Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Clinton Not Progressive Enough? Depends Upon What You Mean By Progressive [View all]RiverLover
(7,830 posts)24. You do realize Bill Clinton wrecked welfare with his "welfare reform", right?
Clinton Touts Welfare Reform. Here's How It Failed.
Sept 2012
...But while welfare reform may have initially reduced poverty, it left those still living at that income level worse off than they were before, reaching fewer of them and giving those it did reach less. And our poverty rates didnt stay low. When they began to rise again, the program couldnt offer them the support it used to. The recession has been a crystal clear, and incredibly painful, demonstration of this fact.
Dylan Matthews has already taken a look at the claim that millions moved off of welfares rolls and poverty was reduced. As he writes, the programs numbers have steadily fallen since 1996: Since reform, the rolls have shrunk from 12.6 million to 4.6 million. The number of people in poverty fell by 6.4 million people under Clinton, whereas the number of people in poverty increased by 7.4 million between 1981 and 1993 (and the rate went from 14 percent to 15.1 percent). There is a catch, though. But its worth noting that welfare reform led to a huge spike in extreme poverty, as defined as the number of households making under $2 a day, Matthews adds.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has done excellent work to track TANFs failures. While the official poverty rate among families declined in the early years of welfare reform, when the economy was booming and unemployment was extremely low, it started increasing in 2000 and now exceeds its 1996 level, it reports. Over the last 16 years, the national TANF caseload has declined by 60 percent, even as poverty and deep poverty have worsened. In fact, nearly 70 percent of poor families with children received cash assistance in 1996; in 2009, less than 30 percent did. And the families who are able to access benefits arent getting much.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/169788/clinton-touts-welfare-reform-heres-how-it-failed
Sept 2012
...But while welfare reform may have initially reduced poverty, it left those still living at that income level worse off than they were before, reaching fewer of them and giving those it did reach less. And our poverty rates didnt stay low. When they began to rise again, the program couldnt offer them the support it used to. The recession has been a crystal clear, and incredibly painful, demonstration of this fact.
Dylan Matthews has already taken a look at the claim that millions moved off of welfares rolls and poverty was reduced. As he writes, the programs numbers have steadily fallen since 1996: Since reform, the rolls have shrunk from 12.6 million to 4.6 million. The number of people in poverty fell by 6.4 million people under Clinton, whereas the number of people in poverty increased by 7.4 million between 1981 and 1993 (and the rate went from 14 percent to 15.1 percent). There is a catch, though. But its worth noting that welfare reform led to a huge spike in extreme poverty, as defined as the number of households making under $2 a day, Matthews adds.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has done excellent work to track TANFs failures. While the official poverty rate among families declined in the early years of welfare reform, when the economy was booming and unemployment was extremely low, it started increasing in 2000 and now exceeds its 1996 level, it reports. Over the last 16 years, the national TANF caseload has declined by 60 percent, even as poverty and deep poverty have worsened. In fact, nearly 70 percent of poor families with children received cash assistance in 1996; in 2009, less than 30 percent did. And the families who are able to access benefits arent getting much.
http://www.thenation.com/blog/169788/clinton-touts-welfare-reform-heres-how-it-failed
And much like Third Way is now saying NAFTA was bad for American workers but the TPP will be good, they're now saying Clinton's Welfare "Reform" should be fixed. Bill Clinton himself is saying it, which clues us in on how his wife will approach the issue...
Bill Clinton Says Big Flaw In His Welfare Reform Should Be Fixed
May 2014
Earlier this week, former President Bill Clinton delivered a 90-minute defense of his economic record, which some are analyzing through the prism of Hillary Clintons expected presidential campaign.
But within that defense, Clinton admitted to a big mistake: the five-year time limit on welfare benefits for parents with children.
As Clinton noted, its not necessarily a problem when jobs are readily available, but its just plain cruel in the middle of a jobs crisis.
"It did far more good than harm. But now, given the changed climate and the aftermath of the crash, the poorest welfare families, about 15% of the total, are worse off. And we should do something for them. And all of us who supported it should admit that We shouldnt have a five-year time limit that includes prolonged recessions."
http://ourfuture.org/20140502/bill-clinton-says-big-flaw-in-his-welfare-reform-should-be-fixed
May 2014
Earlier this week, former President Bill Clinton delivered a 90-minute defense of his economic record, which some are analyzing through the prism of Hillary Clintons expected presidential campaign.
But within that defense, Clinton admitted to a big mistake: the five-year time limit on welfare benefits for parents with children.
As Clinton noted, its not necessarily a problem when jobs are readily available, but its just plain cruel in the middle of a jobs crisis.
"It did far more good than harm. But now, given the changed climate and the aftermath of the crash, the poorest welfare families, about 15% of the total, are worse off. And we should do something for them. And all of us who supported it should admit that We shouldnt have a five-year time limit that includes prolonged recessions."
http://ourfuture.org/20140502/bill-clinton-says-big-flaw-in-his-welfare-reform-should-be-fixed
And that "crash" was brought about by the repeal of Glass-Steagall, which was his doing...
Can we really afford another Clinton's supposed caring on social issues? There's what is said while campaigning, and then what is done in office.
They seem to be more in line with Republicans, and it has hurt our country.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
121 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Clinton Not Progressive Enough? Depends Upon What You Mean By Progressive [View all]
McCamy Taylor
Feb 2015
OP
I hope you're wrong. That would mean all they want is revenge for losing their houses and jobs.
McCamy Taylor
Feb 2015
#3
You don't need welfare? Who is going to take care of the elderly who are poor? Who is going to
jwirr
Feb 2015
#62
No you don't understand because you are socially secure. All you are saying is 'money matters more
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#45
Every "ism" in this country means more profit for a capitalist and lower wages for all.
McCamy Taylor
Feb 2015
#13
No, *you* don't care. You're the one who's willing to sacrifice one for the other.
Marr
Feb 2015
#83
You're presenting a false choice: that we can only have either economic
winter is coming
Feb 2015
#103
Dodd-Frank is being dismantled, in case you missed that. By both parties. nt
RiverLover
Feb 2015
#109
Both parties, right in front of us, and you deny it. Better Believe It means unbelievable here~
RiverLover
Feb 2015
#114
When one is not equal under the law, one does not get equal opportunities.
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#47
And yet some of the countries with the highest median incomes and low poverty rates
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#58
Your verbiage paints civil rights as part of a bargain that causes mass poverty.
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#55
Sure they want what they think is best, best for them and the people they know
Fumesucker
Feb 2015
#107
Dude, "social issues" are why we have a crap minimum wage and no universal health.
McCamy Taylor
Feb 2015
#15
Sanders and Warren don't say that, but look at this thread, many people stridently insist that
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#51
How do you think LGBT equality went from being the 'wedge issue that costs Democrats elections' to
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#65
I would say the most empowering thing you could do for American women
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Feb 2015
#53
Did you happen to notice the citation about women comprising a majority of the poor?
Marr
Feb 2015
#82
Yep. In this model, having women represent 51% of Wal-Mart and Amazon warehouse workers is "equality
Widget2000
Feb 2015
#100
A speech from 1995?!? That is supposed to convince me HRC is progressive? She's a war hawk.
peacebird
Feb 2015
#14
You do realize Bill Clinton wrecked welfare with his "welfare reform", right?
RiverLover
Feb 2015
#24
Yep, and even on their few social justice issues, DLC-types don't lead. They just cynically play the
Marr
Feb 2015
#84
No, the dismantling of democracy and the increase of authoritarianism and inequality
woo me with science
Feb 2015
#29
Spot on. There's nothin progressive bout Hillary. It's all pretend with her & she's a lousy actress.
InAbLuEsTaTe
Feb 2015
#38
Not this Third Way garbage again. Neoliberals shit on women and poor people.
woo me with science
Feb 2015
#19
You nailed it. Hillary is a fraud and those of us who after informed see right through her phony shtick.
InAbLuEsTaTe
Feb 2015
#39
Here's the thing, a heck of a lot of people don't give a shit about "social policy" or "isms".
Autumn
Feb 2015
#21
When I was born, LGBT people were illegal, put in jail or institutions, marginalized and
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#68
The triangulators who decided it was okay to impoverish people as long as
winter is coming
Feb 2015
#35
Pro war, pro Wall Street, pro TPP, pro Keystone XL, pro H-1B visas, member of "The Family".
Scuba
Feb 2015
#32
And yet a few short years ago, all I heard from straight Democrats was that gay rights was a 'wedge
Bluenorthwest
Feb 2015
#69
This frequently breaks down into "there is no true Scotsmen" type argumentation.
HereSince1628
Feb 2015
#67