A question for the HRC group

[LAS14]

120. An attempt to answer.

I'm really glad to see a bunch of posts that accept the premise that some sort of negotiation with the Sanders camp is in order. Not because they are right where the campaigns disagree, but because they've mobilized a lot of people/energy, and we should model compromise to move forward with a united party. Would that the congress used this model.

I was not happy to see the plethora of "we're right we don't need to talk to them" responses. Good bye Sanders voters with that attitude. I'm far from a wonk, and tend to trust the positions of people I've followed for a long time, but here's my best take on how we might at least talk to the Sanders people.

- immediately give back any campaign contributions that she has received from various corporations that exist in the oil, pharmaceutical, and banking industries

I think this is a non-starter. It would accept the premise that somehow this money has influenced her policies. This is not to say donors don't influence some pliticians... not at all. On the other hand, perhaps the focus could be shifted to the future. To overturn Citizens United, either with an amendment or with SCOTUS appointments. There are probably other ways the two camps could agree on reducing the costs of running political campaigns.

- support a complete and total ban on fracking
Hillary already has a complex stance on this. Could they suggest modifications?

- support a framework of moving to a single-payer healthcare infrastructure. Of course, keep the ACA....but move towards single-payer

I'd be interested in hearing the Sanders examples of how you move toward that while supporting ACA. Would they be interested in fixing the problems in ACA? Problems that would have been fixed already of we could have engaged in the iterative legislation that accompanies most large, complex projects. (Think big, Bernie!!!)

- support revised Glass-Steagall act which prohibits the intermingling of commercial and investment banking
I don't pretend to understand the differences between Hillary's position and Bernie's. I just know that people I trust (eg., Paul Krugman) think Hillary's is better. Are there details that could be discussed?

- support for cap and trade on CO2 emitters
I'm all for this. I'm surprised Hillary's not. I'll have to investigate.

- a pledge to overturn Citizens United, and support the complete end to SuperPACS, thus relying only on individual contributions for campaign funding. And to nominate SCOTUS Justices who support such policies
I think this is her position. Yes? No?

- gun reform (a given....I do agree with her positions on this)
Non starter.

- a pledge not to engage in further military action in any Mideast conflicts (unless we're directly attacked), and to support a policy of supporting other Mideast countries taking the lead to combat terrorism
I'm against such pledges re foreign policy. You can't know what's in the future.

- a $15 federal minimum wage
$13.50?

- Release of the speech transcripts
Baloney