Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Hillary News & Views 11.18: SEIU, Taxes, Texas, and African-American Outreach

Today’s Hillary News & Views begins with coverage of Clinton’s endorsement from SEIU.

The New York Times reports:
The Service Employees International Union, one of the largest and most politically influential unions, threw its support behind Hillary Rodham Clinton on Tuesday, the latest indication that she is consolidating support among the institutional pillars of the Democratic Party.
Mary Kay Henry, S.E.I.U’s president, said the group’s members “believe she is going to fight like hell for our agenda.”
Ms. Henry, noting that Mrs. Clinton had met twice with S.E.I.U. workers this year, cited the former secretary of state’s support for higher wages, an immigration overhaul, strengthening voting rights and addressing mass incarceration. Mrs. Clinton also assured the group that, if elected, she would use her executive authority to bolster union protections, Ms. Henry said.
“She knows that workers being able to join together and collectively bargain is essential to building an economy that works for everybody,” the service workers president said.
The service employees union, which has about two million members, offers Mrs. Clinton support from a group that is about half female and includes many minorities, demographic groups she is counting on to capture the Democratic nomination. With a growing number of Hispanics joining its ranks, the group has increased its activism in recent years around immigration issues. It has also gotten involved in racial justice issues, lending its support to the Black Lives Matter movement.
The Huffington Post reports:
In the case of SEIU, there's reason to believe rank-and-file membership would broadly support Clinton over other candidates in the Democratic primary. The union has a high proportion of African-American and Latino members -- demographics that have clearly favored Clinton over Sanders in polling. According to SEIU, the union carried out three national town hall meetings and polled membership three times since last year before settling on Clinton as a candidate.
Even before Tuesday's announcement from SEIU, Clinton had already locked down union endorsements representing a majority of the unionized workers in the U.S. That includes the two primary teachers unions -- the American Federation of Teachers and the National Education Association, which together boast 4.6 million members -- as well as the 1.6 million-member American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees. She's also picked up the endorsements of the carpenters' union and the machinists' union, among others.

Clinton is pointing out that she is the only Democratic candidate who is not planning to raise taxes on the middle class.

Politico reports:
Clinton’s campaign is mounting an attack against Sen. Bernie Sanders for proposals to raise taxes on the middle class that were part of the national single-payer health care bills he introduced in Congress.
“Bernie Sanders has called for a roughly 9-percent tax hike on middle-class families just to cover his health-care plan,” said Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon, referring to legislation Sanders introduced in 2013, “and simple math dictates he'll need to tax workers even more to pay for the rest of his at least $18-20 trillion agenda. If you are truly concerned about raising incomes for middle-class families, the last thing you should do is cut their take-home pay right off the bat by raising their taxes.”
Sanders introduced a single-payer health care bill in 2013 that included a 2.2 percent income tax across the board, as well as a 6.7 percent payroll tax for employers, The Washington Post reported Friday, and he has introduced similar legislation in multiple sessions of Congress. While payroll taxes are split between employers and employees, economists and the Congressional Budget Office have said that most of those fees are carried by the workers in the form of lower wages.
The Washington Post reports:
Clinton is using that 2013 legislation because Sanders has yet to release updated details of either his health care plan or how he’d pay for it. Sanders is also putting off a speech he had planned to give explaining his vision of democratic socialism, which could be because now that the primary campaign is competitive, he’s wary of alienating moderate Dems by emphasizing his leftist bona fides (but who knows; there could be other reasons).
In any case, there is a genuine division here: Sanders is willing to broadly raise taxes to pay for the programs he supports, while Clinton has adopted the same pledge she and Barack Obama did in 2008: no tax increases for anyone making under $250,000 a year.
Clinton held a large rally in Texas as she organizes for that state’s March 1st primary.

The Star-Telegram reports:
“Now, every election is about the future,” Clinton told more than 1,500 people in the gymnasium at Mountain View College in Dallas. “That’s why I’m laying out the plans I think will make our country strong.
“But this election will have such an impact on the society and economy,” she said during her half-hour speech. “So I’m going to work hard in Texas and I need your help.”
Clinton also took a jab at Republican Gov. Greg Abbott about healthcare, criticizing his decision not to expand Medicaid in Texas, which would give more low-income Texans health coverage.
“I don’t know about you, but I’d be a little worried about turning [healthcare] over to Greg Abbott,” she said, adding that he “should be doing everything he can to bring healthcare to more people in the state.”
Clinton said she saw a sign referring to the need to “turn Texas blue.”
And she admitted doing that could take a while.
But she said that if Texans and voters nationwide “stand together in favor of what we believe is the right path for America” – which she said includes defending LGBT rights and preventing gun violence – “if we stand together, we will make change.”
Clinton’s African-American outreach is revealing itself not only in her appeals to voters and lawmakers, but also in who she chooses for leadership positions within her campaigns.

Black Enterprise reports:
Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign has tapped advertising agency Burrell Communications to assist with its focus on the issues and concerns of African American voters, reports NBC News.
Based in Chicago and Los Angeles, the firm is currently headed by two African American women, Fay Ferguson and McGhee Williams Osse, who both share years of professional experience in advertising and marketing.
The hiring of Burrell Communications adds to Clinton’s list of African Americans who are currently working with her campaign. Some of these prominent figures include LaDavia Drane, who is Clinton’s Director of African American Outreach; Marlon Marshall, who is Director of Political Engagement; Brynne Craig, Deputy National Political Director; and Karen Finney, Clinton’s communications adviser and spokesperson.
Marshall, who is the highest ranking African American staffer on any presidential campaign, is credited by Clinton aides with helping to create a diverse campaign team at the state and upper staff level.
As Clinton’s campaign push continues, her African American backing continues to grow, with 50 current and former black mayors already announcing their support for her, including Kasim Reed of Atlanta, Michael Nutter of Philadelphia, Steve Benjamin of Columbia, South Carolina, and many more.
Politico reports:
Hillary Clinton's top deputy will be on Capitol Hill on Tuesday to continue the campaign's outreach to African-American Democrats.
John Podesta, the chairman of Clinton's presidential campaign, will be at the Democratic National Committee headquarters to discuss their strategy and talk to members of the Congressional Black Caucus.
The Clinton campaign has been heavily courting members of the black caucus — a group that strongly supported her 2008 primary opponent, then-Sen. Barack Obama — since she first announced her candidacy earlier this year.
Finally, a touching piece from U.S. News and World Report: “I Don’t Need Hillary Clinton to be Perfect”:
Hillary Clinton has had a perfection problem for years. She wasn't our idea of a perfect First Lady because she dared to step out of the mold of what voters knew and were comfortable with. She wasn't the picture of perfection as a Senate candidate because what FLOTUS had ever dared to tout her own qualifications to run for national office? She wasn't the perfect wife because she stayed with her straying husband, and she wasn't the perfect wife because many assumed she stayed for reasons of ambition rather than marital loyalty; that didn't sit well with women regardless of whether they were baby boomers, Gen Xers or Millennials. She wasn't perfect because she turned all our expectations on their heads about women politicians. In 2008, she was still a transitional woman trying to navigate the gap between twentieth century stay-at-home First Ladies and the first generation of accomplished feminist women who were going to "have it all," whether voters were ready for that or not.
But why did we project those expectations and visions of American womanhood onto Hillary, while also holding it against her for tenaciously clinging to her own dreams and making personal compromises many of us contend we would never have made in order to achieve them.
We clearly still live in a time where women are criticized and judged more harshly than men based on this expectation of perfection. That obvious, but unspoken, need for female perfection plays out in so many parts of our lives. It's what fuels the "mommy wars," our debates about "leaning in" vs. institutional changes for increases in women's professional advancement, and the sales of women's magazines, books, and websites that call on us to continually examine the things that are wrong – or imperfect – with our lives. Too many women expect perfection of themselves and end up projecting that onto candidate Hillary. If we, as twenty-first century American women, judge ourselves harshly for failing at the perfection game, how can we not view Hillary through that same lens?


  1. AMEN....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  2. Lysis: I'm really bummed today b/c of these polls. Quinnipiac has Hillary way down in CO--I can't believe it but it was all over the CNN crawl this afternoon. CO has a 2.8 plus (REP) advantage in voter registration--but this poll had a 7.9 % (REP) advantage in the sampling. But still this is bad news in a state where Obama won by 5 points last time. In addition Florida Atlantic University has a poll out today where HRC is losing to Trump by 8, Carson by 9!!!, Rubio by 7--she's even losing to Cruz by 3!! Now someone on a conservative blog gave the FL sampling--and it favored Rs by 8.8%. So hopefully this was another outlier in a state when Ds have a half million edge in voter registration.

    But if this is the case--it's terrible news.

    1. For your own sanity, pay little mind to general election polls right now. Quinnipiac's #s are consistently insane...and here they are saying that Clinton can't get out of the 30s in CO! It's just nuts. These numbers are in an alternate universe from the new PPP poll that shows Hillary approaching competitiveness in SOUTH Carolina.

      A big polling wrapup is on the way. Focus on the nomination.

    2. Yeah but Scan--these BIASED Q polls are USED and absorbed by the biased media to sour people's minds against Hillary. CNN said today the Republican are "trouncing" her "in the key swing state of Colorado".

    3. I know. But if it wasn't Quinnipiac, they'd go with another poll to push the "drama" angle for ratings. I've been wailing about Quinnipiac for a gets exhausting. But they just keep on releasing shitty polls because they get attention.