Hillary Clinton's Problems with Intersectionality

A reasonably catching blog post, On Bernie and Women by a clear proponent of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign, focuses on issues with presidential candidate Bernie Sanders and intersectionality. Complaints about Sanders disrespecting Secretary Clinton due to being a woman or complaints about Sanders failing to treat minority populations with respect are abound, mostly hearkening back to issues brought up in the four part Looking For Bernie. I've made a habit of responding to a number of misleading statements about Senator Sanders as well as questioning the lack of parallel questioning on intersectionality on Secretary Clinton. Seemed like a good thing to compile in one place in case others are interested in this topic.

Clinton is clearly a proponent of abortion rights and breaking glass ceilings. She is not as consistently a friend of impoverished women or children. She's made some serious missteps with minority populations as well. Here's a few of the things I'm concerned about having to do with Hillary Clinton and intersectional feminism.

Let's start with Hillary Clinton laughing about her then-client, accused of raping a 12 year old, passing a polygraph which in her words “forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs” and resulted in her tearing the child’s character apart in court.

Hillary Clinton suggested that rape survivors' statements should be assumed exaggerated if they are minors. She also stated the child searched out older men (which doesn't even seem to be supported), implying this 12 year old was complicit in her rape.

As a First Lady, Hillary Clinton called children, teens, and young adults engaged with gangs "Superpredators," and says "we have to bring them to heel."

 A Black Lives Matters activist identified this as an attack on black and brown youth. She requested a response from Clinton about the comment.

Hillary did not respond at the time of the question. She instead told the protester she would talk about it later and wanted to get "back to the issues. The issues that I think are important." The activist was ushered out. Complaints have been made that Bernie Sanders did not handle his first interaction with BLM well, but he at least gave up a stage to the activists and let them address a crowd. After taking a day to work out a response, the answer she provided was appropriate though it sounded carefully crafted. By the way, the bill which was connected with the "superpredator" comment was voted for by Sanders. Sanders though, prior to the vote, made the following statement about the failings of the bill:

[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 39 (Wednesday, April 13, 1994)] Mr. Speaker, let me begin with a profound remark: Two plus two equals four.
In other words, there is a logical and rational process called cause and effect. In terms of Newtonian physics, that means that every action causes an equal and opposite reaction. In other words, Mr. Speaker, there are reasons why things happen, as controversial as that statement may be.
A farmer neglects to tend and care for his fields—it is likely that the crop will fail.
A company neglects to invest in research and development—it is likely that the company will not be profitable.
In a similar way, Mr. Speaker, a society which neglects, which oppresses and which disdains a very significant part of its population—which leaves them hungry, impoverished, unemployed, uneducated, and utterly without hope, will, through cause and effect, create a population which is bitter, which is angry, which is violent, and a society which is crime-ridden. This is the case in America, and it is the case in countries throughout the world.
Mr. Speaker, how do we talk about the very serious crime problem in America without mentioning that we have the highest rate of childhood poverty in the industrialized world, by far, with 22 percent of our children in poverty and 5 million who are hungry today? Do the Members think maybe that might have some relationship to crime? How do we talk about crime when this Congress is prepared, this year, to spend 11 times more for the military than for education; when 21 percent of our kids drop out of high school; when a recent study told us that twice as many young workers now earn poverty wages as 10 years ago; when the gap between the rich and the poor is wider, and when the rate of poverty continues to grow? Do the members think that might have some relationship to crime?
Mr. Speaker, it is my firm belief that clearly, there are some people in our society who are horribly violent, who are deeply sick and sociopathic, and clearly these people must be put behind bars in order to protect society from them. But it is also my view that through the neglect of our Government and through a grossly irrational set of priorities, we are dooming tens of millions of young people to a future of bitterness, misery, hopelessness, drugs, crime, and violence. And Mr. Speaker, all the jails in the world, and we already imprison more people per capita than any other country, and all of the executions in the world, will not make that situation right. We can either educate or electrocute. We can create meaningful jobs, rebuilding our society, or we can build more jails. Mr. Speaker, let us create a society of hope and compassion, not one of hate and vengeance.

He has made clear he voted for the bill because it included the Violence Against Women Act:

I have a number of serious problems with the crime bill, but one part of it that I vigorously support is the Violence Against Women Act. We urgently need the $1.8 billion in this bill to combat the epidemic of violence against women on the streets and in the homes of America.

And here are some additional issues with Hillary and women/minorities:

Clinton voted to build a wall on the border with Mexico was in September 2006.

TANF/welfare reform is mentioned in that ontheissues.org quick list as well, but it’s President Bill Clinton’s law. Here’s more on TANF and Secretary Clinton.

Admittedly, I’d love to see more from both candidates about specifically improving welfare reform for mothers with children. Her 2008 campaign, however, continued to express support for TANF’s depletion of resources for mother's with dependent children.

Her re-authorization of the arguably racistly-applied PATRIOT Act.

Clinton completely failed to call-out the problems with Arizona's election fraud. I don't throw the term election fraud around lightly. I initially shot down a lot of Bernie Sanders supporters who were worried election fraud occurred here with the statistics of how infrequently it is found and the idea it was buying into Republican narratives. I’ve had to eat a reasonable amount of crow. Here's their Secretary of State saying election fraud did occur in this case:

Here’s the Mayor of Phoenix requesting a Department of Justice Inquiry.

As yet, Clinton's team appears to have failed to respond to the calls for an extension on the election or a re-vote made by the people affected. Her failure to come forward and speak out against the disenfranchisement of Arizona voters, and those who ran into the most problems were unsurprisingly disproportionately minorities, seems to be worthy of comment as a failure in intersectionality.

While there's no way this list is complete, it's clear the argument that Bernie Sanders has worse problems with intersectionality than Clinton doesn't seem to hold much water.

Primer for Discussing Libertarianism

Preface:
I've been putting off writing these posts for months because it became too important and simultaneously a medical problem led to issues with mental fatigue. I constructed a set of expectations: The writing had to cite sources, it had to cover every from of the ideology from every angle, it had to be irrefutable. Why bother if it won't be perfect?

This version isn't that. It will be part of a series of brief essays on the subject with varying levels of complexity in addressing root political and philosophical realities. I'm mostly self-educated in philosophy and politics, and there certainly exist better responses to these issues. I have no idea if there are readable responses unburdened by jargon. I haven't run across much in that vein myself.
For now, I'm going to try to put it out there in logical and easily communicated parcels.  We'll start with definitions, get into flaws with libertarianism in general, and then I'll likely speak on issues with Randian Objectivism.

And just to be up-front, I've got a strong opinion: Libertarianism is an ill-considered set of beliefs based on an unfounded principle that humans are able to be sensible and the market is more accountable to the populace than governmental institutions.

Root Terms:

Libertarianism is an American political ideology rooted in social liberalism and fiscal conservatism. By contrast, the Republican Party serves social and fiscal conservatism while the Democratic Party is typically on the liberal end of both social and fiscal issues.

Social liberalism is of course where you get greater range of individual choice. Examples here include protection in practicing minority religions/avoidance of protecting a singular faith above others throughout American history, racial equality and abortion rights in the 50s to 70s, or marriage rights over the last decade. Radically socially liberal groups may also promote reductions in governmental secrecy, reduced control over intellectual property (this comes up mostly with anarchist groups), restrictions on police authority, or other forms of increased civilian autonomy/authority.
Social conservatism focuses on maintaining traditional patterns/avoiding social disruption to ensure stability. Examples of social conservatism include focus of maintaining prayer in public agencies sure to traditional pence in those settings or a believe in Christianity as the central American faith, working to manage recidivism through longer/more aggressive criminal sentencing, and historically a push to maintain white, male, heterosexual, protestant, cis-gendered privilege. As national values change, conservative values slowly drift to maintain the status quo or get back to how things were before recent changes.

In the US, fiscal conservatism is typically expressed as a belief that capitalist market forces function best and create the most successful economies when freed as much as possible from government and other non-market forces. Cited as part of the party platform for both republicans and libertarians is the goal of limited government, but far-right or super-fiscally-conservative members may be opposed to virtually all forms of taxation. Many representatives of both parties support financing a public protective force (police, military, fire, emergency medical, etc) though republicans and libertarians may strongly vary on how large a force. Additionally, libertarians and some republicans tend to favor privatizing many public services. Examples include postal service, education, eliminating social security in favor of everyone having individual responsibility and freedom to invest or not invest in their own retirement. Often there is a sense individuals are the most capable of deciding what is best for their lives and that government has a tendency to spend distractedly and destructively.

Fiscal liberalism is about specific government intervention to provide for the impoverished and to reduce disparities between high income and low income individuals, or at least to provide services to reduce inter-generational barriers in growth and avoid developing a de facto aristocracy. Programs like Temporary Aid for Needy Families (detailed in the first post in this blog), SNAP (the food stamp program), state assistance for mental and physical health to people without insurance, public law enforcement, most fire departments (even many volunteer fire departments may qualify for assistance from government grants or support if a fire department is damaged in a natural disaster), or storm recovery. Several regulatory programs fall under fiscal liberalism as well.  The CDC is a function of public spending for protection of the general public.  USDA guidelines banning the use of pus (as in: from wounds) as coloration in milk, a once-common practice at the turn of the 1900s, exemplify expansion of government powers to regulate business in the public interest.

As an aside: There are a few complex issues like military spending that may have a basis in liberal fiscal policies but be supported by fiscally conservative groups and individuals. With military spending we see the expenses balloon and the tables turn as fiscal liberals push to reign in spending on the military to ensure appropriations can still cover other programs without requiring increased taxes.

Ribbon Cutting – Confronting Welfare

*****This is a re-post from a previous attempt to start blogging.  I thought I'd throw it in at the start because it functions as a pretty relevant reference for some of what we'll likely end up talking about later.*****

Just to start off on the right foot, let’s get the whole welfare thing out of the way.  This is some crucial information if you’re planning on talking to anyone about politics ever.  It’s coming in bullets to make it maximally digestible and reference-able.

There’s a few forms of what might be called “welfare” in the American governmental system (dodging what most Americans would term “charity” such as food banks through churches). We’re looking at the majors – Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF, or the welfare that goes to mothers and children in impoverished situations), unemployment, food stamps, financial aid for students, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and Medicare/Medicaid.  There are several more kinds of welfare programs, but these are the ones most people complain about when they complain about overspending and misuse.  We won’t get into the business end of welfare too much today, but that would include the subsidies we give to farms for certain crops or businesses for products (hybrid cars are a good example).  I’ll give you some links for those who want to know more or argue against what I’m writing.

TANF -  This is probably the most misunderstood of all the welfare programs.  This is the one that goes to families (usually mothers) with children, often with a work requirement for the mothers.  It was previously known as Aid to Dependent Children (ADC) and Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC).  States set the standards for access to the program within a federal guideline, but it’s always connected with income and the presence of children in need in the family.  It is typical for states to set a barrier to any possibility of increasing benefits if the mother has additional children.  The most important thing I can share with you about this form of welfare is that the federal and state governments set some pretty restrictive rules on receipt of benefits that very few of the people I speak with seem to know.  Those rules include the following:

1. In North Carolina and many other states, the benefits are set to a specific dollar amount when you first seek them based on the number of children in the home.  In other words, a mother having more children while receiving TANF does not see a rise in benefits (except in very specific situations listed in the link in Appendix C, Standard Counties, Non-financial Eligibility Rules, #10).
2. This form of welfare requires recipients either work or do community service (30 hours weekly in a single parent home and more in a two-parent home) unless a state government opts out of the requirement.
3. The federal government sets a maximum of 60 months (five years) of receipt for a family in a lifetime.  States can set (and some have) more restrictive term limits.  This means a mother with a child receiving benefits for three years and halting benefits when she returns to work has only two years  remaining if she ever needs to seek the support for any reason in the future.

Unemployment – I worked in the Employment Security Commission in NC (now called the Department of Employment and Commerce).  The men and women seeking unemployment checks have to have a work history enabling them to earn significantly less than they earned while working as a “welfare” income based on their previous income.  Next, they have to continue to report places they are seeking work each week to continue receiving benefits.  Finally, the unemployment benefit is also limited to a certain term based on the adult’s work history.  It’s a kind of insurance against losing a job for adults with a history as what some would call a “contributing member of society.”

Food Stamps (or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program/SNAP) – States distribute this federal support for food.   Eligibility requires you’re registered as seeking work.  The program, like TANF, is means-tested.  Families making beyond a certain percentage of the poverty line are ineligible for benefits.  Additionally you can’t have much money saved (less than $2000 for most families including what you have in cash), and in every state, the money is distributed as a debit card with restrictions on what it can pay for in stores to an approved item list.  Whites were the largest segment of SNAP recipients in fiscal years 2005-2010.

Financial Aid for Students -  Students need to prove academic merit by being accepted to a college/university program.  There are limitations on available aid based on family income and financial holdings.  Some of the aid comes in the form of grants, but the majority is in loans.  Those loans are typically paid back over 10-25 years, and currently the debt burden is akin to buying a car, or in some cases buying a house.  Loans are also available from the private sector for individual that do not meet criteria for need-based loans.  The most incredible thing about financial aid loans is they cannot be discharged by bankruptcy except in incredibly rare circumstances.  Anecdotal Information Warning: I work in a rural hospital setting and the doctors typically talk about having $200,000-$300000 in loans to pay off.  As a quick note, that is not at the time of discharge from school.  A couple hundred thousand dollars after working in the field paying on loans for months and sometimes years to reach that point.  For fun/terror, you can play with this repayment calculator.

SSI – Pretty much money for people with recognized disabilities.  Getting approved for disability (SSI and associated benefits) can literally take years and involve multiple denials of eligibility.  Some people, usually with obvious physical problems, can be approved more quickly.  SSI payments are based on your past total earnings, so people without work histories receive less money.  People living on SSI in North Carolina get an average of about $680/month or $8160/year as of 2012.

Medicaid/Medicare – Government-supported insurance programs.  There’s some upcoming changes for these programs, but the these are the bullet-points:

• Medicaid is insurance usually associated with TANF and mothers/children.  Medicare is usually connected with older adults and Social Security.  Both can be granted through SSI.
• Medicaid for the mothers (at least in NC) doesn’t cover inpatient psychiatric care under most circumstances.
• Medicaid is not available to mothers as part of TANF if another family member or another individual has custody of their child.
• Medicaid and Medicare are funded with federal grant money and reduce the burden on the state to pay for individuals who would otherwise seek medical care without insurance.
• Hospitals redistribute medical costs for indigent clients in part to the state and would be able to reduce medical costs for insured individuals further by not having to absorb the cost of care for the uninsured.
• Hospitals cannot legally turn away individuals seeking care without evaluation.

These introductory notes will help establish a base understanding of the reasoning behind several of my political and some of my mental health entries.  Stay tuned.  I’ll be kicking out another entry soon.

*****End Re-post***** 

As a brief note in reference to a response to the original posting, I left off WIC (The Women Infants Children food program).  WIC helps provide food support for children up to age 5 and mothers of those children to buy very specific food items.  The purchases, previously done by vouchers, are now usually handled on a debit-like card and the funds cannot be accepted by stores for any items except those on the approved list of "nutritious foods" (in NC, it is pretty closely tied to milk, fruits, vegetables, whole grain breads and tortillas, some cereals, peanut butter, eggs, infant food and formula, dried and canned beans and lentils, and soy/tofu products).  It's pretty limited funding, mostly focused on making sure breastfeeding mothers are able to provide sufficient nutrition and very young children don't starve.