 2005. (She missed the actual vote that was a lost cause to be with a seriously ill Bill Clinton in the hospital)

This shows the complex, mixed bag that either Clinton represents for Democrats. They are both very smart and since 1992 extremely powerful. First of all, rethink the real credit she deserves for pushing Bill Clinton to veto the bill. The bill was NOT that complex and Kennedy mounted an impressive case against the bill each time it came up. I seriously doubt that BILL Clinton did not completely understand the ramifications. Why did a Democratic President have to be persuaded to veto this? Not to mention, why after being persuaded in 2000 and taking action to push for a veto, did she vote for it in 2001?

She incidentally was not the only ambitious politician to vote for this in 2001 - she was joined by Joe Biden (the DE excuse is weak given how many terms he had won) and John Edwards (who gets no break from being very junior - Elizabeth was a bankruptcy lawyer) Some who didn't include Gephardt, who did not vote on this and John Kerry joined Kennedy and the MA Congressional delegation in voting no.

Where this is interesting NOW is that Warren is no longer a Harvard Professor schooling the First Lady. She is a Senator, who already has very impressive accomplishments from her short time there - something very unusual in the Senate. Where in 2004, this interview was a strong statement on HRC's intelligence, power and ability -- but introduced a concern for her ability to not bow to moneyed interests, now you can contrast HRC and Warren herself.

You could say it was Warren's articulate, very strong oped that forced into public eye the really bad impacts of the bill that actually started HRC's effort for the veto. So, could you say that Warren herself deserves some credit for the ultimate veto? Not to mention, if you listened to the debate in the Senate - Kennedy made many of the same points Warren made. Is it believable that the impassioned Kennedy did not make those same points to Clinton?

If Warren did decide to challenge Clinton, this video actually is 100% in her favor. Neither woman's intelligence is questionable - and both are well above the level where a difference matters. (I would argue that Warren has more intellectual creativity and ability to craft solutions). In addition, there is no question that both women are very strong and very willing to take stands. So, why do I say it favors Warren?

The Achilles heel of the Clintons has always been the fear that they have supported the moneyed interests and can be corrupted. That 2001 vote could end up being the 2016 equivalent of the IWR vote's impact in 2008.

[IrishAyes]

27. VERY well put.

Thanks.

[INdemo]

2. So then what should we expect form Hillary as President?

More of the same I would say.

Top contributors for 2008 and it will look much the same on 2016

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=N00000019

[Thinkingabout]

6. opensecrets.com does not always tell the full story, only the information they want to put out,

the rest of the story is blank with them.

[JDPriestly]

9. What is your evidence to back up your statement about Open Secrets?

I would like to know how reliable that website is. Do you have a link or some specific informatino to back up what you said about them?

[Thinkingabout]

10. This article listed campaign contributions to Elizabeth Warren, she claims she spent

$42 million on her campaign and the amount misses the mark by nearly $40 million.

https://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/contrib.php?cycle=2014&cid=N00033492&type=I&newmem=N

[JDPriestly]

12. Maybe she did not spend all the money she collected on her own campaign.

It is typical for politicians to save money and to give money to help out candidates in other races I think. She may raise money for the Democratic party.

I could not open Open Secrets from that link. My computer said the connection was reset.

I don't know what that means. It happens every once in a while.

[Thinkingabout]

15. Warren said she spent the $42 m on her campaign, I think she is telling the truth,

I don't think she squandered $40 million and ended in the red, as I say opensecrets may tell the truth of what they say but they missed $40 million, she says she took money from Wall Street, I take her at her word.

[The Wizard]

24. With off shore money laundries

opensecrets is a mere smoke screen.

[IrishAyes]

28. I disagree for the most part.

[INdemo]

19. You can do the research on this with the FEC

and their records will confirm her big contributors were Walls St associated firms and big banks. When Wall St. contributions are large they expect large favors in return and Hillary will no doubt respond. But wait Hillary Clinton has not announced that she will run for President nor has the first primary or Democratic caucus taken place yet. I am predicting she will not win the nomination.
If she Does this is one liberal that will stay home because I have never in my voting life ever voted for a Republican and I wont be starting in 2016.So either way we will have a Republican President.

[Thinkingabout]

20. I disagree with your conclusion of either way there will be a republican presidenr, the cognitive

dissonance has convinced some but many more do not believe this story.

[NorthCarolina]

4. Wow...great video, very informative.

Thanks for posting this, and a very Happy New Year to you.

[JDPriestly]

7. Unfortunately, most Americans don't understand that the bankruptcy law was changed in, I think,

2005 to make it much more difficult for ordinary Americans to settle and escape the pressure of debt that they cannot repay if they are to be able to live their lives in dignity.

Different laws apply to individual personal bankruptcy and corporate bankruptcy.

Thus, if a corporation invests in something it needs to build its business and then the corporation does not do well, it can reduce or renegotiate or even not pay its debt.

But if a student invests in a student loan in order to enter a profession or to get a job, that student loan usually cannot be discharged or forgiven or renegotiated in bankruptcy. Under certain conditions there may be other ways to mitigate the student debt, but it is hard.

This sounds kind of hard to understand, but it is one of the terrible laws passed during the George W. Bush administration that came back to haunt a lot of people during the economic meltdown.

Lots of Democrats voted to revise the bankruptcy law. Shame on them. What can I say? Shame on them. Lots of so-called liberals. This issue is one of the reasons I support Elizabeth Warren or if she does not run Bernie Sanders for president.

Why should a student's investment in his/her education be treated any differently than a corporation's investment in paper stock or equipment?

And student loans are not the only problem with our bankruptcy laws.

[AlbertCat]

14. Why should a student's investment in his/her education be treated any differently than ...

... a corporation's investment in paper stock or equipment?

I can think of a lot of reasons they should be treated differently!

for instance....Paper stock and equipment don't have a will power to do or not do what is necessary. And of course a corporation is NOT a person.


But these are reasons for the "forgiveness" of debt to be flexible and give the benefit of the doubt to the STUDENT, not the corporation! The law is the exact opposite of what it should be.

[LeeGMor]

29. Bankruptcy in Biblical Times

Just FYI...A bankruptcy lawyer who is also a pastor Informed me on behalf of my friend, his client, who was feeling guilt over having to declare bankruptcy...even though forced by illness and insurance cancellation...that in biblical times debts were forgiven every seven years just to do the right thing and give people a leg up. Don't know how factual this is, but if true, how quaint and wonderful

[ColesCountyDem]

30. It quite true. Furthermore...

Every seventh year, debts were forgiven, as well as every fiftieth year-- the Year of Jubilee.

"At the end of every seventh year you must cancel the debts of everyone who owes you money." Deuteronomy 15: 9 .

The poor were given the right to pick grapes or pluck grain when passing a field or vineyard, after the harvest: Deuteronomy 23:24-25. They also had the right to glean the fields for any sheaves left behind, and farmers were urged not to be too efficient or acquisitive/miserly in their reaping: Deuteronomy 24:19. Every that grew in a field that had been left fallow belonged to the poor (Exodus 23:11), and every third year, a tenth portion of the entire harvest was given to the poor (Deuteronomy 14: 28-29).

I think one can objectively see the benefits of such a system.

[LeeGMor]

32. Thanks

Very helpful and informative

[ColesCountyDem]

35. You're very welcome, and welcome to DU!

[JDPriestly]

34. When I lived in Austria, the vintners in the area in which I lived traditionally left the last

grapes on the vines so that the poor could go and pick them and enjoy the grapes. That is a wonderful custom.

[JDPriestly]

33. I think that is in the Old Testament.

My grandfather used to leave fields fallow that is without planting every so many years based on Old Testament rules. It was good for the soil. I doubt that corporate farms do that any more. But it was a good idea. I think the rules about forgiving debt in the Old Testament were good for society. We do need to have bankruptcy. Europe is not as generous about it as we are. We are right on that.

Creditors, that is lenders, have the responsibility to lend wisely. Borrowers should not always be given loans. I think that now, it is too easy to get loans, to get into impossible debt.

As far as debt for medical or dental care, we need universal care. Who gets the big medical bills and who doesn't is, with the exception of a few life-style related illnesses, just a matter of luck, good and bad. My mother did not use her Medicare until she was, I think, in her late 80s. Others need surgery and other treatments for cancer in their 20s. Luck is what that is about.

As a society, we can do so much better.

The Bible also teaches us not to be greedy. That's a good start. A lot of lending is done out of greed. Let's pay people livable wages. Let's have a society that teaches some thrift and the art of enjoying life without constant consumption and waste. That's what I think. Wisdom is something we could all use.

Thanks for the post.

[supercats]

16. Brilliant!!!

So my question to Senator Warren is: You are our shining Robin Hood, I want you to be our next President....But will you still be our shining Robin Hood as President, or will you turn into Senator Hilary Clinton?

[NorthCarolina]

17. I really don't

want to play guessing games again. I truly hope Bernie Sanders throws his hat into the ring; he will have my vote as he is an absolute known quantity. Don't get me wrong, I like EW BUT, I also know that Obama campaigned in a way that led me to foolishly believe he was a genuine Liberal, and I know that in itself was much by design. I don't want to get blind sided like that again so I am very skeptical of any Democrat that suddenly appears on the scene as a savior. Further, I'm sure the DLC (or whatever they like to call themselves now...New Dems) can sense the prevailing winds and know that their candidate this go around will need to take on an even more progressive personna for campaign purposes. Bottom line is, I don't want to be fooled again so I'm counting on placing my chips with Bernie.

[Maineman]

18. Very informative. Clinton understood perfectly, but sold out to the big banksters anyway.

And no, Warren is not another Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. They were politicians, and very good ones. Obama promised to be a president for all the people. Obviously that included right wing Repubs and corporate "persons". He has also said that he needed people to get activated so he would be able to do (more progressive) things. Look at what he did for the highly active LGBT community. If we will be active for the next two years, he has a chance to do some good things.

[Dustlawyer]

21. With Bernie's track record and the fact that the money in politics problem is his number one

issue, he has my total support! If EW would be his running mate he might stand a chance. Just getting these issues in the spotlight for awhile would be a minor victory! We have two rotten, corrupt Parties that need overhaul, and at least two oligopolies that need busting up and major reform, banking and the media. Bernie will more than anyone else would or can. He knows the other Senators and many of the House members and would be more effective than people give him credit for. The big issue for now will be if he believes that enough of us will support him in a manner sufficient to give him a fighting chance. They (the Plutocrats) have had their politicians slip the Rider in the spending bill to add to the amount of money that can be given in order to better be able to defeat populist candidates.
I believe EW on the financial stuff, but not sure of her on much else. I don't think she could be bought off, just don't know the rest of her politics.

[davidpdx]

22. Shame on Hillary Clinton for selling out not only her constituents in New York,

but also selling out all of the country.

[awake]

26. Thank you for posting this

Halfway through I began to rethink HRC and that maybe I should support her then the bombshell at the end and it reconfirms my mistrust of the Clintons. I truly hope we can find a better person to run than Hillary.

[LeeGMor]

31. THE PRICE OF POLITICAL POSITIONS

Would that E. Warren had emerged sooner and could be the next Dem. Candidate..but years of groundwork and GOOD WORK have put Hillary there.
Regrettably she was virtually forced to vote against her sentiments to even get to where she is now. The true flaw is not in the candidate but in the system which requires a quid pro quo as the price a candidate must pay for he monies needed to get elected and advance..pay back is always a bitch!
There has never been a perfect leader in history...
I'm not religious, but David of biblical fame did a deadly deed, FDR did questionably things, all leaders, even great ones, have baggage, some more than others. The thing is that in possessing superior ability and know how...Hillary CAN and WILL do more good than bad...for the good of all...that should be the measure of her mettle. I don't live in a fairy tale, but she should not be judged by how many toads she had to kiss to become president but whether she can turn our pumpkins into coaches that ALL can ride in!