Hillary Clinton Encouraged To Set Ethics Boundaries In 2016
Hillary Clinton Should ‘Set Ethics Boundaries.’
In an opinion article for CNN, Richard Davis said that Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton could benefit from establishing precise ethics boundaries in 2016. Davis knows what he’s talking about when it comes to the subject of ethics. He was “a former assistant Watergate special prosecutor” and worked as “an assistant secretary of the treasury for enforcement in the Carter administration.”
Richard noted that while Clinton has endured her share of controversies, “things certainly are looking more positive for Hillary Clinton than they appeared six months ago.” It’s no secret that Hillary has experienced tremendous scrutiny over her emails over the past year. Republicans desperately hoped to link them to the Benghazi terrorist incident; it was a transparent attempt to solely blame Hillary for the tragedy in a bid to damage her poll numbers.
This culminated in the highly politicized attack on Hillary during her ten-hour testimony before the House Benghazi Committee. In a reversal of fortune for House Republicans, the October showdown boosted her overall image and made her far more sympathetic than they anticipated. The propped-up email scandal may have fizzled, but the boost Clinton enjoyed due to the GOP’s failed antics has also faded a bit.
Making things more problematic, there are some serious minefields for Clinton to navigate in 2016, specifically the Clinton Foundation and speaker fees paid to husband and former president Bill Clinton. Davis advised Hillary Clinton to pay close attention going forward to who can submit donations to the foundation and “where the former president will speak for money.”
“Taking these steps now is particularly important for Hillary Clinton because one area where her poll numbers remain problematic is whether she is viewed as honest and trustworthy.
And, as demonstrated by a recent Washington Post article, there remains media interest in the extraordinary amounts of money the Clintons have raised for their political and philanthropic activities.”
There is good news for Clinton. Of all candidates, she’s often viewed as being the most capable of directly tackling the threat of ISIS. At the same time, Clinton is seen as possessing the maturity to address domestic and foreign policy concerns in a realistic manner.
While Richard Davis acknowledges that Hillary Clinton would not be “operating with a clean slate,” it is of the utmost important to put her foot down now, giving her opponents on both sides of the aisle as little as possible to attack her with in the primaries and general election. Money coming into one’s campaign and the sources will become a matter of increasing concern as the field narrows.
Taking an ethical approach to how and from where her campaign receives money is one thing. Clinton would also benefit from distancing herself from controversial DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Wasserman Schultz has been outright accused of impeding democracy. The more it appears Debbie is doing this on behalf of Hillary, the worse it will look for Clinton’s campaign in the long-run.
Hillary Clinton cannot afford to assume others will feel she is the most logical choice for the Democratic nomination or office of president. She must proactively make changes to her campaign to validate such a viewpoint.