Sure they’re blue dogs. They’re also smart. The campaign is going to be very expensive. Any danger of undue influence is nicely countered by Hillary’s need for progressive support and staying on the right side of Elizabeth Warren, much less Bernie. Also, if successful, it will deprive Trump of funds which he is now seeking and will continue to do so. As a Chicago pol once remarked, “politics ain’t beanbag”.
Beverly, so you must think that if Bernie won the nomination he wouldn’t court the sources of funds Hillary is courting? I suppose he’d finance his campaign with mom & pop, and college age donors giving $2 to $100 each…. which you well know wouldn’t give him the funds required to even make the election a decent contest.
What kind of Kool-Aid do you drink? It’s it’s very difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can ignore realities just because they don’t suit their desires or don’t match their utopian idealisms.
I think Senator Warren (she deserves the dignity of her title) will be more effective for progressives in the Senate. As others have noted, she is likely to be a major force there and able to exert considerable influence over Hillary; probably more than Bernie! I’m sure you’re right that “people” (Bernie supporters) will be critical of soliciting “dirty money” but I really doubt that individual contributions will be sufficient to finance this war. It’s not just ads; it’s more ground organization to get out the vote. I hope that progressive voters will come to agree with Senators Warren and Sanders it’s necessary to do whatever they can to keep Trump out of the White House. It certainly would be nice to change the Senate too. Changing the House is probably asking too much.
Back step and regroup young gyrene, you are fooling with the wrong Marine. I have a huge bursting radius. EMichael is fine. Now put something intelligent out here and don’t fool with me. I am just walking patrol and drinking some good and expensive bourbon.
I would suggest that the general public has spoken on the lesser evil of both of the past two democratic presidents (Clinton and Obama) were not the lessor evil.
Both Clinton and Obama had majorities in both houses when elected. the policies of both presidents caused the democratic party to loose seats to the point that republicans regained control of both houses.
Now we have the democratic elite doing their best to elect another neoliberal (Hillary) that will do nothing for the base; and if history repeats its self and lose any gains the democrats may have been on the verge of making.
For those who really want change, you have till the presidential election is finished to organize and hold the interest of the general public.
Whether Bernie wins or not; do not waste what he has started. Know that means keeping a record down to the town and city level of those interested in change and finding a method of staying in contact. For it is at this level you can force real change.
“In 2009, the Clinton-led State Department approved a permit for the 400-mile Alberta Clipper pipeline, which is designed to pump up to 450,000 barrels of oil per day from the Canadian oil sands to Wisconsin (where recent polls show Democratic primary voters are concerned about its impact). According to federal lobbying records reviewed by the IBT, Chevron and ConocoPhillips both lobbied the State Department specifically on the issue of “oil sands” in the immediate months prior to the department’s approval, as did a trade association funded by ExxonMobil.
Those three oil companies have delivered between between $2.5 million and $3 million to the Clinton Foundation. That is on top of money their executives and lobbyists delivered to Clinton’s campaign and super PAC in her 2008 presidential bid — the year before she approved the pipeline.”
The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, ratified in 1780, it is thought to be the world’s oldest still-functioning written constitution. Drafted in part by John Adams, it inspired and informed the U.S. Constitution, forged seven years later. Part I, Article VII, of the Massachusetts charter reads:
“Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.”’
“Hillary Clinton is campaigning as a guardian of President Barack Obama’s progressive policy accomplishments. In recent weeks, she has called the Affordable Care Act “one of the greatest accomplishments of President Obama, of the Democratic Party, and of our country,” and promised that she is “going to defend Dodd-Frank” and “defend President Obama for taking on Wall Street.”
Meanwhile, however, Clinton’s campaign has been relying on a team of strategists and fundraisers, many of whom spent much of the last seven years as consultants or lobbyists for business interests working to obstruct Obama’s agenda in those two areas.
Consultants associated with the Dewey Square Group, a lobbying firm that has been retained by business interests to defeat a variety of progressive reforms, are playing a major role in the Clinton campaign. Charles Baker III, the co-founder of Dewey, is a senior strategist and the campaign’s chief administrative officer. Michael Whouley, another Dewey co-founder, played an early role in advising Clinton’s plan for the current campaign by convening some of the very first strategy sessions. Senior Dewey officials Jill Alper and Minyon Moore are also close advisers and fundraisers for Clinton, while at least four other Clinton officials have worked at Dewey within the last four years. In addition, disclosures show that Clinton’s Super PACs Priorities USA Action and Correct the Record have also paid Dewey Square Group for a variety of services in this election.”
“Clinton will win the nomination and the general election, but Sanders will be the Most Valuable Player, in November and beyond. The Democrats are uniting around progressivism.
And both uniting and progressivism are operative words here.”
Bev
That is keeping your eye on the ball. This post is destructive to your operative words.
It’s all over the news, EMichael. The article I linked to is from Politico. One that someone else linked to in this thread is in The Week. And today’s NYT has a long detailed article about these and similar efforts by her this week, including that Clinton’s phoning Republican-leaning Wall Street donors and having long conversations with them.
The problem is that Clinton has her eye on the wrong ball. She’s really hurting herself and she’s clueless that that is so.
Note on Blue Dogs: Blue Dogs get a 50% to 70% rating from Americans for Democratic Action (ADA). (Think former Senator Ben Nelson.) Republicans get 0%. For now, I’ll take even the 50% in order to get Republicans out of office. I believe all of the Blue Dogs will vote for a minimum wage and higher spending on infrastructure. The first step in the long-game progressive agenda is to eliminate the Republican Party as a force.
Getting us on track to controlling Congress and more statehouses depends on achieving high turnout. Getting high turnout depends in large part on the level of enthusiasm for the top of the ticket. The differences in turnout between the Presidential elections and the mid-terms demonstrates that. Although relatively muted in this slightly cryptic post, Beverly’s serial rants against Hillary, even after Clinton has virtually clinched the nomination, suggest she really doesn’t care much about getting Republicans out of the down-ticket offices. All she really cared about is getting her favored candidate into the White House.
After all, there’s no difference between Clinton with her 95% ADA ratings and a Republican with his zero percent. She’s owned by Wall Street. ADA, schm-ADA. (Cue the nose-holding explanation.)
Anyone that can read the Constitution and has been alive the last three decades and is registered as an independent is an idiot.
Urban,
The last eight years have clearly shown that a super majority is necessary for any progressive programs. That is not going to happen until at least 2020.
This election is about holding the gains made and nominating at least two SC justices.
That is all that is going to happen in the next four years regardless of the Dem nominee.
I don’t think giving up in advance is going to advance the cause. You go for whatever you can get now, and if a super-majority is not in the cards, the pressures on Republicans in the face of a landslide loss — certainly those from Northern states, if that happens — will be different from what they have been.
2020 might be the year, but you build towards it to whatever extent you can.
Of course you build towards it, and that is something Sanders can really help with in terms of supporting down ballot.
And you certainly do not give up, but 60 is a long, long way off. And losses in elections will have no effect on the GOP. These people are crazy. I mean, look at the last eight years and if that is not enough, look at their presidential primary. There are middle school elections that had more substance.
they have the birchers and they are not going to go anywhere, and they have a lot of states. just too much to overcome.
Hillary Clinton and her campaign are themselves promoting that they represent the values of the Bush dynasty. The mind simply reels with yet another prime example of the corrupting influence driven by the outrageous cost to run a national election.
Frank K, what are you talking about? Do you mean fund raising from conservatives? Show your work, specifically as to the claim of representing values of the Bush dynasty.
I think the only way that you can arrive at the conclusion that HRH HRC is hurting herself is if you — one — still believes she has any credibility… I was about to say credibility on campaign finance reform or like measures, but in perfect seriousness we can just leave it at credibility. Not only has she run out of that particular commodity but she places absolutely no value on it at all.
I enjoy reading your posts, almost all of which I agree with(ever notice how you like people that agree with you?) However, at this point you(and others with this idea) are contributing to the possibility of Donald Trump being President.
Time to grow up. Sanders has lost. Let’s figure out the best way to go (Yes, the lesser evil). Sanders and his fans can move this debate to the left if they work inside the party. Outside the party, or by attacking the nominee is a recipe for disaster.
I do not like HRC one bit. Never have. Doesn’t matter. to rail against her is to help the GOP. At this stage to attack her is to work towards the deaths of tens of thousands Americans a year(mostly all poor). To attack her is to work towards tens of thousands of Americans facing financial ruin because they got sick.
I won’t bother with all of the other things that Trump would do to this country that would put you into a state of depression.
Time to grow up. Sanders lost. If he had been a Democrat his whole life everything might have been different. But let’s take that mistake and support the team(no matter how you feel about the winner).
The only way to change this country is by working with, and influencing, the Dem party and its platform.
Attacking Clinton at this point is the act of a stupid, selfish two year old.
You have to stop. And you have to have everyone else you know to stop.
We can move left, but if Clinton loses we will not move left in my lifetime(or taking the 57 into account) your lifetime.
You can’t get out the vote is you continue the thoughts you expounded in this post.
That’s a broadside, brother. It’s a funny thing about the internet: people freely call me things – like “A stupid selfish two-year old” – that they would never dare say to my face, not because I’m a tough guy but because it’s rude.
Hillary Clinton is the personification of true political and moral corruption. That’s not an attack. That is an evaluation. That is a judgment arrived at by watching the Billary show for more than 20 years, and by deeply looking into their record. I don’t think Hillary has seen a moment pass where she was not thinking first and foremost about her own ambition, her own advancement – herself. They have a lust for power and wealth, which is self-evident and indisputable. She is worm-eaten by cynicism, perfectly prepared to bend the truth into a lie if it serves her purpose. In the name of geopolitics, she is unabashed in unleashing the dogs of war on hundreds of thousands of funny-looking brown people – and sleeps like a baby.
I fell no particular animus to her. I feel deep contempt for such people: neo-con warmongers; coddlers and abettors of the depredations of the financial class; grotesque political prostitutes; self-serving careerists. That’s who she is. It is offensive; you ought to be offended.
I’m not here to sway anyone to vote for anyone else – as if I had the power. I am not committed to the Democratic Party – they sold me out a long time ago. I am, and have been for 40 years, wholly committed to the ideas Bernie shares. I am not in the least bit worried about Trump. I’m not particularly perturbed that HRH HRC will be the next President. I am overjoyed at what I see happening in politics today – and Bernie, an honest, straightforward politician and an honorable man, has been instrumental in setting off what is in fact a political revolution that is shaking the foundations of the cozy corruption of the political class, as personified by HRC.
If you like, feel free to invite me (this time politely, please) to leave these pages, but I will not be changing my tune. I don’t want to bring her down; I want to show how low she’s prepared to go.
I never asked you to “leave the pages”, I simply asked you to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.
Fairly simple here. Sanders has been incredibly effective in rousing support from a lot of progressives who think just like him. I am in that group.
However, the reason Sanders has never done a thing in his life(until now) to affect the progressive cause is because he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air about what he thought this country should be working towards.
Now, a lot of his supporters are tending on doing the same thing; making themselves a hindrance to any progressive progress cause they cannot get exactly what they want, and right now.
You and people like you, are a big part of the problem.
Rome was not built in a day. So you sit out on the sidelines(like Sanders) and because not everyone is as committed as you, you make fun of the their efforts.
Figure out why Sanders ran as a Democrat, and then grow up and help people move this country further left.
“Bernie has never done a thing in his life(until now) to affect the progressive cause is because he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air about what he thought this country should be working towards.”
You can really know something, then there are the things you pretend to know. It takes the slightest bit of research. I found the link below in 2 minutes.
Watch it if you want — or not — and tell me about how “Bernie has never done a thing in his life(until now) to affect the progressive cause is because he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air about what he thought this country should be working towards.”
He has been in DC serving as a Congressman and Senator for more than 20 years.
What has he done to help elect people like him to Congress?
I am not questioning his stances, I am questioning his accomplishments. I did not know my arrest in DC on November 15, 1969 was such a great accomplishment.
First of all, for the record: From October 2011-January 2012 I took part in the Occupy movement by living in a tent on Freedom Plaza in downtown DC. We marched through the streets. I got arrested during a hearing when Panetta was testifying how well the efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq were going. We disrupted meetings of bank executives and insurance executives. We even managed one day to shut down the US Chamber of Commerce, at which I had the distinct pleasure of chasing Michael Chertoff down a back alley as he tried to slink out of there. I wouldn’t call that sitting on the sidelines.
Bernie has been in Congress for 20 years, you’re right, representing the citizens of VT, of which I was one, and fighting every day, day in and day out, usually with no more than a handful of allies, to advance the democratic socialist agenda — on every single issue, every single piece of legislation, every single vote. Every day for 20 years, EMichael, with the same energy and same commitment he has shown throughout this campaign. If you want to call that sitting on the sidelines, be my guest. I think he’d be surprised to hear someone say that as the junior Senator from the great economic powerhouse of VT, he was responsible to get others elected, as well.
I guess I need to remind you that in 2015, while “he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air,” he decided he was fed up about the ways the middle- and working-classes were taking a beating and decided to run for President. 6% chance. Unknown to all but a few. No PAC. No money. No donor network. No “realistic” evaluations about his chances. No cynicism! He thought to himself, “I have to do this. I know there are millions out there for whom I can speak — and fight! Let’s see.”
He’s won 19 states. He’s bound to win more. He has raised $200 million in contributions from the people — like me — in small contributions averaging less than $30. He has stirred the hearts to activism of an entire generation. He has pushed Hillary to the left and emboldened the Progressives in Congress — Elizabeth Warren has a grin from ear-to-ear (and hasn’t backed Hillary, if you’ve noticed). He has, for the first time ever in a Presidential debate, raised the issue of the Palestinians. He has challenged the prevailing neo-liberal economic agenda and made it politically acceptable to challenge the legitimacy of capitalism and to call yourself a Socialist. He has effectively raised the ideas of income inequality, challenging the power of Wall Street, a massive infrastructure spending program, Medicare for all, repealing Citizens United — and more — from the level of “a great idea” to the level of national debate. And he will, in the end, endorse HRH HRC and campaign against Trump.
And he’s brought hope.
But I guess in your eyes, he should have done more.
First you criticize him for having “sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air,” now you can’t wait for him to return there. Why? And w-h-a-a-a-a-t?
You are not alone in being active, some of us here have done the same in opposing the Kochs in local newspapers for funding Free Enterprise Centers on college campuses and in Show Down in Chicago. From the sixties forward, many of us have been taking a stand somewhere along the line and still are. It was fun telling Durbin I wished the party of the majority would begin to take a stand and start to act like the party of the majority after “Banksters” interviewed him at the Showdown. Pols in my home state typically avoid me. This is an activist board and we do lean and sway to the left as writers. If you can put a sentence together and group a few sentences together that are topical and form a paragraph, we may have a place to portray your words.
My friend EMichael is usually on the right side of discussions. I would be curious about Sanders accomplishments also and beyond saying we will have universal healthcare as if by magic upon his election. There is much to contend with before his wishes and dreams become a reality.
I don’t really think of EMichael as being on the wrong side of the discussion. We disagree. He has his point of view and I have mine but neither of us has the final word on what is true.
I am really glad to hear about your activism. Hightower recently said that the best way to keep this movement going is for each person to decide for himself what he can comfortably give, and then give it. (By the way, the reactionaries always talk about professional protestors being hired to protest things like Trump events. I’ve tried like hell to find out who does the hiring, but I can’t find a thing. Keep me in mind if you hear of anything.)
The short answer to your question about universal healthcare is Bernie is not going to be elected, which doesn’t mean we will not see universal healthcare. I very much doubt when you told Durbin to start acting like a Democrat that you expected him to start acting like a Democrat. I didn’t expect to bring down the corporate state when I camped out, and I doubt Bernie expected to win the nomination, which doesn’t mean he won’t win the nomination. The point is we all decide what we can give, and then give it. And when I hear someone say that Bernie has been sitting in his safe seat talking to the air — well, the record needs to be corrected.
Didn’t Bobby Kennedy say something like, “some people look at things and say why. Others dream things that never were and say why not?” When you reining imagine the corrupt and corrupting power of the reactionary right, as embodied by the Koch Suckers, are you a dreamer?
What I can tell you with absolute certainty is that if you want to see nothing change, do nothing.
January 1962
As a Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) officer, a 20-year-old Sanders leads students in a multi-week sit-in to oppose segregation in off-campus housing owned by the University of Chicago.
August 1963
An organizer for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, Sanders takes an overnight bus with fellow activists for his first-ever trip to Washington, D.C. He hears Martin Luther King Jr.’s historic “I Have a Dream” speech firsthand at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.
1972
Sanders wins 2 percent of the vote in his first statewide race, a special election for a U.S. Senate seat in Vermont.
Sanders wins 1 percent of the vote in his second run for statewide office during a gubernatorial election.
1974
In his second campaign for the U.S. Senate, Sanders attracts 4 percent of the vote.
1976
Sanders gets 6 percent of the vote in a race to replace Gov. Thomas Salmon.
1981
In a stunning upset, Sanders wins the mayoral race in Burlington, Vermont’s largest city, by a mere 10 votes. Running as an independent, he shocks the city’s political establishment by defeating a six-term, local machine mayor.
1983
Sanders wins 52 percent of the vote, defeating his closest challenger by 21 points, to be re-elected to a second term as mayor. Burlington sets a record for voter turnout as the Sanders campaign energizes thousands of new voters.
1984
Mayor Sanders establishes the Burlington Community Land Trust, the first municipal housing land trust in the country for affordable housing. The project becomes a model emulated throughout the world. It later wins an award from Jack Kemp-led HUD.
November 1990
Sanders defeats incumbent Rep. Peter Smith in a race to be Vermont’s sole congressman. He is the first independent elected to the House in 40 years. He will be re-elected by the people of Vermont to serve eight terms.
January 1991
Congressman Sanders votes against a measure providing President George H. W. Bush with authorization to use military force in the Gulf War. “I have a real fear that the region is not going to be more peaceful or more stable after the war,” he says at the time.
October 1992
Congress passes Sanders’ first signed piece of legislation to create the National Program of Cancer Registries. A Reader’s Digest article calls the law “the cancer weapon America needs most.” All 50 states now run registries to help cancer researchers gain important insights.
November 1993
Sanders votes against the Clinton-era North American Free Trade Agreement. Returning from a tour of factories in Mexico, Sanders says: “If NAFTA passes, corporate profits will soar because it will be even easier than now for American companies to flee to Mexico and hire workers there for starvation wages.”
July 1996
Sanders is one of only 67 votes against the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples legally married. Sanders urged the Supreme Court to throw out the law, which it did in a landmark 2013 ruling – some 17 years later.
July 1999
Standing up against the major pharmaceutical companies, Sanders becomes the first member of Congress to take seniors across the border to Canada to buy lower-cost prescription drugs. The congressman continues his bus trips to Canada with a group of breast cancer patients the following April. These brave women are able to purchase their medications in Canada for almost one-tenth the price charged in the States.
August 1999
An overflow crowd of Vermonters packs a St. Michael’s College town hall meeting hosted by Sanders to protest an IBM plan to cut older workers’ pensions by as much as 50 percent. CBS Evening News with Dan Rather and The New York Times cover the event. After IBM enacts the plan, Sanders works to reverse the cuts, passing a pair of amendments to prohibit the federal government from acting to overturn a federal district court decision that ruled that IBM’s plan violated pension age discrimination laws. Thanks to Sanders’ efforts, IBM agreed to a $320 million legal settlement with some 130,000 IBM workers and retirees.
November 1999
About 10 years before the 2008 Wall Street crash spins the world economy into a massive recession, Sanders votes “no” on a bill to undo decades of financial regulations enacted after the Great Depression. “This legislation,” he predicts at the time, “will lead to fewer banks and financial service providers, increased charges and fees for individual consumers and small businesses, diminished credit for rural America and taxpayer exposure to potential losses should a financial conglomerate fail. It will lead to more mega-mergers, a small number of corporations dominating the financial service industry and further concentration of power in our country.” The House passed the bill 362-57 over Sanders’ objection.
October 2001
Sanders votes against the USA Patriot Act. “All of us want to protect the American people from terrorist attacks, but in a way that does not undermine basic freedoms,” Sanders says at the time. He subsequently votes against reauthorizing the law in 2006 and 2011.
October 2002
Sanders votes against the Bush-Cheney war in Iraq. He warns at the time that an invasion could “result in anti-Americanism, instability and more terrorism.”
June 2005
Sanders passes an amendment in the House to stop the government from obtaining library and book-buying records on Americans. Unfortunately, the amendment is later removed in bicameral backroom negotiations.
November 2006
Sanders defeats Vermont’s richest man, Rich Tarrant, to be elected to the U.S. Senate. Sanders, running as an Independent, is endorsed by the Vermont Democratic Party and supported by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
December 2007
Sanders’ authored energy efficiency and conservation grant program passes into law. He later secures $3.2 billion in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for the grant program.
September 2008
Thanks to Sanders’ efforts, funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program funding doubles, helping millions of low-income Americans heat their homes in winter.
February 2009
Sanders works with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley to pass an amendment to an economic recovery bill preventing Wall Street banks that take taxpayer bailouts from replacing laid-off U.S. workers with exploited and poorly-paid foreign workers.
December 2009
Sanders passes language in the Affordable Care Act to allow states to apply for waivers to implement pilot health care systems by 2017. The legislation allows states to adopt more comprehensive systems to cover more people at lower costs.
March 2010
President Barack Obama signs into law the Affordable Care Act with a major Sanders provision to expand federally qualified community health centers. Sanders secures $12.5 billion in funding for the program which now serves more than 25 million Americans. Another $1.5 billion from a Sanders provision went to the National Health Service Corps for scholarships and loan repayment for doctors and nurses who practice in underserved communities.
July 2010
Sanders works with Republican Congressman Ron Paul in the House to pass a measure as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill to audit the Federal Reserve, revealing how the independent agency gave $16 trillion in near zero-interest loans to big banks and businesses after the 2008 economic collapse.
December 2010
As Republicans and President Barack Obama push a deal that would extend Bush-era tax breaks for America’s wealthiest families, Sanders gives an eight-and-a-half hour filibuster-like speech on the Senate floor in opposition, citing growing economic inequality and increasing deficits.
December 2012
Sanders becomes chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee.
March 2013
Sanders, backed by seniors, women, veterans, labor unions and disabled Americans leads a successful effort to stop a “chained-CPI” proposal supported by Congressional Republicans and the Administration to cut Social Security and disabled veterans’ benefits.
April 2013
Sanders introduces legislation to break up major Wall Street banks so large that the collapse of one could send the overall economy into a downward spiral.
August 2014
A bipartisan $16.5 billion veterans bill written by Sanders, Sen. John McCain and Rep. Jeff Miller is signed into law by President Barack Obama. The measure includes $5 billion for the VA to hire more doctors and health professionals to meet growing demand for care.
January 2015
Sanders takes over as ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, using the platform to fight for his economic agenda for the American middle class.
January 2015
Sanders votes against the Keystone XL pipeline which would allow multinational corporation TransCanada to transport dirty tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.
May 2015
Sanders declares his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. Watch the announcement.
“There is much to contend with before his wishes and dreams become a reality.”
I can’t speak for him but I imagine he has examined the issue and decided that the best form of healthcare is universal. I would bet he thinks that the centrality of the health insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry and the like create all kinds of problems that are most easily solved by universal care – problems like cost, equal access (that means everyone, whether they live in a blue or red state), denial of coverage, portability, dependence on employers for coverage, etc… They have important roles to play, but they ought to be treated in the same way we treat public utilities. Banks, too. But no, if the aim is to provide healthcare to everyone and to make it affordable, nibbling at the edges is insufficient.
Corporations are obligated by law to do one thing: increase value to shareholders. That’s perfectly appropriate if your business is construction or real estate or manufacturing cars or computers or what have you. They invest their money, they take the risk, they enjoy the profits – or lose their money. But those corporations whose business is, shall we say, servicing the public interest, then the public has every right to regulate the way they conduct business. In Europe, for example, as part of the negotiations to bail out banks, executive compensation was capped; and X numbers of Euros were set aside by banks to guarantee that their commercial banking concerns – which were really the public’s commercial banking concerns – did not suffer. Needless to say, not only did we not see that here but in many ways, despite the billions in fines many of them have been forced to pay for illegal fraudulent practices, the banks have gotten off scot-free.
When you consider we have the most expensive healthcare in the world, and that so many pre-Obamacare were not covered, and that so many even now remain uncovered, you have to ask why? We pay the highest prices for drugs in the world. Why? When the facts are that 25% of every dollar spent on private health insurance goes to “administrative costs,” including advertising, executive compensation and bonuses, yet the administrative costs for Medicare is 4%, why is it that the more expensive system is allowed to dominate the discussion – indeed, dominate the very construction of the new system, which is what happened when they were drafting Obamacare? When you consider that every single piece of legislation, from speed bumps to tax policy, is a form of social engineering – an act designed to produce a specific outcome – then you have to conclude that we pay the highest costs because the pharmaceutical industry is politically protected, as is the insurance industry, the arms industry, oil and gas – all of it. Making policy may have unintended consequences but it is designed with a specific purpose – in this case to guarantee those industries maintained their profitability.
The administrative costs are controlled by the MLR at 15 and 20% for group and individuals. Maggie Mahar and I talked about this also and her comment was; “many of Medicare’ administrative costs are paid by other govt agencies that collect the premiums (IRS) and cover costs of incoming Med. recipients.” If anyone knew, she would as she has written extensively on healthcare. By and large, private insurers spend more on investigating fraud. Congress doesn’t let Medicare do this–It wouldn’t want Medicare to discover much of this fraud—Pharm, providers, hospitals. Their lobbyists make huge contributions to Congress. This is in the same vein as turning Medicare loose on the healthcare industry to negotiate or set pricing very much in the same manner as what you would see in similar two tier public and private healthcare insurance countries. Most countries have a two tiered system and single payer is not as prevalent.
Attacking healthcare insurance will not get you where you want to be. Going after the healthcare industry and out-of-control usage of pharma, hospital, and procedures will yield far greater results. The US is expensive because of the healthcare industry. The very same Forbes you cite lists Pharma as #3 in profitability. What Pfizer charges off as R&D is strictly buyouts of other companies.
I answered the question of who was covered and who was not covered. To blame 1t 100% on the PPACA is political nonsense. I believe I pointed out the causes of the uninsured utilizing Charles Gaba’s Pie Chart. Kaiser’s Levitt believes Charles to be on the mark and he takes Charles as being credible.
If I can find Ezra Klein’s article I will send it.
I think you are probably right about Sanders’ view. It would seem to follow then that if he can’t get single payer, then he wouldn’t try to improve the ACA in whatever ways might be available. In other words, he would leave everything just as it is.
The history of this country shows clearly, and without dispute, that progressive changes only occur when there are large majorities of progressives in Congress and a progressive President.
My comment about Sanders sitting on the sidelines is due to his refusal to be a Democrat and refusal to support Democratic pols with progressive views like himself elected to Congress. I understand his lack of cash and obviously cannot berate him for not supporting progressives with money, but how about his time advocating for such progressives?
I can honestly say that in terms of progressive policies, HRC has been multiple times more helpful than Sanders due to her decades long support, financially and personally of the DP and down ballot Dems. It is the single biggest reason Sanders will not win the nomination, these people never heard of him before.
Now comes the real test for Sanders. He now has money; he now has a large amount of progressives who believe in him and will support him from a financial basis. Now he can get off the sidelines and do his best to get progressives like him elected to Congress. And actually do something besides take stances(almost all of which I agree with).
You can’t win the game unless you are in the game. Sanders chose not to get in the game until the last year, let’s see how he plays now that he is on the field.
“Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are set to be the two most disliked general election candidates of modern times.
Thirty-seven percent of voters hold a “strongly unfavorable” view of Clinton, according to results of polls from late March to late April aggregated by Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight.
Only one candidate in the last 36 years fares worse: Donald Trump. Fifty-three percent hold a strongly unfavorable view of him.
Those negative ratings are unlike anything seen in the modern era.”
“Sanders slams Trump in Atlantic City”
“Sanders trained his fire on Donald Trump during a Monday rally in Atlantic City, N.J., characterizing the economic struggles of the once-booming resort city as indicative of where Trump would take the country.
It took Sanders just minutes to bring up Trump, launching into a tirade as his supporters booed.
“The greed and recklessness we’ve seen from people like Donald Trump,” he said, before trailing off to ask the crowd if they are familiar with the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
“You know, he’s a brilliant, successful businessman who can bring the kind of prosperity to America today that he brought to Atlantic City, is that your point?” he asked the audience sarcastically.
He went on to slam Trump’s “greed,” highlighting his call to eliminate the estate tax and accused him of not wanting to raise the minimum wage — an issue Trump has waffled on in the past week.
And Sanders framed Trump as dangerous to both the social fabric and economic welfare of America.”
“Some Wall Street donations shift from GOP candidates who have exited the race”
“Hillary Clinton is consolidating her support among Wall Street donors and other businesses ahead of a general-election battle with Donald Trump, winning more campaign contributions from financial-services executives in the most recent fundraising period than all other candidates combined.”
According to a poll Rachel Maddow featured tonight, more Democrats are uncomfortable with Bernie as the candidate than Hillary; and by a substantial margin. I suppose they have no idea what they are talking about, but then, they might.
It is really remarkable how every comment made about Hillary is met not by addressing what is said but by attacking Bernie. That is from the “I told you so but what am I” school of argument. I hear it all the time from reactionaries and climate deniers who are intellectually challenged. It is feeble. It is simple-minded. It is intellectually dishonest.
37% of all respondents from across the country view Hillary “strongly unfavorably.” How do you plan to dismiss them?
Smells like Blue Dogs to me.
Sure they’re blue dogs. They’re also smart. The campaign is going to be very expensive. Any danger of undue influence is nicely countered by Hillary’s need for progressive support and staying on the right side of Elizabeth Warren, much less Bernie. Also, if successful, it will deprive Trump of funds which he is now seeking and will continue to do so. As a Chicago pol once remarked, “politics ain’t beanbag”.
True on Liz. I wish HRC would take her on board for VP. People see her courting Repubs as a sell out Jack.
Beverly, so you must think that if Bernie won the nomination he wouldn’t court the sources of funds Hillary is courting? I suppose he’d finance his campaign with mom & pop, and college age donors giving $2 to $100 each…. which you well know wouldn’t give him the funds required to even make the election a decent contest.
What kind of Kool-Aid do you drink? It’s it’s very difficult for me to understand how an intelligent person can ignore realities just because they don’t suit their desires or don’t match their utopian idealisms.
I think Senator Warren (she deserves the dignity of her title) will be more effective for progressives in the Senate. As others have noted, she is likely to be a major force there and able to exert considerable influence over Hillary; probably more than Bernie! I’m sure you’re right that “people” (Bernie supporters) will be critical of soliciting “dirty money” but I really doubt that individual contributions will be sufficient to finance this war. It’s not just ads; it’s more ground organization to get out the vote. I hope that progressive voters will come to agree with Senators Warren and Sanders it’s necessary to do whatever they can to keep Trump out of the White House. It certainly would be nice to change the Senate too. Changing the House is probably asking too much.
Jack:
I keep thinking of the voice we might have coming from the pulpit if Senator Warren were there. This lady has no fear of self righteous men.
There is no real reason for this link.
“C’mon, Man!”
Keep you eye on the fen ball.
Seriously what is your problem? Is the Clinton campaign paying you?
Hillary is going to sell out the left. The corporate Democrats would rather split the party then win elections by giving in to the left.
EMichael is policing the blogs for incorrect thought.
I’m with Beverly 100 percent. 1000 percent.
I love the contortions these Hillary supporters are going through. It’s laughable.
Hillary doesn’t mind upsetting her left flank. They have nowhere to go. Plus they have operatives like EMichael out spreading lies.
http://theweek.com/articles/622455/hillary-clinton-already-wooing-antitrump-republicans-huge-mistake
Peter:
You have to go through moderation before you can post at AB. You are set!
Peter:
Deep breath. You are on so think your replies and don’t become trollish. Thanks!
Did you read EMichael’s comment? Sounded trollish to me.
Peter:
Back step and regroup young gyrene, you are fooling with the wrong Marine. I have a huge bursting radius. EMichael is fine. Now put something intelligent out here and don’t fool with me. I am just walking patrol and drinking some good and expensive bourbon.
Peter
You are still welcome here.
Bill
Thank you run. Hello Peter,,,think it through!!!
I would suggest that the general public has spoken on the lesser evil of both of the past two democratic presidents (Clinton and Obama) were not the lessor evil.
Both Clinton and Obama had majorities in both houses when elected. the policies of both presidents caused the democratic party to loose seats to the point that republicans regained control of both houses.
Now we have the democratic elite doing their best to elect another neoliberal (Hillary) that will do nothing for the base; and if history repeats its self and lose any gains the democrats may have been on the verge of making.
For those who really want change, you have till the presidential election is finished to organize and hold the interest of the general public.
Whether Bernie wins or not; do not waste what he has started. Know that means keeping a record down to the town and city level of those interested in change and finding a method of staying in contact. For it is at this level you can force real change.
“In 2009, the Clinton-led State Department approved a permit for the 400-mile Alberta Clipper pipeline, which is designed to pump up to 450,000 barrels of oil per day from the Canadian oil sands to Wisconsin (where recent polls show Democratic primary voters are concerned about its impact). According to federal lobbying records reviewed by the IBT, Chevron and ConocoPhillips both lobbied the State Department specifically on the issue of “oil sands” in the immediate months prior to the department’s approval, as did a trade association funded by ExxonMobil.
Those three oil companies have delivered between between $2.5 million and $3 million to the Clinton Foundation. That is on top of money their executives and lobbyists delivered to Clinton’s campaign and super PAC in her 2008 presidential bid — the year before she approved the pipeline.”
http://www.ibtimes.com/political-capital/oil-companies-donated-clinton-foundation-while-lobbying-state-department-2348832
The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, ratified in 1780, it is thought to be the world’s oldest still-functioning written constitution. Drafted in part by John Adams, it inspired and informed the U.S. Constitution, forged seven years later. Part I, Article VII, of the Massachusetts charter reads:
“Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.”’
“Hillary Clinton is campaigning as a guardian of President Barack Obama’s progressive policy accomplishments. In recent weeks, she has called the Affordable Care Act “one of the greatest accomplishments of President Obama, of the Democratic Party, and of our country,” and promised that she is “going to defend Dodd-Frank” and “defend President Obama for taking on Wall Street.”
Meanwhile, however, Clinton’s campaign has been relying on a team of strategists and fundraisers, many of whom spent much of the last seven years as consultants or lobbyists for business interests working to obstruct Obama’s agenda in those two areas.
Consultants associated with the Dewey Square Group, a lobbying firm that has been retained by business interests to defeat a variety of progressive reforms, are playing a major role in the Clinton campaign. Charles Baker III, the co-founder of Dewey, is a senior strategist and the campaign’s chief administrative officer. Michael Whouley, another Dewey co-founder, played an early role in advising Clinton’s plan for the current campaign by convening some of the very first strategy sessions. Senior Dewey officials Jill Alper and Minyon Moore are also close advisers and fundraisers for Clinton, while at least four other Clinton officials have worked at Dewey within the last four years. In addition, disclosures show that Clinton’s Super PACs Priorities USA Action and Correct the Record have also paid Dewey Square Group for a variety of services in this election.”
http://readersupportednews.org/news-section2/318-66/35090-focus-top-hillary-clinton-advisers-and-fundraisers-lobbied-against-obamacare
“I think Senator Warren (she deserves the dignity of her title) will be more effective for progressives in the Senate.”
Why not President of the Senate?
“Clinton will win the nomination and the general election, but Sanders will be the Most Valuable Player, in November and beyond. The Democrats are uniting around progressivism.
And both uniting and progressivism are operative words here.”
Bev
That is keeping your eye on the ball. This post is destructive to your operative words.
It’s all over the news, EMichael. The article I linked to is from Politico. One that someone else linked to in this thread is in The Week. And today’s NYT has a long detailed article about these and similar efforts by her this week, including that Clinton’s phoning Republican-leaning Wall Street donors and having long conversations with them.
The problem is that Clinton has her eye on the wrong ball. She’s really hurting herself and she’s clueless that that is so.
Note on Blue Dogs: Blue Dogs get a 50% to 70% rating from Americans for Democratic Action (ADA). (Think former Senator Ben Nelson.) Republicans get 0%. For now, I’ll take even the 50% in order to get Republicans out of office. I believe all of the Blue Dogs will vote for a minimum wage and higher spending on infrastructure. The first step in the long-game progressive agenda is to eliminate the Republican Party as a force.
Getting us on track to controlling Congress and more statehouses depends on achieving high turnout. Getting high turnout depends in large part on the level of enthusiasm for the top of the ticket. The differences in turnout between the Presidential elections and the mid-terms demonstrates that. Although relatively muted in this slightly cryptic post, Beverly’s serial rants against Hillary, even after Clinton has virtually clinched the nomination, suggest she really doesn’t care much about getting Republicans out of the down-ticket offices. All she really cared about is getting her favored candidate into the White House.
After all, there’s no difference between Clinton with her 95% ADA ratings and a Republican with his zero percent. She’s owned by Wall Street. ADA, schm-ADA. (Cue the nose-holding explanation.)
I say NO to the democrat establishment.
Forget about republicans’ “deep unease” about Trump.
Think center left democrats’ “deep unease” about Clinton.
Right now the GOP is being shoved rightward by its base, and the dems continue to ignore theirs.
Note to ilsm.
There may not be a dem base…………
Independent rules!
Anyone that can read the Constitution and has been alive the last three decades and is registered as an independent is an idiot.
Urban,
The last eight years have clearly shown that a super majority is necessary for any progressive programs. That is not going to happen until at least 2020.
This election is about holding the gains made and nominating at least two SC justices.
That is all that is going to happen in the next four years regardless of the Dem nominee.
EMichael —
I don’t think giving up in advance is going to advance the cause. You go for whatever you can get now, and if a super-majority is not in the cards, the pressures on Republicans in the face of a landslide loss — certainly those from Northern states, if that happens — will be different from what they have been.
2020 might be the year, but you build towards it to whatever extent you can.
Of course you build towards it, and that is something Sanders can really help with in terms of supporting down ballot.
And you certainly do not give up, but 60 is a long, long way off. And losses in elections will have no effect on the GOP. These people are crazy. I mean, look at the last eight years and if that is not enough, look at their presidential primary. There are middle school elections that had more substance.
they have the birchers and they are not going to go anywhere, and they have a lot of states. just too much to overcome.
Hillary Clinton and her campaign are themselves promoting that they represent the values of the Bush dynasty. The mind simply reels with yet another prime example of the corrupting influence driven by the outrageous cost to run a national election.
Frank K, what are you talking about? Do you mean fund raising from conservatives? Show your work, specifically as to the claim of representing values of the Bush dynasty.
Beverly Mann,
I think the only way that you can arrive at the conclusion that HRH HRC is hurting herself is if you — one — still believes she has any credibility… I was about to say credibility on campaign finance reform or like measures, but in perfect seriousness we can just leave it at credibility. Not only has she run out of that particular commodity but she places absolutely no value on it at all.
Ms 57,
I enjoy reading your posts, almost all of which I agree with(ever notice how you like people that agree with you?) However, at this point you(and others with this idea) are contributing to the possibility of Donald Trump being President.
Time to grow up. Sanders has lost. Let’s figure out the best way to go (Yes, the lesser evil). Sanders and his fans can move this debate to the left if they work inside the party. Outside the party, or by attacking the nominee is a recipe for disaster.
I do not like HRC one bit. Never have. Doesn’t matter. to rail against her is to help the GOP. At this stage to attack her is to work towards the deaths of tens of thousands Americans a year(mostly all poor). To attack her is to work towards tens of thousands of Americans facing financial ruin because they got sick.
I won’t bother with all of the other things that Trump would do to this country that would put you into a state of depression.
Time to grow up. Sanders lost. If he had been a Democrat his whole life everything might have been different. But let’s take that mistake and support the team(no matter how you feel about the winner).
The only way to change this country is by working with, and influencing, the Dem party and its platform.
Attacking Clinton at this point is the act of a stupid, selfish two year old.
You have to stop. And you have to have everyone else you know to stop.
We can move left, but if Clinton loses we will not move left in my lifetime(or taking the 57 into account) your lifetime.
You can’t get out the vote is you continue the thoughts you expounded in this post.
We really cannot afford another two Scalias.
EMichael,
That’s a broadside, brother. It’s a funny thing about the internet: people freely call me things – like “A stupid selfish two-year old” – that they would never dare say to my face, not because I’m a tough guy but because it’s rude.
Hillary Clinton is the personification of true political and moral corruption. That’s not an attack. That is an evaluation. That is a judgment arrived at by watching the Billary show for more than 20 years, and by deeply looking into their record. I don’t think Hillary has seen a moment pass where she was not thinking first and foremost about her own ambition, her own advancement – herself. They have a lust for power and wealth, which is self-evident and indisputable. She is worm-eaten by cynicism, perfectly prepared to bend the truth into a lie if it serves her purpose. In the name of geopolitics, she is unabashed in unleashing the dogs of war on hundreds of thousands of funny-looking brown people – and sleeps like a baby.
I fell no particular animus to her. I feel deep contempt for such people: neo-con warmongers; coddlers and abettors of the depredations of the financial class; grotesque political prostitutes; self-serving careerists. That’s who she is. It is offensive; you ought to be offended.
I’m not here to sway anyone to vote for anyone else – as if I had the power. I am not committed to the Democratic Party – they sold me out a long time ago. I am, and have been for 40 years, wholly committed to the ideas Bernie shares. I am not in the least bit worried about Trump. I’m not particularly perturbed that HRH HRC will be the next President. I am overjoyed at what I see happening in politics today – and Bernie, an honest, straightforward politician and an honorable man, has been instrumental in setting off what is in fact a political revolution that is shaking the foundations of the cozy corruption of the political class, as personified by HRC.
If you like, feel free to invite me (this time politely, please) to leave these pages, but I will not be changing my tune. I don’t want to bring her down; I want to show how low she’s prepared to go.
Certainly no reason to “leave these pages”. Also no reason to expect others here to agree.
I never asked you to “leave the pages”, I simply asked you to be part of the solution instead of part of the problem.
Fairly simple here. Sanders has been incredibly effective in rousing support from a lot of progressives who think just like him. I am in that group.
However, the reason Sanders has never done a thing in his life(until now) to affect the progressive cause is because he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air about what he thought this country should be working towards.
Now, a lot of his supporters are tending on doing the same thing; making themselves a hindrance to any progressive progress cause they cannot get exactly what they want, and right now.
You and people like you, are a big part of the problem.
Rome was not built in a day. So you sit out on the sidelines(like Sanders) and because not everyone is as committed as you, you make fun of the their efforts.
Figure out why Sanders ran as a Democrat, and then grow up and help people move this country further left.
EMichael,
“Bernie has never done a thing in his life(until now) to affect the progressive cause is because he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air about what he thought this country should be working towards.”
That is pure ignorance.
You can really know something, then there are the things you pretend to know. It takes the slightest bit of research. I found the link below in 2 minutes.
Watch it if you want — or not — and tell me about how “Bernie has never done a thing in his life(until now) to affect the progressive cause is because he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air about what he thought this country should be working towards.”
Jesus, man, that is pure ignorance.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=bernie+sanders+and+civil+rights&view=detail&mid=004350D484CA5D0E277F004350D484CA5D0E277F&FORM=VIRE
He has been in DC serving as a Congressman and Senator for more than 20 years.
What has he done to help elect people like him to Congress?
I am not questioning his stances, I am questioning his accomplishments. I did not know my arrest in DC on November 15, 1969 was such a great accomplishment.
First of all, for the record: From October 2011-January 2012 I took part in the Occupy movement by living in a tent on Freedom Plaza in downtown DC. We marched through the streets. I got arrested during a hearing when Panetta was testifying how well the efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq were going. We disrupted meetings of bank executives and insurance executives. We even managed one day to shut down the US Chamber of Commerce, at which I had the distinct pleasure of chasing Michael Chertoff down a back alley as he tried to slink out of there. I wouldn’t call that sitting on the sidelines.
Bernie has been in Congress for 20 years, you’re right, representing the citizens of VT, of which I was one, and fighting every day, day in and day out, usually with no more than a handful of allies, to advance the democratic socialist agenda — on every single issue, every single piece of legislation, every single vote. Every day for 20 years, EMichael, with the same energy and same commitment he has shown throughout this campaign. If you want to call that sitting on the sidelines, be my guest. I think he’d be surprised to hear someone say that as the junior Senator from the great economic powerhouse of VT, he was responsible to get others elected, as well.
I guess I need to remind you that in 2015, while “he sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air,” he decided he was fed up about the ways the middle- and working-classes were taking a beating and decided to run for President. 6% chance. Unknown to all but a few. No PAC. No money. No donor network. No “realistic” evaluations about his chances. No cynicism! He thought to himself, “I have to do this. I know there are millions out there for whom I can speak — and fight! Let’s see.”
He’s won 19 states. He’s bound to win more. He has raised $200 million in contributions from the people — like me — in small contributions averaging less than $30. He has stirred the hearts to activism of an entire generation. He has pushed Hillary to the left and emboldened the Progressives in Congress — Elizabeth Warren has a grin from ear-to-ear (and hasn’t backed Hillary, if you’ve noticed). He has, for the first time ever in a Presidential debate, raised the issue of the Palestinians. He has challenged the prevailing neo-liberal economic agenda and made it politically acceptable to challenge the legitimacy of capitalism and to call yourself a Socialist. He has effectively raised the ideas of income inequality, challenging the power of Wall Street, a massive infrastructure spending program, Medicare for all, repealing Citizens United — and more — from the level of “a great idea” to the level of national debate. And he will, in the end, endorse HRH HRC and campaign against Trump.
And he’s brought hope.
But I guess in your eyes, he should have done more.
First you criticize him for having “sat on the sidelines in his comfortable little seat and talked to the air,” now you can’t wait for him to return there. Why? And w-h-a-a-a-a-t?
ms 57:
You are not alone in being active, some of us here have done the same in opposing the Kochs in local newspapers for funding Free Enterprise Centers on college campuses and in Show Down in Chicago. From the sixties forward, many of us have been taking a stand somewhere along the line and still are. It was fun telling Durbin I wished the party of the majority would begin to take a stand and start to act like the party of the majority after “Banksters” interviewed him at the Showdown. Pols in my home state typically avoid me. This is an activist board and we do lean and sway to the left as writers. If you can put a sentence together and group a few sentences together that are topical and form a paragraph, we may have a place to portray your words.
My friend EMichael is usually on the right side of discussions. I would be curious about Sanders accomplishments also and beyond saying we will have universal healthcare as if by magic upon his election. There is much to contend with before his wishes and dreams become a reality.
I don’t really think of EMichael as being on the wrong side of the discussion. We disagree. He has his point of view and I have mine but neither of us has the final word on what is true.
I am really glad to hear about your activism. Hightower recently said that the best way to keep this movement going is for each person to decide for himself what he can comfortably give, and then give it. (By the way, the reactionaries always talk about professional protestors being hired to protest things like Trump events. I’ve tried like hell to find out who does the hiring, but I can’t find a thing. Keep me in mind if you hear of anything.)
The short answer to your question about universal healthcare is Bernie is not going to be elected, which doesn’t mean we will not see universal healthcare. I very much doubt when you told Durbin to start acting like a Democrat that you expected him to start acting like a Democrat. I didn’t expect to bring down the corporate state when I camped out, and I doubt Bernie expected to win the nomination, which doesn’t mean he won’t win the nomination. The point is we all decide what we can give, and then give it. And when I hear someone say that Bernie has been sitting in his safe seat talking to the air — well, the record needs to be corrected.
Didn’t Bobby Kennedy say something like, “some people look at things and say why. Others dream things that never were and say why not?” When you reining imagine the corrupt and corrupting power of the reactionary right, as embodied by the Koch Suckers, are you a dreamer?
What I can tell you with absolute certainty is that if you want to see nothing change, do nothing.
January 1962
As a Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) officer, a 20-year-old Sanders leads students in a multi-week sit-in to oppose segregation in off-campus housing owned by the University of Chicago.
August 1963
An organizer for the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, Sanders takes an overnight bus with fellow activists for his first-ever trip to Washington, D.C. He hears Martin Luther King Jr.’s historic “I Have a Dream” speech firsthand at the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom.
1972
Sanders wins 2 percent of the vote in his first statewide race, a special election for a U.S. Senate seat in Vermont.
Sanders wins 1 percent of the vote in his second run for statewide office during a gubernatorial election.
1974
In his second campaign for the U.S. Senate, Sanders attracts 4 percent of the vote.
1976
Sanders gets 6 percent of the vote in a race to replace Gov. Thomas Salmon.
1981
In a stunning upset, Sanders wins the mayoral race in Burlington, Vermont’s largest city, by a mere 10 votes. Running as an independent, he shocks the city’s political establishment by defeating a six-term, local machine mayor.
1983
Sanders wins 52 percent of the vote, defeating his closest challenger by 21 points, to be re-elected to a second term as mayor. Burlington sets a record for voter turnout as the Sanders campaign energizes thousands of new voters.
1984
Mayor Sanders establishes the Burlington Community Land Trust, the first municipal housing land trust in the country for affordable housing. The project becomes a model emulated throughout the world. It later wins an award from Jack Kemp-led HUD.
November 1990
Sanders defeats incumbent Rep. Peter Smith in a race to be Vermont’s sole congressman. He is the first independent elected to the House in 40 years. He will be re-elected by the people of Vermont to serve eight terms.
January 1991
Congressman Sanders votes against a measure providing President George H. W. Bush with authorization to use military force in the Gulf War. “I have a real fear that the region is not going to be more peaceful or more stable after the war,” he says at the time.
October 1992
Congress passes Sanders’ first signed piece of legislation to create the National Program of Cancer Registries. A Reader’s Digest article calls the law “the cancer weapon America needs most.” All 50 states now run registries to help cancer researchers gain important insights.
November 1993
Sanders votes against the Clinton-era North American Free Trade Agreement. Returning from a tour of factories in Mexico, Sanders says: “If NAFTA passes, corporate profits will soar because it will be even easier than now for American companies to flee to Mexico and hire workers there for starvation wages.”
July 1996
Sanders is one of only 67 votes against the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples legally married. Sanders urged the Supreme Court to throw out the law, which it did in a landmark 2013 ruling – some 17 years later.
July 1999
Standing up against the major pharmaceutical companies, Sanders becomes the first member of Congress to take seniors across the border to Canada to buy lower-cost prescription drugs. The congressman continues his bus trips to Canada with a group of breast cancer patients the following April. These brave women are able to purchase their medications in Canada for almost one-tenth the price charged in the States.
August 1999
An overflow crowd of Vermonters packs a St. Michael’s College town hall meeting hosted by Sanders to protest an IBM plan to cut older workers’ pensions by as much as 50 percent. CBS Evening News with Dan Rather and The New York Times cover the event. After IBM enacts the plan, Sanders works to reverse the cuts, passing a pair of amendments to prohibit the federal government from acting to overturn a federal district court decision that ruled that IBM’s plan violated pension age discrimination laws. Thanks to Sanders’ efforts, IBM agreed to a $320 million legal settlement with some 130,000 IBM workers and retirees.
November 1999
About 10 years before the 2008 Wall Street crash spins the world economy into a massive recession, Sanders votes “no” on a bill to undo decades of financial regulations enacted after the Great Depression. “This legislation,” he predicts at the time, “will lead to fewer banks and financial service providers, increased charges and fees for individual consumers and small businesses, diminished credit for rural America and taxpayer exposure to potential losses should a financial conglomerate fail. It will lead to more mega-mergers, a small number of corporations dominating the financial service industry and further concentration of power in our country.” The House passed the bill 362-57 over Sanders’ objection.
October 2001
Sanders votes against the USA Patriot Act. “All of us want to protect the American people from terrorist attacks, but in a way that does not undermine basic freedoms,” Sanders says at the time. He subsequently votes against reauthorizing the law in 2006 and 2011.
October 2002
Sanders votes against the Bush-Cheney war in Iraq. He warns at the time that an invasion could “result in anti-Americanism, instability and more terrorism.”
June 2005
Sanders passes an amendment in the House to stop the government from obtaining library and book-buying records on Americans. Unfortunately, the amendment is later removed in bicameral backroom negotiations.
November 2006
Sanders defeats Vermont’s richest man, Rich Tarrant, to be elected to the U.S. Senate. Sanders, running as an Independent, is endorsed by the Vermont Democratic Party and supported by the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.
December 2007
Sanders’ authored energy efficiency and conservation grant program passes into law. He later secures $3.2 billion in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 for the grant program.
September 2008
Thanks to Sanders’ efforts, funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program funding doubles, helping millions of low-income Americans heat their homes in winter.
February 2009
Sanders works with Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley to pass an amendment to an economic recovery bill preventing Wall Street banks that take taxpayer bailouts from replacing laid-off U.S. workers with exploited and poorly-paid foreign workers.
December 2009
Sanders passes language in the Affordable Care Act to allow states to apply for waivers to implement pilot health care systems by 2017. The legislation allows states to adopt more comprehensive systems to cover more people at lower costs.
March 2010
President Barack Obama signs into law the Affordable Care Act with a major Sanders provision to expand federally qualified community health centers. Sanders secures $12.5 billion in funding for the program which now serves more than 25 million Americans. Another $1.5 billion from a Sanders provision went to the National Health Service Corps for scholarships and loan repayment for doctors and nurses who practice in underserved communities.
July 2010
Sanders works with Republican Congressman Ron Paul in the House to pass a measure as part of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street reform bill to audit the Federal Reserve, revealing how the independent agency gave $16 trillion in near zero-interest loans to big banks and businesses after the 2008 economic collapse.
December 2010
As Republicans and President Barack Obama push a deal that would extend Bush-era tax breaks for America’s wealthiest families, Sanders gives an eight-and-a-half hour filibuster-like speech on the Senate floor in opposition, citing growing economic inequality and increasing deficits.
December 2012
Sanders becomes chairman of the Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee.
March 2013
Sanders, backed by seniors, women, veterans, labor unions and disabled Americans leads a successful effort to stop a “chained-CPI” proposal supported by Congressional Republicans and the Administration to cut Social Security and disabled veterans’ benefits.
April 2013
Sanders introduces legislation to break up major Wall Street banks so large that the collapse of one could send the overall economy into a downward spiral.
August 2014
A bipartisan $16.5 billion veterans bill written by Sanders, Sen. John McCain and Rep. Jeff Miller is signed into law by President Barack Obama. The measure includes $5 billion for the VA to hire more doctors and health professionals to meet growing demand for care.
January 2015
Sanders takes over as ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, using the platform to fight for his economic agenda for the American middle class.
January 2015
Sanders votes against the Keystone XL pipeline which would allow multinational corporation TransCanada to transport dirty tar sands oil from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico.
May 2015
Sanders declares his candidacy for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States. Watch the announcement.
“There is much to contend with before his wishes and dreams become a reality.”
MS57, does Senator Sanders have any suggestions as to what can be done on health care short of establishing single payer?
JackD,
I can’t speak for him but I imagine he has examined the issue and decided that the best form of healthcare is universal. I would bet he thinks that the centrality of the health insurance industry, the pharmaceutical industry and the like create all kinds of problems that are most easily solved by universal care – problems like cost, equal access (that means everyone, whether they live in a blue or red state), denial of coverage, portability, dependence on employers for coverage, etc… They have important roles to play, but they ought to be treated in the same way we treat public utilities. Banks, too. But no, if the aim is to provide healthcare to everyone and to make it affordable, nibbling at the edges is insufficient.
Corporations are obligated by law to do one thing: increase value to shareholders. That’s perfectly appropriate if your business is construction or real estate or manufacturing cars or computers or what have you. They invest their money, they take the risk, they enjoy the profits – or lose their money. But those corporations whose business is, shall we say, servicing the public interest, then the public has every right to regulate the way they conduct business. In Europe, for example, as part of the negotiations to bail out banks, executive compensation was capped; and X numbers of Euros were set aside by banks to guarantee that their commercial banking concerns – which were really the public’s commercial banking concerns – did not suffer. Needless to say, not only did we not see that here but in many ways, despite the billions in fines many of them have been forced to pay for illegal fraudulent practices, the banks have gotten off scot-free.
When you consider we have the most expensive healthcare in the world, and that so many pre-Obamacare were not covered, and that so many even now remain uncovered, you have to ask why? We pay the highest prices for drugs in the world. Why? When the facts are that 25% of every dollar spent on private health insurance goes to “administrative costs,” including advertising, executive compensation and bonuses, yet the administrative costs for Medicare is 4%, why is it that the more expensive system is allowed to dominate the discussion – indeed, dominate the very construction of the new system, which is what happened when they were drafting Obamacare? When you consider that every single piece of legislation, from speed bumps to tax policy, is a form of social engineering – an act designed to produce a specific outcome – then you have to conclude that we pay the highest costs because the pharmaceutical industry is politically protected, as is the insurance industry, the arms industry, oil and gas – all of it. Making policy may have unintended consequences but it is designed with a specific purpose – in this case to guarantee those industries maintained their profitability.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2014/02/12/is-the-profit-motive-ruining-american-healthcare/#26427b5ba0ce
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28212223
http://www.forbes.com/sites/johnlamattina/2014/07/29/do-drug-companies-make-drugs-or-money/#31bfa91f7fcf
Are we as a people committed to people’s healthcare or are we committed to corporate profits?
Bernie says people. So do I.
Ms 57:
The administrative costs are controlled by the MLR at 15 and 20% for group and individuals. Maggie Mahar and I talked about this also and her comment was; “many of Medicare’ administrative costs are paid by other govt agencies that collect the premiums (IRS) and cover costs of incoming Med. recipients.” If anyone knew, she would as she has written extensively on healthcare. By and large, private insurers spend more on investigating fraud. Congress doesn’t let Medicare do this–It wouldn’t want Medicare to discover much of this fraud—Pharm, providers, hospitals. Their lobbyists make huge contributions to Congress. This is in the same vein as turning Medicare loose on the healthcare industry to negotiate or set pricing very much in the same manner as what you would see in similar two tier public and private healthcare insurance countries. Most countries have a two tiered system and single payer is not as prevalent.
Attacking healthcare insurance will not get you where you want to be. Going after the healthcare industry and out-of-control usage of pharma, hospital, and procedures will yield far greater results. The US is expensive because of the healthcare industry. The very same Forbes you cite lists Pharma as #3 in profitability. What Pfizer charges off as R&D is strictly buyouts of other companies.
I answered the question of who was covered and who was not covered. To blame 1t 100% on the PPACA is political nonsense. I believe I pointed out the causes of the uninsured utilizing Charles Gaba’s Pie Chart. Kaiser’s Levitt believes Charles to be on the mark and he takes Charles as being credible.
If I can find Ezra Klein’s article I will send it.
I think you are probably right about Sanders’ view. It would seem to follow then that if he can’t get single payer, then he wouldn’t try to improve the ACA in whatever ways might be available. In other words, he would leave everything just as it is.
Ms 57,
The history of this country shows clearly, and without dispute, that progressive changes only occur when there are large majorities of progressives in Congress and a progressive President.
My comment about Sanders sitting on the sidelines is due to his refusal to be a Democrat and refusal to support Democratic pols with progressive views like himself elected to Congress. I understand his lack of cash and obviously cannot berate him for not supporting progressives with money, but how about his time advocating for such progressives?
I can honestly say that in terms of progressive policies, HRC has been multiple times more helpful than Sanders due to her decades long support, financially and personally of the DP and down ballot Dems. It is the single biggest reason Sanders will not win the nomination, these people never heard of him before.
Now comes the real test for Sanders. He now has money; he now has a large amount of progressives who believe in him and will support him from a financial basis. Now he can get off the sidelines and do his best to get progressives like him elected to Congress. And actually do something besides take stances(almost all of which I agree with).
You can’t win the game unless you are in the game. Sanders chose not to get in the game until the last year, let’s see how he plays now that he is on the field.
“Trump vs. Clinton: Who will voters like least?”
“Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are set to be the two most disliked general election candidates of modern times.
Thirty-seven percent of voters hold a “strongly unfavorable” view of Clinton, according to results of polls from late March to late April aggregated by Harry Enten of FiveThirtyEight.
Only one candidate in the last 36 years fares worse: Donald Trump. Fifty-three percent hold a strongly unfavorable view of him.
Those negative ratings are unlike anything seen in the modern era.”
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/279211-trump-vs-clinton-who-will-voters-like-least?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1731
Ah, it’s enough to make the heart of every liberal Democrat swell with pride.
“Sanders slams Trump in Atlantic City”
“Sanders trained his fire on Donald Trump during a Monday rally in Atlantic City, N.J., characterizing the economic struggles of the once-booming resort city as indicative of where Trump would take the country.
It took Sanders just minutes to bring up Trump, launching into a tirade as his supporters booed.
“The greed and recklessness we’ve seen from people like Donald Trump,” he said, before trailing off to ask the crowd if they are familiar with the presumptive Republican presidential nominee.
“You know, he’s a brilliant, successful businessman who can bring the kind of prosperity to America today that he brought to Atlantic City, is that your point?” he asked the audience sarcastically.
He went on to slam Trump’s “greed,” highlighting his call to eliminate the estate tax and accused him of not wanting to raise the minimum wage — an issue Trump has waffled on in the past week.
And Sanders framed Trump as dangerous to both the social fabric and economic welfare of America.”
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/279202-sanders-slams-trump-in-atlantic-city?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1731
While Bernie, the faux-Democrat, never does a thing to help Democrats get elected.
“Financial Sector Gives Hillary Clinton a Boost”
“Some Wall Street donations shift from GOP candidates who have exited the race”
“Hillary Clinton is consolidating her support among Wall Street donors and other businesses ahead of a general-election battle with Donald Trump, winning more campaign contributions from financial-services executives in the most recent fundraising period than all other candidates combined.”
http://www.wsj.com/articles/financial-sector-gives-hillary-clinton-a-boost-1462750725?utm_source=&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=1731
And Hillary does what she does best, blazing the trail towards prosperity for all Americans — a true Progressive leader.
Isn’t this the starting point of Beverly Mann’s initial post? Beverly, I guess Bernie was right all along, eh?
According to a poll Rachel Maddow featured tonight, more Democrats are uncomfortable with Bernie as the candidate than Hillary; and by a substantial margin. I suppose they have no idea what they are talking about, but then, they might.
JackD,
It is really remarkable how every comment made about Hillary is met not by addressing what is said but by attacking Bernie. That is from the “I told you so but what am I” school of argument. I hear it all the time from reactionaries and climate deniers who are intellectually challenged. It is feeble. It is simple-minded. It is intellectually dishonest.
37% of all respondents from across the country view Hillary “strongly unfavorably.” How do you plan to dismiss them?