Hillary and FMLA

Dana Goldstein notes the collapse of Hillary Clinton's argument that she played some kind of key role in passing the Family and Medical Leave Act:

Seriously though, a bigger story supposedly "uncovered" in the First Lady papers is that Hillary never held or attended any meetings on the Family Medical Leave Act, which was the first piece of legislation President Bill Clinton signed, 10 days after entering office. Having just written a piece about the FMLA for the upcoming print issue of the Prospect, I can tell you that anyone familiar with the law should have already realized Hillary's very limited involvement. The non-profit organization the National Partnership for Women and Families originally drafted the bill, which was then championed in the House by former Colorado Congresswoman Pat Schroeder and in the Senate by Chris Dodd and Ted Kennedy. These three were at work trying to pass the FMLA from the late-1980s on, while the Clintons were in Arkansas and running a national campaign.

Beyond that, my understanding is that the law actually passed before Bill Clinton was elected:

The bill reached its final form in 1991, passing both houses of Congress only to be vetoed by Bush, who said the bill would tie the hands of businesses. An attempt to override the veto failed, but Congress re-introduced and passed the bin without any major changes in 1992, at the height of the presidential campaign, knowing Bush would veto the bill again and leave himself open to charges that he was "anti-family."

When Clinton won, the law passed again, and he signed it. Given that history, it's just inconceivable that Hillary could have played a large role. Ezra Klein wonders if Ted Kennedy and Chris Dodd are supporting Barack Obama in part out of spite because they don't like Clinton claiming credit for their legislative achievements. I don't think you need spite to factor into it -- the essence of the case for Hillary, according to HIllary, is her experience so of course people in a position ot know how tenuous her claims to experience are don't find the case for Hillary all that compelling.

Comments

I expect Tim K and Petey to explain how this is good news for Hillary any time now.

Posted by Jake | March 20, 2008 11:48 AM

Good news? No, Jake- this is GREAT NEWS!!! FOR HILLARY!!!!

Posted by Monster | March 20, 2008 11:55 AM

Aw, that joke never gets old.

At what point will the mainstream press tap into the fact that Hillary has massively puffed up her resume? When they do, we're going to see the same thing happen to her that's happened to Obama. Live,24 hour coverage of the issue on Fox News and CNN.

Posted by Helter | March 20, 2008 12:01 PM

No, no, no Tim K is going to tell us Obama can't win because of Wright and nothing else matters. Look at the polls, Obama is toxic, we must vote for Hillary.

Posted by bjd | March 20, 2008 12:06 PM

First S-Chip, Ireland, Bosnia then FMLA, her "experience" and now NAFTA.. Clinton lied!!! NO!!!! You dont say..

Posted by Ann | March 20, 2008 12:17 PM

There was a great diary on this very subject a few weeks ago on Daily Kos. Take a look: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3/9/111930/6389/50/472849

Posted by Suze | March 20, 2008 12:18 PM

After the abject failure of the super secretive Hillary-care; Hillary Clinton sought to rehabilitate herself politically, in yet an even more covert manner: http://theseedsof9-11.com

Posted by Peggy McGilligan | March 20, 2008 12:20 PM

Helter, one of Hillary's central claims is that she is experienced. This experience amounts to largely symbolic roles with no direct line authority, budget or accountability for success or failure. It is particularly scary in light of the fact that Hillary is going to be facing someone who can make a credible claim to experience in the GE if she were to win. How in the world would she be able to pivot, particularly in light of her penchant for resume inflation?

Posted by z adura | March 20, 2008 12:21 PM

"Seriously though, a bigger story supposedly "uncovered" in the First Lady papers is that Hillary never held or attended any meetings on the Family Medical Leave Act, which was the first piece of legislation President Bill Clinton signed, 10 days after entering office." ...

Did Senator Clinton say that she held or attended meetings on the FMLA?

"Having just written a piece about the FMLA for the upcoming print issue of the Prospect, I can tell you that anyone familiar with the law should have already realized Hillary's very limited involvement.

How can someone who never held or attended a meeting on the FLMA still have limited involvement?

She either was involved or she was not.

Which is it?

Posted by TheOkie | March 20, 2008 12:24 PM

Beyond that, my understanding is that the law actually passed before Bill Clinton was elected...

So -- she made it happen, before she was for it?

Doesn't that mean that HRC controls space and time, and may possibly exist simultaneously in different dimensions?

Jeez; you almost have to vote for her on that basis alone!

Posted by Jemand von Niemand | March 20, 2008 12:39 PM

Hurray,

Finally this gets the coverage it deserves.

The KOS diaraist Maineoiac's excellent, detailed and link-filled post on the subject (already mentioned above)was posted all the way back March 8.
What took this story so long to catch on.

I posted an entry on my site yesterday about this, and am delighted to see that bigger fish were already on it.

HERE’S A CLICKABLE LINK TO MY POST

at...

100 REASONS NOT TO VOTE FOR HILLARY CLINTON

Posted by Steve | March 20, 2008 12:41 PM

A correction, Matt. Yes, the law was passed before Clinton took office -- twice - but it was then vetoed by Bush. Since 1992 elected a new Congress along with the new president, the bill had to be passed AGAIN - which is was, quite quickly. Congressional leaders planned on this two weeks before Bill Clinton was sworn in; they all thought of it as establishing his ability to break Washington gridlock.

Posted by M2 | March 20, 2008 12:56 PM

I thought it was S-CHIP she was claiming all the credit for which pissed off Ted Kennedy as he was an author of that one too.

Anyway, to paraphrase TheOkie from yesterday - it was Bill Clinton who was president and signed the bill not Hillary Clinton. She shouldn't claiming credit for his work.

Posted by Mike | March 20, 2008 1:02 PM

I doubt the support for Obama by Kennedy and Dodd are out of that. They know politics. And that is where their support comes from. Many in the party are sick and tired of the Clintons and their control over the party.
Especially when the Clintons began to play the usual games and hedging and polarizing mindset.
They also probably saw very early before most did, that the Clintons would stop at nothing, including taking the party down, to get their way.
I am thinking many democrats also see the Clintons are weakening the party from their control of 20 years. The party has stagnated and cannot rebuild effectively.
It's their chance to finally be free of their iron grip and oppressive rule.

Posted by vwcat | March 20, 2008 1:44 PM

Every reason she gives for us to vote for her turns out to be bullshit. I still don't know why I am supposed to vote for her at this point. Considering that her second-biggest high profile supporter - Jack Nicholson - doesn't even seem to be taking that seriously (calling her "the best man for the job" and his campaign video of him as the Joker and other psychos endorsing Clinton), we shouldn't be surprised.

Posted by Reality Man | March 20, 2008 1:50 PM

Thanks for this. I really hope the media will collectively grow a pair and do more to call out Hillary on this resume-puffing. Not to mention--where the heck are her 2006 tax returns??

Posted by Ruth | March 20, 2008 2:12 PM

Sounds similar to the videotaping interrogations law that Obama claims as one of his crowning achievements. Never mind that the legislation had been introduced in the previous two sessions by another senator. Emil Jones and Obama decided to play 'let's make a Senator' by having Obama introduce all the high profile legislation during that term regardless of whether he had done any of the work on the bills.

Sure probably a fair amount of what Clinton is claiming credit for is nonsense but so are some of Obama's "achievements."

Posted by Obama is a ttouchdown vulture | March 20, 2008 2:35 PM

Sounds similar to the videotaping interrogations law that Obama claims as one of his crowning achievements. Never mind that the legislation had been introduced in the previous two sessions by another senator. Emil Jones and Obama decided to play 'let's make a Senator' by having Obama introduce all the high profile legislation during that term regardless of whether he had done any of the work on the bills.

But didn't the interrogation law fail to pass the legislature when it was introduced before? Obama managed to get it to pass through his negotiations -- or so say everyone who was a participant in the process, including those who initially opposed the law. That isn't the case with FMLA.

Posted by jbryan | March 20, 2008 2:56 PM

TheOkie: How can someone who never held or attended a meeting on the FLMA still have limited involvement?

She either was involved or she was not.

Apparently her involvement was limited to taking credit for other peoples work.

Posted by Another Mike | March 20, 2008 3:02 PM

it passed about 8 says after Clinton was sworn in, I believe. and no, she didn't have anything, not one single thing, to do with it. I'm sure she supported it, Clinton campaigned saying he'd make sure it passed if it hadn't by the time he was President, and passed it immediately after. actually most credit for it should go to Dodd, who introduced and reintroduced the measure numerous times throughout the late 80s and early 90s.

Posted by onceler | March 20, 2008 3:09 PM

The law passed because the Democrats took over the Senate. Obama's negotiating skills certainly helped the process but videotapping interrogations was not his idea and he had never introduced similar legislation while in the minority. Obama was able to sell the legislation as a the compromise position since liberals were attempting to permanently end the death penalty in Illinois. Everyone involved in the process also agree on this.

Surely you understand that Obama also points to ideas that were not his and legislation that he was not the original author of as examples of his achievements.

Posted by Obama is a touchdown vulture | March 20, 2008 4:23 PM

Facts:

BOZObama would not be where he is if the news media was not shoving him down the throats of the american people AS WELL AS GIVING HIM A FREE RIDE when it comes to airing obama's dirty; meanwhile the news media does anything and everything to make Hillary look like this racist monster!!!

As well, he would not be where he is if most of the blacks weren't being RACIST and only voting for him because he is black!!! you can say the Clintons played the RACE card but it is the news media who twisted and turned it to make it come out that way... as well, I believe that BOZObama's camp put out the photo of him dressed in the kenyan garb to try and cast Hillary as a racist fear monger!!!

jesse jackson and al sharpton are the biggest RACISTs in the country... well, I take that back; REV. WRIGHT is the biggest racist... but as BOZObama does, he smoothed it over for the SIMPLETONS following him with his ability to use his slick silver tongue!!! he slithers very well when it comes to trouble, just like a snake!!!

I am sorry but the FACT that he did not DENOUNCE and REJECT this rev. wright buffoon tells a story and those that follow him are blinded by his beautiful oratory but those who see him clearly see it for what it is... BOZObama is running to bring people together but still yet he has attended a church, and not only this, he has taken his daughters to this church, so that they can be filled with this anti-american rhetoric... you can see it in Michelle, talking about for the first time in her adult life she is proud of AMERICA... not only this, BOZObama talks about how people are being bamboozled, okie-dokie'd, and hoodwinked

Posted by Muniz4Hillary | March 20, 2008 8:20 PM

Muniz4Hillary:

For starters, calm down with the exclamation points -- they make your "comments" sound more hysterical than they are (If that's possible).

Question. My parish priest from the second grade through my sophomore year in college, a mentor, a coach, a guest at my parent's table turned out to be a pedophile. Does that mean my familiy supports pedophilia? No. I find it reprehensible. We can't control the behavior of others.

The same applies to Rev. Wright. Obama was very clear when he said that he finds some of the Rev's rhetoric reprehensible, but he also knows the man beyond the soundbite. He's seen the work this man has done in the community that goes beyond what Fox News and twitters from a McCain staffer. There is more to this than is being shown on YouTube.

Your hysterical posting about how Obama would not be here unless the media was shoving him down our throats and that the only reason he's getting the black vote is because black people are being racist by voting for him is laughable in it's ignorance.

And while we're on the topic of ignorance, you should research before you write. Michelle Obama never said she wasn't proud to be an American. She said it was the first time in her adult life that she was really proud of her Country. There is a big difference. Especially when the remark is taken in context (In this case, she was discussing her husband's campaign).

Frankly, the only racist in the room seems to be YOU.

Posted by Muniz4Hillary is a Moron4Hillary | March 21, 2008 3:22 PM

Muniz4Hillary:

For starters, calm down with the exclamation points -- they make your "comments" sound more hysterical than they are (If that's possible).

Question. My parish priest from the second grade through my sophomore year in college, a mentor, a coach, a guest at my parent's table turned out to be a pedophile. Does that mean my familiy supports pedophilia? No. I find it reprehensible. We can't control the behavior of others.

The same applies to Rev. Wright. Obama was very clear when he said that he finds some of the Rev's rhetoric reprehensible, but he also knows the man beyond the soundbite. He's seen the work this man has done in the community that goes beyond what Fox News and twitters from a McCain staffer. There is more to this than is being shown on YouTube.

Your hysterical posting about how Obama would not be here unless the media was shoving him down our throats and that the only reason he's getting the black vote is because black people are being racist by voting for him is laughable in it's ignorance.

And while we're on the topic of ignorance, you should research before you write. Michelle Obama never said she wasn't proud to be an American. She said it was the first time in her adult life that she was really proud of her Country. There is a big difference. Especially when the remark is taken in context (In this case, she was discussing her husband's campaign).

Frankly, the only racist in the room seems to be YOU.

Posted by Muniz4Hillary is a Moron4Hillary | March 21, 2008 3:23 PM

FMLA was vetoed by Bush I. When Clinton was running for office, Hillary met with quite a few women leaders and talked about what things could be accomplished related to women and family issues if Bill were elected. She met with Schroeder (who also happens to be 100% behind Hillary for president) and others about FMLA.

So it was no surprise when FMLA was reintroduced in Congress quickly in 1993, passed and signed into law by Clinton.

As information, Hillary Clinton also met with breast cancer activists during the summer of 1992 about developing an agenda for research, etc. That agenda was also quickly developed as soon as Clinton took office with Hillary's help.

Posted by Betsy McCall | March 21, 2008 10:36 PM