The following is a list of links that explain the truth of Bill and Hillary Clinton with regards to their continued support for keeping people who use Crack Cocaine in prisons.
Bill never would reduce the crack cocaine that was asked for by many during his administration. Yesterday the supreme court gave permission to judges to have disgression in sentencing guidlines.
Clinton Signs Bill To Disapprove of Equalizing Crack-Powder Cocaine Sentences
On October 30, President Clinton signed a bill that blocks the U.S. Sentencing Commission amendments to equalize the penalties for crack and powder cocaine from taking effect
(see "Congress Nixes Amendments to Sentencing Guidelines on Cocaine, Money Laundering," 58 CrL 1086, October 25, 1995).
In a statement Clinton said the U.S. is making strides in combatting crime and violence.
"We have to send a constant message to our children that drugs are illegal, drugs are dangerous, drugs may cost you your life -- and the penalties for dealing drugs are severe," he said.
"I am not going to let anyone who peddles drugs get the idea that the cost of doing business is going down."
SENTENCING December 1995
Judges given leeway in crack sentencing
By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press Writer Mon Dec 10, 6:25 PM ET
WASHINGTON - The Supreme Court, weighing in on an issue with racial undertones, ruled Monday that federal judges have broad leeway to impose shorter prison terms for crack cocaine
in a case that bolsters the argument for reducing the difference in sentences for crack and powder cocaine.
The court, by 7-2 votes in the crack case and one other involving drugs, upheld more lenient sentences imposed by judges who rejected federal sentencing guidelines as too harsh.
The decision was announced ahead of a vote scheduled for Tuesday by the U.S. Sentencing Commission, which sets the guidelines,
that could cut prison time for as many as 19,500 federal inmates convicted of crack crimes.etcetc
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071210/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_crack_cocaine;_ylt=ArOPMaGWWUQbAt1NkZylP42s0NUE
""at the npr black brown forum""With Her Eye On Nov. '08, Polls Dictate Clinton Crime Policy
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/celeste-fremon/with-her-eye-on-nov-08_b_75207.html ""When asked about her own policy,
"""Clinton said she agreed with the feds' recommendation for equalizing the sentences,
but she opposed making the sentencing changes retroactive"".
"I have problems with retroactivity," she said. "It's something a lot of communities will be concerned about as well."
Obama, Edwards, Richarson, Dodd, Kucinich said they were in favor of the sentencing change being applied to those already serving time.
Now before we get to the reality of how such a sentencing change would play out, let's parse what Clinton said:
Although she agrees that disproportionate punishments for crack versus cocaine are wrong for the future,
she doesn't feel that past disproportionate punishments are wrong.""
ARE THE CLINTONS TOO INVESTED IN THE PRISON INDUSTRY? CLICK READ MORE
Too Little Too Late: President Clinton's Prison Legacy
[Press Release]
CONTACT: Daniel MacallairE-mail: [dmacallairATcjcj.org]Tel: (415) 621-5661 x310
"We really need an examination of our entire prison policy." -President Bill Clinton, Rolling Stone interview, October 6, 2000
"The proliferation of our prisons, however necessary, is no substitute for the hope and order in our souls." -President George W. Bush, Inaugural Address, January 20, 2001
Although Republicans are normally thought to hold the tough on crime mantle, in President Clinton's first-term (1992-1996), 148,000 more state and federal prisoners were added than under President Reagan's first term (1980-1984), and 34,000 more than were added under President Bush's four-year term (1988-1992).3 [See Chart I]
Throughout its tenure, the Clinton administration consistently supported increased penalties and additional prison construction. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 provided state and municipal governments with $30 billion to add 100,000 new police officers, to build more prisons, and to employ more prison guards, as well as funding for crime prevention programs.
While everyone is affected by the nation's quadrupling of the prison population, the African American community has borne the brunt of the nation's incarceration boom. From 1980 to 1992, the African American incarceration rate increased by an average of 138.4 per 100,000 per year. Still, despite a more than doubling of the African American incarceration rate in the 12 years prior to President Clinton's term in office, the African American incarceration rate continued to increase by an average rate of 100.4 per 100,000 per year. In total, between 1980 and 1999, the incarceration rate for African Americans more than tripled from 1156 per 100,000, to 3,620 per 100,000. (See Chart III)
Today, more than ever before in the history of the United States, education is the fault line, the great Continental Divide between those who will prosper and those who will not in the new economy. If all Americans have access to education, it is no longer a fault line, it is a sturdy bridge that will lead us all together from the old economy to the new...Because of costs and other factors, not all Americans have access to higher education. Our goal must be nothing less than to make the 13th and 14th years of education as universal to all Americans as the first 12 are today. -President Bill Clinton, Princeton University Commencement Address
"During the Clinton administration, the Department of Justice grew faster than any other agency of the federal government." -The Washington Post, February 9, 2001.
In the last days of his presidency, President Bill Clinton told a reporter from Rolling Stone magazine that mandatory minimum sentences were "unconscionable" and "we really need a re-examination of our entire prison policy."14 With a state, federal and jail inmate population that has grown by over 673,000 inmates since 1993, President Bill Clinton managed to contradict the last eight years of his stance on crime control in one sentence. President Clinton devoted two consecutive campaigns to "getting tough on crime," signing into law a bill that included the largest increase in crime control funding ever,15 and promoting measures that revoked sentencing discretion from federal judges. In his last days in office-- when he could no longer make lasting criminal justice policies--President Clinton repudiated one of the major tenets of his approach to crime control.
During the final year of George W. Bush's term as Governor of Texas, the State's prison population became the largest in the nation, edging out California's, even though 13 million more people live in California than in Texas.16 In 1999, as Governor, George W. Bush signed more death warrants than any other governor in the U.S.17 Having shown his conservative mettle on the crime issue, and having spoken of his own tribulations with alcohol abuse and a past conviction for drunk driving, President Bush's challenge is now to help others who are caught up in the criminal justice system to achieve the same kind of redemption he has. Based on his campaign platform, and a sober analysis of bi-partisan support for criminal justice reform, the authors recommend that President Bush begin his presidency by breaking with the policies of the last administration in two ways:
1. Deliver on his $1 billion promise for drug treatment. During the 2000 presidential campaign, Bush-Cheney 2000 issued a brief on drug policy that promised to provide an additional $1 billion for states to expand local drug treatment programs. Following through quickly on this promise will help states marshal resources to treat drug abuse through model programs, and will help the President emphasize prevention over prison. The administration might consider providing matching funds to states that follow the Arizona and California models--diverting less serious offenders into rigorous sentencing options like drug treatment, employment/restitution programs, and community service.18
2. End the Crack/Powder Cocaine sentencing disparity.
"One of the things that we have got to make sure of in our society is that our drug-prevention programs are effective. And I think a lot of people are coming to the realization that maybe long [mandatory] minimum sentences for first-time users may not be the best way to occupy jail space and/or heal people from their disease. And I'm willing to look at that." -President George W. Bush, on Inside Politics, CNN, January 18, 2001.
In 1986 and 1988, two federal sentencing laws were enacted that made the punishment for distributing crack cocaine 100 times greater than the punishment for powder cocaine. The result of these laws is that persons convicted of federal crack offenses, who tend to be African American, receive much harsher penalties than those convicted of powder cocaine charges, a much larger portion of whom are white. For example, someone convicted in federal court of distributing 5 grams of crack cocaine automatically receives a 5-year, mandatory minimum sentence, while it takes 500 grams of powder cocaine to trigger a 5-year mandatory sentence.
Despite the fact that about 2/3 of crack cocaine users are white or Hispanic, 84.5% of defendants convicted of crack possession in federal court in 1994 were African American, 10.3% white, and 5.2% Hispanic according to data from the United States Sentencing Commission. Trafficking offenders were 4.1% white, 88.3% black, and 7.1% Hispanic.19
By contrast, powder cocaine offenders were more racially mixed. Defendants convicted of simple possession of cocaine powder were 58% white, 26.7% black, and 15% Hispanic. The powder trafficking offenders were 32% white, 27.4% black, and 39.3% Hispanic.
As a part of the 1994 crime bill that President Clinton signed, the U.S. Sentencing Commission--a body designed to develop and oversee federal sentencing guidelines--was directed to study the effects of these laws. In 1995, they recommended equalizing the quantity of crack and powder cocaine that would trigger a mandatory sentence. Congress rejected that recommendation, which marked the first time it had done so since the establishment of the commission. President Clinton followed Congress and signed the rejection into law.
Groups ranging from the Cato Institute to the Rand Corporation have urged the federal government to revisit the cocaine sentencing disparity and mandatory minimums. As President Bush struggles to unite a fractured body politic, this bi-partisan issue is an excellent way to bring people together around criminal justice reform. Having already proven he can be tough on crime, President Bush must now prove that he is able to be smart on crime as well.
This report was funded by a generous grant from the Center on Crime,Communities and Culture of the Open Society Institute. Special thanks to Gregory Caldwell of CJCJ, Doug McVay of Common Sense for Drug Policy, Marc Mauer from the Sentencing Project, and Dr. William Chamblis from George Washington University, for their editorial and research assistance.
The Get-Tough- On-Crime Bug is Making Us Sick
By Sean Gonsalves, AlterNet. Posted December 4, 2007.
November 02, 2007 edition - http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1102/p01s02-usju.htmlMore equity in cocaine sentencingRevised guidelines lessen disparity in prison terms for crack versus powder.By Alexandra Marks | Staff writer of The Christian Science MonitorNew York
A change in federal sentencing guidelines has quietly narrowed the huge discrepancy in prison time for convictions involving powder versus crack cocaine, after a 20-year battle over the issue.
Since 1988, possession of five grams of crack cocaine – an amount equal to five packets of sugar substitute – landed a person in jail for five years. But people caught with cocaine powder would have to possess 100 times that amount, or 500 grams, to get the same five-year stint behind bars.
It's known as the 100-to-1 ratio. And because most people convicted of crack offenses are black and most convicted of powder cocaine offenses are white, critics have long argued that the disparity represents an egregious racial inequity in America's criminal-justice system.
etcetcPreviously, when the commission lessened sentencing guidelines for LSD and possession of marijuana plants, the changes were retroactive. But that is unusual. Of 696 amendments made to guidelines since their inception, only 25 were applied retroactively, says a commission spokesman.http://realcostofprisons.org/blog/archives/2007/11/federal_sentenc.html
America's One-Million Nonviolent Prisoners
[Press Release] [Exec Summary]
CONTACT: Daniel MacallairE-mail: [dmacallair@cjcj.org]Tel: (415) 621-5661 x310
What is most disturbing about the prison population explosion is that the people being sent to prison are not the Ted Bundies, Charlie Mansons, and Timothy McVeighs - or even less sensationalized robbers, rapists, and murders - that the public imagines them to be. Most are defendants who have been found guilty of nonviolent and not particularly serious crimes that do not involve any features that agitate high levels of concern in the minds of the public. Too often, they are imprisoned under harsh mandatory sentencing schemes which were ostensibly aimed at the worst of the worse.
As this analysis will show, the very opposite has been true over the past 20 years. Most of the growth in America's prisons since 1978 is accounted for by nonviolent offenders and 1998 is the first year in which America's prisons and jails incarcerated more than 1 million nonviolent offenders
etc
http://www.cjcj.org/pubs/one_million/onemillion.html
June 16, 1999
Today Congress confronts a similarly failed prohibition policy. Futile efforts to enforce prohibition have been pursued even more vigorously in the 1980s and 1990s than they were in the 1920s. Total federal expenditures for the first 10 years of Prohibition amounted to $88 million--about $733 million in 1993 dollars. Drug enforcement cost about $22 billion in the Reagan years and another $45 billion in the four years of the Bush administration. The federal government spent $16 billion on drug control programs in FY 1998 and has approved a budget of $17.9 billion for FY 1999. The Office of National Drug Control Policy reported in April 1999 that state and local governments spent an additional $15.9 billion in FY 1991, an increase of 13 percent over 1990, and there is every reason to believe that state and local expenditures have risen throughout the 1990s.
Those mind-boggling amounts have had some effect. Total drug arrests are now more than 1.5 million a year. There are about 400,000 drug offenders in jails and prison now, and over 80 percent of the increase in the federal prison population from 1985 to 1995 was due to drug convictions. Drug offenders constituted 59.6 percent of all federal prisoners in 1996, up from 52.6 percent in 1990. (Those in federal prison for violent offenses fell from 18 percent to 12.4 percent of the total, while property offenders fell from 14 percent to 8.4 percent.)
Yet as was the case during Prohibition, all the arrests and incarcerations haven't stopped the use and abuse of drugs, or the drug trade, or the crime associated with black-market transactions. Cocaine and heroin supplies are up; the more our Customs agents interdict, the more smugglers import. In a letter to the Wall Street Journal published on November 12, 1996, Janet Crist of the White House Office of National Drug Policy claimed some success:
http://www.cato.org/testimony/ct-dbz061699.html
The NationJanuary 5, 2007 (web only)Incarceration NationSilja J.A. TalviEvery year, American taxpayers fund an estimated $60 billion for our incarceration system. This system staples together a network of public and corporate-run jails, prisons, pre- and post-release centers, juvenile detention centers and boot camps. All together, these facilities hold well over 2 million human beings, locked away without public oversight or scrutiny.
Yet throwing money at the perceived scourge of criminality in the United States doesn't appear to have had the desired effect: Despite the staggering incarceration statistics, violent crime has actually begun to creep up over the last two years, according to the latest FBI Uniform Crime
As one 14-year-old girl put it to me in Seattle's King County Juvenile Detention Center, "This place just teaches us to be better criminals. It's like a criminal training school."
Part of the reason for the slight climate shift has to do with the fact that taxpayers are growing increasingly tired of throwing money into fiscal sinkhole of multibillion-dollar corrections budgets. (California's corrections budget is a whopping $8.75 billion, yet two-thirds of prisoners still end up back in prison.) And then there is the fact that adult and juvenile violent crime rates have, until recently, been on an overall decline since 1993, and the hysteria generated by the crack cocaine epidemic has finally died down to a dull ebb.
From Judge Gertner's perspective, this change necessitates a "re-education" of the judiciary, reclaiming their independence in a criminal justice system that has favored strict guidelines over judicial discretion--especially in drug cases--since the passage of the Reagan-era Anti-Drug Abuse Act in 1986, the law that established the 100-to-one crack-to-powder cocaine sentencing disparity.
With a new Democratic majority in Congress, a number of pending bills do seek to right some of the legislative wrongs of the past. Democratic Representative Charles Rangel has introduced HR 2456, the Crack -Cocaine Equitable Sentencing Act, introduced in 2005 and still in committee, which would equalize the drug-quantity ratio and eliminate the mandatory minimum for simple possession. Even some conservatives have moved forward on criminal justice reform. Republican Senator Jeff Sessions's S 3725, the Drug Sentencing Reform Act, introduced in 2006, would reduce the drug quantity ratio to a twenty-to-one disparity and mandatory sentence for simple possession to one year.
http://216.109.125.130/search/cache?ei=UTF-8&p=federal+cost+of+jailing+drug+prisoners+taxpayers+2007+clinton+years&y=Search&u=realcostofprisons.org/blog/archives/2007/01/post_4.html&w=federal+cost+jailing+jail+drug+drugs+prisoners+prisoner+taxpayers+2007+clinton+years&d=H4V367XiP4A-&icp=1&.intl=us
Looking for Latinos: "CRACK COCAINE" Obamaites on the Prowl http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mayhill-fowler/looking-for-latinos-obam_b_75550.html
MY RESPONSE:""Molly is keeping the precinct walking tally, notingon a scale of 1-5 whether a listee is likely to votefor Obama. The catch of the day is Easter, a fetchingAfrican-American girl who has just turned 18. Virginiaand I find Easter sitting on the back steps of herapartment building. Easter says that she's registeredto vote but hasn't made up her mind about anycandidate. Virginia launches into Obama's position oncrack versus powder cocaine. Above our heads, aHispanic gentleman reclines on his balcony sofa like amodel in a Manet painting and stares down at us.Laughing, Easter interrupts Virginia with an admissionthat she's been planning to vote for Hillary "becauseBill is cool." Appalled, I now offer my two cents.Between us, Virginia and I turn Easter for Obama. Atthis point, Mike finds us and takes Easter's picturefor the Tribune."" Virginia is smart she understands that BILL ISN"TCOOL. He wouldn't reduce crack cocaine and that hasnot only hurt those who use it but those who have topay taxes to keep them in jail at a rate of close too100k a year.
SEE LINK FROM BLOG WHICH POINTS OUT HOWHILLARY CLINTON WOULD KEEP THESE PRISONERS IN JAILEVEN THOUGH THE OTHER CANDIDATES CHOSE TO LET THEM OUTDUE TO SILLY LONG JAIL TERMS FOR USING CRACK WHICHBILL CLINTON WOULD NEVER REDUCE!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/celeste-fremon/with-her-eye-on-nov-08_b_75207.html
QUESTION::: I wonder how much money in stocks the clintons have invested in privatized prisons?
""I sure wish i could see her portfolio""
I googled "CLINTONS HAVE INVESTED IN PRIVATIZED PRISIONS" WOW = http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=+clintons+have+invested+in+privatized+prisons&btnG=Google+Search and of all persons AL GORE comes up on this link YIKES
http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:5n1TECiw2MYJ:www.dunwalke.com/10_Clinton_Administration.htm+clintons+have+invested+in+privatized+prisons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us U.S. Vice President Al Gore,Harvard trained supporter of significant increases in enforcement and private prisons. (Photo Courtesy Wikipedia) "The Clinton Administration took the groundwork laid by Nixon, Reagan and Bush and embraced and blossomed the expansion and promotion of federal support for police,
enforcement and the War on Drugs with a passion that was hard to understand unless and until you realized that the American financial system was deeply dependent on attracting
an estimated $500 billion-$1 trillion of annual money laundering. Globalizing corporations and deepening deficits and housing bubbles required attracting vast amounts of capital."http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:KgqYGTMv6k8J:www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0709/S00328.htm+clintons+have+invested+in+privatized+prisons&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=us
The clinton years may have been good at the time but the welfare to work bill never funding the mothers for proper education and never funding the children for proper child care and the 1994 clinton crime bill that took away pell grants which lead from a 30% recidivism rate to a 70% rate cost americans dearly as prisons were privatized and children were allowed to go wild due to mothers having to work two jobs at micky D's and now we pay 100k a yr to support these children in jails as bill never reduced crack cocaine which puts them in jail longer and thusly we pay to keep them there which has caused us all to be further in debt and more kids killing others as they see no jobs because their mothers never got educated and could be examples to them. yea they were great yrs but turned to hell very fast after Slick willy got out and then he goes to a bunch of balck churches and gets seen as the black president NOT and now we all suffer and blame bush for slick willys term and actions and inactions.
yeaa it was great but for who and for how long ??? Here is what she did during her time with the www.childrensdefensefund.org
and this doesn't count what she may have done with walmart.
http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/PageServer?pagename=c2pp_summit2007
2007 Cradle to Prison Pipeline� Crisis in America National Summit September 25 - 26, 2007 Howard University Washington, D.C.
http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:E_T52L02xVsJ:www.answers.com/topic/marian-wright-edelman+marian+wright+edelman+hillary+clinton+children+prison&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us
In 1997, Edelman criticized President Clinton for his
welfare reform package by warning it could lead to record numbers of uninsured children, increased child abuse, and rising firearms deaths.
The CDF's "The State of America's Children Yearbook 1997" criticized the package and warned that "if America does not stand up now for its children, it will not stand strong in the new millennium."
In the same interview, Edelman also criticized the welfare legislation that the Clinton administration created. This legislation cut $54 billion from such programs as food stamps and child and family nutrition. "I'm not trying to defend the former welfare system," Edelman said. "But I'm for ending child poverty as we know it, not just for ending welfare as we know it." The CDF developed a volunteer program to document the effects of this legislation, hoping to discover if those who left the welfare program now had jobs, health care, and child care.
AMY GOODMAN: Marian Wright Edelman, we just heard Hillary Rodham Clinton. She used to be the head of the board of the Children's Defense Fund, of the organization that you founded. But you were extremely critical of the Clintons. I mean, when President Clinton signed off on the, well, so-called welfare reform bill, you said, "His signature on this pernicious bill makes a mockery of his pledge not to hurt children." So what are your hopes right now for these Democrats? And what are your thoughts about Hillary Rodham Clinton?
MARIAN WRIGHT EDELMAN: Well, you know, Hillary Clinton is an old friend, but they are not friends in politics. We have to build a constituency, and you don"t -- and we profoundly disagreed with the forms of the welfare reform bill, and we said so. We were for welfare reform, I am for welfare reform, but we need good jobs, we need adequate work incentives, we need minimum wage to be decent wage and livable wage, we need healthcare, we need transportation, we need to invest preventively in all of our children to prevent them ever having to be on welfare. And yet, you know, many years after that, when many people are pronouncing welfare reform a great success, you know, we"ve got growing child poverty, we have more children in poverty and in extreme poverty over the last six years than we had earlier in the year. When an economy is down, and the real test of welfare reform is what happens to the poor when the economy is not booming. Well, the poor are suffering, the gap between rich and poor widening. We have what I consider one of -- a growing national catastrophe of what we call the cradle-to-prison pipeline.
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/07/24/1431211
America's Cradle to Prison PipelineSM This CDF report documents America's Cradle to Prison Pipeline, an urgent national crisis at the intersection of poverty and race that puts Black boys at a one in three lifetime risk of going to jail, and Latino boys at a one in six lifetime risk of the same fate. Tens of thousands of children and teens are sucked into the Pipeline each year etc etc etc
http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/PageServer?pagename=c2pp_report2007&JServSessionIdr008=ywf26wlxm7.app5b
Oh yea thats right Bill Clinton passed the 1994 crime bill that removed pell grants for prisoners Federal Crime Bill By Paul Wright On September 13, 1994,
Bill Clinton signed the final version of the crime bill into law. The same week congress passed the crime bill it also passed the "Bank Reform Bill." Included in this law is a provision which will prevent the government from pursuing negligence cases against the individuals who caused the collapse of the savings and loan industry (mainly by looting the institutions they were entrusted to run or that they owned).
Thus, it is apparent that "crime" isn't the issue, the issue is who steals what from whom. The mood of congress was accurately captured by Senator Joe Biden, an admitted plagiarist, who said "If someone came to the floor and said we should barb wire the ankles of anyone who jaywalks, I think it would pass.
" Officially titled the "Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994," the final version of the bill is 120 pages long. It contains many administrative amendments to existing laws, clarifications, etc. in addition to its substantive portions. etc This law abolished Pell grants for prisoners. The federal Pell Grant was created in 1965 by Senator Claiborne Pell, D-RI, to aid low income students for college. The 1965 bill stated that no qualifying low income persons would be excluded, prisoners were specifically mentioned in the bill and were intended to be included in the grant program. Media hypsters insinuated that prisoners were taking advantage of the opportunity for Pell Grants because of an oversight in the original Pell Grant Bill that failed to specifically exclude them. The $6.3 billion program is considered a quasi-entitlement, says the U.S. Department of Education, and receives whatever funding is necessary for grants to all income eligible persons. Of that $6.3 billion in the most recent fiscal year, a total of $35 million was allotted for prisoners. Most of that amount was in the form of federal aid paid not directly to individual prisoners, but in the form of payments to state programs designed to provide educational services to their prison inmates. The $35 million allotted to prisoners represents less than six tenths of 1 percent of the $6.3 billion total. Political rhetoric has propelled the myth that the money wasted on prisoner Pell Grants will now be used to provide assistance to more worthy recipients in the community. The truth of the matter is that the $35 million saved won't stay in the education budget. It will be retained by the U.S. Treasury (presumably to help pay for the $9.8 billion earmarked for construction of more prisons).
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c103:H.R.3355.ENR:)
""" Pell Grants in Prisons Reduce Crime Rate - New York Times Pell grants are among the very few opportunities prisoners have to get ...
A tough and dumb crime bill will only add prisons, prisoners and more debt to a..."""
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E04EED8153AF935A35751C0A962958260
the CLINTONS and KIDS
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0011,hentoff,13268,6.html
""The Clinton "welfare reform" law mandates a five-year cumulative lifetime cap on the benefits. You are off the rolls forever. The "safety net" that Eleanor Roosevelt and her husband worked so hard to get into law has been torn apart by William Jefferson Clinton"to the applause of his wife"" etc etc etc
Bill Clinton also passed the 1994 clinton crime bill which took away pell grants for prisoners and increased the recidivism rate from 30% to 70%
which many white people supported unknowingly that it would end up costing them 100k a yr to house these mostly drug users.
""Hillary blames bush administration"" http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=2857
He also never reduced the crack cocaine to shorter sentences like what most white people get for using regular coke and we pay 100k a yr to imprison them.
Most white people never complained. Not they are finally having hearings to reduce crack cocaine to the same charge as white peoples regular cocaine.
He was a major player with ALGORE (GOOGLE IT) to create privatized prisons across the USA in many states that would agree.
Prisons are now big business and on the NYstock exchange and traded UP hurting many poor all for the royal buck. Bill Clinton goes to some black churches and trys to portray himself as the black president but he is the WHITE DEVIL
Yes the bills took until Bush was in office to become effective (5 yrs for women to be pushed off welfare) so it was done to appear that it was all Bushs fault.
Yes then bush also did more harm as most republican presidents do.
SEE MY SITE HERE = http://bushclintonhurtchildren.blogspot.com/
BUSH CLINTON HURT CHILDREN GAYS BLACKWATER, MARK PENN, HILLARY, AMY GOODMAN, GOP TIES, ETC **its all here**
The following is a long laundry list of sites and people speaking the truth to people we all trust. I have been accumulating them and it has sickened me to see this truth.
Comments are closed for this post.
