The irrationality of Clinton Derangement Syndrome: an objective look at Clinton-Gore policies.

[Maddy McCall]

The Domestic Policies of the Clinton-Gore Administration (1993-2000): A Brief Summary

With Clinton Derangement Syndrome being all the rage in some parts of the internets, and with continued focus on the, um, "Bush-Clinton dynasty", I thought it would be useful to take an objective look - albeit at a high-level - at the domestic policy record of the Clinton-Gore administration in the time period of 1993-2000. Unfortunately, I don't have time to delve into the details here - so this post is just a quick review of the most significant (in my view) Bills, key initiatives, and the most important vetoes of President Clinton during those tumultuous years.

Typically, if you Google around, you will find terribly depressing stats about the Clinton-Gore administration - you know, stats that reveal their utter and sneering contempt for the working class, middle class and the poor, and their Dearth of IdeasTM in comparison to Sen. Obama's Party of IdeasTM - stats like the longest economic expansion in U.S. history, turning record deficits into record surpluses, significant reductions in the national debt, 22 million jobs created, longest period of real wage growth in decades, lowest unemployment in decades, lowest poverty rate since 1979, and so on. Frankly, I do find it odd that all of these egregious and unpleasant numbers only serve to remind some alleged "progressives" of how the Clinton administration was no different from the Bush dynasty; after all, the ugly and depression-era years of 1993-2000 happened to be sandwiched between two periods of unprecedented peace and prosperity (Bush Sr. and Bush Jr.).

Anyway, since all of those gains during the Clinton administration were either a complete fluke or due to the Bold LeadershipTM and Transformative VisionTM of George Bush Sr., Ronald Reagan and/or Sen. Obama's Party of IdeasTM, I'd like to focus my attention instead, on the key Bills, policies, initiatives and vetoes during the 1993-2000 period. This provides an additional window into what really happened in that era from a domestic policy perspective - and allows us to possibly see the connection between actions and results. I will not discuss basic aspects of the Clinton-Gore budget policy that aimed to preserve key programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, etc. nor will I address the broader aspects of Clinton governance that turned government entities like FEMA into prized/respected agencies and the Veterans Administration into the best healthcare provider in America (as Paul Krugman has observed). I will not cover the Clinton-Gore efforts to modernize Government and require agencies to create websites and make necessary Government information available freely on the net - nor their broader technology and innovation agenda. I will not cover failed attempts to pass progressive legislation - like the universal healthcare bill. I will also not cover Presidential appointments like those of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer to the Supreme Court or the vast number of other progressive and accomplished appointees, especially women and minorities, to senior positions in Government or the Judiciary.

snip/

B. Bills or Policy Positions With a Net Positive Impact (one of the sources)
1. Family and Medical Leave Act (1993)

2. National Voter Registration (Motor Voter) Act (1993) - this was the trigger for the fastest expansion of voter rolls in U.S. history and a major win for the voting rights movement

3. Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (1993)

4. Expansion of Earned Income Tax Credit (1993) - perhaps the largest poverty reduction program in the U.S.

5. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (1993) - this was the famous budget with tax increases on the wealthy and tax cuts for the middle class and small businesses, which the GOP railed against forever

6. Federal Direct Student Loan Program (1993) - this allowed the Government to loan money to students directly at lower rates and compete against private agencies

7. Creation of AmeriCorps (1993)

8. Assault Weapons Ban (1994)

9. Violence Against Women Act (1994) - the National Organization of Women called this the "greatest breakthrough in civil rights for women in nearly two decades"

10. California Desert Protection Act (1994)

11. Minimum Wage Increase Act (1996)

12. Megan's Law (1996)

13. Food Quality Protection Act (1996)

14. Enhancement to Safe Drinking Water Act (1996)

15. Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) (1996)

16. State Children's Health Insurance Program - SCHIP (1997)

17. Child Tax Credit; HOPE Scholarship, Lifetime Learning Tax Credit (1997)

18. Head Start/Pell Grants Expansion (1997)

19. Adoption and Safe Families Act (1997)

20. Child Support Performance and Incentive Act (1998)

21. Workforce Investment Act (1998) - provides federal job training funds for dislocated workers, adults and youth

22. Work Incentives Improvement Act (1999) - this was "landmark legislation modernizes the employment services system for people with disabilities and makes it possible for millions of Americans with disabilities to no longer have to choose between taking a job and having health care"

23. Senior Citizens' Freedom to Work Act (2000) - allowed senior citizens to work part time without losing their social security benefits

24. Victims of Trafficking and Violence Prevention Act (2000)

25. Re-authorization of Older Americans Act (2000) - with an important program added "The National Family Caregiver Support Program"


snip/

CONCLUSION

A quick review of the domestic policy legacy of the Clinton-Gore administration reveals that the administration indeed made some impressive gains in the 1990s - both from a progressive policy perspective as well as gains for the majority of the American people - despite the tremendous opposition it faced from a Republican Congress for most of its tenure. No doubt, Clinton had to compromise on a handful of bad-to-very-bad bills owing to a number of challenges - both of a personal and political nature - that he faced, particularly following the defeat of the Democratic party in the congressional elections in 1994, after the failure to enact universal healthcare. To any rational progressive, there can be no doubt that the Clinton administration of the 1990s is not even remotely comparable to the Bush regimes that preceded and succeeded it - nor was it the "forever-triangulating" caricature that it is routinely made out to be. As I have said before, no Democratic President was perfect and if we use one-sided measures to evaluate every President, FDR would seem worse than George (W.) Bush.


To see a complete list of Clinton-Gore admin domestic policies, visit http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011797.php

[lligrd]

1. Personal Responsibility: She Vote For The IWR

She is responsible for the state we are in.

[Forkboy]

2. The trouble here is two fold...

One, this isn't Hillary Clinton we're talking about here, but Bill.

Second, both the Clintons and Gore have veered in opposite directions since 2000. In 2000 I would have gladly voted for Hillary over Gore. Today, it's just the opposite. Gore was a very centrist politician (that's being kind if we go back far enough), not the raging populist we see today, the Gore that so many like more than ever. I suspect (but could be wrong) that Gore wouldn't have voted for IWR, for KYL/Lieberman. I doubt Gore would have someone like Mark Penn around him. I doubt Gore would vote for a flag burning amendment. These are all things that have happened since the things you've posted here.

This isn't really a defense of Obama. I also think Gore would outclass him in almost all areas as well. But that's a different thread for a different day.

[readmoreoften]

4. Okay, but also to be fair. No positives, then no negatives.

We can't keep pinning the negatives of Clinton's presidency on Hillary if we're not going to accept the positives. If we discount all of the above (and I'm happy to) then we really shouldn't hold her accountable for DOMA and DADT.

[Forkboy]

5. That goes both ways.

She can't try to claim the positives for herself but then disown the negatives. If we can't have it both ways then neither can she.

[readmoreoften]

6. I'm fine with that. I think the situation is muddy for both candidates.

Clinton gets her husband's positives and negatives. Obama gets the benefit of the doubt in situations he never had to face (IWR, DADT, DOMA) but is also criticized for lack of experience... In the end, the benefit of the doubt with less experience will probably be the stronger political position. I'm fine with throwing out Clinton's whole history and just focusing on her senatorial record.

[Forkboy]

7. We've reached a point of agreement.

:)

:toast:

[dkf]

3. I don't necessarily dislike their policies, just the way they conduct themselves and their

screw everyone who doesn't do what they want attitude.

[boston bean]

10. Really, that's exactly how I feel about the Obama campaign and for good reason I believe. nt

[not_too_L8]

18. better quality campaign than Hillary....

[Maddy McCall]

8. .

:kick:

[rodeodance]

12. :-)

[benEzra]

9. "8. Assault Weapons Ban (1994)"

the misguided DLC crusade that helped undermine a lot of the other accomplishments. It didn't actually ban anything, but it DID create and perpetuate the "Dems'll-take-yer-guns" meme, helped throw away the House and Senate, and cost Gore at least 3 states in '00. Aaaargh.


----------------------
The Conservative Roots of U.S. Gun Control

Dems and the Gun Issue - Now What? (written in '04, largely vindicated in '06, IMO)

Thoughts on Gun Ownership

[rodeodance]

11. The "triangulating" meme is droped into threads--Hit and Run--seldom

backed up.

[Bonobo]

13. I love a good 5 second cut and paste in the morning.

[Mooney]

14. The fact that there are actually HRC supporters using the term "Clinton Derangement Syndrome"

goes to show far the Bush-like bunker mentality has contaminated their discourse.

The asshats over at National Review have used the term "Bush Derangement Syndrome" to insinuate that anyone who has any problem with W's policies has no legitimate reason for it. It implies that the only possible reason to oppose Bush is clinical insanity. If you're now co-opting this phrase and applying it to Bill or Hillary Clinton or anyone who served in their administration, then it just goes to show how far the rot has set in. Will you next start lamenting the fact that the liberal media never reports the good news coming out of Iraq?

[rodeodance]

15. you missed 2 key words before using it " irrationality of"

[Mooney]

17. I didn't miss them at all.

And the fact that those words were used supports what I said. The idea is that anyone who has a problem with HRC is... irrational. That's the main pillar of "Clinton Derangement Syndrome."

[AllentownJake]

16. Who's running

Last time I checked Hillary was on the ballot not Bill or Al. :shrug:

[blm]

19. So, in YOUR view NO Dem senator or congressman crafted any of those programs.

Or presented them BEFORE Clinton took office.

In your view, none of the good was possible without Clinton?

Or is it possible that ANY Dem president could have EASILY marched through progressive programs that would STILL TODAY be in effect for this nation if Bill had made the correct decision to COOPERATE with and facilitate access to documents for the many outstanding matters being investigated regarding Bush1's criminal operations.

The good things accomplished in Clinton's years were so QUICKLY REVERSED by the end of Bush2's first year in office - and all the NEGATIVES (deep-sixing IranContra, Iraqgate, BCCI and CIA drugrunning matters to protect BushInc) have ended up hurting our party, this nation and the world beyond measure at this point.

[Lilith Velkor]

20. The Bill Clinton administration was a mixed bag

Dubya, on the other hand, has been nothing but shit. Anyone who conflates the two is either dishonest or off their fucking rockers IMO.