Excellent Speech by Hillary Clinton

...We are not working together. We are not finding common ground. We are not making the investments in the future that our country desperately needs.

We have to ask ourselves how we deal with the great challenges that confront us.

That's for sure!  Unfortunately, under Republican (lack of) "leadership," we're not dealing with those challenges, not at all.

More of Hillary Clinton's speech, with my comments, in extended text...

How do we keep our economy strong in a competitive world that we see? How do we keep our community safe in a dangerous world that he cannot escape? How do we protect our values in a rapidly changing world?

...The truth is, we can't be secure without a strong economy. And we cannot sustain our deepest values without an economy that rewards hard work.

Too much of what you hear coming out of Washington these days is either defeat us or denial or happy talk. I'm sure you've heard the same claims. There's no way we can compete with China and India. We've already lost the battle for manufacturing.

We can't sustain a strong American middle class anymore. Growing income in inequality is inevitable. Deficits don't matter.

Well, as my late father used to say with probably less appropriate language, that's a lot of nonsense. We do face a set of economic challenges because of technology and demography and globalization.

This is excellent stuff.  Hillary Clinton truly seems to understand that we deficits matter, that growing income inequality is a huge problem, that we face huge economic challenges from globalization and huge political challenges from terrorism and other threats.  She also seems to understand that the answer isn't to throw our hands up in the air and say it's hopeless.  As Hillary says:

I don't think that the American spirit has changed. I don't think that the need to respond to the circumstances confronting us has disappeared.

Instead, I would argue that it is now our turn. That it is up to this generation of leadership in both the public and the private sector to do what others have done before us.

Right on.  It's time for our leaders to lead, and the rest of us to step up to the plate.  But for that, we're going to have to start with new leadership.  And this is what that new leadership is going to have to do:

... we do have a choice about how we deal with globalization and the competitive threat that it poses.

We can choose to unleash the power of innovation and enterprise in ways that promote our economic growth and our values so that all Americans share in the prosperity.

We can choose to think hard about the long-term implications of the physical path we're on as a nation. And we can choose to chart a wiser course.

To do that we start from the principles that have inspired Americans from the beginning; sticking with fiscal discipline, rewarding hard work, investing in our people, growing a strong middle class by giving everyone a chance to succeed.

If we lead with those values, we can once again compete and win in the global economy. I know we can do this.

[...]

We can return to fiscal discipline. We can invest in infrastructure, research and education, jump start a smarter energy future, promote manufacturing, reign in healthcare costs. And we can do it in ways that renew the basic bargain with America's middle class.

Inspiring.  Smart.  This woman knows what she's talking about.  She also knows that:

Tax cuts alone can't secure the middle class.

They are not the cure all for everything that ails the American economy.

It takes the right tax system and the right investments, including infrastructure. And right now we don't have either.

How true.  And in words that echo those of Wesley Clark and Jim Webb - two personal heroes of mine - Hillary says that we need to start "updating both our virtual and our physical infrastructure."  She adds:

In broad band coverage, we've fallen in just six years from first to 15th. Our rural areas are being left behind, being depopulated because they don't have the right kind of infrastructure.

So this is not just about our big cities; this is about how we need to knit together our entire country. If we had a rural redevelopment plan that focused on skilled partnerships and tax incentives and broad brand, we could literally have the country as wired as we once had it electrified.

We saw after Hurricane Katrina how high the cost is for neglected infrastructure, whether it's old fashioned levies and roads or high tech communication systems for first responders. And we will be paying those economic and human costs for years to come.

You can say that again, sister!  Then she turns to one of my favorite subjects, energy:

We need a drive for smart energy that starts right now. The way to reduce our oil addiction is through technology. And we need a much more aggressive strategy. We have a National Institute of Health. Why don't we have a National Institute of Energy? I think we need a major energy research program similar to what President Eisenhower did after Sputnik went up because we are suffering through what might be called and some have silent Sputnik. And the energy issue is one of those.

If we had a major energy research program, it would create a portfolio of cutting edge energy research technologies that would reduce our oil dependence, increase our efficiency and reduce green house gas emissions.

[...]

The United Kingdom is creating new jobs by investing in alternative smart energy. They signed onto Kyoto. And it has served as a great organizing principle. And they now have not only reached their earliest Kyoto targets to reduce green house gas emissions and, therefore, help us in this very real problem of global warming, but they are creating jobs.

And these are good jobs.

[...]

And when they beat their Kyoto targets by 50 percent, which is what is predicted, they will do it by helping to create new technologies, put people to work in not only making energy more efficient but cleaning up the environment.

[...]

We certainly ought to be able to invest $20 billion a year in trying to get us independent from foreign oil.

Exactly!  Why is this so difficult for some people (translation:  right-wing Republicans named "Bush," "Cheney," "Hastert," and "Allen") to understand?  Perhaps because it's such a no-brainer?

On fiscal policy, I agree with Hillary 100%:

Now, I think a return to fiscal discipline, living within our means is essential for our long-term health. It is also critical to whether or not we control our own destiny as a nation.

Over the long-term and maybe the median turn, red ink fiscal policies will undermine America's competitiveness. We have to ask ourselves whether our taxing and spending policies are in line with our economic goals. Do we have the right priorities and values in the federal budget?

Again, why is it so hard for supposed economic "conservatives" to understand this?  Perhaps they're not really "conservatives" when it comes right down to it, at least not with your money? And perhaps Democrats like Hillary Clinton actually ARE?  Ironic, eh?

I like what Hillary has to say on outsourcing and trade as well, two issues that have come up repeatedly in the current primary campaign between Harris Miller and Jim Webb:

...China is not a free market economy. It is a managed economy. They manage their markets. And they manage their currency. So when we hand them our enormous budget deficits to finance by buying our debt like treasury bonds, we give them the opportunity to manage our economy, too, to favor the consumption of inexpensive products over the production of American products by American workers.

Now, that is an economic policy that we shouldn't be outsourcing, but we are. And the way to get our economic national power back is to, first of all, cut the deficit. And secondly, as Larry Lindsey also recommends, get serious about negotiating with China to bring up its exchange rate.

Then there's the question of trade.

Now, this is one place where we face stagnant thinking across the political spectrum. You're either a die hard free trader or an unreconstructed protectionist with very little regard, frankly, for how trade agreements are actually working.

I'm in favor of introducing some evidence into this evidence free zone. And so I will be introducing legislation that will require the International Trade Commission to report to Congress on the actual effects of every trade agreement we sign; the good, the bad and the ugly.

Finally, in words that sound a lot like Jim Webb, Hllary discusses the shrinking middle class:

The costs of a middle class life, education, healthcare, transportation, retirement are all increasing. It's the first time since we've been keeping records that we've had four years of rising productivity and falling wages.

Our essential bargains with the middle class is breaking down. People who work hard and contribute should feel that they're not just running in place, that they and their children can get ahead.

We should not in a globalized world face a choice between profits and pensions. Now, I understand that the world has changed and what used to work 50 years ago doesn't work today.

But that's why we need to rethink our industrial age bargain and come up with a new one that really keeps faith with the American middle class.

We have to look for solutions that as President Kennedy famously said did lift all those, not just lift the big ones and ground the others.

In sum, this is a long speech, but it's a good one.  It's definitely worth reading. If nothing else, it demonstrates once again why it is a big mistake, as I wrote back in July 2005 to EVER underestimate Hillary Clinton.

Comments