Interview with Clinton: One Day at a Time

(2 of 3)

One group that probably ultimately wouldn't want it to go on too long is the Democratic Party itself. Can you envision a point at which — if the race stays this close — and with the difficulties that everyone has analyzed in accumulating enough delegates to get any distance ahead where party elders would step in and say "Senators Clinton and Obama, this is now hurting the party and whoever will be the nominee in the fall. We need to figure this out."
No I really can't. I think people have short memories. Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A. My husband didn't wrap up the nomination in 1992 until June, also in California. Having a primary contest go through June is nothing particularly unusual. We will see how it unfolds as we go forward over the next three to four months.

Could you envision it going all the way to the actual convention itself?
I think we should take it one day at a time. I find that usually is a better policy in life and in politics.

The experience argument is one that is very important to the whole campaign. It is not only important on the Democratic side, but also on the Republican side. If you were to go toe-to-toe with Senator McCain, in the category of experience doesn't that actually in the end favor him?
No, I don't think so. I think there is a threshold of experience that voters want to see people cross. I have a lifetime of experience. Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience. We both cross that threshold. Then we are in the arena and can engage in the debate over what that experience means. But no voter doubts that we have the experience to do the job, and I think that is a big difference.

In some of the interviews this morning you were quoted talking about whether or not there would be a possibility of a joint ticket — of a Clinton-Obama ticket or an Obama-Clinton ticket. Are there are circumstances in which you would consider being his running mate if he were to offer the ticket?
I think this is all pretty premature. There are a lot of contests left. I think the question was certainly aimed at the historic nature of our candidacies and the possibility that we would have a unified Democratic ticket and that may be something to consider down the road, but right now there are a lot of contests left and I am doing everything I can to be successful in winning them.

The Rezko case has come up a number of times. In your own words, what is the relevance of the Rezko case to his campaign and to the qualifications of Senator Obama?
Well, there seem to be a lot of questions that he needs to answer on this issue. But those are his questions to answer. I believe that this is part of the process.

There are has been talk about you being concerned that voters in Florida and Michigan would be disenfranchised. When the Democratic National Committee was making its policy in those two states, we knew that was going to happen. Why were you not concerned then about them being disenfranchised?
Oh, I was. I said it at the time. I wasn't on the DNC, I didn't have a vote on that. I pointed out how important it is for us to carry Michigan — you can't win without carrying Michigan — and how critical it is to carry Florida. We haven't won without it and we face a much more difficult electoral map if we don't have Florida in our column. I feel strongly that the votes of Michigan and Florida should count. What I agreed to was not to campaign in either state and I did not campaign. I didn't hold press conferences. I didn't do political events. I complied with the rules as they were put forth for the candidates. But 1.7 million Democratic voters in Florida were privy to that agreement and Florida is in a particularly unfortunate position, because the Democrats have no say in when their primary is going to be held. It was after the first four contests that everyone tries to carve out a special space. And the voters of Florida clearly took it seriously. I think that there is an effort both on the part of the Democratic governor in Michigan and Florida to try to figure out how to sort this through. I feel strongly that we shouldn't be telling Democratic voters in states we have to carry that their votes don't count.

Obama criticized the way in 1992-93, the way you handled your quest for more universal health care in America, and has said that he would do it in a more open fashion. Is he being naive in terms of whether it is possible to solve this in a transparent way?
Well, what I learned from that process is that it is not the executive branch that is going to really determine what the outcome of this health care debate is. It is the legislative branch. They have hearings. They have open public hearings on the plans we suggested. They really have control over the process. It is going to be imperative that the President works with the Congress to get this done. I believe the plan that I put forth has a very good chance of garnering congressional support. Obviously Congress will work with Congress on a plan, unless something dramatically changes [with] how the world works between now and 2009. But it is something that I think I have a special insight into having been on both sides of Pennsylvania Avenue. I understand the potential influence to set the agenda and create the playing field that the President has, but the President has to understand that the Congress will come up with the legislation. I have talked about this many times in '93. The Congress told the President, "Well, you decide what you want and then come to us." And that didn't work out. I have laid out a plan. I have made it universal. I intend to do everything I can to get to universal health care, unlike Senator Obama, who does not have a plan that is universal. I will be working with the members of Congress, particularly the chairs of the relevant committees, from the very beginning.