Hillary Clinton

Two years ago, Hillary Clinton was elected by New York State residents to represent their interests on the national scene in the United States Senate. She ran a campaign filled with promises to invigorate the economy of Western New York, bring more rights to the underprivileged women and minority voters, and raise standards of higher elementary education and hold all teachers and students to the higher standards.

Now, two years later, it is time for her to be sized up under completely new standards.

Since Sept.11, 2001, America has faced new challenges and problems, and the issues that were once in the forefront were pushed behind debates of war and national security. While Clinton has followed up on some of her campaign promises, her actions in the wake of the terrorist attacks will be remembered as less than satisfactory. In a time when New York pride was on the line, Clinton was often silent, and while she was boasted of the $11billion she brought to the city for recovery, it fell short of the original plan of $20 billion.

Sen. Clinton has been criticized in the past for setting political advancement at the forefront. The Spectrum recently criticized Clinton for not standing up to President George W. Bush's request for unconditional power in his war against Iraq. In the days following her vote, protesters showed up in droves at her offices across the state. In her speech, she said that she needed to show support for the president and that a unified front was more important than the needs of the people who elected her. Such an attitude is unacceptable from a representative of the people.

Another way Clinton could be a more valuable asset to New Yorkers would be to show face support for important local issues.

Last year, when Children's Hospital in Buffalo was in danger of being shut down by Kaleida, the owners of the hospital, Sen. Clinton was nowhere to be found. Workers, doctors, nurses and residents all joined the protests and rallies against the proposed shutdown. While this is not an issue that directly affected the junior senator, it is exactly the type of issue that should concern her: working families who would lose employment and restoring a faltering economy while keeping successful businesses in Western New York.

Clinton's economic solutions for upstate and Western New York, while good overall, smack of voter recruitment when coupled with her lack of involvement in the region. The money that the senator has directed into the area has mainly been for restoration projects, such as the Rochester ferry and projects at the Buffalo waterfront. While it is impressive that she is making sure the areas are supported, it is passive support at best. She would be better served - and Western New York would be better served - if she were to ensure that funds are properly allocated and that actual jobs are created. The best way to do this, and to understand the need, would be to maintain regular contact with her constituents outside of New York City.

Although her voting record is difficult to disagree with, her dedication to Western New York on the economic level and all of New York State on other issues is questionable at best. She has been absent on prominent New York issues, such as the current gubernatorial race. While it would make sense for her to secure further Democratic influence in the state, she and the rest of her party have refused to throw substantial support behind H. Carl McCall, the Democrat facing current Gov. George E. Pataki in the upcoming race.

In some ways, Sen. Clinton is in a no-win situation. If she pays too much attention to upstate and Western New York, she is seen as pandering for votes, but too little time shows apathy. There is a way to use fame to get things done and improve the quality of life for others, but Clinton seems to be using it more for her own long-term political goals, whatever they may be.