(notations from Chris Dodd):
Edwards helping to Bankrupt Americans.. which makes the middle class highly susceptible to Poverty. (the centerpiece of his platform)
Remember who Co-Sponsored the Iraq Vote?.. John Edwards in case you've forgotten..
and promoted the Iraq War for two years on the White House website? John "kiss ass" Edwards
* Edwards supported a bankruptcy bill that was vetoed by President Clinton. In 2000 John Edwards voted for the Bankruptcy Overhaul bill. While this bill included a slight increase of the minimum wage, its major design was to revise bankruptcy laws to make it easier for courts to force debtors to repay their debts, while before the law had allowed debtors to discharge their debt. 12 Democrats and 2 Republicans rejected this bill, including Chris Dodd, Ted Kennedy, Paul Wellstone, and Tom Harkin. President Clinton eventually vetoed this bill because it was too hard on debtors.
* Edwards voted for the same bill in 2001, again choosing financial interests over working families. In 2001 Edwards voted for a similar Bankruptcy Overhaul bill that again required Americans facing bankruptcy to undergo debt repayments instead of debt relief. Specifically, the bill required debtors able to pay $10,000 or 25% of their debts over five years to file under Chapter 13, which requires a reorganization of debts under a repayment plan, instead of seeking to discharge their debts under Chapter 7. Edwards voted with nearly the entire Republican caucus in supporting this bill, as well as voting to end debate on the measure. Chris Dodd voted to reject this bill, joining Senators Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry, and Wellstone. In all, the bill was rejected by 13 Democrats and 2 Republicans.
* Edwards would not allow relief for people who were forced into bankruptcy from medical bills. Edwards also sided with the entire GOP caucus to vote against the Wellstone amendment to the 2001 bill. This amendment would have provided an exemption for debtors who were forced to file for bankruptcy due to medical expenses, under the rationale that health expenses are often unpreventable and can be an especially debilitating cost to low and middle income families. Chris Dodd was one of the 34 Democrats who voted for this amendment?a group that included Senators Clinton, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry and Wellstone.
* Edwards rejected a means test amendment that would have protected debtors from sudden financial misfortune. On the same bill, Edwards again voted with the entire GOP caucus to reject an amendment that would have included a more consumer friendly means test than that included in the original bill. The amended means test would have used the average of a debtor's last two months of income to determine their ability to pay a certain threshold amount of debt, instead of the last six months of income. The amended means test was designed to protect debtors who face financial difficulties from sudden job loss or disability. Paul Wellstone, who authored the amendment, said the original test "will make it impossible for families to rebuild their lives." 22 Democrats supported this amendment, including Chris Dodd. Dodd was accompanied by Senators Clinton, Durbin, Feingold, and Kennedy.
* Edwards supported the final version of the Bankruptcy bill that "punishes the vulnerable." Months later, Edwards again voted for the similar version of the Bankruptcy bill that emerged from negotiations with the House of Representatives. He also voted to limit debate twice on the bill, stifling further amendments or arguments. This version was not substantively different from the earlier versions, as it still made it significantly harder for working Americans to discharge their debts through the bankruptcy system. Chris Dodd rejected this bill, along with Senators Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Kennedy, Kerry and Wellstone. 14 Democrats and 2 Republicans voted against the final measure.
The bill Edwards supported "punishes the vulnerable and it rewards the big banks and credit card companies for their poor practices," said Sen. Paul Wellstone, D-Minn., a leading opponent of the legislation. "We are heading into hard economic times and we're going to make it hard for people to rebuild their lives."Edwards has been part and parcel of the GOP agenda all the way. Edwards voting record is one of the worst of our Dem Senators. Edwards is helping create poverty in the middle class with his bankruptcy vote and earning millions for himself when working for the Hedge Fund sector. The same Hedge Fund sector that was buying sub-prime mortgages for their investment portfolios.. The same "POVERTY" he now professes to help as the centerpiece of his presidential campaign. It must be hard for Edward's supporters to understand the meaning of the words "poverty" and "hypocrisy", when their candidate, John Edwards exemplifies it so well.
Why shouldn't he, he voted for it!
Ironically, the centerpiece of his campaign these days, revolves around the damage he's done through his Senate vote.Also courtesy of seasonedblue's research:
That would open up questions about the bundled money that Edwards has taken, the fact that the biggest contributers to his campaign came from hedge fund employees and trial attorneys:"Mr. Edwards also developed mutually beneficial relationships with public and private institutions.
He founded the Center on Poverty, Work and Opportunity at the University of North Carolina, which provided him with a platform. In return, he raised $3 million to sustain it. He was hired by the Fortress Investment Group, a New York hedge fund, to “develop investment opportunities,” according to a 2005 Fortress news release. That led to meetings with such people as Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany; Henry Kravis, founder of KKR, one of Wall Street’s most successful investment funds; and the chief executives of General Electric, Citigroup, Coca-Cola and DaimlerChrysler."
“Fortress became a vehicle for foreign travel,” Mr. Turlington said, “but it was also a way to spend more time with sophisticated financial people.”
The Edwards campaign declined to disclose the amounts raised or spent by the two similarly-named nonprofit agencies — the Center for Promise and Opportunity and the Center for Promise and Opportunity Foundation — since their 2005 tax filings, which are the most recent to have been filed.
snip:
...the line between a bona fide charity and a political campaign is often fuzzy, said Marcus S. Owens, a Washington lawyer who headed the Internal Revenue Service division that oversees nonprofit agencies.
“I can’t say that what Mr. Edwards did was wrong,” Mr. Owens said. “But he was working right up to the line. Who knows whether he stepped or stumbled over it. But he was close enough that if a wind was blowing hard, he’d fall over it.”snip:
Of the explicitly political entities, Mr. Edwards’ OneAmerica Committee 527 organization allowed donors to give without limitations. The money was transferred to his leadership political action committee. Leadership committees were initially created to allow prominent politicians to raise money for distribution to needy office-seekers. But Mr. Edwards spent the entire $2.7 million he raised for OneAmerica, including $532,000 raised by the 527, on himself, an increasingly common trend among politicians.The New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/22/us/politics/22edwards.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=sloginAs far as his generalized anti-lobby stance:
EDWARDS: Some Lobbyists Are Just More Equal Than OthersStill reporting from SEIU's conference, TAPPED's Garance Franke-Ruta was amused to hear John Edwards 'jazzing up' conventioners for the SEIU's 'Lobby Day'. Franke-Ruta blogs: "John Edwards has made it very clear that he thinks lobbyists are the bane of the American political system, and will prevent needed healthcare reform. ...The SEIU has worked with: Bond & Co.; Clark & Weinstock; Colling Murphy Swift Hynes Selfridge LLC; Robert Giroux; Jennings Policy Strategies; the Nueva Vista Group; Bill Lynch Associates; and Tighe Patton Armstrong Teasdale. ... I seriously doubt that the Edwards campaign has a problem with any of this SEIU activity, either, despite his anti-lobbying stance."
http://blogometer.nationaljournal.com/archives/2007/09/919_why_the_tas.html
No one's squeaky clean in this election, and Edwards talks from both sides of his mouth.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
