By Jules Witcover
Ater cautious and civil sparring by former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in their first New Hampshire encounter, they took off the gloves in their Democratic debate last week and defined the essential issues between them.
The first concerns health care. Mr. Sanders insists that the party should lead a popular "revolution" starting with truly universal health care run by the government. Ms. Clinton strenuously disagrees, arguing that so-called Obamacare should continue and be improved on an evolutionary basis through the private insurance industry.
"I don't want us to start over again," she said. "I think that would be a great mistake to once again plunge our country into a contentious debate about whether we should have and what kind of system we should have for health care. ... Let's go down a path where we can actually tell people what we will do. A progressive is someone who makes progress. That's what I intend to do."
Mr. Sanders has said his approach would cover all Americans and would be cheaper for them, because the tax they would be obliged to pay for it would be much less than the high premiums extracted by the private insurers. Ms. Clinton has argued his way would be unworkable and never would get through a Congress potentially run by a Republican majority.
The second issue involves foreign policy. Ms. Clinton argues that her four years running the State Department under President Barack Obama demonstrates she has stronger experience than Mr. Sanders, who had little in 18 years in the House and Senate. Mr. Sanders counters that judgment counts for more, citing his vote against authorizing the 2003 invasion of Iraq, which she supported and now says was a "mistake."
These two sharp differences were forcefully and heatedly reiterated in the debate, as were the ways the candidates are financing their campaigns. Ms. Clinton has received millions from wealthy donors and corporate interests, and she uses a super PAC. Mr. Sanders has relied on small individual gifts averaging $27 that have surprisingly matched or exceeded her take.
To the point, Mr. Sanders in the debate said he does "not only talk the talk but walk the walk" as "the only candidate up here that does not have super PAC." But when he alluded to Ms. Clinton's heavy support from Wall Street, where he has vowed to "break up the banks," she quickly accused him of resorting to a "very artful smear that you and your campaign have been carrying out," adding, "Let's talk about the issues that divide us."
Ms. Clinton complained that "there is this attack that he is putting forth, which really comes down to ... anybody who ever took donations or speaking fees from any interest group has to be bought. And I just absolutely reject that, senator." She added bitterly: "And I really don't think these attacks by insinuation are worthy of you. Enough is enough. If you've got something to say, say it directly."
Mr. Sanders replied by noting he had vowed that he would not make negative comments or advertisements against his opponent and had lived up to his word. But he did resume earlier questioning of Ms. Clinton's claiming to be a progressive after having said in one interview that she was a moderate.
As for her tapping Wall Street and other financial interests for big-dollar donations, Mr. Sanders observed generally that "there is a reason why these people are putting huge amounts of money into our political system. It is undermining American democracy, and it is allowing Congress to represent wealthy campaign contributors and not the working families of this country."
The sharp personal turn in the Democratic debate, at least on Ms. Clinton's part, was probably predictable in light of the early polling lead Mr. Sanders held over Ms. Clinton in his neighboring state and the continuing doubts raised over her controversial use of a private email server as secretary of state.
Mr. Sanders also seemed to touch a sensitive nerve on Ms. Clinton's connections with Wall Street, judging from her spirited pushback that he was implying some quid pro quo in the huge campaign contributions. The issue is likely not to be dismissed merely by the ire Ms. Clinton expressed over it's being raised.
No comments:
Post a Comment