Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Edwards, introduced by Mario Cuomo, Revisits “Two Americas” in NYC

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-21-07 11:11 PM
Original message
Edwards, introduced by Mario Cuomo, Revisits “Two Americas” in NYC
==June 21, 2007, 10:56 pm
Edwards Revisits “Two Americas”

By Karen James

Riffing off his Two Americas campaign theme, John Edwards took aim at the financial services industry in a speech tonight in New York, where he blamed a lack of industry regulation for the demise of the American Dream.

“Big financial interests are writing our economic policies – and while their profits are setting records, record numbers of families are going bankrupt and losing their homes.”

Mr. Edwards unveiled his plans to create a new Family Savings and Credit Commission that would increase federal oversight of all financial products marketed to families if elected president. ==

==Despite arriving more than one hour late for the speech, Mr. Edwards received an enthusiastic welcome from a crowd that had been treated to an extended warm-up act featuring former Gov. Mario Cuomo, who was on hand to introduce the speaker. The audience was so sympathetic in fact, that it booed down one irate woman who called Mr. Edwards arrogant after Mr. Cuomo, stalling for time, opened the floor for questions.==

Read the rest at http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/06/21/edwards-revisits-two-americas/

Here is the speech:

"Building One America"
Cooper Union
June 21, 2007

Thank you, Governor Cuomo, for introducing me and for inviting me to share some thoughts with all of you today.

I want to use our time together to continue a conversation about the economic life of our country: those served by it and those left out in the cold; the fundamental values our economy elevates and the ones it violates.

More than that, I want to talk about what we have to do to put our economy back in line with those fundamental values � and to put our government back in the service of America's best interests, not the special interests.

It is fitting to continue this conversation here at Cooper Union � a school founded by a man who couldn't afford to go to college, but who succeeded and made sure that others would have chances he never did.

Peter Cooper's story is the story of America. A place of optimism and upward mobility, a place where people work hard and sacrifice because they know it will lead to a better life for themselves and their children. And a place where we recognize that we are all in it together.

I know that story well, because it's my story, too. My father had to borrow $50 to bring me and my mother home from the hospital. Now I enjoy all the blessings of America.

Governor Cuomo knows it, because it's his story, too. His father came here without a penny in his pocket or a word of English and he raised his son to work hard and to stand up for the rights of working people.

I'm willing to bet that most of you or your parents or grandparents can tell similar stories.

We call it the American Dream: The right to succeed on the strength of your own merits � and the responsibility to help others to do the same.

Nobody gets to pull the ladder up behind them, once they've gotten to the top, and everybody has a chance to make the climb. It's a simple principle of fairness and opportunity, first and always, even in a complex world.

That's the soul of the American Dream. It is what draws people from around the world to our shores; it is what has sustained the optimism of the American people; and it is what has helped build the wealthiest nation in history.

But if you go out and talk to people around this country, they'll tell you, they still believe in the American Dream � they just think it's out of reach.

It's hard to call it the American Dream when fewer than a third of Americans thinks life will be better for their children than it is for them.

It's understandable that they feel that way. For the last 20 years, about half of America's economic growth has gone to the top 1 percent.

Today, the top 300,000 Americans now make more than the bottom 150 million put together.

Productivity is up but median income is down. People are making more, while they're making less. Men in their 30s today earn less in real dollars than the men did 30 years ago. More and more women have gone to work, and now married couples with children are working an average of 10 hours a week more than their parents did. Working families with breadwinners in their 40s are almost three times more likely to fall in to poverty than they were a generation ago.

What does all this mean in real terms? It means that our system rewards wealth, not work.

The gap between CEOs and the average worker is out of sight � today, the average CEO makes 400 times what the average worker makes.

Our tax system has been rewritten by George Bush to favor the wealthy and shift the burden to working families. That is simply wrong � and even those who benefit the most from our current system know that it is wrong.

Warren Buffett once complained that his receptionist loses more of her income in payroll taxes than he does. He called it "class welfare," and he meant welfare for the rich.

Nobody understands these divisions better than the man who introduced me today -- the man who dared to differ with Ronald Reagan's rosy vision of a "shining city on the hill" and who told a legendary "tale of two cities," where the rich and powerful are insulated from the needs of the vast majority of Americans.

Governor Cuomo's words ring as true today as they did in 1984 � or in 2004.

Because there are still two cities. There are still Two Americas.

One America that lives by the paycheck calendar; another that never has to look at the calendar before writing a check.

One America that's afraid it won't be able to leave its children a better life; another whose children are already set for life.

One America � middle-class America � long forgotten by Washington; and another America � narrow-interest America � whose every wish is Washington's command.

It's no coincidence that our economy is only working for a few when Washington is only working for a few.

Since 1996, the number of Washington lobbyists has tripled to 36,000. That's 20 times more people than live in my hometown of Robbins, North Carolina. It's 60 lobbyists for every member of Congress. Sixty. And I can tell you from experience, a lot of them are more powerful than the members.

So what happens?

Big insurance and pharmaceutical companies are writing our health care policies to ensure their own profits, not their customers' well being, while 45 million Americans go without health insurance and premiums skyrocket for everyone.

Big oil companies and electric utilities are writing our nation's energy policies. No surprise, they are blocking the development of clean renewable energies we so desperately need, both to protect the environment and to stimulate a new wave of economic growth.

Big financial interests are writing our economic policies � and while their profits are setting records, record numbers of families are going bankrupt and losing their homes.

Sallie Mae and other banks are blocking efforts to make college more affordable and student debts smaller. Cable and telecommunications companies are blocking efforts to make high-speed Internet universal and affordable. Accounting software companies are blocking efforts to make it easier for you to do your taxes.

Is it any wonder that so many hard-working, law-abiding middle class Americans feel as if the economic system is stacked against them?

And that's the problem of Two Americas. It's not that some people are doing well � Lord knows, that is what we all want. It's that too many people don't even have a chance. It's that the system that should be helping more people to succeed increasingly protects those who already have -- and it's doing it at the expense of everyone else.

There are a lot of people, especially people in Washington, who don't want me to talk about the Two Americas. And if you think they don't want me to talk about middle class Americans, you can bet they don't want me to talk about the 37 million Americans who are living in poverty here in the wealthiest nation on earth.

People tell me, poverty isn't good politics. But what is politics if not the public forum for our highest ideals?

They tell me there are better ways to win votes than to talk about poor people. But this isn't about winning votes: it's about winning back the American Dream for everyone willing to work hard to achieve it.

I'm not surprised, frankly, that people who rigged the system to begin with want to keep it that way forever, forget who gets left behind in the bargain. But the last time I checked, you're not supposed to check your values at the door when you run for president.

And you should not be president if you do not acknowledge the divisions that threaten our economy, our society and our soul.

Abraham Lincoln � who once spoke here at Cooper Union � famously said that a house divided against itself cannot stand. That is as true in our Two Americas as it was in his.

I have learned something in the last four years, though. It's not enough to talk about the Two Americas. We also need to talk about what we need to do to build One America -- and to do that, I believe we have to build One American Economy.

We should start with the Wild West of the credit industry, where some abusive and predatory lenders are robbing families blind. It's time for a new sheriff in town.

Debt has become the central fact of middle-class existence. Thirty years ago, families saved around 8 percent of their income; today, the family savings rate is negative � so families are going more deeply into debt. "Debt collector" is one of the fastest-growing jobs.

We can't afford all this debt, either. There were 1.2 million foreclosures in 2006 -- a 40 percent jump -- and millions more are expected.

Lenders deliberately build in tricks and traps for families. There are all kinds of fees, teaser rates, penalty rates, cross-default clauses. Terms are disguised instead of being disclosed.

As Elizabeth Warren has pointed out, you can't buy a toaster that has a one-in-five chance of burning your house down � consumer protections prevent it. But you can easily get a mortgage that has the same one-in-five chance of putting the family out into the street � and the lender doesn't even have to disclose the risk.

Our leaders in Washington stand by and watch. Of course, the financial industry is one of the top three givers to political campaigns, so the math just isn't that hard.

It's time we did more than say "buyer beware" while millions of families go broke every year. We should put in place the same consumer protections for financial products that we have for everything else Americans can buy. And when I'm president, I'll do just that.

First, I will create a Family Savings and Credit Commission to make sure that financial services treat families safely.

Right now, there's no sheriff in town. Interest rates were effectively deregulated 20 years ago. States cannot effectively regulate banks because most are based in other states. Federal regulators put bank "soundness" � profitability � far ahead of consumer protection.

My Family Savings and Credit Commission will change this. It will deal with all financial services -- credit cards, mortgages, car loans, check-cashers, payday loans, investment accounts, and more. It will ban the most abusive terms and make sure consumers understand the others.

Second, I will also pass strong national laws protecting us against the worst abuses in credit markets � predatory mortgages � abusive credit card terms � and payday loans with interest rates of 300 percent or higher.

Finally, I will help create alternatives to abusive lenders. I will help working families build up a cushion by matching their savings and bringing bank accounts to the 56 million without them. And I will support non-profit groups offering affordable, short-term loans. We need a new era of responsible lenders who see families as long-term investments, not quick bucks.

All across the economy, we need to do the same thing � take on the special interests and put Washington back on the side of regular families.

We need to take on insurance and drug companies to reform health care, bringing down costs and covering the 45 million uninsured.

The oil and power companies may not like it, but we need to invest in renewable energies and use energy far more efficiently.

And we need to do more to reward the hard work of regular families.

I grew up in a mill town where work was often in short supply, and it was understood that work was the key to upward mobility. It wasn't a chore � what I've heard called "a Monday-to-Friday kind of dying." It was a ladder to a better life.

It still is � and Americans' hard work is the driving force of our nation's prosperity.

Why then do we do so little to reward the average work of regular families?

It's time the working people of this country knew the system was working for them, not just for their bosses.

We need to reform our tax code. Our current system favors the unearned income of people already doing incredibly well instead of rewarding the work of families trying to get ahead. It has all kinds of loopholes and shelters that lawyers can twist for their wealthy clients. It forces millions of families to hire help to figure out how much they owe. That's just not right.

And we need to strengthen our labor laws. Unions made manufacturing jobs the foundation of the middle class and they can do the same for the millions of new service jobs in the labor market. But businesses routinely � and illegally -- block organizing drives by harassing and firing service workers. We need fair laws that let workers form a union if they choose.

These are just some of the things I believe we need to do to build One America � and which I will do as president. So you're going to hear me talking a lot more about them.

Not because it's good politics.

Not because it'll win me some more votes.

But because I believe we cannot go on as Two Americas -- one favored, the other forgotten -- if we plan to stay productive, competitive and secure.

Because I believe the backbone of the American economy is the hard work, determination, and ingenuity of the middle class.

And because I believe that the way a strong nation becomes stronger is by giving all its citizens a chance to prosper.

I know that together we can build One America � a place where everyone has a fair shot at the American Dream.

A place where our government cares more about people, wages and jobs than it does about profits, corporate prices and campaign contributions.

A place where patriotism means more than supporting a war; it means supporting one another.

That's the One America I want to help lead. And I look forward to working with all of you to build it.

I thank you for taking the time to listen to me today. And now, I'd be happy to take some questions.

http://johnedwards.com/news/speeches/20070621-reduce-debt/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
countmyvote4real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 01:01 AM
Response to Original message
1. Mario Cuomo should be on the SCOTUS instead of the * turds.
Edited on Fri Jun-22-07 01:04 AM by countmyvote4real
If Cuomo is introducing an Edwards rally, that says something to me. It reinforces my gut choice for Edwards. Of course, if Al Gore entered the race, then all things would change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 01:41 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. I agree. Sadly, he is too old for the SCOTUS. Perhaps Attorney General?
President: John Edwards
Vice President: Barack Obama (I think it is almost a certainty that if Edwards wins the nomination he will choose Obama as his VP for political reasons)
Secretary of State: Wes Clark
Attorney General: Mario Cuomo
Secretary of Defense: Max Cleland

THAT would be a great administration! :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
countmyvote4real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 01:00 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. That works for me. Let's make it happen. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Kick
:kick: for this "positive" thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 04:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. Is Cuomo endorsing Edwards?
Can anyone tell me?

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 04:52 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. He has also said Edwards talks the most about real solutions to problems
Edited on Fri Jun-22-07 04:54 PM by draft_mario_cuomo
Earlier this year. It seems Cuomo likes Edwards, whose "Two Americas" theme is reminiscent of Mario Cuomo's "Tale of Two Cities". I don't think he will offer a formal endorsement. That might complicate things for his son, who is the AG of NY, home of HRC. Plus, I don't think he endorsed anyone in the 2004 primaries. According to one DU'er who met him recently, Cuomo said he would not endorse anyone until they all came to Cooper Union. HRC and Obama apparently were invited, like Edwards, but declined to appear at Cooper Union, where the format is modeled after a famous Lincoln speech given in 1860. The Cooper Union series' aim is to get beyond 30 second sound-bites and truly discuss the issues in depth. Given that, I do not expect to see some other candidates appear there. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Thanks.
I appreciate the info.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IA_Seth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. According to a Clark supporter...
That attended this very event, he had a convo with Cuomo that went something like this...

Clark Supporter: "Hi Governor." He then expressed to Cuomo that he had been an admirer for years and that he was a "Wes Clark Democrat".

Cuomo: Asked if Clark was going to run?

Clark Supporter: Clark waiting for those preconditions.

Cuomo: Looked Clark supporter straight in the eye and said "We need him."

If you recall Cuomo was one of those Democrats who urged and supported Clark to run for President. I don't know who he is supporting, if anyone, but I imagine his support of Clark is still there.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
venable Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-22-07 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. he said exactly the same thing about Edwards
that his campaign was so important, his voice, his detailed policy proposals, his commitment to justice and equality...he gave the exact reasons he was important.

this, though, he said on the record to a huge crowd at Cooper Union, not just to an Edwards supported.

The feeling in the room was that, even though Gov. Cuomo said he was not endorsing until all the candidates showed up at Cooper Union, his obvious connection to Edwards and his message was about as close to an endorsement as you could get. Even Edwards joked about it after the introduction, about how close to an endorsement he had just gotten, and then looked at the Governon and joked that Cuomo would be flustered by Edwards supposition. It was light and sharp and nice to behold.

By the way, and maybe it's just me, but this verb - 'need' - sounds funny to me. I don't think we 'need' any one person, we only need good candidates, good ideas, good, winning politics. I am just a little uncomfortable with needing a particular person.

Gandhi was needed, Mandela and Steve Biko were needed. I get that.

But so were Pol Pot and Stalin - the feeling that carried them was the sense that it was that particular person that was needed.

We are not dealing with the Mahatma, Mandela, or Pol Pot here.

Anyway, rant over.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
countmyvote4real Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jun-23-07 01:08 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. I agree. We need progressive policies, but want a leader that can fulfill them.
Edited on Sat Jun-23-07 01:09 AM by countmyvote4real
What's left to say?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-24-07 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. bothered?
You seem a bit bothered by the fact that Mario Cuomo would think we (the party, the country, whoever Mario was talking about) need Wes Clark. I guess if you have a real problem with that word "need", you'd have to take it up with the Governor as he's the one who used it.

So you were there, at the event, to gauge the feeling in the room? Anything else you remember from the night?

I'm glad to see that Cuomo spoke kindly of Edwards in his introduction. It would have been pretty ungracious of Cuomo to speak otherwise after Edwards accepted the invite to his series at Cooper Union. He is trying to get all the "top" candidates, Dem and Republican there. I imagine if any Republicans take him up on his offer he'll have nice things to say about them in his introductions as well....which I guess won't sit well with some here but whatever...Mario's quest is to further the discourse, not try to score points with anybody.

As for Wes Clark, it has been gratifying to me to see Cuomo say supportive things about him through the years. I remember seeing him interviewed on some public affairs show in spring of '04 and being pleased to hear him tout Clark as a good VP possibility. Even though I was not one who wanted Wes as VP, it was nice to hear that Mario thought he would be a wise choice....

I like this blurb he wrote for Clark's upcoming book:
"General Clark has produced a clear and compelling description of what we need to do to defeat terrorism, rebuild our economy and restore our global leadership role. In so doing, this war hero, successful diplomat and brilliant Rhodes Scholar demonstrates exactly the kind of skills, experience and leadership we need to show us the way."

And, of course, there's that old quote of Mario's where he talks about how straightforward and truthful Wes Clark is.

So, you see, it's all good. Mario gave Edwards a wonderful introduction, he likes and admires Wes Clark to the point that he thinks we 'need' him and you had a great night at Cooper Union...It's all good, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
venable Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-25-07 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. I remember a lot from that night
and I spoke at some length with the Governor before the event.

My problem with the word 'need' is when it used to suggest (as it often is here) that we won't be alright unless we have person x or y.

That is idolatry, and I am certain that Cuomo is not an idolater.

I like Edwards. You like Clark. I'd say the big difference is that I believe that there are many who can carry Edwards message. I prefer it to be Edwards because I think he is a good man, but if it were someone else, anybody who gives clear, passionate voice to the same causes of honesty and fairness, I would be just as enthusiastic for them.

How about you? Do you believe that the policy positions that Clark espouses - whatever they might be - can ONLY be brought forth by Wesley Clark, nobody else? I seriously doubt that Cuomo believes that. I hope that's not what you are implying.

Anyway, so what you are saying is that Cuomo thinks we 'need' Clark, and he gave a nice intro to Edwards only because it was the polite thing to do?


I'm sorry, I just don't agree with either point. And I happen to know without a doubt that the latter point is wrong, as the conversation I had was lengthy (more than 20 minutes) and it spoke precisely to the subject. So, for me, anyway, yes, it's all good.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CarolNYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-25-07 07:10 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Cuomo's words
Edited on Mon Jun-25-07 07:18 AM by CarolNYC
Well, I'm not as comfortable speaking for Mario Cuomo as you seem to be so again I'll say that if you have a problem with what he said, you'd have to take it up with him and ask him to elaborate. I can't deny that I do like the sound of it, whatever he meant exactly. I agree he's not a idolater and yet he said we need Wes Clark.

And I would imagine he thinks highly of Edwards as well. If I remember correctly, he's said good things about him and his campaign before. It's no surprise. There's lots to like. I just don't think an introduction at an event that the Governor is sponsoring and to which the candidate has accepted an invitation is exactly proof of anything. Your conversation with the Governor as a supporter or campaign worker or whatever rather than the address to the crowd would be a better gauge of his sincere feelings regarding Edwards, IMHO. Obviously, you may think differently.

I imagine that if Guiliani should accept the invitation, Cuomo would find some nice things to say about him in an introduction as well. Giuliani might even also try to spin it into some kind of semi-endorsement from the Democratic Governor whom he once endorsed, against party lines. But I would certainly hope that doesn't mean that Cuomo in any way, shape or form would want Giuliani anywhere near the White House in the future.

So, thanks for the answer. I'd suggest if you have a real issue with the Governor's words that night you ask him about them when you see him next. No doubt he'd be a better interpreter of his words than I. And again I'm glad you enjoyed the night. Sounds like a good time was had by all. I hope some of the other candidates accept the invite, Democrat and Republican.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
venable Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-25-07 11:20 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. it's a great venue, historic, and Cuomo and Lehrer run it well.
(well, of course it's a Cooper Union run thing, but Cuomo and Lehrer are the face of it).

I hope, and even expect, others to come there. Serious, wonky discussion is good.

cheers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
draft_mario_cuomo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-25-07 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. Edwards-Clark=landslide
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC