A legitimate question for Clinton Supporters Re: political ideology

[NightWatcher]

This is not an invitation to a flame war or a name colling Battle Royale. Can we save that for a different thread.

Are there any major differences in the political ideologies of Bill and Hillary Clinton? I sincerely would like to hear what they are.

This is not a Pro-Obama nor an Anti-Clinton thread.

My question surrounds the privatization of government agencies or departments. In 1996 the Bill Clinton Administration privatized the investigative arm of the US Office of Personnel Management (OPM) http://www.egovcompetition.com/executive.html . The Office of Federal Investigations (OFI) was tasked with conducting background checks and suitability investigations for people who possessed security clearances. In July 1996 USIS was created as a private company that was a contractor for the government that was responsible for security clearance investigations among other things. In 1999, the Carlyle Group purchased control of USIS. In late 2007 USIS was sold to Providence Equity Partners, (Providence is the world's leading private equity firm focused on media, entertainment, communications and information investments. http://www.provequity.com/about_us/index.asp?Section=1,0,0). I witnessed first hand as the quality and ethics of the investigations slouched and suffered- putting our security in danger.

My question is, will Hillary encourage or facilitate the sale of vital agencies to private corporations?

I am worried about this because of the talk of universal health care. Both Hillary and Obama say that they will give the US People health care that is "just like the plan available to Congress" or Medicare. Is there a chance that she might sign everyone up for Medicare (or Medicaid) and then privatize Medicare and sell it off to a corporation where the focus would change from providing health care to making money.

(edited for spelling)

[Deep13]

1. I have no idea what the answers to your very specific questions are.

I do know that whatever health-care reform is enacted will look very different from what the candidates are now proposing.

I am aware of only one major policy difference of opinion between Bill and Hillary. According to HC biographer Carl Bernstein, Hillary was very hostile to NAFTA and urged Bill to reject it.

[papau]

2. Hillary is on record as favoring single payer and anti-privatizing gov - your

Medicare crap shows a lack of knowledge of how Medicare is run now.

Insurance companies drop the insurance game and sell themselves as administrative services only companies - and do the heavy lifting for the Medicare administration - NOW.

Give it up.

Hillary will give us real change

Obama will give us vision, small steps as per his own words last spring, and voluntary provisions as in his nuke reporting emissions bill's no new penalties (which Hillary co-sponsored - giving neither her or Obama many points in the nuke regulatory game)

[NightWatcher]

3. "medicare crap"?? My question is Will Hillary privatize a government arm

[Gman]

4. I sure hope there are no differences

I want the Clinton administration back in the White House.

I would say there is absolutely no chance of HRC doing what you say about Medicare. And don't buy complete bullshit being put out by the Obama surrogates about HRC's health care plan. Obama is a Republic in disguise.

[elixir]

5. I've heard she doesn't support NAFTA, at least not as Bill presented it.

[Didereaux]

6. I think there exists quite a bit of difference...

First and foremost is that Clintons philosophy(and she has been very consistent in this throughout the years) is one based upon a pragmatic-socialism, i.e. that a government has a responsibility to care for its citizens, and social issues have equal weight with other issues. Obama has such a short public history, and little really exists in the record, but he seems to lack a singular philosophy save that of pragmatic immediacy. By that I mean you deal with issues as they arise, and you do so with the tools available, even if that compromises the more desirable solution.

Clinton has a rather long history of compromises, but on the whole every one causes the solution to be aimed more twoard her goals than the person she is cutting the compromise with. Obama, what little record exists has no such resoluteness or maybe astuteness to derive that bit of advantage in the compromise.