What did Edwards do/say about poverty when he was a Senator?

[MethuenProgressive]

Honest question. No flames, please.

[Pastiche423]

1. NOTHING

He din't think about it until he thought it might help HIM in the presidential race.

[The Backlash Cometh]

87. This is a dishonest answer, or an uninformed one.

Nobody, including Jon Stewart, felt that helping the poor was going to be a winning campaign issue. Quite honestly, I didn't either. Though it is important to me that I have a president who includes it on his plate, I certainly didn't think that it would work because it's the exact opposite of what the Republicans have been pushing the last ten years. Or to say, it's the complete opposite of Grover Norquists desire to end all social programs.

It wasn't until Michael Moore came up with that brilliant connection that good Christians would be reaching out and helping those who are too poor to get insurance for themselves, that it suddenly caught fire.

And Edwards said it first. Whether you like him or not, you have to give him that.

[Pastiche423]

91. The question the OP asked

was, what did johnnyboy do while in the senate that pertained to poverty.

My answer was correct. He was my senator. I paid attention to him and his votes during his only term in the senate.

What did I miss?

Watch what they do, not what they say.

[The Backlash Cometh]

95. I was responding to the comment you made:

"He din't think about it until he thought it might help HIM in the presidential race"

The point is, that Edwards must have been following his heart to take a risk with the poverty issue. It's not an issue that generally wins a lot of votes.

[Pastiche423]

97. Must have been does not equal DOING

[The Backlash Cometh]

101. You are right that he did nothing WHILE IN THE SENATE.

But you can't jump from there and say he made it part of his presidential campaign BECAUSE IT MIGHT HELP HIM in his presidential run for office!

That's absurd. Give the man credit. That was a major risk.

[Pastiche423]

102. Give him credit for what?

He did NOTHING while in the senate irt to poverty.

[The Backlash Cometh]

103. Fine. He did nothing. But that doesn't support an opinion that he then

ran a presidential campaign based on the issue because he thought it might help his run for office. That's ignoring how incredibly successful the Republicans have been on pushing a Grover Norquist, "eat the poor" agenda. Edwards should be given credit for going against the grain.

I don't disagree that you have a right to be sore about him because he didn't perform as you would have liked as a Senator, however, the man is young and he's showing signs of broadening his views and interests. I have no problem with that.

[Pastiche423]

104. What does what you say have to do w/the OP's question?

HE DID NOTHING ABOUT POVERTY THE ENTIRE TIME HE WAS IN THE SENATE!

[The Backlash Cometh]

107. Well, then maybe you should have stuck to that instead of going on

a leap and claiming that he added it to his agenda aftereward because he thought it might help his run for the presidency.

Can you understand that the basis of our disagreement is not on the OPs question and the answer we both agree on, but the liberties you took to explain why Edwards added the poverty issue to his agenda afterwards?

[Pastiche423]

108. Liberties?

:rofl:

I gave my opinion. I have known this opportunist for a very long time. He never cared about poverty until he decided to run again.

Do you honestly believe he just woke up one morning at age 52 and decided, POVERTY! That's my life's calling?

For cripe's sake, have you not read this thread where no one can come up w/anything he did in the senate in regards to poverty? Do you also believe he went to work for a hedge fund to learn about poverty?

How friggen naive can one be?

[The Backlash Cometh]

110. We'll agree to disagree.

As you said, yours was just an opinion, and so was mine. I always understood that the Edwards were committed to advancing Education opportunities to all concerned, so this is just a natural outcrop of that, as far as I'm concerned.

[LaPera]

105. Hmmm, Hillary/Obama supporter? Exactly what has your candidate done?

[Pastiche423]

106. Hmmm, no

But what does that have to do w/the OP's question?

[wundermaus]

2. FYI - links of information

Website on Candidate's background -
http://ontheissues.org/John_Edwards.htm

wiki on Edwards -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards

and as presidential candidate -
http://johnedwards.com/issues/poverty/

[maximusveritas]

3. I was wondering about this as well

I'm not aware of him doing/saying anything about this issue until deciding to run for President.

[1932]

4. His Senate record:

Voted NO on criminal penalty for harming unborn fetus during other crime. (Mar 2004)
Voted NO on maintaining ban on Military Base Abortions. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on banning partial birth abortions. (Oct 1999)
Rated 100% by NARAL, indicating a pro-choice voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted NO on prioritizing national debt reduction below tax cuts. (Apr 2000)
Voted YES on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)
Voted YES on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)
Voted YES to Increase subsidies for women-owned non-profit business. (Mar 2004)
Rated 15% by the US COC, indicating an anti-business voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on $1.15 billion per year to continue the COPS program. (May 1999)
Voted NO on increasing penalties for drug offenses. (Nov 1999)
Rated B- by VOTE-HEMP, indicating a pro-hemp voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on funding smaller classes instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted YES on funding student testing instead of private tutors. (May 2001)
Voted YES on spending $448B of tax cut on education & debt reduction. (Apr 2001)
Rated 83% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on removing consideration of drilling ANWR from budget bill. (Mar 2003)
Voted NO on drilling ANWR on national security grounds. (Apr 2002)
Voted NO on terminating CAFE standards within 15 months. (Mar 2002)
Voted NO on preserving budget for ANWR oil drilling. (Apr 2000)
Voted NO on confirming Gale Norton as Secretary of Interior. (Jan 2001)
Rated 0% by the Christian Coalition: an anti-family voting record.
Voted NO on cap foreign aid at only $12.7 billion. (Oct 1999)
Voted NO on establishing free trade between US & Singapore. (Jul 2003)
Voted NO on establishing free trade between the US and Chile. (Jul 2003)
Voted YES on granting normal trade relations status to Vietnam. (Oct 2001)
Voted YES on removing common goods from national security export rules. (Sep 2001)
Voted NO on expanding fee trade to the third world. (May 2000)
Rated 17% by CATO, indicating a pro-fair trade voting record. (Dec 2002) THIS WAS LOWEST CATO RATING FOR ANYONE RUNNING IN '04
Voted YES on banning "soft money" contributions and restricting issue ads. (Mar 2002)
Voted NO on require photo ID (not just signature) for voter registration. (Feb 2002)
Voted YES on funding for National Endowment for the Arts. (Aug 1999)
Voted YES on background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted NO on more penalties for gun & drug violations. (May 1999)
Voted NO on loosening license & background checks at gun shows. (May 1999)
Voted YES to require health insurance for every child. (Aug 2003)
Voted NO on $40 billion per year for limited Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Jun 2003)
Voted YES on allowing reimportation of Rx drugs from Canada. (Jul 2002)
Voted YES on allowing patients to sue HMOs & collect punitive damages. (Jun 2001)
Voted NO on funding GOP version of Medicare prescription drug benefit. (Apr 2001)
Voted YES on including prescription drugs under Medicare. (Jun 2000)
Voted NO on limiting self-employment health deduction. (Jul 1999)
Voted YES to let states make bulk Rx purchases, and other innovations. (May 2003)
Rated 100% by APHA, indicating a pro-public health record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES to end government propaganda on Medicare bill. (Mar 2004)
Voted YES on adopting the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. (Oct 1999)
Voted YES on military pay raise of 4.8%. (Feb 1999)
Voted YES to federalize aviation security. (Nov 2001)
Voted YES to hiding sources made post-9-11 analysis impossible. (Jul 2004)
Voted YES to CIA depends too heavily on defectors & not enough on HUMINT. (Jul 2004)
Voted YES to administration did not pressure CIA on WMD conclusions. (Jul 2004)
Voted NO on repealing Clinton's ergonomic rules on repetitive stress. (Mar 2001)
Voted NO on killing an increase in the minimum wage. (Nov 1999)
Rated 100% by the AFL-CIO, indicating a pro-union voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted NO on using the Social Security Surplus to fund tax reductions. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on Social Security Lockbox & limiting national debt. (Apr 1999)
Rated 100% by the ARA, indicating a pro-senior voting record. (Dec 2003)
Voted YES on More tax cuts and tax credits for 98% of Americans. (Jul 2004)
Voted NO on $350 billion in tax breaks over 11 years. (May 2003)
Voted YES on increasing tax deductions for college tuition. (May 2001)
Voted NO on phasing out the estate tax ("death tax"). (Jul 2000)
Voted NO on across-the-board spending cut. (Oct 1999)
Rated 22% by NTU, indicating a "Big Spender" on tax votes. (Dec 2003)

[bling bling]

6. Hmmmmm...your list seems to be *missing* some VERY relevant votes...

Where's the part on your list where he voted YES to free trade with China?
Where's the part on your list where he voted YES on the 2001 bankruptcy bill?
Where's the part on your list where he voted against the 2002 amendment for voting rights to be reinstated to convicted criminals?


Why would you leave those off the list?? How many others were omitted? Please respond.

[maximusveritas]

7. Edwards now says he was wrong on the bankruptcy bill

"Like a lot of Democrats, I voted for a bankruptcy reform bill before. I can't say it more simply than this: I was wrong. "
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/bankruptcy/archives/2005/04/index.php#005440

He's changed quite a bit from his time in the Senate. It really comes down to whether you trust him or not. If you do, you just think he's had an honest conversion on these issues. If you don't, you think he's just saying whatever it takes to win the primary election.

[Milo_Bloom]

9. How can he be trusted?

He was WRONG on Iraq

WRONG on Bankrupcy.

WRONG on Free Trade with China.

Didn't he just hit his 3rd strike?

Now his tax plan is a travesty that does little but help corporations by maintaining status quo.

How many times does he get to say "I was wrong" before people realize his is insincere?

[1932]

16. Look at that long list of everything he was right about.

That's why you can trust him.

[Milo_Bloom]

50. Sorry, but no.

I don't give people special rewards for doing that which they should be doing. (Do you expect a cookie every time you stop at a red light???)

If someone can be SO WRONG, SO MANY TIMES, there is something fundamentally wrong with their reasoning and they cannot be trusted to make sound decisions.

[1932]

79. So wrong, so many times?

In six years, three votes are all that anyone ever criticizes him for, and there were a lot of Democrats keeping him company in those three votes, and a lot of them were not even southern Democrats trying to keep their red states blue.

Bernie Sanders is not going to win a national election for president. John Edwards will, and there is every indiciation that he is going to right what is wrong with American, which is this outrageous, destabilizing, immoral polarization of wealth that is threatening to sink the American ship, and that is despite those three votes.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

81. Great points 1932! nt

[Milo_Bloom]

98. Yes, so many times.

I didn't mention his support of the Patriot Act or his recent rhetoric on Iran, "Let me be clear: Under no circumstances can Iran be allowed to have nuclear weapons. For years, the US hasn't done enough to deal with what I have seen as a threat from Iran.....To ensure that Iran never gets nuclear weapons, we need to keep ALL options on the table. Let me reiterate -- ALL options must remain on the table...."

John Edwards has a history of getting on the wrong side of the big issues and then apologizing once public opinion turns.

Further, we can see from his tax plan, that even when he adopts something as a pet issue, his solution do nothing to solve the actual problem.

His record, his rhetoric and now his plan prove him to be a cheap charlatan and little more.

[1932]

111. If that's your argument, then I'm not worried about Edwards.

That's a lot of spin, with no substance.

[Milo_Bloom]

112. Edwards tax plan is the thing with no substance.

I, on the other hand offered cold hard facts, and his own voting record and his own words.

The man, clearly, cannot be trusted to come through on promises and lacks the judgement to be in charge.

Of the candidates, he is probably the most dangerous, as he is the most willing to sell out his principles and later cry crocodile tears as he apologizes for lacking judgment.

[1932]

113. All that is is spin.

[Alexander]

93. The list full of omissions and votes left out of it?

No thanks.

[bling bling]

10. But it's dishonest to omit it from the list claiming to be his voting record.

There wasn't a statement before the list qualifying it, such as: "here's Edwards voting record minus the stuff that contradicts his current rhetoric."

It's disingenuous to present it as a full list when it's not. Especially when that particular vote that was omitted is relevant to the question in the OP.

[1932]

15. You expected a list of every vote? I was answering the question, what has he done for poor

and I thought this answered the question.

[bling bling]

19. You included "Voted YES to federalize aviation security" but didn't include the bankruptcy vote?

Oh well. It's ok. You were just trying to be helpful. I am too.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

21. Which interests were helped the most by the bankruptcy bill?

[bling bling]

28. Well, it forced more people in debt to file under stricter Chapter 13 laws,

I don't think it was in the interests of the people who were in debt.

If Edwards was truly a populist candidate he'd have been on the same side of the aisle as Paul Wellstone when it came to that vote. But he's not. And that's the whole point. The whole point is that what he says does not match his actions.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

29. Can you answer the question? I know about the bill and opposed it

==Which interests were helped the most by the bankruptcy bill?==

[bling bling]

37. You know what Mario. I've spent the last 2 hours researching and providing links.

If you want your question answered, answer it yourself. But defend him using relevant facts and links.......or don't. Your easy, cheap, and squirmy way of defending him with distraction techniques and one-liners accompanied by smilies rolling their eyes isn't enough for me. If you have nothing more to offer than that then thanks, but no thanks.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

38. You know the truth is the same interests who pushed that bill are now heavily supporting Obama

(and not Edwards) That is why you want to avoid that question. If Edwards is a corporate whore what does that make Obama? He is on par with HRC of all people in corporate support...

[bling bling]

40. Oh brother. Whatever, DMC. n/t

[draft_mario_cuomo]

41. So you are going to pretend the same corporate interests are not heavily supporting Obama?

If you are truly concerned about the issue you would care about who the people that brought us that bill are supporting... Instead this is another instance of faux outrage from Team Obama, who love to attack the records of Edwards and Clinton while hiding behind the fact their candidate has a very brief record.

This is a "when did Edwards stop beating his wife?" thread aimed to make him look like a hypocrite. If you are willing to do that you should be prepared to defend your candidate's record. Saint Obama can easily be made to look like a hypocrite as well...

[bling bling]

43. My candidate sponsored more bills in 2 years than yours did in a full term.

So Edwards record in terms of taking action and leadership is more brief. But that's not the point. Remember the OP. For once can you stick to the topic of an OP?

I am asking you an honest question now: Please list out for me what Edwards did as a Senator that shows action to back up his claim that "poverty is the cause of my life." If you can provide me with a reasonably impressive list of actions I'll retract my statements that Edwards actions haven't matched the hype about him when it comes to poverty.

There's nothing in it for me to be against Edwards. I don't even have any personal pride invested in this topic. So, (unlike you), if you do the research and provide me with the information I've requested (from verifiable sources) I will actually take it into consideration and use that information to influence my opinion.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

44. List?

You speak of Edwards' actions not living up to the hype. The same thing can be said about your candidate, particularly regarding Iraq (which he did not even speak about in the senate during his first 11 months. So much for the "anti-war crusader" myth...), where the hype is the greatest. He is also marketed as an agent of change. That can also be disputed.

I've followed the money. The people who best know who is going to serve their interests and maintain the status quo have rendered their verdict via their pocketbooks.

You aren't interested in evidence. 1932 has presented some and you have ignored it. He has also asked questions asking about Obama's record on the same issues. For some reason you have been quiet on that...

[bling bling]

46. I'm not interested in evidence?

Oh, ok. Well then, how about this: For the sake of lurkers here who are genuinely and truly interested in evidence that shows how Edwards actions as a Senator match his current rhetoric on poverty, would you please provide a list. You certainly spend enough time on these boards. Why not just spend the time to put together a list that answers the OP.

Reminder: The OP asked about Edwards words and actions relating to poverty as a Senator. A CATO percentage rating isn't acceptable. Please be more specific.

[1932]

63. Why isn't a 17% CATO rating on free trade (lower than Kucinich and Gephardt) not relevant?

Why are you entitled to discount any fact that disproves your argument?

And if you won't count that, then what about the 100% AFL-CIO rating?

[bling bling]

66. Because he voted YES FOR FREE TRADE WITH CHINA.

If free-trade is such an indicator of his stance on poverty, then that vote seems to be a contradiction. A MAJOR contradiction. I don't see how you can cherry pick 2 of his NO votes for free trade with 2 countries as PROOF that he's a leader on poverty, but his other vote of YES on free trade with China doesn't have any reflection at all in terms of his stance on poverty.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

67. Who was president at the time that bill was passed? What was the vote? nt

[1932]

68. China cheats less as a member of WTO then outside WTO, which is why so many Dems voted for that one.

And that's why, even with the yes vote on China, CATO believes Edwards is more anti-free trade then Kucinich and Gephardt.

[bling bling]

70. I'll take your word for it because I'm too tired to check your facts.

Good response on that question. Thanks.

[1932]

24. What's Obama's CATO rating?

I like Obama, so I expect it to be low. I wonder if it's as low as Edwards's.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

30. His Wall Street rating is #1 and his corporate America rating is on par with HRC

I don't know his CATO rating but corporate America sure likes him and his platform...

[Ethelk2044]

51. This is a lie. He is not for corporations

Receipts: $58,912,520
Total Spent: $22,648,832
Cash on Hand: $36,263,688
Debts: $922,848
Date of last report: July 15, 2007
Totals may include compliance fund receipts


Source of Funds:
(How to read this chart / methodology)

Individual contributions
$58,605,160
99%

PAC contributions
$4,975
0%

Candidate self-financing
$0
0%

Federal Funds
$0
0%

Other
$302,385
1%

[draft_mario_cuomo]

52. Nice DLC spin. No corporation can directly donate to a candidate

They can "encourage" their employees to support a candidate. The CEO can get his/her buddies in the executive leadership to "bundle" money for a candidate. So in the figures you show they are going to be counted as "individual" contributions. As of the first two quarters Obama had 260 "bundlers" who funneled at least $50,000 each.

[LBJDemocrat]

99. LOL!

Well said.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

42. No answer from Team Obama? nt

[TeamJordan23]

84. last time I checked, this thread was about Edwards, not Obama. nm

[harun]

92. How did the dem's "get it wrong" on that one?

Meaning, what did they say to justify voting for that garbage when they did vote for it?

[1932]

14. That's a pretty loonnnggg list though, you have to admit. The low CATO rating is the highlight.

Did you know that it was lower than Gephardts and Kucinichs, the China trade vote notwhithstanding.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

45. Why no response from "bling bling" regarding this important fact?

[bling bling]

49. What important fact??? What did any of those have to do with poverty?

Neither you, nor your partner in cheer-leading have adequately answered the OP. What did Edwards do as a Senator for poverty? You appear to be an awfully big fan, maybe you should compile a list in Word that you can easily cut and paste when this question is addressed. It's a relevant question. If there is a relevant answer, it's in Edwards best interest for you to answer this question when it comes up. It will only help him.

[1932]

62. 100% AFL-CIO rating and the most anti-free trade Dem running in '04 (and probably '08)

If you don't know what that has to do with being against poverty, I cannot help you.

[bling bling]

64. Please explain what Edwards did as a Senator. Just like the OP asked.

100% AFL-CIO rating doesn't tell me anything. What is their rating based on? How did they score it. Please be more specific. Comparing his anti-free-trade-ness to the other '04 candidates also does not help me understand what he did as a Senator for poverty. He voted YES for free trade with China. That seems to fly in the face of your anti-free-trade argument. If free-trade is such an important indicator, then why wouldn't his vote on free trade with China be a HUGE factor AGAINST him. Why didn't you include this vote before in your list, but you did include the others where he voted against free trade? Please explain.

[1932]

65. Apparently he voted with AFL-CIO on every bill that mattered to them over 6 yrs

And apparently he voted in a way the CATO institute didn't like on free trade more often than any Democratic presidential candidate in '04, including Kucinich and Gephardt.

Sorry you don't like it, but that's how they do this thing.

Feel free to google if you want to know exactly which votes they were counting. I assume they don't invent those numbers.

[bling bling]

69. It's not that I don't like it.

I was just hoping for more than that as an answer to the OP. That's fine though. His 100% ratings from the AFL-CIO aren't nothing. They're something.

[1932]

72. Thank you for acknowleding that those ratings are something.

It's annoying to respond to the OP with a long list of relevant information and to be told that it doesn't mean anything, as if some people are only here to criticize and will listen to absolutely no evidence that challenges there pre-judgments.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

96. Thanks for posting that...

The broad picture is the Edwards was a junior Senator in the minority party. His ability to do something about anything would have been pretty much limited to casting votes.

[bling bling]

5. Not much. Please don't take people's words for it. Check it out. Here's a link:

John Edwards didn't do much of anything for poverty when he was a Senator, considering he's called it the issue of his life. In fact, his voting record was much more conservative until right before he ran for President in 2003.

John Edwards:
1999: 31st most liberal senator
2000: 19th most liberal senator
2001: 35th most liberal senator
2002: 40th most liberal senator
2003: 4th most liberal senator

http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh072904.shtml

I've asked for supporters here to prove why Edwards is the populist candidate and so far all I've got in response is a bunch of quotes (words, rhetoric) and actual deeds that only go back a couple of years.

I personally went and looked at John Edwards voting record and wasn't impressed. Like everything with him, the hype just doesn't match the record. The best website for viewing voting records is here. I'm linking directly to John Edwards record for you:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/e000286/

[dsc]

47. While I will say Edwards became more liberal over time

the explanation for the discrpency isn't what you are implying.

Our advice? If Goldberg is so impressed by the Journal, maybe he ought to try reading it. On July 10, the Journal’s Richard E. Cohen (not the Post columnist) tried to explain the pleasing facts which so many scribes have been peddling. Are Kerry and Edwards really first and fourth most liberal? That rating is based on calendar year 2003, when both senators—campaigning for the White House—missed large numbers of the 62 votes the Journal used for its tabulations. (Kerry missed 37 of the 62 votes; Edwards missed 22.) Writing in the rag Goldberg loves, Cohen laid out the big picture:
COHEN: The bigger picture presents a more nuanced view of the two senators on the Democratic presidential ticket. Since joining the Senate in 1985, Kerry has compiled a “lifetime average” composite liberal score of 85.7 in NJ's vote ratings. Ten other current senators have a lifetime composite liberal score that is higher than Kerry’S. (See NJ, 3/6/04, p. 679.) Meanwhile, Edwards, who first joined the Senate in 1999, has a lifetime composite liberal score of 75.7, a number that puts him in the moderate wing of his party.


Both he and Kerry missed several votes and that was why they ranked so high.

[bling bling]

53. Thank you for clarifying that. I appreciate your non-combative approach, also. n/t

[dsc]

54. No problem

I think in all fairness he has cared about poverty for several years. I think he became more liberal on social issues over time.

[tritsofme]

76. Over time, or

Over time when he no longer had to compete in North Carolina and social conservatism was no longer advantageous to him?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

82. Judgment call. I think over time. Why? He was new to politics in 1998

Remember, this is a guy who would not even vote regularly before he entered politics. Is it really that surprising if a newcomer to politics shifted a little to the left when he learned more about the issues, when he saw the impact particular policies were having on people as he criss-crossed the nation campaigning? It isn't as if he was in politics for 20-25 years and then suddenly became more progressive, like many other politicians have done.

[dsc]

90. A fair question

and because I don't know the answer I am not supporting Edwards as of yet.

[karynnj]

57. Very nice explanation

[Jack Bone]

8. It took some time...but check the link vmaus gave..

"on the issues"

it showed me, that even though Sen. Edwards might not've been very vocal about poverty before his candidacy for President. His votes, look as if he's been fighting this fight prior to his 2004 bid.

here's some of them

Voted NO on using the Social Security Surplus to fund tax reductions. (Jul 1999)
Voted NO on killing an increase in the minimum wage. (Nov 1999)
Protect overtime pay protections. (Jun 2003)
Voted NO on phasing out the estate tax ("death tax"). (Jul 2000)
Voted YES on reducing marriage penalty instead of cutting top tax rates. (May 2001)
Voted YES on increasing tax deductions for college tuition. (May 2001)


of course, what I think of as a pretty good record, you might disagree w/.

[bling bling]

11. I'm sorry. But it's not the record of someone who says poverty is the cause of their life.

It's the LEAST we can expect from any Democratic Senator to vote as he did on the list you provided.

And none of those really have much to do with poverty. When's the last time a person who went to bed hungry thought to themselves "if that marriage penalty could just be reduced, I could feed my children."

Sorry to be sarcastic. It's not meant to be personal against you.

What he should have done is sponsor bills. That would have been actions that match his rhetoric. What are issues that disproportionately affect people in poverty? Finding jobs, decreasing drop-out rates, literacy, crime, drugs, healthcare. Things of that nature. If he'd have sponsored bills like that I would take his current rhetoric more seriously.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

12. You mean like sponsoring a bill on affordable housing...

:eyes:

[bling bling]

13. No. I don't mean like sponsoring 1 bill related to low income housing in 6 years.

That's not at all good enough if you want me to believe the hype....

********

Edwards, a Democrat, was a Senator from North Carolina from 1999 to 2004.
Edwards sponsored 81 bills since Jan 19, 1999, of which 74 (91%) haven't made it out of committee and 0 were successfully enacted.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/presidential.xpd


And,

Here's a site listing 69 of the bills he sponsored. As you can see, it's not exactly a record of someone who can seriously expect people to believe that poverty is "the cause of his life." He has to rely on his loyal supporters to distract distract distract because nobody who takes a seriously objective look at his record could defend that his actions match his rhetoric.

http://www.congress.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/?&Db=d106&querybd=@FIELD(FLD003+@4((@1(Sen+Edwards++John))+01573))

edit: removed sentence related to attendance record.

[1932]

17. Are you going to provide context for the attendance record?

How many of those missed votes happened after Kerry picked him as VP? What was his attendance comparied to other people running in '04. What was his attendance before '03?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

18. It is ironic after Obama just missed a vote on implementing the 9-11 commission recommendations nt

[1932]

22. Between you and me...

Edwards and Kucinich had the two highest attendance records for congressional votes for most of the '04 campaign, which is remarkable, since Edwards was actually campaigning to win the thing and he was still putting voting first. They were in low 90s high 80s, IIRC. (Gephardt, who is an OK guy, had the lowest, IIRC, and it was something like 17%, and the average was around 50%, I think.)

So, I really doubt Edwards's attendance record is anywere but near the top for all senators, regardless of whether they were running for president.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

32. Thanks for the info. I did not know that nt

[karynnj]

59. The bill was NOT in jeopardy

it had over 80 votes!

Just like Edwards (and Kerry), the leadership will let Clinton, obama, Dodd, and Biden know when their votes will make the difference. Here - it didn't. In 2003 and 2004, Kerry had Daschle enter which way he would have voted - which did put him on record. (Also, Kerry missed many votes in 2003, not for campaigning, but because he had surgery for cancer - he joked about the experience of watching CSPAN under pain medication.)

[bling bling]

23. I just copied and pasted the whole blip about Edwards (all three sentences).

The attendance record is irrelevant to this discussion. The sponsorship part was what was relevant. I removed the sentence related to his attendance record in the other post.

[1932]

26. So you get a pass for your post, but you're bitching about me cutting and pasting a list that

included a vote on federalizing aviation security?

But why is it unimportant to you now? Because it actually is a good voting record? Did you look up Obama's and see that it was lower?

If Edwards's legislation didn't make it through a Republican (or DLC) controlled Senate and Executive, that's Edwards's fault?

Why don't you provide a list of the legislation he sponsored -- all 81 bills -- and we'll take them one by one to see what this guy is made of.

I'd like to see what the low CATO rating and the high rating by liberal organizations is based on.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

33. Yes, where is Obama's record?

We hear of what he did in the state legislature but for some odd reason we never hear of what he did in the U.S. senate. I would be interested in seeing it. All I know of it is that he sponsored a bill going to bat for the coal industry...

[bling bling]

36. Yes. I would like to provide a list of the legislation he sponsored and you take them one by one.

That's a good idea. Since My other link didn't work I'm going to just have to cut and past the list but it only included 69. Please just start there. I can search later for the others.

On edit: I'll start the list it in a new post rather than a subthread to avoid confusion. See post #39

[karynnj]

58. The year used was 2003 - all of which was before Kerry picked him

[draft_mario_cuomo]

20. The link doesn't work and how about Obama's Senate record on Iraq?

BTW, where are you in this thread? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3412341

How about applying the same scrutiny to Obama regarding Iraq, which he is running on and allegedly has crusaded against? :)

[bling bling]

25. Distraction technique. How typical, Mario. How about let's talk about Edwards in this thread?

How about that?

And you're right the link doesn't work. It's too long. Maybe I'll just copy and paste the whole list....stand by.

[1932]

27. Yeah. Let's talk about his 100% rating by AFL-CIO, NARAL,APHA, and ARA and his

low ratings by CATO and COC.

Would you like to talk about that?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

35. Do we also need to see who corporate America is investing their money to?

The best indicator of who is pro-corporate is who corporate America wants in the White House...

[draft_mario_cuomo]

34. Sure, but how about you discussing Obama's record in that thread?

If Obama fans are going to attack Edwards' record they better be prepared to defend their guy's record...

[Jack Bone]

31. I simply replied to the OP's ?...w/ the info given in another reply

Critique me all you want...I was simply trying to help..God forbid that...

I even clarified things by saying something or other at the bottom of my post...

Electioneer all you wish, but look @ the calander...what does it say?

The elections are in November '08!!

I'm gonna put my lil' tin-foil hat on for ya here...:tinfoilhat:

The only reason the M$M is shoving this election down our throats is that they don't want us to focus on how much *'s is screwing us!! it's a friggin' carrot in front of an ol' borrowed mule!!

check it out..if you haven't already...DO SOMETHING!!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=401

[bling bling]

39. List of bills that Edwards co-sponsored:

(Moved here from post #36) in response to 1932's request:


Let's remember the point of the OP, and the point of my post regarding Edwards sponsoring legislation RELATING TO POVERTY.

****

1. S.RES.188 : A resolution expressing the sense of the Senate that additional assistance should be provided to the victims of Hurricane Floyd.

2. S.RES.268 : Designating July 22, 2000 as "National Fragile X Awareness Day".

3. S.754 : A bill to designate the Federal building located at 310 New Bern Avenue in Raleigh, North Carolina, as the "Terry Sanford

4. S.975 : A bill to amend chapter 30 of title 39, United States Code, to provide for a uniform notification system under which individuals may elect not to receive mailings relating to skill contests or sweepstakes, and for other purposes.

5. S.1018 : A bill to provide for the appointment of additional Federal district judges in the State of North Carolina, and for other purposes.

6. S.1131 : A bill to promote research into, and the development of an ultimate cure for, the disease known as Fragile X.

7. S.1424 : A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide the same tax treatment for special pay as for combat pay.

8. S.1610 : A bill to authorize additional emergency disaster relief for victims of Hurricane Dennis and Hurricane Floyd.

9. S.1850 : A bill to amend section 222 of the Communications Act of 1934 to modify the requirements relating to the use and disclosure of customer proprietary network information, and for other purposes.

10. S.2064 : A bill to amend the Missing Children's Assistance Act, to expand the purpose of the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children to cover individuals who are at least 18 but have not yet attained the age of 22.

11. S.2065 : A bill to authorize the Attorney General to provide grants for organizations to find missing adults.

12. S.2100 : A bill to provide for fire sprinkler systems in public and private college and university housing and dormitories, including fraternity and sorority housing and dormitories.

13. S.2185 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cibacron Red LS-B HC.

14. S.2186 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Solvent Violet 13.

15. S.2187 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cibacron Scarlet LS-26 HC.

16. S.2188 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 191.1.

17. S.2189 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 147.

18. S.2190 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Solvent Blue 67.

19. S.2191 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Yellow 199.

20. S.2192 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Cibacron Brilliant Blue FN-G.

21. S.2193 : A bill to suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Blue 60.

22. S.3180 : A bill to provide for the disclosure of the collection of information through computer software, and for other purposes.

23. S.3221 : A bill to provide grants to law enforcement agencies that ensure that law enforcement officers employed by such agencies are afforded due process when involved in a case that may lead to dismissal, demotion, suspension, or tranfer.

24. S.3228 : A bill to promote the development of affordable, quality rental housing in rural areas for low-income households.

25. S.AMDT.473 to S.1059 To express the sense of the Senate that members of the Armed Forces who receive special pay should receive the same tax treatment as members serving in combat zones.

26. S.AMDT.514 to S.1059 To express the sense of the Senate that members of the Armed Forces who receive special pay should receive the same tax treatement as members serving in combat zones.

27. S.AMDT.619 to S.96 To provide that a party to a Y2K action making a tort claim may only recover for economic losses to the extent allowed under applicable state or federal law in effect on January 1, 1999.

28. S.AMDT.620 to S.96 To provide that certain companies, selling non-Y2K-compliant products beginning in 1999, not be included under the protections as outlined in the substitute amendment.

29. S.AMDT.1229 to S.1283 To allow the District of Columbia Public Schools to consider funding of a program to discourage school violence.

30. S.AMDT.1519 to S.1233 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

31. S.AMDT.1556 to S.1233 To provide for an increase and a decrease in the amounts of certain appropriated funds.

32. S.AMDT.1592 to H.R.2466 To provide funds for the Forest Service to acquire lands at Lake Logan, NC.

33. S.AMDT.1890 to S.RES.188 To add the Governor of Delaware to the list of commended Governors.

34. S.AMDT.3052 to S.CON.RES.101 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

35. S.AMDT.3275 to S.2549 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

36. S.AMDT.3276 to S.2549 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

37. S.AMDT.3349 to H.R.4576 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

38. S.AMDT.3375 to S.2549 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

39. S.AMDT.3402 to S.2549 To express the sense of the Senate that members of the Armed Forces who receive special pay for duty subject to hostile fire or imminent danger should receive the same tax treatment as members serving in combat zones.

40. S.AMDT.3421 to S.2549 Expressing the sense of the Senate that long-term economic development aid should be immediately provided to assist communities rebuilding from Hurricane Floyd.

41. S.AMDT.3423 to S.2549 To authorize the Secretary of the Navy to convey, to the city of Jacksonville, North Carolina, certain land for the purpose of permitting the City to develop the parcel for initial use as a bike/green way trail.

42. S.AMDT.3556 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

43. S.AMDT.3557 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

44. S.AMDT.3570 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

45. S.AMDT.3571 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

46. S.AMDT.3572 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

47. S.AMDT.3573 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

48. S.AMDT.3574 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

49. S.AMDT.3575 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

50. S.AMDT.3576 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

51. S.AMDT.3577 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

52. S.AMDT.3578 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

53. S.AMDT.3579 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

54. S.AMDT.3580 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

55. S.AMDT.3581 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

56. S.AMDT.3582 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

57. S.AMDT.3586 to S.2522 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

58. S.AMDT.3589 to S.2522 To provide emergency funding to the Department of Commerce and the Department of Agriculture to assist communities affected by Hurricane Floyd, Hurricane Dennis, or Hurricane Irene.

59. S.AMDT.3613 to H.R.4577 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

60. S.AMDT.3779 to H.R.4578 To make funds available for the acquisition of lands on the Pisgah National Forest.

61. S.AMDT.3780 to H.R.4578 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

62. S.AMDT.3818 to S.RES.268 Designating July 22, 2000 as "National Fragile X Awareness Day".

63. S.AMDT.3819 to S.RES.268 To amend the preamble.

64. S.AMDT.3820 to S.RES.268 To amend the title.

65. S.AMDT.3901 to H.R.4578 To make funds available for law enforcement purposes on the Pisgah and Nantahala national forests.

66. S.AMDT.3902 to H.R.4578 To make funds available for "Surveys, Investigations, and Research" to remain available until expended, to repair or replace stream monitoring equipment and associated facilities damaged by natural disasters.

67. S.AMDT.3954 to H.R.4461 Purpose will be available when the amendment is proposed for consideration. See Congressional Record for text.

68. S.AMDT.3974 to H.R.4461 To provide emergency funding to the Department of Agriculture's Rural Community Facilities program.

69. S.AMDT.4300 to H.R.209 To establish a technology partnerships ombudsman.

[bling bling]

55. Oops...should say "Sponsored", (not co-sponsored). Too late to edit. n/t

[draft_mario_cuomo]

56. Where is the list for Obama? nt

[bling bling]

71. Hey 1932:

I'm still waiting for your input here as we discussed before. But I'm going to bed now. So if you post your analysis here tonight and I don't respond, that's why and I'll definitely have a look at it tomorrow.

[1932]

73. They look like good bills to me. What do you want me to comment on?

It looks like a good chunk of them will require another round of research to get the purpose.

Go for it.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

60. Apparently this is the new Team Obama talking point

I guess you got the Team Obama memo first... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=3413138&mesg_id=3413138

[ulysses]

61. but please don't flame him.

:eyes: Cut and paste from somewhere.

[DemBones DemBones]

74. Instead of whining about it, tell us what Edwards did.

I've been told he didn't do much, that he was absent so much due to campaigning for the presidency that he wouldn't have been re-elected to the Senate.

If that's not true, offer up some proof instead of saying over and over "This must be the new Obama talking point."

I support Kucinich, not Obama, but I'm interested in what Edwards did or didn't do in the Senate.

You, or some Edwards supporter, ought to answer the question instead of trying to pick a fight with anyone who asks it. That tactic makes it appear that you have no answer.

[1932]

75. I posted a long list of his senate votes above.

Did you know that he had a lower CATO rating on free trade than Kucinich in 2004?

[draft_mario_cuomo]

78. And you also debunked the "he was too busy campaigning to vote" meme

Some are not interested in answers. I have seen you admirably repeatedly present fact after fact whenever this charge is made. :yourock:

[DemBones DemBones]

88. Thanks. That is surprising. nt

[draft_mario_cuomo]

77. Reply

==he was absent so much due to campaigning for the presidency==

That myth was debunked in this thread.

==he wouldn't have been re-elected to the Senate.==

That has been debunked numerous times. He had an approval rating of 56%, for instance, in the summer of 2004.


==You, or some Edwards supporter, ought to answer the question instead of trying to pick a fight with anyone who asks it.==

The OP has been answered numerous times as well (and subsequently ignored by the anti-Edwards posters who routinely pose this question). The intent of the thread was not to get an answer to the question, though, but to smear Edwards as a hypocrite. Why do research for someone else if they are not interested in the results anyway?

It isn't whining but merely pointing out an apparent fact.

[DemBones DemBones]

89. When every Edwards thread has multiple

angry posts from you, it makes it hard to find the info, which I would like to have. If I were not interested in the results, I wouldn't have asked.

You still haven't provided specific answers or sources for the information. If you have them, why not share them?

[LSK]

80. Irrelevant

His Senate tenure was during a Republican House which controlled legislation.

I think the Senate was controlled by the Republicans too except for about 1 year.

Kinda hard to push your own legislation when your party does not control Congress.

[draft_mario_cuomo]

83. Yes, and the brief period of Dem senate control was when there was a popular Republican prez

* was in his honeymoon period during the first few months of Democratic control of the senate and then 9-11 occurred and *'s approval ratings sky-rocketed. It is hard to believe now but * was once a very popular president.

[TeamJordan23]

85. He could have made public speeches to increase awareness of the problem. nm

[LSK]

100. if a tree falls in the forest, does it fall?

How do you know he did not make speeches?

[MethuenProgressive]

86. Thanks for all the input, DUers. But...

...it's a real shame that the Edwards supporters put way more energy into attacking the question than honestly answering it, though.

[blindpig]

94. Doesn't matter

What's important is that he's airing issues that the rest are dancing around. Maybe he's not sincere, don't care. What's important is that he's broached the issue of class, the biggest elephant in the room. Who else is pointing at the elephant? I thank him for that.

[surfermaw]

109. He was busy getting Bill Clinton out of trouble

That is the honest truth. What about that speech,

[beaconess]

114. He almost singlehandedly kept several anti-civil rights, elitist judges off the bench

And took tremendous heat for it in North Carolina. He should get huge credit for that - but because much of that kind of work is done behind the scenes, we don't hear much about it.

FYI - he consistently received an A rating from the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights.