« Ponderable | Main | How Big Is PUMA Now? »

Obama's Democratic Platform Includes New Governance Planks, Emphases On Women, Fatherhood

07 Aug 2008 03:33 pm

Here it is -- the draft of the 2008 Democratic National Committee platform.  You're looking at it the version that was sent to platform committee members this morning. They'll amend and ratify it before the convention.

Platform 8 7 08 (2).pdf

Its title: "Renewing America's Promise."

The content is organized thematically. The platform emphasizes, among things, opportunity for women and goes into detail about a panoply of different economy, family and rights issues as they relate to women.  

The platform divides into sections. The first is about the economy, entitled "Renewing the American Dream."  Then comes "Renewing American Leadership," with a special emphasis on withdrawing from Iraq. Then: "Renewing the American Community." Then a brand new section that reflects Obama's campaign theme: "Renewing American Democracy," which opens with a section on ethics and governance. 

In 2004, John Kerry's platform repeated the word "strong" in each title: A "strong, respected America.. a strong, growing economy, strong, healthy families," etc.

The preamble includes an olive branch to Republicans and independents:

And so, Democrats -through the most open platform process in history -are reaching out today to Republicans and Independents who hunger for a new direction and a reason to hope. Today, at a defining moment in our history, the Democratic Party resolves to renew America's promise.

Here's what the platform says about some hot topics:

2nd Amendment

We recognize that the right to bear arms is an important part of the American tradition, and we will preserve Americans' continued Second Amendment right to own and use firearms. We believe that the right to own firearms is subject to reasonable regulation, but we know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne.  [Note: in 2004, the platform contained a single line -- "we will protect Americas' Second Amendment rights to own firearms".]

Fatherhood:

Too many fathers are missing-missing from too many lives and too many homes. Children who grow up without a father are five times more likely to live in poverty and are more likely to commit crime, drop out of school, abuse drugs and end up in prison. We need more fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception. We need them to understand that what makes a man is not the ability to have a child-it's the courage to raise one. We will support fathers by providing transitional training to get jobs, removing tax penalties on married families, and expanding maternity and paternity leave. We will reward those who are responsibly supporting their children by giving them a tax credit, crack down on men who avoid child support payments, and we will ensure that payments go directly to families instead of bureaucracies.

Immigration

We support a system that  requires undocumented immigrants who are in good standing to pay a fine, pay taxes, learn English, and go to the back of the line for the opportunity to become citizens. They are our neighbors, and we can help them become full tax paying, law-abiding, productive members of society. At the same time, we cannot continue to allow people to enter the United States undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. The American people are a welcoming and generous people, but those who enter our country's borders illegally, and those who employ them, disrespect the rule of the law.

Intelligence Gathering

We support constitutional protections and judicial oversight on any surveillance program involving Americans. We will review the current Administration's warrantles  wiretapping program. We reject illegal wire-tapping of American citizens.

Iran

The world must prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. That starts with tougher sanctions and aggressive, principled and direct high-level diplomacy, without preconditions. We will pursue this strengthened diplomacy alongside our European allies, and with no illusions about the Iranian regime. We will present Iran with a clear choice: if you abandon your nuclear weapons program, support for terror, and threats to Israel you will receive meaningful incentives; so long as you refuse, the United States and the international community will further ratchet up the pressure, with stronger unilateral sanctions; stronger multilateral sanctions inside and outside the U.N. Security Council, and sustained action to isolate the Iranian regime.

Domestic violence

Ending violence against women must be a top priority. We will create a special advisor to the president regarding violence against women. We will increase funding to domestic violence and sexual assault prevention programs. We will strengthen sexual assault and domestic violence laws, support the Violence Against Women Act, and provide job security to survivors. Our foreign policy will be sensitive to issues of aggression against women around the world.

Intelligence Reform

Barack Obama will depoliticize intelligence by appointing a Director of National Intelligence with a fixed term, create a bipartisan Consultative Group of congressional leaders on national security, and establish a National Declassification Center to ensure openness.

Abortion (called "Choice")

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman's right to choose a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay, and we oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

Governance

We will lift the veil of secret deals in Washington by publishing searchable, online information about federal grants, contracts, earmarks, loans, and lobbyist contacts with government officials. We will make government data available online and will have an online video archive of significant agency meetings. We will put all non-emergency bills that Congress has passed online for five days, to allow the American public to review and comment on them before they are signed into law. We will require Cabinet officials to have periodic national online town hall meetings to discuss issues before their agencies.


Comments (31)

Anybody want to take on the task of determining, issue by issue, where the platform has moved further left since 2004 and where it has moved right?

Where the hell is the gay rights platform? 40 pages of gobbledeegook, including a huge section on the 'danger' and 'urgency' *gasp* of global warming yet nothing on this generation's civil rights movement from the party of civil rights.

Thanks Obama. Though I suppose the Clintons wouldn't have been any better.

Thanks Marc, should be good reading. Any word yet on speaking schedules in Prime Time?

Well, there you have it.

The party platform is supposed to mirror the principles and policies of the nominee, in this case pro-abortion candidate Barack Obama. The proposed platform does just that, by promoting unqualified support for abortion and the Roe v. Wade case that ushered in 50 million abortions.

It also includes a short phrase about a woman's ability to pay for an abortion -- meant to tout support for making taxpayers fund abortions.

The final aspect of the language hearkens to Obama's pledge to Planned Parenthood in a July 2007 speech saying his first action as president would be signing the so-called Freedom of Choice Act. That's a Congressional bill that would overturn every abortion limit nationwide from a ban on partial-birth abortions to parental notification laws.

Tax-funded abortions, leaving parents in the dark about their daughter's abrotions, no partial-birth abortion ban. These are totally out of step with about 70 percent of the American people.

The most explicit they're going to get in this kind of document is under "A More Perfect Union". Repeal DOMA and ensure equal civil rights regardless of race, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation. That last one can be a dog whistle to gay marriage activists but we're probably at the point where a specific mention of civil unions is appropriate.

Didn't bother to read through it all, but I did notice the position on Intellgence/Wire Taping is exactly the same as the administrations... just with some nice fluff thrown in about being against "illegal wire taping". I'm also against illegal shooting of puppies!

Steven,

Democrats are not pro-abortion. We believe that abortion is not for the government to prohibit because it impedes the individual choice to which women are entitled when it comes to their reproductive systems. However, we believe abortion should be reduced as far as possible through addressing the root causes of abortion: poverty, lack of education around birth control, and single-parent families.

And the line about the cost of abortions isn't at all about funding them with taxpayer dollars. It's about not actively making them more expensive than other comparable, equally important health care services, which is what the Bush Administration has done. No, we won't impose our moral priorities on Americans, but that doesn't mean we don't have the spine to advocate for moral concerns. I, for one, respect your moral concerns and support your right to ask people to consider and follow them. What I don't support is you -- or a government you and/or I elect -- using the law to force people to make the choices you feel are correct. Unfortunately, such an approach is counterproductive to your cause in the long run because it denies people the opportunity to even make the right decisions.

Tim Fitzgerald

A sincere thank you, Tim Fitzgerald. Beautifully stated.

Steven,

The Platform also includes support for sex education, which is an effective method for significantly reducing teen pregnancy and abortions:

The Democratic Party also strongly supports access to affordable family planning services and comprehensive age-appropriate sex education which empowers people to make informed choices and live healthy lives. We also recognize that such health care and education help reduce the number of unintended pregnancies and thereby also reduce the need for abortions. (45)

The 2004 Republican platform (I couldn't find a draft of the 2008 document), however, promises more abstinence-only education:

"We also support the President’s efforts to double the amount spent on abstinence-only education and to promote healthy relationships." (www.gop.com/images/2004platform.pdf)

But abstinence-only education has been a failure at preventing teen pregnancies.

Handing out condoms (etc) doesn't promote promiscuity. But it does help stop unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

I'm still waiting to hear how the platform meeting results were integrated into this process?

QT

Thank you for posting this!

Handing out condoms promote promiscuity? Would handing out knives promote violence? Handing out guns promote shootings? Handing out the answers to tests promoting cheating?

Yes to all of the above. Naturally if you give a kid a gun, he's not going to say, "now I must shoot someone". Just like if you give a kid a condom he's not going to find someone to have sex with. Not I'm not equating guns and condoms here for the loonies - but I do use them both! (not concurrently!)

But strangely enough, kids already have the urge to have sex. Fewer of them have the urge to shoot someone. Giving a kid a condom and telling him it will keep him safe is a lie first of all. It can still give them an STD, and if you can get pregnant using a condom, you can get AIDs using a condom. Naturally risk level is reduced. But it's not a bullet proof vest.

So yes, giving a kid inclined to do nothing other than think about sex all day long will indeed cause him to think more about and seek out how he/she can have sex. Neither of those things is positive for society and the only reason why people seem to tolerate it, is some kind of anti-puritan backlash that says if the Quakers would have been pissed about it we should go along with it.

BTW, plenty of Republican dominated states and schools teach sex ed. They teach about STDs and condoms. My wife is in fact a sex ed teacher and a heavily Republican state and district. So don't try to paint republicans as wanting to teach ONLY abstinence. They teach sex ed to the degree that a student should learn it. Not the degree that enables a student to be more confident, and indeed, seeking out for opportunities to have sex.

Sex ed should always be taught with a - you are not ready - emphasis. Indeed, if a student is sitting in a high school classroom 8 hours of the day they are not ready.

So don't try to paint republicans as wanting to teach ONLY abstinence.

Not Republicans, just Republican politicians who won't stand up against their party's own empirically bankrupt platform.

Sam, I couldn't disagree more. It is, in fact, healthy to have sex using a safe method. Which means getting tested for STDs, being conscientious about your partners being tested for STDs, and using contraception. Like in many aspects of life, any remaining (very very small) risk is worthwhile.

A Paradigm shift in healthcare delivery can facilitate National, Universal Access to healthcare for all Americans

I'm a career federal government employee and I know that depending on the Federal government to fix the National Healthcare System is a non-starter. I've never been in the medical profession but I'm a Technoprogressive and a Futurist and I believe that by bringing to bear a LOT of advanced IT, and other medical technologies towards these issues we have a shot at creating a cost-effective and efficacious National Healthcare System with universal access. The model I have in mind involves the use of telemedicine to push the vast majority of primary care out of the institutional setting and down into the "Home Care" environment. I feel that by employing Telemedicine technology in the home, combined with Personal/Electronic Medical Records, that'll enable & empower the average healthcare consumer to monitor their own health and to manage minor injuries as well as relatively complex chronic diseases and comply with healthy behavioral, dietary and lifestyle changes in a more cooperative manner. By taking advantage of the amount of households in this nation have PC's and Internet access, the average household can access a vast array of healthcare related information and websites with all sorts of tools and plans and management protocols that can be easily modified for individual households, and families. Care plans for individual persons within a household can be implemented and compliance can be monitored through numerous telemedicine peripheral devices. Telemedicine can allow individuals to monitor their own health in the privacy in their own homes and also provide their clinicians with an unprecedented surveillance capability so that they can keep an eye on their patient’s health (subject to their patience compliance with the reporting protocol). I feel that instead of all of the classical solutions that are currently being offered, that what's needed is to reengineer the entire infrastructure so that all care except various types of intensive care, trauma & surgeries that can't be performed on an outpatient basis are pushed out into the community on a much more extensive basis than they are currently. The model that I've been developing envisions care being rendered in an inverted pyramid with telemedicine in the home at the bottom, at the next highest level of care would involve receiving a homecare visit from a trained caregiver, at the next highest level of care would be referrals to outpatient clinics, express clinics in Malls (or big box retailers like Wal-Mart or Kmart) or MRI/CT centers, Ambulatory SurgiCenters/Day SurgiCenters or specialty care clinics and at the highest level of abstraction within the health care system, care would be rendered in hospitals that render services only in an intensive, acute care setting. Hospitals would also host the central telemedicine control centers from which primary care would be rendered remotely direct into the homes of patients. All other care would be rendered at a lower (but appropriate) level of abstraction within the healthcare system. In this way, a great deal of the physical infrastructure (and its associated costs) that currently constitutes our national healthcare system can be disintermediated. In addition, all of the clinics and SurgiCenters, and the hospitals can be networked on high-speed backbone that can also support the telemedicine system so that vast amounts of data and images can be shared effortlessly. Rendering as much Primary care in the home as is practicable thru the use of telemedicine combined with homecare visits will facilitate the implementation of preventative healthcare protocols & comprehensive chronic disease management protocols. The way I see it, if you can push the "healthcare system" down into individuals homes, and use it to promote healthier, wellness lifestyles with a preventative theme, then that should lesson the necessity of so many ER visits & re-hospitalizations or the (load) that is placed on the healthcare system. If the load is lessened, then that should provide opportunities for disintermediating brick & mortar healthcare infrastructure.

ENERGY POLICY: Let us not be upstaged by Paris Hilton. Let us not continue to pay our enemies for the Jihad against us in the middle East. Our energy policy should contain short term as well as long term solutions. Thus, research and developement of alternative fuels, alternative biofuels, & nuclear fuels, must be a priority. One source of funding could be the use of excess profits tax revenues to fund nonpartisan nonprofit instutional research with developmental models using laid off American auto workers as production force members. But also we must have currently more drilling and production in the US, perhaps more environmentally friendly and controlled, but more drilling: in offshore areas, the Colorado shale fields, and the uninhabited areas of Alaska's North Slope. Do not neglect the short term nor the long term. Neglect of the short term will bury us in economic depression. Neglect of the long term may bury us literaly, as the success of the Jihad depends upon our buying more and more middle-Eastern oil at exhorbitant prices.

The body of the firearms section actually calls for "reinstating the assault weapons ban". This is a killer. Almost all civil rights are founded on the idea of self determination and governmental non-interference in peoples lives. After Heller, Prohibiting self defense or gun ownership by honest citizens should be off the table. Many gun owners (democrats included) see this as an acid test, the rest of the platform is useless if this issue drive people off. Apparently the party has not learned from what happened to Al Gore in TN and many others after the first AWB.

Platforms are important, but they are essentially internal documents. The Democratic Party needs a long-term vision statement. A vision statement is brief statement of values and how those values relate to one another.

Republicans have "Republican Principles," a powerful communication resource about core conservative values. In less than 200 words it describes the conservative concept of good government.

Americans don't know McCain any better than they know Obama. The difference is that McCain is running as a conservative. Each and everyone of us can repeat a line from "Republican Principles."

Example: "I believe government must practice fiscal responsibility and allow individuals to keep more of the money they earn"

The report referenced below is not perfect by any means, but it does have some important take away points about the power of a long-term vision to change the direction of our country.

http://www.commonwealinstitute.org/reports/Vision_Report_Paxson_219008.pdf

Thank you for posting this Marc.

Strangely your highlighted section on 2nd Amendment is blank. Editing trouble?

The platform document confirms the fear, that despite lip-service respecting Second Amendment rights, the party is committed to reinstating a so-called "assault weapon" ban and even claims such a law prevents terrorism. The millions of ordinary American voters who currently own rifles which would put those voters at risk under such a law are not likely to agree. The marketplace is already responding with inflated demand as more rifles are being sold in anticipation of this new rifle ban by the Democrats.

The "assault weapon" plank is bad politics and bad policy. Even worse, the plank is contemptuous of the Bill of Rights.

You would think by now the Democrats would have learned that lesson. Yet people like Kessler and 'Third Way' continue to steer the Democrats towards the edge of disaster by claiming an "assault weapon" ban polls well. Well, that opinion polling is not supported by the election polls which are the only polls which really matter, as seen in 2000 and 2004 election results.

Democrats just don't get it. More gun bans. Al Gore lost his home state in no small part because Democratic gun owners jumped ship and voted for Bush. Gun bans cost votes. It's just that simple.

I was seriously considering voting Democrat this election. Due to the threat of the Assault Weapon Ban, I seriously have to rethink this. I mistakenly thought after the historic decision of the Supreme Court the Democratic Party would drop this. We need to concentrate on the other things that are important: the economy, working on the deficit, healthcare, social security and getting the economy back to the level of working on paying the debt instead of just the deficit. I think the Demorcrats may be offering the right message on how to fix these issues this time. But I cannot allow my hard won rights of gun ownership and the right of self defense to be watered down either. I don't know if I can trust the party to keep their word. We will have to make sure party members understand we will never tolerate this violation of our freedoms again so they will drop this one issue and let us get back to working on the other issues.

Michael Arkin:

FYI-You don't "drill" for oil shale. You do one of two things: A) develop it through open pit mining which would dig up a sizeable chunk of NW Colorado, SE Wyoming and NE Utah. The rock must be ground up and then retorted using up most of the region's available water and huge amounts of electricity. The tailings would then be dumped into area canyons for "reclamation." B) The other processing method, which is far from proven, is to retort the shale "in situ," or in place. This involves cracking the shale strata possiblly with high explosives and then injecting steam into the earth to "melt" the kerogen which is somehow sucked out of the ground for further process. Again, massive amounts of water and energy are required.

The kerogen in the rock (oil shale is a rock, by the way) can be used for producing diesel, kerosene I think and a few other items - not gasoline, though. Essentially the shale region of the U.S. West would become a national sacrifice area for energy production, which troubles many of the people who live there.

If we need to do that for energy security, the trade-off might be worth it. In any case, oil shale development will be costly, long-term,consumptive (water, energy, land), and a real environmental mess. And please don't simplisitcally lump it into the ease of just drilling another hole from an existing offshore rig. You're talking apples and oranges.

Those that support abortion do not want any interference from anybody, including the goverment. The last time I checked the judicial is part of the goverment. Then lets got back to pre roe vs wade and remove that decision.

Of course the Democrats are pro-abortion. To be pro-choice results in abortions. Period. I know, because I had an abortion in 1985. Obama said in the Saddleback debate that deciding when life began was "above my pay grade." Well, he makes $4 million a year--what's a woman making $12,000 a year to do? I remember "reasoning" in the parking lot of an abortion clinic that if abortion was legal, it must be okay.
Today, I know that it is not about the freedom of my reproductive organs but about the freedom to kill a unique human being--my own child. I regret my abortion terribly, and I am sorry that people fall for that line "a woman's choice" or "let's make abortion rare." All legal abortion does is enable promiscuity and help the sex industry. Norma McCorvey, the "Roe" of Roe v. Wade, is now against legal abortion and so am I. People think that life without legal abortion is unthinkable. As a woman who has lived it, let me suggest that paying $500 to kill our own children should be unthinkable. The Democratic platform is an insidious lie.

The Democratic position tries to reduce the number of abortions necessary by funding family planning programs. McCain has voted consistently against these programs resulting in more pregnancies.

Philosophers and religions have grappled with "when live begins" for hundreds of years. Even the Catholic Church has had different definitions.

To define life as beginning at conception, puts all abortions in the category of murder. That would mean even in the case of rape or incest the woman (or child) would have to complete the pregnancy regardless of perhaps greater emotional damage than the abortion would cause.

Further, the "morning after" pill, which the pro-life groups have already fought, would become illegal since it prevents a fertilized egg from implanting.

Finally, what about all the fertilized eggs from in-vitro fertilization. Would it be illegal to dispose of them because they are human life and subject to all the laws that "born" people are subject to?

In the early stages of pregnancy it must remain the woman's choice to determine her options including abortion!

I am all for fatherhood, but I want to remind you that there are many fathers who are being kept away from their children by vindictive mothers who are most willing to take the child support money but allow the fathers no access to their children. The courts will go after the fathers for child support, but do not take any action against a mother who is in contempt regarding visitation. I am tired of fathers being painted with this broad brush as irresponsible and uncaring, when in reality many are dutifully writing checks while their hearts are broken by being alienated from the children they love. Research has shown that fathers who are involved with their children are much more likely to support them materially. Let's crack down on mothers who rob their children of a relationship with a father.

Why don't we have discussion on how abortions could be prevented. Thw answer is in the male populations hands......just use birth control and there would never be a woman pregnant to have to make such a decision. I love how all the conservative talk people discuss abortion but never discuss when paternity begins and ends.
And yes Janet you will never see the invitrofertilization discussed as a problem by any politician. You cannot theologically be against abortion and for invitrofertilization where each petri dish is flushed, except the ones used. The reason it will never be discussed is because the same people who preach against abortion rights have probably used the procedure to have their families. And politicians are not going to chance losing those votes.

It continues to amaze me that we as humans find an excuse for bad behavior and bad judgments everyday. Abortion is a two sided idea. Moral and choice. Each party has their platform and viewpoint only from these two thoughts. Death is death. You can't change it and to say it is no ones right to take choices away from a person is something I wish people could ask themselves. This is a problem the world has had for a very long time. Education is important but to attribe one link to poverty and those less fortunate... wrong. These women have the babies. It is hard to educate girls on sex, abortion, birth control, adoption, contraceptives when you are fighting raging hormones and 15 year old celebrites who are getting pregnant. When you are exposed to it enough then it becomes ok. It could go on and on and it does. I can't begin to understand a party that wants to help people and fund programs for the less fortunate, the weak,...but can't take a moral stand on abortion and continually make it a choice issue. Talk about double standards.

Democrats are " Not for Abortion," it aught to be rare, but there will always be someone who needs help for many reasons. However, I suggest MEN take added responsibility for their actions. Too often Women have to bear the burden for uncaring men, egotistical men and those who are totally irresponsible. It's time to take a good look at the problems that exsist and will continue, un less people in general start changing their own bad habits. Decency, civility, and respect for each other, will help to solve many problems. As far as Gun Control goes, No one want to stop you guys from going hunting, BUT there are too-------many guns on the street, too much violence and guns contribute to many atrocities. No one needs a semo automatic to go hunting unless you are kill crazy, and not out for the sport. We need more "Common Sense" out there, and not so much "ME" "MYSELF and I"

I think it is ironic that Obama says "We need more fathers to realize that responsibility does not end at conception". Sounds like the beginning of life to me!

I am not against all abortions, but I am definetly against abortions where the pull the baby out, knock a hole in it's head and suck it's brains out. This may be a woman's body but they are not the only parent of this baby. How can someone be charged with two murders if they kill a pregnant woman but no one is charged when all you have to do is deliver the baby. When a woman finds out she is pregnant and elects to carry a baby to full term, she should at least be required to deliver it. It may be a woman's body but she is no longer the only person involved. Somebody needs to have the guts to do what our Supreme Court does not. Set a time that life begins. I worked at an abortion clinic and had to quit because they were no longer just protecting the women, they were killing innocent babies.