Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans

Hello all,

What with all the various updates and upgrades of the plans of these two I figured it was time to throw the plans (or parts of them, Edwards has too much stuff to all post here) up and allow for compare and contrast time. You all know I like Edwards and really the devils in the details. So here we go. I am not going to link because this is all taken from their respective websites. If Obama supporters want to add to any of his plans from announcements he has made please feel free to. I am however going strictly from what I see from their sites on issues or that I know they have discussed

Poverty: Edwards' baliwick and he has a stated goal, which I like a lot.

End Poverty by 2036: Edwards believes that ending poverty should be a goal our nation actively pursues. A national goal will rally support for the cause and help us measure our progress. In 1999, Tony Blair announced a 20-year goal to end child poverty in Great Britain and he has already reduced child poverty by 17 percent [Washington Post, 4/3/2006]. Edwards calls for a national effort to:

Cut poverty by one third within a decade, lifting 12 million Americans out of poverty by 2016.
End poverty within 30 years, lifting 37 million Americans out of poverty by 2036.

Obama no such grand statement on his website issues page but that's ok.

So the two of them agree on minimum wage increase, they are both indexing with inflation now and creating transitional or stepping stones jobs, changing how the Earned Income Tax Credit works, they also both agree unions should be stronger. The difference comes in the scale of ideas and plans that they have for addressing the issues. Edwards attacks poverty at many different levels. If any of you read farmerchuck's diaries on a regulat basis you can see how badly these programs are needed in rural areas. Also, many people here talk about wanting to have farms, build more solar and windfarms and that is what Edwards' addresses. How we can use the need for a cleaner environment to give people more jobs and return manufacturing back to the US. He wants us to have a "green collar" class, people who work in those ever important green jobs.

Investing Seed Money for Rural Recovery: Helping innovative small businesses is a promising approach to economic development, but only 1 percent of state economic development funds now support entrepreneurs. Edwards will create the Rural Economic Advancement Challenge

Creating the New Energy Economy in Rural America: Renewable sources of energy -- including ethanol, biodiesel, wind, and solar -- can make the U.S. independent of foreign oil, cut global warming pollution, and create new industries and hundreds of thousands of jobs in rural America. Edwards will establish the New Energy Economy Fund to jumpstart renewable energies. He will create new markets for ethanol by requiring all new cars to run on both gasoline and E85 ethanol, requiring 25 percent of chain gas stations to carry E85, supporting E20 and E30 fuels, and working with U.S. automakers to make efficient and alternative-fuel cars. He will support locally owned biorefineries with start-up capital. He will also require 25 percent of electricity to be generated from renewable sources by 2025.

Creating Fairness for Family Farmers: Edwards recognizes that the rules are stacked against family farmers. He supports the strict enforcement of laws against anticompetitive mergers, unfair pricing, and country-of-origin laws. He will enact a strong national ban on packer ownership to stop the spread of large corporate hog interests and create a national moratorium on the construction and expansion of hog farm lagoons. To help family farmers he will also limit farm subsidies to $250,000 per person, close loopholes in payment limits, and expand conservation programs.

Investing in Rural Broadband: Once a world leader in broadband access, the U.S. is now 21st in the world, trailing Estonia. Rural households are only about half as likely to have a broadband connection even though digital inclusion is one of the quickest and surest ways to attract businesses

Prohibiting Banks from Discriminating against Rural America: Rural communities have fewer bank branches, fewer per-capita small business loans and more high-cost mortgages. Deregulation has led to bank consolidation while small towns rely on community banks to support local businesses. Edwards will strengthen the Community Reinvestment Act

Guaranteeing Rural America the Funding It Needs and Is Entitled to: More than half of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's $70 billion in rural development funds has actually gone to metropolitan regions, suburbs of midsize cities, and resort towns like Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket. Edwards will rewrite these funding rules and get resources to the intended isolated and disadvantaged areas. Because many small towns lack the grant-writing capabilities of larger towns, Edwards will direct federal agencies to offer a simplified, one-page grant application for small grants to rural towns and counties, based on the successful COPS program.

Rural schools enroll 40 percent of American children - including most children in Iowa, New Hampshire, and North Carolina - but receive only 22 percent of federal education funding. Small rural schools often struggle to provide a complete curriculum and attract and retain excellent teachers. [NEA, 2007] so Edwards will

Investing in Teachers: Research has found that teachers are the most important part of any school, and rural schools have particular difficulty recruiting and retaining teachers. They often lose teachers to wealthier districts. Edwards will improve pay for teachers in rural and other hard-to-staff schools, including rural schools, to help attract quality new and experienced teachers. He will also offer college scholarships for students who commit to teach in underserved rural schools after graduation. [Rural School and Community Trust, 2006 and 2007]

He will rewrite the unfair Medicare and Medicaid funding formulas that punish rural states and communities. He will also support investments in telemedicine to instantaneously connect distant specialists and advanced equipment with local doctors and patients, allowing better monitoring, chronic disease management, and emergency response

Edwards will help local areas improve their infrastructure and tackle local pollution problems. He will also establish tough clean air and water requirements for concentrated animal feeding operations.

Edwards also addresses issues of poverty in the cities as well. Both he and Obama talk about HUD and predatory lending:

Edwards suggested creating one million new housing vouchers over five years to let low-income families choose to live in better neighborhoods. He believes that we should also expand the supply of affordable housing that is economically integrated with other communities. He also proposed coordinating housing policies across metropolitan areas, cutting HUD bureaucracy, and requiring recipients of new housing vouchers to work if they can.

Fight Predatory Lending. Home ownership promotes economic security and, for most families, is the top generator of wealth. However, predatory lenders use deceptive terms and abusive interest rates and fees to strip away families' equity, reducing the amount of wealth they have saved in their homes and sometimes depriving them of their homes entirely. Edwards called for fair rules to protect homeowners

but then Edwards goes on to talk about how to help families save as well:

Help Low-Income Workers Save with "Work Bonds." Edwards proposed a new tax credit to help low-income, working Americans save for the future. The credit would match wages to $500 per year and be directly deposited into a savings account. Edwards has also proposed expanding the Savers Credit to match the savings of low-income families.

Expand Access to Bank Accounts and Fight Abusive Payday Lending. As many as 28 million Americans don't have bank accounts, and they pay check cashers $8 billion for services most banks provide for free. Short-term payday loans regularly charge interest rates above 300 percent. Edwards suggested subsidizing bank accounts for working families and national rules to prevent abusive payday lending.

Obama's take on improving the lot of the poor is a bit different:

Some studies have indicated that the most important factor in a child's education is the quality of their teacher. Barack Obama introduced a plan to support school districts that try new methods to improve student achievement and reward high-quality teachers and school leaders. Under his initiative, 20 districts across the country will get grants to develop innovative plans in consultation with their teacher unions. High-performing teachers, and those who take on new responsibilities, such as working at struggling schools and mentoring new teachers, will be eligible for pay increases beyond their base salary. These innovation districts will show results that can be replicated in other school districts.

Barack Obama's "STEP UP" plan addresses the achievement gaps among grade-school children by supporting summer learning opportunities for disadvantaged children through partnerships between local schools and community organizations

Barack Obama believes we should create an Affordable Housing Trust Fund to develop affordable housing in mixed-income neighborhoods. The Affordable Housing Trust Fund would use a small percentage of the profits of two government-sponsored housing agencies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, to create up to 14,000 new units of affordable housing every year.

Barack Obama believes that all workers who want a job should not only be able to gain meaningful employment, but also be able to move up the career ladder to further support their families and serve as role models for their children. Obama has introduced legislation to help strengthen career ladders by first identifying regions and industries where career pathways are not fully developed and then establish public-private partnerships to lift up low-wage workers. Obama supports using the successful organized labor model of providing workers with additional skills and opportunities, and looks forward to working with organized labor to build more opportunities for low-income workers to reach economic security.

Barack Obama will create the 5-E (Energy Efficiency, Environmental Education and Employment) Disconnected Youth Service Corps. This program would directly engage disconnected and disadvantaged youth in energy efficiency and environmental service opportunities to strengthen their communities while also providing them with practical skills and experience in important career fields of expected high-growth employment. The program would engage private sector employers and unions to provide apprenticeship opportunities. The program also encourages summer high school students to stay in school, and provides GED help and other wrap-around social services for drop-outs.

Three quarters of welfare recipients live in areas that are poorly served by public transportation and low-income workers spend up to 36% of their incomes on transportation. As president, Obama will work to eliminate transportation disparities so that all Americans can lead meaningful and productive lives. Obama will strengthen the federal Jobs Access and Reverse Commute program to ensure that additional federal public transportation dollars flow to the highest-need communities and that urban planning initiatives take this aspect of transportation policy into account.

Barack Obama will strengthen Small Business Administration programs that provide capital to minority-owned businesses, support outreach programs that help minority business owners apply for loans, and work to encourage the growth and capacity of minority firms

Now it does stand to reason that Obama would focus more on minorities and Edwards on rural America, those are their roots and so that is what they are familiar with. What I like about Edwards is the large amount of specifics and how in the end all his programs tie together. In Edwards Rural and Poverty plan he addresses things like the environment and education all together so you can see how his vision will mesh.

Education: Obama first:

Increase Funding for Head Start

Research shows that many poor and minority children do not enter kindergarten ready to learn. Black children start school substantially behind white children in reading and math, and these early achievement gaps expand throughout elementary school. Barack Obama supports increasing funding for the Head Start program to provide low-income preschool children with critically important learning skills, and supports the necessary role of parental involvement in the success of Head Start.

Place High-Quality Teachers in Low-Income Classrooms

Some studies have indicated that the most important factor in a child's education is the quality of their teacher. Barack Obama introduced a plan to support school districts that try new methods to improve student achievement and reward high-quality teachers and school leaders. Under his initiative, 20 districts across the country will get grants to develop innovative plans in consultation with their teacher unions. High-performing teachers, and those who take on new responsibilities, such as working at struggling schools and mentoring new teachers, will be eligible for pay increases beyond their base salary. These innovation districts will show results that can be replicated in other school districts.

Extend Summer School Opportunities to Low-Income Students

Students lose an average of two months or more worth of math facts and skills during the summer, with the largest learning loss affecting children who live in poverty, suffer from learning disabilities, or do not speak English at home. Barack Obama's "STEP UP" plan addresses the achievement gaps among grade-school children by supporting summer learning opportunities for disadvantaged children through partnerships between local schools and community organizations.

Make College More Affordable

College tuition rates are rising almost 10 percent a year. These surging tuitions priced over 200,000 students out of college altogether in 2004. Two decades ago, the Pell maximum grant covered 55 percent of costs at a public four-year college, compared with only 32 percent today. The very first bill Barack Obama introduced in the U.S. Senate was a bill to help make college more affordable by increasing the maximum Pell Grant amount to $5,100. Barack Obama will also eliminate wasteful subsidies to private banks under the federal student loan program. Reforming this program will save taxpayers billions of dollars each year -- money that Obama will direct to fund need-based grants, such as the Pell Grant.

Edwards: Now on top of the stuff for education he plans for the rural area there is this for college:


Creating a National "College for Everyone" Initiative: Edwards will create a national initiative -- based on the Greene County program -- to pay one year of public-college tuition, fees, and books for more than 2 million students. In return, students will be required to work part-time in college, take a college-prep curriculum in high school, and stay out of trouble.

Lower Costs: Research has shown that reducing the price of college can increase college enrollment rates, particularly in the first year of college. Unlike existing student aid programs, which give more money to schools with higher tuition, College for Everyone will encourage states and colleges to keep tuition low. State budget cuts are the number-one driver of higher tuition. [Dynarski, 1999; NCES, 2004]

Clear Eligibility: Many high school students and parents assume they cannot afford college, overestimating tuition and overlooking student aid. College for Everyone's universal eligibility for qualifying students would break through the noise of the current student aid system and send a strong message that all qualified students can afford college. [ACE, 1998]

Strong Preparation: Too many students don't go to college -- or fail once they get there -- because they were not adequately prepared in high school. The number one determinant of success in college is the rigor of high school courses. College for Everyone students will be required to complete a college-prep curriculum in high school. Edwards will also work with school districts to strengthen high school curricula. [Department of Education, 1999]

Overhauling the Student Loan Program: Banks that make student loans receive large federal subsidies and a guarantee against default. However, millions of students have borrowed directly from the U.S. Department of Education, receiving loans that have very similar terms but are far less expensive for taxpayers. Edwards will let all students borrow directly from Education. By eliminating bank subsidies on student loans, he will free up almost $6 billion a year to make college more affordable. [CAP, 2006]

Simplifying Financial Aid: The application for student aid, known as the FAFSA, is needlessly complicated and longer than many tax forms. Many students and families need classes to help fill it out, and 1.5 million high school students do not apply for aid even though they are eligible. Edwards would dramatically simplify the application process by using information the federal government already has, eliminating two-thirds of the questions. [TICAS, 2007]

Giving Students the Tools They Need to Apply for College and Aid: Financial aid alone is not enough. Too many students lack the encouragement and guidance they need to apply to college. In some large cities, a single counselor must serve more than 700 students. Edwards will help every low-income high school eligible for Title I hire a new college counselor, helping students choose college-track courses and navigate the admissions and financial aid process. [McDonough, 2007; Bridge Project, 2003]

Create Second-Chance Schools for High School Dropouts: As many as one-third of all students drop out of school, and the rates are even worse for poor and minority students. Almost a third of dropouts between the ages of 25 and 34 live in poverty. Large majorities of recent dropouts regret their decision and now believe that a high school degree is the key to good jobs. Edwards believes that we should create second-chance schools, including some in evenings and at community colleges, to help former dropouts get back on track. [Civic Enterprises, 2006; Manhattan Institute, 2006; Urban Institute, 2001]

Strengthen Public Schools: Edwards suggested expanding access to preschool programs such as Head Start and North Carolina's Smart Start, investing more in teacher pay and training to attract good teachers where we need them most, and strengthening high schools with smaller schools and a more challenging curriculum.

Lots of differences here: Obama gives you more Head Start Funds, allowing teachers in 20 districts to get paid more if they are willing to work more by mentoring teachers in less affluent schools or willing to teach at less affluent schools a pay raise, extra summer school classes and extra Pell Grant money.

Edwards gives you: improved public schools, a year free college, lowered tuition, raises for teachers like Obama in lower income areas BUT if a teacher commits to working in a lower income area they will get a scholarship for college, work to strenthen curriculum, get rid of bank subsidies for loan AND put more guidance counselors in schools to help kids and famililes take the right classes and get the right financing.

When I look at the issues pages of these candidates, and this is how I pick who I like; Edwards gives me a total plan to address poverty, health care, the environment (to be addressed later) and education which all feed into each other. I look at Obama and I see that he is addressing some obvious problems but is not really connecting the dots to provide a whole new approach and full overhaul of how ths country approches these issues. Like I said I am biased but I am interested to see what other folks think. I will compare and contrast their environment and healthcare plans later.

I hope you enjoy the read though.

With respect,

Chaos (crossposted at Dkos, Diatribune and Progressive Historians)



Display:


it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 2)

but this was hardly a comparison piece.

i personally think edwards is impractical (at best) and severely underestimates the costs of the parts of his plans (that i know about) and overestimates his ability to do anything about them.

my f-i-l is a farmer, and i've been pushing him to get solar and wind generators up on his farm for years.  but it's impractical because there's no access point for hundreds of miles -- and he has been able to collect proof of similar difficulties for farmers across the country.

the problem with rural broadband is equally great.  the pipes just don't go there.  putting pipes into rural areas of illinois would cost $5B -- and they are close to several hubs.  edwards would know that this has been looked at if he'd talked to the democratic governor's association.

among the people i know who actually work to alleviate proverty, edwards ideas are generally scoffed at, although they like the fact that he raises the issue.  that doesn't give me confidence.

so here we have a candidate who is extremely optimistic about what he can do, who basically had an inconsequential career in the senate, flip-flops about the issues and his associations (dlc).  it's hard to say that he'd really get half (and i think that's generous) his ideas before congress in legislative form.  more likely, we have no idea what he would do as president, and i'm not sure he does, either.  afaict, his ideas sound great as long as you don't know anything about the policy area.

plus he basically ignores or brushes off the biggest issues of the day.  like the voters or congress will ignore them.

i have trouble thinking of edwards as a serious person.  but that's just me...


peace. love. equality. still waiting after 40 years...
by bored now on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 08:11:52 AM EST

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 0)

It's also okay to like your candidate, but calling Edwards plan impratical is not an objective. Several of the programs he mentions already exist in places like New York at the local level.


by bruh21 on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 09:07:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 1)

hmmm, i'm pretty sure i couched it as saying it was impractical on the issues i knew something about.  i also don't see how he will get the country interested in making the sacrifices needed to really solve this problem.  but i don't mind that he's raising these issues -- i just don't expect him to go anywhere by doing do.

and i have a philosophical difference with edwards -- i don't think government can solve all the problems he wants to address, some will have to be worked through within the economic and social realms.  but that's a debate that no one here is really interested in having...


peace. love. equality. still waiting after 40 years...
by bored now on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:32:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 0)

because although he calls it poverty- they are all  issues of broader consideration than that. for example, with education costing people inflationary rates of 8 percent per year increases do you really think everyone isn't interested in how to help their kid get into college? or for example the healthcare issue- do you really think most americans aren't worried about this issue (for record this is actually a topic I've researched so I can tell you that 9 in 10 are indeed worried about it enough want to government to fundamentally take over (not just tinker, but take over the system).


by bruh21 on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:57:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 1)

helping people to afford college is a longtime staple of democrats in washington and a great issue (saying that with two people in this family in college, and not qualified to get a dime in financial aid).  i'm not sure that i think any of the health care proposals make one candidate better over the others, but that may because i look at this from a "what can they get passed" p.o.v., not "what can they think up."

i'm also extremely dubious that health care is a top tier issue with the electorate, since pre-election polls always list health care as a hot issue and exit polls always list it at the bottom of voter concerns:

Pew Research Center for the People & the Press survey conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates.  July 14-Aug. 5, 2003.  Nationwide.

"I'd like to read you a list of some programs and proposals that are being discussed in this country today. For each one, please tell me whether you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose it. The first one is: The U.S. government guaranteeing health insurance for all citizens, even if it means repealing most of the recent tax cuts." Form 1 (N=1,284, MoE ± 3.5)
    Favor     Oppose     Unsure        
    %     %     %        
7-8/03     67     26     7        

"I'd like to read you a list of some programs and proposals that are being discussed in this country today. For each one, please tell me whether you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose it. The first one is: The U.S. government guaranteeing health insurance for all citizens, even if it means raising taxes." Form 2 (N=1,244, MoE ± 3.5)
    Favor     Oppose     Unsure        
    %     %     %        
7-8/03     67     29     4

ABC News/Washington Post Poll. Oct. 9-13, 2003. N=1,000 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3 (total sample). Fieldwork by TNS Intersearch.

"Which of these do you think is more important: providing health care coverage for all Americans, even if it means raising taxes, OR, holding down taxes, even if it means some Americans do not have health care coverage?" Options rotated
    Coverag Holding    Unsure
    For All Down Tax            
    %     %     %        
10/03     79     17     4        
12/99     71     26     3        

"Which would you prefer: the current health insurance system in the United States, in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance, OR, a universal health insurance program, in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that's run by the government and financed by taxpayers?" Options rotated
    Current Universal
    System     Program    Unsure        
    %     %     %        
10/03     33     62     6        

2004 Exit Poll - MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE    
Moral Values (22%)
Economy/Jobs (20%)
Terrorism (19%)
Iraq (15%)
Health Care (8%)
Taxes (5%)
Education (4%)


peace. love. equality. still waiting after 40 years...
by bored now on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 03:59:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 1)

incidentally his theme remains two americas- namely how to bring people and keep them in the middle class reflects on that theme.


by bruh21 on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:57:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

to the contrary (3.00 / 3)

It's pretty obvious that Edwards has the best thought out plans.  He's assmbled the best policy team, including people like Elizabeth Warren.

All of the analysis by independent groups have shown that his healthcare plan has the most realistic price tag and best design.  He's also the only candidate who isn't pretending he is going to eliminate the deficit, something Obama and Hillary pretend, even though they have no plan to do so.


by MassEyesandEars on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 09:09:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

About eliminating the deficit (3.00 / 1)

I used to be big on balanced budgets and still am in theory, but I don't think they work in practice anymore because of the two-party dynamic. If the Dems balance the budget like Clinton did, then the Repugs will just squander the money on war, corporate welfare and tax cuts for the wealthy once in power like Bush did. And when Dems raise taxes to clean up the mess Repugs make a huge stink about it.

Better not make it any easier for them. Obviously you cannot go too much into the red but just enough that there's no wiggle room left for Repug pet programs. And the electorate doesn't seem too concerned about deficits either, especially not the supposedly fiscally conservative conservatives. Now I do believe that long-term deficits hurt the economy, but that's just the price the country has to pay until the electorate starts to punish their leaders and representatives who run deficits by voting them out.


by End game on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 10:20:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: About eliminating the deficit (3.00 / 1)

If you're still at all philosophically into balanced budgets over economic growth and development, definitely read the long-form papers and briefs at the Economic Policy Institute.  A balanced budget in the long-run is a sound idea.  But in the short-term and short-run, bad economics.

Unless you went to the University of Chicago to get your econ degree.


Help build a stronger and more progressive Democratic Party from the grassroots on up
by Peter from WI on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 12:49:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I have trouble of thinking of (2.33 / 3)

Hillobama as making any real change.

You are like many of those who give up before the fight starts against the Republicans.  Change scares those with a vested interest in the status quo.  I don't want Republican-Lite and that is exactly what Hillobama offer.  


by littafi on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 09:34:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 2)

I am sorry that Edwards plans are much better than your golden boys, but that is not a reason to trash him. The truth of the matter is that Edwards supporters know exactly what he will do because he has gone into it in much more depth than Obama.

Edwards has said none of his plans will be easy, and has asked Americans to be patriotic about something besides war, and challenged us to tackle tough problems together. Obama is too afraid of offending people to really challenge the American people.


by RDemocrat on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 10:51:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Support John Edwards! (none / 0)

RDemocrat,you are right on this.
Edwards has the plans
He has the boldness to confront the corporations
What he doesn't have is the corporate $$...AND that is my main reason for supporting him.
He also has the moral leadership that this country wants and deserves.By not accepting corp. $$,that shows leadership,because that's what we Democrats want:
We want the MONEY and the LOBBYING out of POLITICS.Edwards is not waiting until it becomes law,he's doing it now!

I have a problem with Obama hesitating at the Iraq funding vote.

I have a problem with Obama taking $$ from the lobbyists' spouses.

and I have a problem with him not showing true leadership in bringing forth bold plans.
I guess I feel that it's about Obama and not the people.

I like Obama,I just don't think he's ready to enter the mess and tackle the disaster that Bush & Co. will be leaving behind.

Edwards is demonstrating it now!
-


by yann123 on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 11:54:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 2)

Who are the people you know that work to alleviate poverty?  Poverty experts at the Heritage Foundation?

All kidding aside, the people I know in and around this area, where there is a premier poverty and social inequality policy program at the UW, and folks involved in urban and rural poverty issues both, all tell me they are liking Edwards not just because he is making poverty an issue, but because he actually gets some of the issues wrapped up in it.

John himself has made the point that he cares about poverty as a moral crisis, but does not know everything about it.  He doesn't have all the answers.  The Center on Poverty, Work, and Opportunity was not about pushing solutions right off the bat, but figuring out what is wrapped up in the issue of poverty and figuring out what the solutions are.

The important thing is that Edwards is, and has said so, willing to learn the best ways to address poverty at its roots.  Some of the solutions are good steps.  Nay, great steps.

But he gets poverty on the moral crisis level as well as on level of the spirit of addressing it.

Find me one politician that knows the details of how to solve poverty, down to a t, and I'll give you a politican that hasn't won an election in years.  

And dude, don't try to smear Edwards with the DLC crap.  This is MyDD, not podunkassdemocraticblog.blogspot.com.  We all know by now that that is a lie and it just doesn't hold water here anymore.  Bad form.


Help build a stronger and more progressive Democratic Party from the grassroots on up
by Peter from WI on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 12:58:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 1)

well, i've founded hfh chapters (and continue to work with them); have worked with acorn and their partners (and am referring to several people there); a variety of churches on different project (umc, pcusa, ame and black baptist churches); as well as some local chicago efforts on the southside.  i don't know if that's up to snuff for you, but that's been my experience.

does the heritage foundation have poverty experts or was that just a cheap shot?

as for the dlc comment, not only have i been present when john edwards has called himself a dlc'er, but i mentioned it when we spoke for his purposes.  maybe he doesn't know about his own record -- and perhaps you know it better -- but he certainly didn't deny it when we talked.  it's not a big secret that his thinking has changed over time (at least, i didn't think it was)...


peace. love. equality. still waiting after 40 years...
by bored now on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:37:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: it's ok to like edwards... (3.00 / 0)

The people I know that work in poverty and community issues rather like Edward's proposed policies and think that he's the only one really speaking on those issues at all. As to the dlc bit, Edwards never had anything to do with them no matter how badly they wanted to have him he didn't want them.


by Quinton on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:06:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (3.00 / 2)

This is an awesome diary and thanks for posting it. While they generally want the same things, I think the plans show that Obama favors taking baby steps in solving problems, while Edwards wants to tackle big problems with big solutions. He has decided to challenge the American people to solve these problems.

Obama wants to spread hope without asking anyone for any sacrifices. While this is the safer path, it doesn't allow for really solving problems. I think you show here why Edwards represents the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party and Obama doesn't. I look foward to reading you studies on the other issues.


by RDemocrat on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 10:55:21 AM EST

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (3.00 / 1)

Let me correct this for you

"I think you show here why Edwards represents the Democratic wing blogosphere of the Democratic Party and Obama doesn't."
by soros on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 12:20:58 PM EST

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (3.00 / 1)

Sorry, but if you think only the blogosphere wants this:

"Edwards gives you: improved public schools, a year free college, lowered tuition, raises for teachers like Obama in lower income areas BUT if a teacher commits to working in a lower income area they will get a scholarship for college, work to strenthen curriculum, get rid of bank subsidies for loan AND put more guidance counselors in schools to help kids and famililes take the right classes and get the right financing."

Your wrong.


by jsamuel on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 12:30:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (none / 0)

I'm sure the average person would like all of those things but the average person is not viewing Edwards through the same set of optics as the bloggers are.
by soros on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 01:05:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (3.00 / 1)

i have no idea what you mean- explain.


by bruh21 on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:58:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (none / 0)

What does it mean to "end poverty"?

Are you talking about some arbitrary "poverty" line defined as income? That's the only way you could "end poverty". Otherwise, somebody is always going to be in the lowest income 15% of the population. In a real sense, "ending poverty" is just a slogan.


by hwc on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:20:47 PM EST

Which is a great way (3.00 / 0)

for you to ignore the poor.  1 of 8 in the country don't need to ask "what is poverty?"  They live it.


by littafi on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 02:23:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (none / 0)

Although no one likes the formula used to calculate the poverty line, it at least has the benefit of giving a standard reference for discussing the issue, for comparing how we are doing this year versus last year, and so on.

So, yes, I would think the best definition we currently have of "ending poverty" would be seeing the poverty rate (i.e., the percent of population living below the Census Bureau's poverty line) approach zero.


Keep it short. DemocraticShortList.com
by Rob in Vermont on Mon Jul 09, 2007 at 05:19:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Compare and Contrast: Edwards v Obama Plans (none / 0)

Re plans to end poverty, it is always important to remember that money trickles UP, not down.  Money put in at the bottom is SPENT!  That means there is a profit to be made.  Entrepreneurs will find money to invest in order to make this profit, that will provide jobs and prosperity.  Money put in at the top will not be invested and  make new jobs unless there is a market. The market only exists where there is money to be spent.  It seems to me that Edwards is planning to put more money in at the bottom than Obama.


by ericdoc on Tue Jul 10, 2007 at 12:37:56 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.