How Bernie Sanders can hammer Hillary Clinton on the Democrats' top issue

[Omaha Steve]

AP Photo/Andy Duback, File

http://theweek.com/articles/566910/how-bernie-sanders-hammer-hillary-clinton-democrats-issue

July 17, 2015

By Ryan Cooper

Over the past year or so, the Democratic Party has begun settling on a big new policy goal: beefing up family support programs. Now that ObamaCare has started the work of making health care available for all, support for children and parents is the major remaining hole in the U.S. safety net.

Though she has not yet released a formal proposal, Hillary Clinton has made family policy a centerpiece of her campaign, consistently positioning herself as a pro-family candidate. She focused sharply on the subject during her recent policy address, touting the benefits of sick leave and maternity leave, and the economic benefits of women in the workforce.

Bernie Sanders, her strongest challenger in the Democratic primary, can do her one better, however. In keeping with his blunt, forthright campaign, he can challenge Clinton where her orthodoxy makes her policy weaker — in particular, her mindless valorization of work.

As I said, we don't know exactly what Clinton will advocate yet, but it's likely that her campaign will roughly follow the proposals coming out of the Center for American Progress (closely tied to both Clinton and the Democratic Party). In a recent paper, CAP analysts Heather Boushey and Alexandra Mitukiewicz outlined a maternity leave policy taken from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand's FAMILY Act. It would create a new branch of the Social Security Administration and a small payroll tax increase to provide up to 60 days of paid family leave for parents.

FULL story at link.

NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT
Ryan Cooper is a national correspondent at TheWeek.com. His work has appeared in the Washington Monthly, The New Republic, and the Washington Post.

[Thinkingabout]

1. Hillary is strong enough to take the hammer. She has a record of advocating for women and children

issues.

[HooptieWagon]

18. Only when she's not voting to drop cluster bombs on them.

And of course, the Iraqi women and children aren't as well off as before Hillary voted to go to war.

[JaneyVee]

2. That was a good read, the only thing...

Running a campaign on "working less" is a tricky line to walk. People hear "work less" and they think "welfare state", or poverty, or less $$$. The thing is, Americans like to work. They want more money. Even with higher wages Americans for the most part would want to work even more hours. Of course there is a limit to everything, but fir the most part, Americans want maximum work, maximum pay, and maximum pleasure. America, more than anywhere in the world is obsessed with materialism and luxury goods.

[OKNancy]

5. but don't you think most people work to just have a life without

too much worry? In other words... nothing fancy, just pay the bills, raise the family, enough to eat.

Although I admit I love a luxury soy candle now and then.

[JaneyVee]

9. Oh definitely. Most people want to make...

Enough money to not have money worries. Most aren't angry that they aren't wealthy or at the wealthy, they want to be able to make ends meet, enjoy a life with their family, and give their children a good life. What I meant was, people like to work for it and will if given the opportunity.

[Aerows]

7. Unless you are one of those "weird" Americans

that takes pride in making things.

And if I worked more hours, eating and sleeping would be out of the question. Heaven knows I don't get enough of either as it stands, but yes, please lecture me on how much more I need to be on the clock. Because that is what I need some more of.

Where do you come up with this kind of stuff? My God. You are the only American I've spoken to recently that needs more responsibility, MORE hours, and oh, are you going to suggest we all would be happy to work for less pay?

Yeah. You should not have a second of free time unless breathing has become a health priority. Even then, only in short gasps.

[JaneyVee]

8. It's weird that you think I was talking about you personally.

And what part about 'maximum' pay made you think I meant less pay?? MAXIMUM means MORE. My god.

Newsflash: people like to work. People like to make money. And yes, people like leisure time. Like I stated up above. I have no idea how you managed to take it to that extreme but you managed to misinterpret my entire post.

better luck next time.

[marym625]

11. Maybe you are one of the lucky ones

But most Americans don't want to work like we have been. There's no time for a life outside of work. Hell, there is no life outside of work. You are constantly connected, basically working 24/7,; even on vacation

Anyone that works like the majority of Americans work now, would love to work fewer hours. Corporate America has scared employees into making the company their lives. It's killing us. I have watched many, many people age greatly in a short time because of the stress. I have watched spouses split up because at least one does nothing but work.

I don't owe my soul to the company store.

[JaneyVee]

13. They would love to work fewer hours for more money.

Not fewer hours for less money.

[marym625]

15. of course

But I was replying to what you said. And it's just not true.

Working less (fewer hours) is not seen as something bad when you're putting in a minimum of 60 hours a week with no overtime. Working less, even for the same money per hour would be a godsend to most Americans. But the corporations have zero loyalty and if you don't break your back, your health, your family for them, they'll find someone who will.

Working less, or more accurately said, working fewer hours, is a right wing talking point to shame people. Everyone should be able to make a living wage working 40 hours a week. But that is often not the case. And when you get into middle management, you are just as much an indentured servant as someone having to work 2 or 3 jobs. You want to keep yourjob, you receive no overtime, and the money is the same if you put in 10 hours or 80. But you put in fewer than 60 and you can kiss your job goodbye

Working fewer hours is a good thing and it's not an insult. To push that Americans don't like that is pushing a corporate tagline

[Admiral Loinpresser]

21. +1 n/t

[BlueJazz]

16. Some of the people in my other country have a name for Americans. I don't use it but I...

...understand what they're saying. They call us 'Ants" It's a sad word to me.

[marym625]

17. Very sad

And unfortunately, accurate

[GoneFishin]

19. It's part of the plan to make the uppity middle class, with time to be politically engaged, a thing

the past. It's a deliberate conservative effort to keep average Americans too starved for time, money, and energy to be politically engaged. A lot of the progressive social advancements took place in the 60s and 70s when families could survive happily on a single income, pay for college and a yearly vacation.

But when peoples' base needs are met they become ambitious, and want a say in how their tax money is spent overseas on wars, etc..

Can't have that.

[99th_Monkey]

3. The Bern is well under way !! Woot!! nt

[OKNancy]

4. "valorization of work"

Yes, it's bad to work.. no good, no valor in work.

What a stupid article.

[JaneyVee]

10. That was my point above. Thanks.

[NorthCarolina]

6. He can hammer her

on virtually every domestic issue and all he needs to do is keep telling the truth.

[SoapBox]

12. ^This!^

[marym625]

14. K&R!

[MisterP]

20. there's no more holes in our healthcare?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

22. KnR! n/t

[Purveyor]

23. K&R Thanks for posting. eom