Hilary Clinton's promises

Okay so I needed a new thread that actually discuss her policies - seeing as I think she'll be President (I can't say POTUS cos I keep seeing the word "POCUS" like hocus Pocus....) anyway, link to the policies/promise here (ta Ben):

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/

I'm starting with this one, personally as it's an issue I feel very strongly about.

LGBT rights and equality

There are still too many places where lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans are targeted for harassment and violence. There are still too many young people out there feeling hopeless and alone.
Hillary, October 3, 2015


Support LGBT youth, parents, and elders. Hillary will end so-called “conversion therapy” for minors, combat youth homelessness by ensuring adequate funding for safe and welcoming shelters, and take on bullying and harassment in schools. She’ll end discriminatory treatment of LGBT families in adoptions, and protect LGBT elders against discrimination.

Honor the military service of LGBT people. Hillary applauds the Pentagon’s decision to allow transgender personnel to serve openly, and as Commander-in-Chief, she will upgrade service records of LGBT veterans dismissed due to their sexual orientation.
Fight for an AIDS-free generation.

Protect transgender rights. Hillary will work to protect transgender individuals from violence, make it easier for transgender Americans to change their gender marker on identification documents, and invest in law enforcement training focused on fair and impartial policing, including in interactions with LGBT people.

Promote human rights of LGBT people around the world. Hillary will promote LGBT human rights and ensure America’s foreign policy is inclusive of LGBT people, including increasing our investment in the Global Equality Fund to advance human rights.


All sounds very good to me......?

Like I said the other day, she's not getting a fair shake in the media. All the focus is on the e-mails, her health, how Millennials liked Bernie better ... she has a lot of good ideas.

I also like the fact that as a former senator and secretary of state, she has a deep understanding of how the government works and how things get done.

Early Childhood Education

I believe getting off to a good start should be our children's birthright, part of the basic bargain that we have with each other as a nation. Every child should have the tools and the skills to thrive in tomorrow's economy, especially those kids from our most vulnerable and at-risk communities.
Hillary, June 15, 2015

Hmmmm, well yes, so say all of us. Wouldve liked a little more passion there but....

As president, Hillary will:

Make preschool universal for every 4-year-old in America. Despite research showing its benefits, only about half of the roughly 8.1 million 3- and 4-year-olds in the United States are enrolled in preschool, with only one in four enrolled in publicly funded preschool. Hillary believes that every child deserves the same strong start. That’s why she will work to ensure that every 4-year-old in America has access to high-quality preschool in the next 10 years.

*(CAN SOMEONE EXPLAIN THIS POINT PLEASE? Is pre-school not mandatory at aged four?)


Significantly increase child care investments so that no family in America has to pay more than 10 percent of its income to afford high-quality child care. The cost of child care has increased by nearly 25 percent during the past decade, while the wages of working families have stagnated. While families across America are stretched by skyrocketing costs, child care has become more important than ever before—both as a critical work support for the changing structure of American families and as an essential component of a child’s early development. These high costs severely squeeze working families, prevent too many children from getting a healthy start, and act as a disincentive for parents to stay in the workforce. Hillary will fight for every family in America to have access to high quality, affordable child care by significantly increasing the federal government’s investment in child care subsidies and providing tax relief for the cost of child care to working families.

Improve the quality of child care and early learning by giving a RAISE to America’s child care workforce. One of the key drivers of high-quality child care is a supported and effective child care workforce. Yet, despite the high cost of child care, too many workers are not receiving a living wage, which fuels turnover and undermines the quality of care—and also causes many of those caring for and educating our children to live in poverty themselves. To increase the quality of child care in America and pay child care workers for the true value of their work, Hillary will create the Respect and Increased Salaries for Early Childhood Educators (RAISE) initiative. In line with Clinton’s Care Workers Initiative, RAISE will fund and support states and local communities that work to increase the compensation of child care providers and early educators and provide equity with kindergarten teachers by investing in educational opportunities, career ladders, and professional salaries.

Double our investment in Early Head Start and the Early Head Start–Child Care Partnership program. Early Head Start provides comprehensive services to our youngest learners and their families—including health, nutrition, and pre-literacy support with a strong focus on children’s social and emotional development. The Early Head Start–Child Care Partnership program brings Early Head Start’s evidence-based curriculum into the child care setting to provide comprehensive, full-day, high-quality services to low-income families. To ensure our children have a strong foundation to learn, Hillary will double the number of children served by Early Head Start and the Early Head Start–Child Care Partnership program.

Expand access to evidence-based home visiting programs. There is increasing scientific evidence that brain development in the earliest years of childhood is crucial to economic success. That’s why Hillary will double our investment in home visiting programs such as the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting (MIECHV) program. These programs—which provide home visits by a social worker or nurse during and directly after pregnancy—significantly improve maternal and child health, development, and learning.

Award scholarships of up to $1,500 per year to help as many as 1 million student parents afford high-quality child care. More than 25 percent of all college students are balancing school with raising a child. We should support them, not only because the economic benefit of a college degree lifts their own earning prospects, but also because it lifts the future earnings of their children too. To support America’s student parents, Hillary will launch the Student Parents in America Raising Kids (SPARK) program. SPARK will award scholarships of up to $1,500 per year to as many as 1 million student parents. Recipients can use the awards for costs that create barriers to success—including child care and emergency financial aid.

Increase access to high-quality child care on college campuses by serving an additional 250,000 children. Student parents face many challenges, with greater financial and time constraints than many of their peers. College students who are parents leave school with an average debt that is 25 percent higher than non-parents. The demands of parenting mean that student parents spend two hours less on average per day on educational activities. And while nearly half of student parents attend two-year colleges, less than half of all two-year college campuses in America offer on-campus child care services. Student parents need our support. Hillary will work to dramatically increase access to child care on campus by increasing funding for campus-based child care centres.


I like the RAISE initiative. That's good.

Keep in mind, American presidents can only get things done when the Congress is of the same party. When it is a different party, is when you see the interpersonal and political skills of the president.

Congress makes the laws. Everything depends on if the electorate elects a Democratic Senate and House to carry out the president's pledges. You saw that the electorate did not do that with Obama. Nevertheless, he showed that he was the most skillful president ever at maneuvering around obstacles. He will go down as the greatest president ever because of this.

If the voters don't give Hillary the lawmakers, she will not be able to make laws. It's that simple.

Quill please explain this part to me - simply as you can please.

If the voters don't give Hillary the lawmakers, she will not be able to make laws. It's that simple.

http://gawker.com/remember-when-hillary-clinton-was-against-gay-marriage-1714147439

Her team needs to simplify her collection of promises  or ''election manifesto'' as we call it over here.
People visiting the website of a presidential candidate should not subjected to huge walls of text and bombarded with too much information.


Simplify it totally, break it down into bite size pieces and summarise it!  Imo the priorities should be in this particular order of importance :
jobs, wages
healthcare
childcare and education
crime control including gun control
taxation policies
pensions
state security
lgbt rights



I have put lgbt issues last on her list of priorities, in relation to the number of people affected. Same sex marriages are all very well but human priorities are decent food, health, jobs, housing, pensions ... and crime control.

Yes I agree Jules - all individual policies are equally important as one policy simply doesn't work without a network of good policies.

If you click on the link at the top of the OP it takes you to her policies and they are bite size - I hate long walls of text, it tempts me to skim and I end up skipping important parts then I have to go backwards to understand what I've just read!

eddie wrote:Quill please explain this part to me - simply as you can please.

If the voters don't give Hillary the lawmakers, she will not be able to make laws. It's that simple.

Congress drafts and ratifies laws, which the president either signs into law or vetos. The people vote for their Congresspeople as well as the president.

If the people don't give Clinton enough Democratic congresspeople, that means Congress will be mostly Republican and they can be expected to refuse to work with her.

Okay so is that the same as our parliament having "seats"? I think it is.

See this is why politics is stupid. It makes policies not worth the paper they're written on.

eddie wrote:Okay so is that the same as our parliament having "seats"? I think it is.

See this is why politics is stupid. It makes policies not worth the paper they're written on.

Same thing as seats, we call them that too.

I'd hate to have the alternative to a system in which the president can't do everything he/she wants

Ben Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Okay so is that the same as our parliament having "seats"? I think it is.

See this is why politics is stupid. It makes policies not worth the paper they're written on.

Same thing as seats, we call them that too.

I'd hate to have the alternative to a system in which the president can't do everything he/she wants

Well I'm all for teams of people deciding on stuff - that's very important to me - but somehow, the buck or the final decisions, have to be decided by someone if there's a stalemate. What im trying to say is - it's not bloody fair to have a policy you wholly believe in that can't be put through just because some twat doesn't like you or is having a meltdown day.
There's no fair way of pleasing everyone. There's no fair way, of being fair.

I hate that

The real problem is that Republicans have taken the honesty and integrity out of the system. You'd think two houses where bills are debated by people who care about the good of the country and informed about the issues would be a good thing, but we don't really have that. We have the Democrats desperately trying to fix the country's problems, and the Republicans desperately trying to stop the Democrats and gain power.

Ben Reilly wrote:The real problem is that Republicans have taken the honesty and integrity out of the system. You'd think two houses where bills are debated by people who care about the good of the country and informed about the issues would be a good thing, but we don't really have that. We have the Democrats desperately trying to fix the country's problems, and the Republicans desperately trying to stop the Democrats and gain power.

Well I'm not going to debate LW RW tactics as they're all the bloody same here, (I'd rather " talk about the stones.." ) but politics has been set in stone (see what I did?) for too many years to change.
I'd like a vote on that actually! Change the way politics works.

The British parliamentary system is basically one house. The US system is two houses, and if they can agree on a bill, there's always the president, who has to sign the bill before it becomes law. By having three 'checks' a bill has to run through, it was supposed to assure that everything was discussed and all interests were balanced (in fact, the founders call the process checks and balances).

In Britain you have one house and one check...unless some backbenchers force a division, at which point a new election is necessary. Barring that, there is one check in the British system.

But in America, not only are there three checks, but there are three different elections. So, a party can turn out a permanent check, so to speak, in that they will always vote no to the president's programs, and likewise he will veto their programs. That's the deadlock I'm referring to...a president can do nothing if he doesn't have his party in control in the legislature.

It's a complex system, and sometimes it's hard to get voters to realize what they are doing when they split their votes. But, like the last six years, no legislative programs go through without a single party.