What is this Presidential election really about?

Dear Friends,

There are many very important issues in the current Presidential election including income inequality, institutional and persistent racism, universal healthcare, gender equity, tax fairness, discrimination in the workplace, religious bigotry, women's reproductive healthcare, and the list goes on and on.  However, in my view, there are two issues that rise above all the others because they are each, in their own way, existential issues, and they are interrelated.  The two issues are global warming and America becoming an oligarchy.

There can be no question that the monied interests control the Congress and our political system.  The monied interests had disproportionate impact prior to the Citizens United decision and have almost completely taken over the political process today.  All of the campaigns of the Presidential candidates from both major political parties, except for Bernie Sanders' campaign, are funded by monied interests.  Bernie Sanders' success, despite the fact that the average donation to his campaign is less than $30 and despite the fact that his campaign has no PAC supporting it, is nothing short of a miracle.  If we do not break the control of the monied interests soon, we will have a very well entrenched oligarchy which will be difficult, if not impossible, to dislodge.  There is no way that "money controlling politics" can be changed incrementally.  The monied interests will not permit it.  Bernie Sanders is right.  Only with a political revolution can the "money in politics" problem be solved.

I have written before about the fact that climate change and global warming are the biggest threat to us (here).  Depending on who is doing the estimating, climate change is responsible for somewhere between 100,000 and 400,000 deaths worldwide per year and those numbers will be increasing for the foreseeable future regardless of any actions that we take now.  The economic cost of climate change is so staggering that I cannot comprehend the numbers.  In 2015 in the United States alone there were 10 weather events where the damages for that event were in excess of $1 billion.  Worldwide the damages caused by climate change were $1.2 trillion.  In addition there will be millions of people displaced as the sea levels rise and persistent droughts occur, which will continue to happen even if we take bold action now.

There are also substantial health risks associated with global warming.  The zika virus is the latest one to hit the news.  While it may be too early to say that the zika epidemic is caused by global warming, it is clear that the spread of the virus is facilitated by global warming, just as other health problems will be accelerated by global warming.  The following paragraphs from an article in The New York Times (here) summarize the point very well, and for sure it will not just be mosquitos that will rapidly expand the scope of health problems as the world warms.

But these same experts added that the Zika epidemic, as well as the related spread of a disease called dengue that is sickening as many as 100 million people a year and killing thousands, should be interpreted as warnings.
Over the coming decades, global warming is likely to increase the range and speed of the life cycle of the particular mosquitoes carrying these viruses, encouraging their spread deeper into temperate countries like the United States.
Recent research suggests that under a worst-case scenario, involving continued high global emissions coupled with fast population growth, the number of people exposed to the principal mosquito could more than double, to as many as 8 billion or 9 billion by late this century from roughly 4 billion today.

History is replete with examples of scarcity and shortages causing hatred, bigotry, violence and war.  When, as a result of global warming, we do not have enough water to drink and grow food, millions of people are displaced from their homes by drought and rising sea level, and rising temperatures speed the spread of diseases, we will experience even more hatred, bigotry, violence and war than we do today.

We are well past the point where incremental changes can have a significant impact on the terrible devastation of global warming.  The carbon that we have already released will increase these problems for a long time regardless of what we do now.  Incremental changes will simply delay for a few years when we hit the tipping point after which the cumulative impact of human activity will cause warming that will destroy us.  A blog by Anthony Barnosky and Elizabeth Hadly at HuffPost Science (here) entitled "Five Climate Tipping Points We've Already Seen, and One We're Hoping For" makes my point very well.  The blog discusses five tipping points that have already occurred.  The one the authors are hoping for is a groundswell of political support and will to actually make the necessary changes.  Here are excerpts from the final paragraphs of that blog:

All of these examples, and many more, indicate that the changing climate has already tipped the world into a new normal, compared to what life was like when today's middle-aged adults were born. So far, we're coping, but not without great expense. 

The costs, both in personal suffering and economic losses, will increase dramatically as new, bigger climate-triggered tipping points hit in the next few decades, if we continue business-as-usual green-house gas emissions...

While it is too late to go back from the climate-triggered tipping points we've already caused, it is not too late to avoid the more severe ones that threaten our near future. Just as solid science alerts us to impending dangers, it also maps out feasible paths to minimizing risks. In the case of climate change, the solution is quickly reducing greenhouse gas emissions to essentially zero, through replacing fossil fuels with clean energy. Studies indicate it is technically and economically feasible to replace coal, oil, and gas by 2050 with a combination of carbon-neutral approaches, including solar, wind, wave, and sustainable biofuel energy. 

That cannot be accomplished of course, without another kind of tipping point: a groundswell of popular support and political will to deal with the problem. If we do not cross that critical threshold soon, it will be too late...

The monied interests that control our political process today for the most part resist the scientific proof of man-made global warming and even those that acknowledge the science want only incremental changes so as not to disrupt the status quo in the short term.  It is clear that incremental changes will not reverse the horrific trend of global warming.

Hillary Clinton is running as the candidate for incremental change.  Bernie Sanders is running as the candidate for a political revolution with bold solutions for both of these existential problems as well as the other important issues facing us today.

I will be 70 years old later this year.  My white privilege and financial situation will protect me from the worst impacts of these two existential problems, but there will be no amount of wealth or privilege that will protect my grandchildren and all people of future generations.  We need to act now and to act boldly and radically to prevent the United States from permanently becoming an oligarchy and to leave the carbon in the ground so that our grandchildren can live in peace and harmony on an Earth that is healthy and stable.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Bernie Sanders for President

Dear Friends,

Bernie Sanders is my choice for President of the United States.  His policies are exactly what this country and the world need now.  The media, many pundits and a number of my friends say he cannot be elected, he is too far left, he is a socialist and he is impractical.  I want to encourage everybody, including the media, to look beyond labels and examine his policies and positions.  Since I believe his policies are the ones that we need now, I intend to work for his election.

Bernie Sanders is not new to his positions.  He has been espousing them for years.  They are not focus group tested policies.  They are what he truly believes.  In the weeks to come, I will focus more on the policies in detail.  For now, these are just summaries of some of his positions and policies that I think are great.

Democracy

Our democracy is being destroyed by big money and voter suppression.  Bernie Sanders has been clear that we need to stand up to the billionaire class who are spending billions of dollars to impose their will on the country.  That is not democracy.  We need to reverse the Citizens United case and provide for government funding of campaigns.  Bernie Sanders is a strong advocate for both of these positions.    We also need to stop the Republican efforts at voter suppression.  Bernie Sanders wants to reinstate the provisions of the Voting Rights Act that require pre-approval of voting rights changes in states with histories of racial discrimination.

Economic Justice

Bernie Sanders, along with Elizabeth Warren, is at the forefront of the movement for economic justice - imposing higher taxes on the rich, having a $15 an hour minimum wage, increasing workers' wages, rebuilding the infrastructure of this country providing thousands of middle class jobs, providing better educational opportunities, focusing on increasing the incomes and opportunities for the poor and middle class, and the list goes on and on.

Bernie Sanders is an outspoken critic of the Trans-Pacific Partnership and other similar "trade" agreements that are negotiated in secret by the government with the help of big business but with no input from economic justice advocates or environmentalists.

Racial Justice

Bernie Sanders has issued a detailed plan to work to eliminate institutional racism in this country, including police and criminal justice reforms.  In addition, all of his economic justice initiatives will help alleviate the lack of economic racial justice in the country.

Privacy

Bernie Sanders is a strong advocate for protecting the privacy of the American people from government spying.

Women's Rights

Bernie Sanders is a strong advocate for women's rights and has been for years.  As mayor of Burlington, VT he passed some of the first legislation to advocate for women's economic rights and he has always been a strong supporter of women's health care rights.

Foreign Policy

Bernie Sanders voted against President Bush's Iraq war and has been consistently in favor of diplomacy over military action.  He is in favor of the Iraq nuclear agreement.  When Bernie Sanders says that war should be the last resort, he means it.

Environment

Bernie Sanders is and has always been an environmental activist.  He is opposed to fracking and the Keystone XL Pipeline and other environmentally dangerous fossil fuel development.  He is a long time supporter of alternative energy options.

Regulating Capitalism

Bernie Sanders understands that capitalism must be regulated.  If left alone the market will destroy capitalism and create an oligarchy as we have seen in recent years.  He is in favor of breaking up the banks that are too big to fail and curbing the abuses of Wall Street and making sure that all businesses have to account for all the costs of their activities including pollution, paying wages so low the government must subsidize the workers, etc.

Immigration

Bernie Sanders has been criticized by some progressives for his immigration position.  While his immigration position is more complicated and nuanced than other Democrats, I think it is very consistent with his guiding principles.  He supports immediately bringing all undocumented people out of the shadows and giving them a real path to citizenship.  He is, however, not in favor of many of the open border and guest worker programs.  His overriding concern is to protect American workers.  If anybody thinks that Republicans and big business want guest worker programs and more legal immigration because they are concerned about providing opportunities to immigrants, they are crazy.  They want those programs for an ongoing supply of cheap labor.  That is the reason that Bernie Sanders has objected to those programs.  Ultimately, he voted for the 2013 immigration reform bill but only after he was able to secure an amendment that provided significant funds for jobs for American workers.  Immigration is important to our success as a country, but we should not bring people here to be cheap labor.  We should bring people here because they want to come and be full participants in our country which will make us a better country.

Education

Bernie Sanders is a strong advocate for education.  Consistent with his core beliefs, we will not be able to achieve economic justice, to reduce the wealth and income gaps between the rich and the poor, to eliminate institutional racism, to compete in the global economy or to achieve economic prosperity for all without a great educational system.  That system has to be truly available to all at no cost.  Bernie Sanders is the leading proponent of making college free and affordable.

Healthcare

Bernie Sanders has been pushing for a universal single payer health system for years.  We are the only developed country in the world that views healthcare as a privilege not a right.  While for those that can pay, we have a great healthcare system.  The system overall costs significantly more than in other developed countries and has significantly poorer results.

I look forward to more detailed discussions of the issues in this election and whether or not Bernie Sanders has the best policies and positions.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal

Plutocracy v. Oligarchy

Dear Friends,

In my blog about big business and big money controlling America (here), I called America a plutocracy.  I often hear other people call us an oligarchy.  I was curious about the difference between an oligarchy and a plutocracy so here is the result of my research on that subject.

Merriam-Webster online dictionary says

Plutocracy

: government by the richest people

: a country that is ruled by the richest people

: a group of very rich people who have a lot of power

Oligarchy

: a country, business, etc., that is controlled by a small group of people

: the people that control a country, business, etc.

: government or control by a small group of people

David Rosen wrote an article on plutocrats v. oligarchs (here).  He starts the piece with the derivation of the two words.

Oligarchy is defined as “government by the few” and came into English use around 1570.  The term derives from two Greek words: oligos meaning “few” and arch for “rule”; similar English-language terms include monarch or hierarchy.  Plutocracy is derived from the Greek ploutos meaning “wealth” and kratos for “govern.” 

In light of the topic of my blog, I think that my use of the term plutocracy was the appropriate one although both words have their merits.  The combination of the two words clearly identifies America today, a country controlled by and benefitting a few very rich people.   

Thanks for reading and please comment,

The Unabashed Liberal

Three Threats to Our Democracy

Dear Friends,

Our democracy is facing three significant threats, which I believe are interconnected.  They are control by a small economic elite, voter disenfranchisement and declining education.  These three threats create a vicious circle of declining opportunity, centralized control among a few, increasing economic disparity and voter suppression.

A recent study by Martin Gilens of Princeton and Benjamin Page of Northwestern (here) entitled "Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens" raises the spectrum that America is more like an oligarchy than a democracy.  I have to admit that I did not read the entire report and perhaps did not fully understand all that I read.  Nevertheless, I did understand this paragraph from the abstract.

The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence. Our results provide substantial support for theories of Economic Elite Domination and for theories of Biased Pluralism, but not for theories of Majoritarian Electoral Democracy or Majoritarian Pluralism. 

I also did read completely an article in The New Yorker by John Cassidy entitled "Is America an Oligarchy?" (here).  That article ends with the following paragraph:

Me, too. There can be no doubt that economic élites have a disproportionate influence in Washington, or that their views and interests distort policy in ways that don’t necessarily benefit the majority: the politicians all know this, and we know it, too. The only debate is about how far this process has gone, and whether we should refer to it as oligarchy or as something else.

Of course our democracy has faced this threat many times in the past.  Doris Kearns Goodwin's book entitled The Bully Pulpit contains a wonderful history of the immense economic and political control of a few people in the heyday of the trusts before Teddy Roosevelt began to break them up.  After a period of time where anti-trust laws were obeyed and enforced, we are once again in an era where political and economic power are concentrated in the hands of a very few.

Voter suppression is also on the rise in the United States.  We have of course faced voter suppression in the past and been able to overcome it.  But clearly it is on the rise again today.  Norm Ornstein wrote an article in The Atlantic entitled "The U.S. Needs a Constitutional Right to Vote" (here).

In his article, Mr. Ornstein points out that the Constitution does not explicitly guarantee the right to vote.  I will simply quote a couple of paragraphs from his article.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that the Supreme Court decision in Shelby County v. Holder, which eviscerated the Voting Rights Act, is leading to a new era of voter suppression that parallels the pre-1960s era—this time affecting not just African-Americans but also Hispanic-Americans, women, and students, among others.

 Voter suppression is nothing new in America, as the pre-civil-rights era underscores. But it is profoundly un-American. The Texas law, promoted aggressively by state Attorney General Greg Abbott, the GOP choice for governor in next year's election, establishes the kinds of obstacles and impediments to voting that are more akin to Vladimir Putin's Russia than to the United States.

The effort should be accelerated. We need a modernized voter-registration system, weekend elections, and a host of other practices to make voting easier. But we also need to focus on an even more audacious and broader effort—a constitutional amendment protecting the right to vote.
Many, if not most, Americans are unaware that the Constitution contains no explicit right to vote. To be sure, such a right is implicit in the Fifteenth, Nineteenth, and Twenty-Sixth amendments that deal with voting discrimination based on race, gender, and age. But the lack of an explicit right opens the door to the courts' ratifying the sweeping kinds of voter-restrictions and voter-suppression tactics that are becoming depressingly common. 

I could not have said it better.  I am proud to point out that my Representative in Congress, Keith Ellison, and another Representative have introduced a Constitutional amendment.  Of course, it will go nowhere with the Republicans in charge of the House.

The third threat is the decline of education in the United States.  Thomas Jefferson was very clear that we needed an educated electorate for our democracy to thrive.  Here are just a couple of his quotations on the subject.

If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.

Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.

If you do not believe that education is rapidly declining in the United States just Google "decline of education in the United States".  You will find no shortage of studies and articles documenting the decline.  Clearly, Jefferson was right that you need an educated populace.  If we are to provide anything that approaches equality of opportunity, we need to provide a great education to people.

The problem is that even if we can take back the power from the economic elite (or oligarchs if you want to be more direct) and even if we can assure the right to vote, without an involved and educated electorate our democracy will fail.  Just as we have overcome threats from the concentration of economic and political power in the hands of a few and voter suppression.  We can overcome the threat of the decline in education too.

We need to elect politicians that have the courage and the conviction to fight for all the people, and that will require getting people to vote.  So do whatever you can to get out the vote.  You will be helping to save our democracy.

Thanks for reading and please comment,
The Unabashed Liberal