Clinton Proposes Big Grants for Family Leave

A recent article published in the New York Times on October 17, 2007 by Patrick Healy that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton proposed $1 billion in grants to states that pay family leave laws and that she will support employers to provide seven days per year to pay sick leave.
The candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination Mrs. Clinton called for expanding the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act, which allows ``eligible'' employees of a covered employer to take job-protected of unpaid leave. Actually the law covers businesses with more that 50 workers. Mrs. Clinton’s proposal would lower that to 25, covering and additional 13 million people.Business representatives said that “paid leaves” are so broad that they risk abuses for minor health concerns. Also, if she extends the unpaid leave act to smaller employer it will create more problems. This article is worth to read because it shows all the discontents citizens face because of candidates’ proposals; specifically Mrs. Clinton’s proposals. However, Mrs. Clinton’s advisers said they would work with Congress and industry to expand the federal law with an eye toward flexibility and support the needs of small businesses.
It seems that Mrs. Clinton has a very ambitious campaign. She is proposing tens of millions of additional dollars for block grant for child care programas. Together would cost $1.75 billion a year. The campaign said the government would cover the costs by establishing a single definition for a tax shelter that would ultimately yield more than $2 billion a year.

Mrs. Clinton support Science

The New York Times published an article on October 3, 2007, written by Patrick Healy and Cornelia Dean, regarding Mrs. Clinton’s commitment to combat global warning. Hillary Rodham Clinton critiqued the Bush administration science policy. She said that if she were elected president the next elections, she would enforce the science research to combat the global warning and find energy alternatives to foreign oil. Also, she pointed out the need for a strong program of human exploration of space.

Mrs. Clinton’s proposals for the new administration seem to be more realistic and necessary than Bush administration. She beliefs that traveling to the Moon or Mars just excites people. For that reason she will focus on nearer-term achievable goals. Her remarks were to attack President Bush for his “war on science” that has allowed political appointees to shape and in some cases distort science-based federal reports.

This article is worth to read because the author displays very important arguments Mrs. Clinton said. The vote is secret, but I confess my secret I will vote for her. I believe she is more realistic. She always has a counterargument for her contenders. For instance, she criticized Republican presidential candidates that said that they do not believe in evolution, while other Republican contenders have said they support teaching evolution and creationist ideas.

Our future president, Mrs. Clinton, sought to lay our her agenda in what one adviser called “a contest of ideas” with her Democratic rivals, who have been increasingly delivering more policy speeches in hopes of winning voters with big ideas that counter nearly seven years of Bush administration policy. She said in a interview. “When science is politicized, it is worse than wrong. It is dangerous for our democracy.”