POV: Hillary Clinton for President
She’s devoted her life to social justice
Photo by Gage Skidmore
Editor’s note: This is the first of two student POVs about the presidential election. Tomorrow: Donald Trump for President.
On November 8, the long and exhaustive 2016 presidential election will come to a close. One candidate will emerge victorious while the other will concede (or is supposed to) gracefully. She or he will then get a couple of months off, a party in January, and finally, the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. After that, she or he will become our commander-in-chief, the face of American political life, a leader of the free world.
There are many components to the office, and it takes a certain kind of person, strong-willed and diplomatic, to handle all of it. Of the two major candidates, only Hillary Clinton is prepared to be president of the United States. Only she has dedicated her entire professional life to public and social service.
She worked for the Children’s Defense Fund to expose racism in schools, advocated against the poor conditions of migrant workers, and took on child abuse cases at Yale’s Child Study Center. Early in her career, she fought for the rights of children and families and established many precedents for child advocacy and protection in law. Clinton could have done anything with her Yale Law degree, but chose fighting for the benefit of children, families, and the greater public good. You don’t do that stuff on a whim.
That social consciousness manifests itself in her platform, which I implore you to check out. One of the greatest issues facing Americans today is income inequality. When the top .1 percent own 20 percent of the country’s wealth, the economy stagnates, money doesn’t circulate, and standards of living for the middle and lower classes fall. We’ve seen it happen in the past, leading to social, political, and economic unrest. Income inequality is as much a social issue as an economic one. With wealth comes a reservoir of privilege and power; if you have money, you have more to say and more opportunities to say it.
Hillary Clinton will address this. She wants to raise taxes on the rich with a “fair share surcharge” and close tax loop holes beneficial to them. Her plans include job creation, company profit-sharing, equal pay and paid leave, and debt-free public college. All of these things are investments in the middle class, investments in future generations, investments in our workers and families. When the common person does well, we all do well, and that’s a philosophy to get behind.
To help bridge the income gap, Clinton seeks to overturn Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the 2010 Supreme Court decision permitting corporate political spending. In doing so, she’ll have to appoint a chief justice who agrees with her. Indeed, the next president could appoint up to four Supreme Court justices. Since they serve for life, they likely will rule on several landmark cases, affecting issues from women’s rights to gay rights to union rights. We could see Citizens United overturned. Or we could watch as Roe v. Wade is sent to the ash heap of history, where opponents think it belongs.
Finally, there’s the complex question of racial justice in America. Since Barack Obama took office, systemic racism has come to the forefront. How our next president handles this—the kind of dialogue she has, the method she applies—is extremely important. A society is best measured by how it treats all people, not just the top few.
I understand the issues that some people may have with Hillary Clinton, such as concern that recently found emails could persuade the FBI to reopen an investigation of her alleged misuse of a private email server.
Clinton has acknowledged her mistake in using that server, and has said that she has learned from it. The showmanship around this probe, or her emails in general for that matter, is far more political than it is prosecutorial. To let this determine your vote is doing you and your country a great disservice.
Clinton is an older white woman who can seem removed from the racial problems of America. It’s also no help that the 1994 crime bill, which her husband signed and she supported, significantly increased incarceration rates—and most of those targeted were African American men. There’s a lot of things she could have and should have done differently.
However, the proof is in the policy. Clinton today has reversed her stance on a number of these issues, is sympathetic to the Black Lives Matter movement, and has met with the mothers of that movement. She wants to implement law enforcement training focusing on conflict resolution, legislate an end to racial profiling, end mass incarceration, protect voting rights, and stop the privatization of prisons. Is this enough? Maybe not, but Clinton at is least responsive to these demands. Her opponent is openly hostile; progress under him would be significantly more difficult to achieve.
Hillary Clinton has some very good ideas. Her vision for America is one of prosperity, equality, and peace. She has a strong social consciousness; no one enters the rigorous game that is politics and stays there for as long as she has without great dedication. Is she perfect? No. But the important thing is that she’s responsive to pressure if it’s put on her—just look at her free public college proposal or her rhetoric on the wealthy. This responsiveness implies that Clinton hears the voters, hears public opinion, and adjusts herself accordingly. Part of that is political, but it’s nonetheless beneficial to those demanding the thing in the first place. This is significant considering that her Republican opponent is resistant not only to public pressure, but to the pressure of his own party.
We have an opportunity to elect the first female president in our history. She is qualified, dedicated, and intelligent. She’s a policy buff, a Yale-educated lawyer, a feminist. I urge you to do the right thing November 8 and choose Hillary Clinton.
Anna Stroinski (CAS’19) can be reached at annastro@bu.edu.
“POV” is an opinion page that provides timely commentaries from students, faculty, and staff on a variety of issues: on-campus, local, state, national, or international. Anyone interested in submitting a piece, which should be about 700 words long, should contact Rich Barlow at barlowr@bu.edu. BU Today reserves the right to reject or edit submissions. The views expressed are solely those of the author and are not intended to represent the views of Boston University.
Comments & Discussion
Boston University moderates comments to facilitate an informed, substantive, civil conversation. Abusive, profane, self-promotional, misleading, incoherent or off-topic comments will be rejected. Moderators are staffed during regular business hours (EST) and can only accept comments written in English. Statistics or facts must include a citation or a link to the citation.