Why I Voted for Hillary

I just got back from my local polling place. This is the first time in memory that I am able to cast a vote for President that actually matters. Having voted in Texas or Maryland since 1986, I haven't cast many votes in races where the winner isn't known days beforehand.

But up until this morning, I didn't know which way to vote. Both Clinton and Obama are terrific candidates, and would make great presidents. Each has flaws, but I'm confident that each would put their considerable talents to work fixing the problems created by eight years of Bush and Cheney.

I finally decided on Hillary for several reasons. Here are the biggest three:

Healthcare. Both Democrats realize that Americans are hurting when it comes to healthcare. We spend more per capita than any other country, and yet 47 million Americans go without health insurance. Most of those are regular working men and women and their children. But unlike Republicans, who have little interest in fixing the problem, both Clinton and Obama have pretty elaborate plans for reforming the system. Neither plan goes as far as I'd like them to, and both plans have been criticized. Obama's plan would still leave 15 million uninsured, and Clinton's plan would mandate coverage, forcing people to take coverage even if they didn't want to. But both plans would allow health insurance to be portable, would pool private plans and create an alternative Medicare-style public plan. And both would pay for it by repealing the tax breaks that Bush gave to households making more than $250,000 per year.

The difference is not with the plans, but in the person who will have to drive them through Congress and sign them into law. Hillary is passionate about healthcare. It was her most public failure during her husband's administration, and it was one of the first issues she grabbed in this campaign. She knows from experienced the size, strength, and tactics of her opposition, from the entrenched fatcats who are growing rich from the status quo. And she won't rest until we have a plan in place to try to fix the system. It may not be perfect, but it's a far sight better than what we have now.

Iraq. Obama mentions at every opportunity that he was right on Iraq, and Hillary was wrong. But we're past the decision to go to war. We're even past the decision to bring troops home. Both Democrats have made it, and unless "Hundred Years" McCain wins the election, they'll be coming home soon after one of them takes office. But while Obama's wants them out in a year or so, save a few non-combat troops, Hillary knows that it will take much longer. There are more than 140,000 troops over there, but there are also more than 100,000 contractors, and a zillion tanks, troop trucks, planes, jeeps, and pieces of equipment that we have to bring back. To bring everyone and everything back will take time, and a year won't do it. Plus, she's allowing the generals to set the timetable, not the rest of us. As a key member of the Senate Arms Services Committee, she knows what the military needs, and can do. She has made a commitment to ending the war in Iraq, but she isn't about to get into a race to see how fast she can get everybody out. She will take a slow, organized approach, trying not to further destabilize the region. Liberals will be scratching their heads wondering why it is taking so long, but I'd feel much better about this approach.

Republicans. The third reason isn't really an issue. It's more a feeling I get when I examine both of these candidates. Obama is running on two words: change and unity. He wants to change the country by changing Washington. And how will he change Washington? That's where the unity comes in. Democrats are more alike than different, and there is really no need for all of the acrimony and harshness. Obama is clearly uninterested in going to war with Republicans; he wants to lead the whole country. "I don't want to pit Red America against Blue America," he said early in the campaign. "I want to be President of the United States of America."
Contrast that to Hillary Clinton, the Most Hates Women in country clubs and NASCAR events everywhere. She's never going to unite the country. She's never going to get Republicans to work with her. And that's fine with me.
There are two ways to get something done in Washington: compromise or win. And for the first time in a long time, we actually have a chance to win. With a Dem in the White House and solid majorities in the House and Senate, we have a chance to reverse some of the damage of the Bush Era. We have a chance to get some control over the defecit, to take some real action for the environment, and to lower the widening gap between rich and poor. Not to mention healthcare and Iraq. But we don't need a coalition-builder in the White House for that; we need a fighter. We need someone to say, "I heard the jokes. I know what you're thinking. I know that you can't stand my being here. But I'm here now, so deal with it. And maybe in four years, your party will put you here. Unless you're a Mormon, that is."

Only she won't be, of course. She won't be President. Not this year, and probably not ever. Today may be the last real day of her campaign, or maybe the last week, or the last month. But the handwriting is on the wall. Even with the superdelegates, even with 65% of the rest of the pledged delegates, even if they re-run Florida and Michigan, it won't be enough. It won't be enough to overcome the national movement that will lead to the first black man to be nominated for President, and not the first woman. But I'm fine with it. Sort of.