This is the first in a (hopefully) collaborative series: WHSBP (title and series idea courtesy of Lambert) to counterbalance the Other Series (WWTSBQ
). This series outlines issues on which Hillary Clinton was ahead of the curve, starting with microcredit. I have posted consistently on microcredit (here, here and here) but it is one obvious issue where HRC got it before everyone else.
This is actually one of the things that surprised me when I read Muhammad Yunus's book, Banker to the Poor.
"It was not until the mid-1980s that people in the United States began showing real interest in applying Grameen principles to their own poverty problems. I supposed it all began in 1985, when Bill Clinton, then governor of Arkansas, was looking for ways to create new economic opportunities for the low-income people in his state. Hillary Rodham Clinton's college roommate, Jan Percy, had just returned from working in Bangladesh with an American organization and was at the South Shore Bank in Chicago. She introduced the Clintons to Ron Grzywinski and Mary Houghton, Chicago-area bankers who had done much to convince the Ford Foundation to support Grameen." (176)
So, the four of them Bill and Hillary Clinton, Ron Grzywinski and Mary Houghton started meeting, according to Yunus, to design the plans for a bank that would provide microloans to the poor in Arkansas. The Clintons also invited Yunus and as he writes
"As I spoke, both the governor and his wife were drawn into my story. After half an hour, Mrs Clinton declared, "We want it. Can we have it in Arkansas?" (...) Hillary Rodham Clinton's support for the Grameen idea has never diminished. She visited us in Bangladesh in April 1995 and she has visited microcredit programs on three different continents. She also co-chaired the Microcredit Summit in 1997." (176)
Yunus then goes on to describe the details of putting together what is now the Southern Good Faith Fund, developed in partnership with South Shore Bank (check out their website if you are interested in socially responsible investments).
However, this is the Clintons we are talking about, so, there was no chance they would be taken seriously by the cool kids. As Yunus describes,
"During a 1992 interview with the editors of Rolling Stone magazine, [Bill] Clinton spoke particularly fondly of Grameen. In a separate article, two of the editors ridiculed him for being too ready to promote micro-credit in the United States. I was disappointed, but an American Friend explained that Rolling Stone's reaction was hardly surprising. He argued that Grameen was a 'Third World technology transfer' and that the American elite might not be ready for it. Given the reluctance of Americans to adopt successful policies from countries as close to them as Canada, Germany or England, it would prove very difficult for Clinton to convince his fellow Americans to follow a Bengali model."
And that is one lesson we have all already learned: the cool kids in the media and the Village
elders hated the Clintons already for coming from Arkansas and mess up "their" place and pollute it with foreign ideas like universal health care and economic opportunities for the poor (and please, spare me the failure of health care reform and and "ending welfare as we know it"; in the first case the Clintons had to deal with the same disgusting media campaign HRC has to face now and in the second case, Clinton had to deal with the Gingrich Congress - a Congress that actually flexed its idiotic muscle against the President, what a concept).
Now one with a brain would suggest that micro-credit is THE ultimate solution to solving global poverty, but it is one tool that can be used to do so alongside other policies. Yunus himself never stated that his idea is the panacea. He is much too smart for that. However, this is what I care about when I think of experience in a presidential candidate. I want someone who is intellectual smart and curious (even if the cool kids, the Village
elders and now the Big Boyz Bloggerz think it's soooo 90s). I want someone with a clear pulse on our global world and has the wherewithal to get in touch with the right people to get things done in a decisive fashion.
Let's not be distracted by stupid snipers stories. This is not what matters ("but SHE LIED!!!!" Fuck
that. I demand neither perfection not sainthood from ANY candidate). Let's look at what really matters: she caught on the idea when it was new, in the mid-1980s and no one was really paying attention. She committed to it and still promotes it. Muhammad Yunus constantly mentions her.
That's why, I think, Hillary should be President. Let's tell the untold stories.
- FrenchDoc's blog
- Printer-friendly version
- Login or register to post comments



Front page
Comments
It's too bad
...the same media that gave us Bush and the Iraq war, is intent on forcing Obama down out throats.
Obama thinks he has the Presidency wrapped up already.
First, there's this quote from a few days ago:
"Well, look, there's no doubt that anything I do is going to be premised on what the economic situation is when I take office,'' Obama said. "I'm going to be sworn in in January, we don't know what the economy's going to look like at that point."
And just yesterday, Ed Rendell said that Obama told him this:
RENDELL: "I had a call from Senator Obama and he said, you know I'm going to be the nominee..."
Obama is a very arrogant jerk, with a huge sense of entitlement.
OxyCon
i wish this kind of thing would get covered--
it's only nonsense and attacking her that makes it on tv--it's awful.
It Takes a Village
, and her family/children work should be part of this series too, French. This is a great idea--thanks!
Hillary, Epilepsy and Axelrod's Wife
The piece in the New York Times on David Axelrod mentioned that Hillary had initiated one of the most important conferences on epilepsy (I first read about it on a blog post here). Here's the quote from the piece:
Setting aside the Axelrod stuff,* I was interested in finding out exactly what the conference was that Hillary had initiated. Well, I found it, here's a description - http://www.ninds.nih.gov/news_and_events.... Interestingly, it's described as "White House" initiated in the press release, yet it's clear from the New York Times article, White House = Hillary Clinton, not some staffer or policy wonk. I wonder how many other things that's true for. It appears from reading the release that the big thing to come out of the conference was setting annual benchmarks, something NIH still does.
* I don't generally have a problem with Axelrod working for Obama despite Clinton's work on epilepsy, what does seem rather noxious, is how hard the Obama campaign has worked to diminish Clinton's work on healthcare. For THAT, Axelrod should be ashamed of himself.
"Do what you feel in your heart to be right -- for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't. " - Eleanor Roosevelt
BDB, write a post about it
and make it part of the series!
Go Global!
I Thought About It, FrenchDoc
But I don't know anything more than what's in my comment.
If I get time, I'm going to put together something on Clinton's legal work, probably her writings on family law, which are fairly influential. I feel way more comfortable talking about her legal work than the healthcare stuff. But I have to find the time to pull some of her writings or at least a synopsis of them.
"Do what you feel in your heart to be right -- for you'll be criticized anyway. You'll be damned if you do, and damned if you don't. " - Eleanor Roosevelt
Obama's trying to take credit for advancing CURE
With Axelrod's assistance
http://www.barackobama.com/2005/03/11/cu...
I also want to include her 1995 Beijing "Women's Rights are Human Rights" speech as a reason HRC should be President:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sk3nzRt7p94