Bernie Sanders

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Left revolts over Biden’s staunch support of Israel amid Gaza crisis

      by

      On Wednesday afternoon, hundreds of liberal Jewish American activists staged sit-ins in the Capitol Hill offices of top Democrats, including in the senate office of progressive champion Bernie Sanders, to demand a ceasefire in the escalating war between Israel and Hamas.As they sang in Hebrew and prayed for peace, the House floor resumed legislative activity for the first time in weeks after the election of a new Republican speaker, congressman Mike Johnson.In his first act, Johnson brought to the floor a resolution declaring US solidarity with Israel after Hamas rampaged through Israeli cities, killing 1,400 people and taking more than 200 hostages, Americans among them. Nearly all House Democrats voted to approve the measure, save for a resolute minority who dissented, citing its failure to address the thousands of Palestinians killed in Israel’s retaliatory bombing campaign of Gaza.The discontent on display in Washington was a testament to the rising anger among the party’s left over the response from Biden and Democratic leaders to Israel’s war in Gaza. But as many progressives split from the White House over the US’s staunchly pro-Israel stance, there were also splits within the left itself – a sign of the raw emotions stirred by the conflict.Nor were the scenes in the House the only signs of discontent as US politics – and civil society as a whole – becomes increasingly roiled by Israel’s response to the 7 October Hamas attack.That same afternoon, Joe Biden was asked about the rising Palestinian death toll during a news conference at the White House. Biden replied that he had “no confidence” in the death count provided by the Gaza health ministry, which says nearly 7,000 Palestinians have been killed since the war began.“I’m sure innocents have been killed, and it’s the price of waging a war,” Biden said, in comments the Council on American-Islamic Relations described as “shocking and dehumanizing.”Online, many progressives seethed, accusing Biden of further enabling violence against Palestinians and predicting that he would pay an electoral price next year with Muslim and Arab American voters, who have emerged as an important Democratic constituency in recent elections.“The White House and many in the US government are clear as they should be that 1,000 Israelis killed is too many,” said Eva Borgwardt, the political director of IfNotNow, a progressive Jewish group leading many of the demonstrations in Washington, including the one at the Capitol on Wednesday. “Our question for them is: How many Palestinian deaths are too many?”As Israel intensifies its bombardment of Gaza, Biden is facing extraordinary and growing resistance from his party’s left flank, especially from young voters and voters of color, over his steadfast support for Israel. They have staged demonstrations, penned open letters and even tendered resignations in protest of the Biden administration’s handling of a war they say is threatening the president’s standing at home and possibly his chances of winning re-election next year.A Gallup poll released on Thursday found that Biden’s approval rating among Democrats plummeted 11 percentage points in one month, to a record low of 75%. According to the survey, the drop was fueled by dismay among Democratic voters over Biden’s support for Israel.Meanwhile, a poll released last week by the progressive firm Data for Progress found that 66% of likely US voters strongly or somewhat agree that the US should call for a ceasefire.Still, the White House has firmly rejected calls for a ceasefire, which Karine Jean-Pierre, the White House press secretary, initially described as “repugnant” and “disgraceful” in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas attack. The administration’s rhetoric has since evolved, with White House spokesperson John Kirby arguing this week that a ceasefire at this stage “only benefits Hamas”. Asked earlier this week whether the US would support a ceasefire, Biden said: “We should have those hostages released and then we can talk.”Pressure is building in Congress, where 18 House Democrats – all progressive lawmakers of color – joined a resolution calling for the White House to support “an immediate de-escalation and ceasefire in Israel and occupied Palestine”.On Capitol Hill, a group of Jewish and Muslim staffers wrote an anonymous open letter to their bosses similarly calling for an “immediate ceasefire” between Israel and Hamas. Urging congressional leaders to act swiftly, they cited the rising death toll in Gaza and the rise of antisemitism, anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian sentiments in the United States.Meanwhile, hundreds of former campaign and congressional staffers to progressive senators, including Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania and Bernie Sanders of Vermont, have penned open letters urging them to call for a ceasefire.So far no senator has backed a ceasefire. Warren, Sanders and several other Democratic senators have urged a “humanitarian pause” to allow aid, food and medical supplies to flow into Gaza after Israel ordered a “complete siege” of the territory. It echoes the position of the US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, who said earlier this week that it “must be considered” to protect civilian life.Sanders’ resistance to back a ceasefire has disappointed some of even his most loyal followers, in a sign of how emotionally fraught the debate over Israel has become on the left.Though the 2024 presidential election is a year away, many progressives, and especially younger activists, have threatened to withhold support for Biden, while Arab and Muslim Americans have expressed deep alarm over the president’s actions and rhetoric.Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, the only Palestinian American in Congress, has accused Biden of abetting the deadly war. “We will remember where you stood,” she wrote in a social media post tagging the president.At his press conference on Wednesday, Biden also cautioned Israel to be “incredibly careful to ensure they’re going after the folks propagating this war”. For many on the left, the warning was buried behind his comments casting doubt on the scale of war deaths in Gaza.“Like many progressive Democrats, I have applauded and been pleasantly surprised by President Biden’s actions on climate and the economy,” Waleed Shahid, a progressive strategist tracking the administration’s response to the war, wrote on X, formerly Twitter. “But he’s crossed a moral line with nearly every Muslim, Arab and anti-war young voter I know.”The White House said on Thursday the Biden administration did not dispute that thousands of Palestinians had been killed and emphasized that the health ministry was run by Hamas.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEven a slight erosion in support could spell danger for Biden, who was already struggling with low enthusiasm, particularly among young voters.In polling conducted after the Hamas attack, a Quinnipiac survey found that slightly more than half of voters under 35 say they disapprove of the United States sending weapons and military support to Israel in the wake of the Hamas attack. By contrast, nearly six in 10 voters between the ages of 35 and 49 support sending weapons to Israel, with older age groups offering even stronger approval.Biden’s allies have largely downplayed the disagreements among the party’s grassroots. They note that most Democrats, including the party’s congressional leaders, the senator Chuck Schumer and the congressman Hakeem Jeffries, are strong supporters of Israel and fully back the president’s handling of the conflict. In the coming weeks, their caucuses are expected to overwhelmingly support a White House request to send $14.3bn in security aid to Israel.A letter to Biden, signed by ​a majority of House Democrats, including every Jewish​ member ​of their caucus and several liberal members, praises his ​”strong leadership during a tragic and dangerous moment in the Middle East​.​”It further commends Biden for displaying​ “steadfast support for our ally Israel in a moment of need and horror” while ​also making “clear statements regarding the fundamental importance of ensuring that the humanitarian needs of the civilian population of Gaza are met.”Deep, abiding support for Israel among Democrats on Capitol Hill obscures a shift among the party’s voters, and especially among those who came of age in a post-9/11 US. A Gallup poll conducted in March found for the first time that a greater number of Democrats say they sympathize more with Palestinians than Israelis.Republicans have sought to exploit those divisions in an attempt to cast the Democratic party as anti-Israel, a narrative progressives say media coverage has unfairly promoted.Many liberal Democrats, including the congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, have forcefully denounced pro-Hamas or antisemitic sentiments expressed by the party’s activist fringe. At the same time, they contend that there is a double standard in the way elected officials speak about Palestinians.They point to comments from Republicans like the senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who described the conflict as a “religious war” and said Israelis should “do whatever the hell you have to do to defend yourself. Level the place.”Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, made a similar remark, saying in an interview: “As far as I’m concerned, Israel can bounce the rubble in Gaza.”“I have long found the ignoring and sidelining of Palestinians in the US House of Representatives, the humanity of Palestinian populations, in the five years I have been in Congress, quite shocking,” Ocasio-Cortez said recently on MSNBC.With expectations that a large-scale Israeli invasion of the besieged territory is imminent, demands for an immediate ceasefire have grown louder and more urgent.In a statement on Friday, amid intensifying bombing and a communications blackout in Gaza, Alexandra Rojas, the executive director of the progressive group Justice Democrats, implored the president to act now to prevent a ground invasion that would “ensure thousands more civilian casualties, bring us closer to an all-out regional conflict in the Middle East, and thrust the United States into another endless war”.Looking to the future, progressives say the administration must be prepared to dramatically reshape Washington’s decades-long approach to Israel and Palestine.“If we want to take a consistent policy towards human rights, we cannot always be focused on supporting the rights and security of one side here,” said Matt Duss, a former foreign policy adviser to Sanders.“The status quo,” he said, “is clearly unsustainable.” More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Bernie Sanders: workers should reap AI benefits in form of ‘lowering workweek’

      by

      If the US’s ongoing artificial intelligence and robotics boom translates into more work being done faster, then laborers should reap some of the gains of that in the form of more paid time off, the liberal US senator Bernie Sanders said Sunday.“I happen to believe that – as a nation – we should begin a serious discussion … about substantially lowering the workweek,” Sanders remarked on CNN’s State of the Union.Citing the parenting, housing, healthcare and financial stresses confronting most Americans while generally shortening their life expectancies, he added: “It seems to me that if new technology is going to make us a more productive society, the benefits should go to the workers.“And it would be an extraordinary thing to see people have more time to be able to spend with their kids, with their families, to be able to do more … cultural activities, get a better education. So the idea of … making sure artificial intelligence [and] robotics benefits us all – not just the people on top – is something, absolutely, we need to be discussing.”Sanders, an independent who caucuses with congressional Democrats, delivered those comments after State of the Union host Jake Tapper asked him about the four-day work week sought by the United Auto Workers. About 13,000 workers from that union went on strike Friday against the nation’s three biggest carmakers – General Motors, Ford and Chrysler-parent company Stellantis – after walking away from negotiations to renew a contract that expired at the end of the previous day.Tapper asked Sanders, who appeared Friday at a rally in support of the strike, whether the concept of a shortened work week may simply be a negotiating tactic that the UAW would abandon when some of its other demands were met. But Sanders defended the validity of the demand while also seizing the moment to reiterate criticisms of the gaudy salaries collected by the car manufacturers’ executives.Sanders – the chairperson of the Senate health, education, labor and pensions committee – alluded to how the CEOs of GM, Ford and Stellantis had pocketed hundreds of times more than their workers’ median wage. Their pay jumped by 40% between 2013 and 2022 while their workers’ real hourly earnings fell by about a fifth since 2008, according to the Economics Policy Institute.According to the UAW, the disparity has shown how workers were never fully compensated for the sacrifices their bosses asked of them after the 2008-09 financial crisis, when they agreed to numerous cuts in the name of bailing out the auto industry. Demands from the union’s striking members include a 40% wage increase, better retirement benefits and job security protections – in addition to the 32-hour work week.Seventy-five percent of Americans support the striking auto workers, according to a recent poll from Gallup.Nonetheless, the sheer scale of the strike could unsettle the US economy as a whole and may eventually mean higher car prices for already distressed commuters.Meanwhile, the UAW’s president, Shawn Fain, told MSNBC and CBS on Sunday that progress had been mostly slow in the talks between his union and the carmakers.Speaking to Tapper before Sanders’s appearance, former Republican US vice-president Mike Pence sought to blame the Joe Biden White House for auto workers’ dissatisfaction.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“All those hardworking auto workers are living in the same reality every other Americans live, and that is wages are not keeping up with inflation,” Pence said.But Sanders contended that the car industry’s top executives are solely to blame for the strike.“American people are sick and tired, in my view, … of corporate greed, in which the very richest people are becoming richer,” Sanders said. “What you’re seeing in the automobile industry, in my view, is what we’re seeing all over this economy – greed on the top, suffering on the part of the working class, and people are tired of it.“You people on top – you’ve never had it so good. … So UAW is standing up against corporate greed. And I applaud them for what they’re doing.” More

    • 138 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      UAW strike: Bernie Sanders commends ‘fight against corporate greed’ – video

      by

      The Vermont senator Bernie Sanders said US motor workers were ‘fighting against corporate greed’ as he spoke in support of the biggest automotive industry strike in decades. Speaking to members of the United Auto Workers union at a rally in Detroit, Michigan, Sanders said it was reasonable for employees at the largest US auto companies – Ford, Stellantis and General Motors – to get a ‘fair share of the record-breaking profits’. A disagreement over a new contract led to about 130,000 workers taking to the picket lines shortly after midnight on Thursday More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A fight against corporate greed’: Bernie Sanders rallies with UAW in Detroit

      by

      US car workers striking against the nation’s three biggest automakers “are waging … a fight against the outrageous level of corporate greed” seen across the country, Bernie Sanders said on Friday.The liberal US senator’s remarks came on Friday afternoon during a rally with the United Auto Workers in Detroit, Michigan, kicking off the first day of the union’s “Stand Up” strikes against General Motors, Stellantis and Ford.During his speech at the rally, Sanders told the crowd: “The fight that you are waging here is not only about decent wages, decent benefits and decent working conditions in the automobile industry. No. The fight you are waging is a fight against the outrageous level of corporate greed and arrogance that we are seeing on the part of CEOs who think they have a right to have it all and could [not] care less about the needs of their workers.”He continued: “The fight you are waging is to rebuild the struggling middle class of our country that was once the envy of the world.”Sanders also asserted that the CEOs and stockholders of the US’s biggest carmakers “make out like bandits”.“We refuse to live in an oligarchy,” Sanders said. “We refuse to accept a society in which so few have so much and so many have so little.”Among those who watched the Vermont senator’s speech was Chris Sanders, a worker at the Ford plant in Dearborn, Michigan, for 10 years. Sanders, 54, told the Guardian that significant media attention and focus on the economic effects of the strike on businesses and consumers misses the point.“The question that should be asked is what has 20 years of not paying our fair share cost the economy?” he said. “If we learned [anything] from the Covid-19 pandemic, we learned that putting money in the hands of real people is what keeps the economy going, because what creates jobs are not billionaires.“What creates jobs is having money in the hands of real people spending it or saving it, because they are spending it on products that create demand.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionChris Sanders noted the Ford plant had been holding job fairs and had trouble hiring because the starting wages of about $16 an hour no longer compete with other jobs. “No one ever has a problem with the executives getting paid $21m to $27m, and hourly labor and benefits is less than 5% of the total cost of a vehicle,” he said. “They just always want to put it to the greedy autoworker and I’m so damn tired of it.”Michigan’s governor, Gretchen Whitmer, it secretary of state, Jocelyn Benson, and lieutenant governor, Garlin Gilchrist II, gave introductory speeches at the rally before the UAW president, Shawn Fain, brought on Sanders, who is an independent but caucuses with Democrats.“It’s time to pick a side,” Fain said while introducing Sanders. “Either you’re with the billionaire class or you’re with the working class.” More

    • 125 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      Why this Labor Day is so consequential | Bernie Sanders

      by

      As we celebrate Labor Day, 2023 let’s take a quick look at the economy over the last few years.Never before in American history have so few owned so much and has there been so much income and wealth inequality.Never before in American history has there been such concentration of ownership in our economy with a handful of giant corporations controlling sector after sector, enjoying record-breaking profits.Never before in American history have we seen a ruling class, utilizing a corrupt political system, exercise so much political power through their Super Pacs and ownership of media.And never before in American history have we seen the level of greed, arrogance and irresponsibility that we see today on the part of the 1%. Corporate greed is rampant.Meanwhile, as the billionaire class becomes richer and more powerful, over 60% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck, and many work for starvation wages and under terrible working conditions. Incredibly, despite huge increases in worker productivity and an explosion in technology, the average American worker is making over $45 a week less today than he or she did 50 years ago after adjusting for inflation.Today, in the wealthiest country in the history of the world, tens of millions struggle to put food on the table, find affordable housing, affordable healthcare, affordable prescription drugs, affordable childcare and affordable educational opportunities. In our country today we have the highest rate of childhood poverty of almost any major nation, and half of older workers have no savings as they face retirement.And, in the midst of this massive inequality, the United States and the world face enormous economic transformation as a result of artificial intelligence, robotics and other new technologies. There is no question but that many of the jobs being done today will not be here in 10 or 20 years.Let’s be clear. These technologies, which will greatly increase worker productivity, have the potential to be extraordinarily beneficial for humanity, or could cause devastating pain and dislocation for tens of millions of workers. The question is: who makes the decisions as to what happens in this radically changing economy, and who benefits from those decisions? Do we allow the “market” to throw working people out in the streets because they are “redundant”, or do we take advantage of the increased productivity this technology creates to improve the lives of all?Throughout the history of humanity, the vast majority of people have had to struggle to feed themselves, find adequate shelter and eke out a living. The good news is that the revolutionary new technology, if used to benefit all of humanity and not just the rich and the powerful, could usher in a new era in human development. It is not utopian thinking to imagine that, for the first time in world history, we could enter a time in which every man, woman and child has a decent standard of living and improved quality of life.In the United States, for example, the 40-hour work week, under the Fair Labor Standards Act, has been the legal definition of full-time work since 1940. Well, the world and technology have undergone enormous changes since 1940 and American workers are now 480% more productive than they were back then. It’s time for those standards to reflect contemporary reality. It’s time for a 32-hour work week with no loss in pay. It’s time that working families were able to take advantage of the increased productivity that new technologies provide so that they can enjoy more leisure time, family time, educational and cultural opportunities – and less stress.Moving to a 32-hour work week with no loss of pay is not a radical idea. In fact, movement in that direction is already taking place in other developed countries. France, the seventh-largest economy in the world, has a 35-hour work week and is considering reducing it to 32 hours. The work week in Norway and Denmark is about 37 hours a week.Recently, the United Kingdom conducted a four-day work week pilot program of 3,000 workers at over 60 companies. Not surprisingly, it showed that happy workers were more productive. The pilot was so successful that 92% of the companies that participated decided to maintain a four-day work week because of the benefits to both employers and employees.Another pilot of nearly 1,000 workers at 33 companies in seven countries, found that revenue increased by more than 37% in the companies that participated and 97% percent of workers were happy with the four-day work week.Needless to say, changes that benefit the working class of our country are not going to be easily handed over by the corporate elite. They have to be fought for – and won. And in that regard there has been some very good news over the last several years. We are now seeing workers stand up and fight for justice in a way we have not seen in decades. In America, more workers want to join unions; more workers are joining unions – 273,000 last year alone; and more workers are going out on strike for decent wages and benefits and winning. We’re seeing that increased militancy all across our economy – with truck drivers, auto workers, writers, actors, warehouse workers, healthcare professionals, graduate student teachers and baristas.Let’s continue that struggle. Let’s think big, not small. Let’s create an economy and government that work for all, not just the few.Happy Labor Day. More

    • 150 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Three-quarters of Americans say Biden too old for second term, poll finds

      by

      More than three-quarters of respondents in a new US poll said Joe Biden would be too old to be effective if re-elected president next year.But as many people in the survey said the 80-year-old Biden was “old” and “confused”, so a similar number saw his 77-year-old likely challenger, Donald Trump, as “corrupt” and “dishonest”.The poll from the Associated Press and Norc Center for Public Affairs said 77% of Americans – 89% of Republicans and 69% of Democrats – thought age would be a problem if Biden won the White House again. Significantly fewer said Trump’s age would be a problem: 51%, with only 29% of Republicans concerned.Trump skipped the first Republican debate last week. On Monday another national survey showed his whopping primary lead slipping only slightly thereafter.Emerson College Polling showed Trump at 50% support, a six-point drop from a pre-debate poll. Ron DeSantis, the Florida governor widely held not to have performed strongly in Milwaukee, was second with a two-point bump to 12%.The investor Vivek Ramaswamy, who barged into the spotlight with an angry debate display, dropped one point to 9%. Nikki Haley, the former South Carolina governor and United Nations ambassador who confronted Ramaswamy, climbed five to 7%.Trump faces 14 more criminal charges than he has years on the calendar, but those 91 counts under four indictments, and other legal problems including being adjudicated a rapist, have not dented his popularity with Republicans or opened him to significant attacks from his main rivals.Spencer Kimball, executive director of Emerson College Polling, did note an apparent “softening of support for Trump since last week’s survey, where 82% of Trump voters said they would definitely support him, compared to 71% after the debate”. But on that score there was also worrying news for DeSantis, whose support “softened from 32% who would definitely support to 25%”.Biden won a US Senate seat in 1972, ran for president in 1988 and 2008, and is already the oldest president ever elected. If re-elected, he would be 86 by the end of his second term.Haley has repeatedly said Biden will probably die in office, claiming to warn voters of the dangers of Kamala Harris, the vice-president, rising to power herself.The AP/Norc poll said: “When asked about the first word that comes to mind when they think of each candidate, 26% of all adults cited Biden’s age and 15% mentioned words associated with being slow and confused, while only 1% and 3% did so for Trump.”There was a less welcome sign for Republicans, particularly those threatening to impeach Biden over alleged corruption involving his son Hunter.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“For Trump, nearly a quarter mentioned words associated with corruption, crime, lying, or untrustworthiness, while only 8% mentioned those traits for Biden.”Two-thirds of respondents supported age limits for presidents, members of Congress and supreme court justices.On Sunday, the Vermont senator Bernie Sanders, a former candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, was asked about Biden’s age.“When people look at a candidate, whether he’s Joe Biden, or Trump, or Bernie Sanders, anybody else, they have to evaluate a whole lot of factors,” the 81-year-old told NBC, adding that when he met Biden recently, “he seemed fine to me”.“But I think at the end of the day, what we have to ask ourselves is, ‘What do people stand for?’ Do you believe that women have a right to control their own bodies? Well, the president has been strong on that.” More

    • 200 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      The US and China must unite to fight climate change, not each other | Bernie Sanders

      by

      Climate change is a global crisis and cannot be solved by any one country alone. If the United States, China and other industrialized countries do not come together to dramatically decrease greenhouse gas emissions, the world we leave our children and future generations will become increasingly unhealthy and uninhabitable. Tragically, the cooperation required to address this existential threat is being undermined by hawks in both the United States and China who are moving us toward a disastrous cold war.Now is the time for a radical rethinking of geopolitics to reflect the reality that international cooperation is not only in the best interests of all countries, but is absolutely necessary for the survival of the planet.Here’s the reality. The last eight years have been the eight hottest on record. This year is on track to be the hottest year in recorded history, and this past July was the hottest month on record. Across the United States, July broke more than 3,200 daily temperature records and dozens of American cities broke or tied their previous daily temperature records three or more times. Phoenix experienced 31 days in a row at or above 110F (43.3C), 13 days longer than the previous record. El Paso, Miami, Austin and many other places also suffered under record-breaking stretches of extreme heat.Smoke from unprecedented wildfires in Canada enveloped US cities and drifted halfway around the world, causing dangerously unhealthy air quality. Vermont, my home state, experienced floods that damaged 4,000 homes and 800 businesses, the state’s worst natural disaster since 1927. In Maui, Hawaii, rapidly moving fires destroyed 2,700 structures in historic Lahaina and took more than 100 lives, making it the deadliest wildfire in the US in more than a century.But it’s not just the US that is dealing with record-breaking heatwaves and enormous climate-caused devastation. China experienced record-high temperatures last month, including the country’s all-time temperature record of 126F (52.2C), and recent flooding has killed about 100 people, destroyed nearly 200,000 homes, displaced some 1.5 million people and caused more than $13bn in damage.From Tokyo to Rome to Tunis to Tirana, cities across Asia, Europe and north Africa experienced their hottest days on record. In Iran, the heat index hit 158F (70C), testing the limits of human survival. In our own hemisphere, Cuba, the Dominican Republic and El Salvador all saw temperature records fall. It’s winter right now in South America, but that hasn’t stopped temperatures from exceeding 100F (37.7C) in some places, a heating event a climate historian labeled “one of the extreme events the world has ever seen”.And it’s not just that temperatures have been soaring on land. Our oceans have never been warmer. Right now, 44% of the world’s oceans are experiencing a marine heatwave. The Mediterranean Sea is experiencing its hottest temperatures on record, more than 9F hotter than average in some places. Off the coast of Newfoundland, waters are as much as 18F above normal. South of Miami, waters reached 101F (38.3C). You’re supposed to find temperatures like that in a hot tub, not the ocean. This warming could further devastate coral reefs, fisheries and marine ecosystems around the world.In the midst of this global crisis, there is both good news and bad news. The good news is that recent years have seen long-overdue steps to transition the global economy away from fossil fuels into more efficient and renewable energy sources. In the United States, the Inflation Reduction Act included an unprecedented $300bn in investments in clean energy and energy efficiency, which could help increase US solar energy by 500% and more than double wind energy by 2035, reducing carbon emissions by roughly 40%.Other countries have also made major investments. China spent $546bn on clean energy last year and continues to manufacture and deploy more renewable energy than the rest of the world combined. By 2030, China may deploy enough renewable energy to essentially power the entire US electrical grid three times over. The European Union has laid out a plan to invest more than $1tn over the next decade in renewables and energy efficiency, aiming to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 55% compared with 1990.Importantly, large sections of the corporate world have turned away from investments in fossil fuels and are now spending hundreds of billions on sustainable energy. Altogether, the International Energy Agency (IEA) expects the global community to invest $1.6tn in wind, solar power, electric vehicles, batteries, and electric grids this year, compared with just $1tn in fossil fuels. This progress has led the IEA to forecast that renewables will surpass coal to become the largest source of global electricity generation by early 2025, much faster than previously predicted.The bad news is that we are still falling well short of the kinds of investments needed to deal with this crisis. We are still not moving fast enough to save our planet. The latest report from the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) projects that without more urgent action, the world will pass the key 1.5C (2.7F) threshold by the early 2030s, risking a far deadlier future for our children and future generations. The science is clear: if the US, China, and the rest of the planet do not act with greater urgency to dramatically cut carbon emissions, our planet will face enormous and irreversible damage.Let’s be clear: since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the US has put more carbon into the atmosphere, by far, than any other country. While the new technologies sustained by fossil fuels improved our standard of living, we laid the groundwork for the climate calamity the planet is now experiencing.In recent years, the rapidly growing Chinese economy has eclipsed the US as the world’s major carbon emitter. Right now, China is building six times as many coal-fired power plants as the rest of the world combined – the equivalent of two new coal plants every week. Last year, they quadrupled the number of new coal plants approved compared with 2021. Current plans will see China add as much new coal to its grid as used in all of India, the second largest coal user, and five times more coal capacity as the US.It is no great secret the Chinese government is undertaking many policies that we and the international community should oppose. They are cruelly repressing and interning the Uyghurs, threatening Taiwan and stifling freedom of expression in Tibet and Hong Kong. China has bullied its neighbors, abused the global trading system, stolen technology and is building out a dystopian surveillance state.The US is rightly organizing its allies to press Beijing on these and other issues. But organizing most of our national effort around a zero-sum global confrontation with China is unlikely to change Chinese behavior and will alienate allies and partners.Most importantly, it could doom our planet by making climate cooperation impossible between the world’s two largest greenhouse emitters. We need to move in a bold new direction. Recent history provides some instructive examples.In 1962, when the US and the Soviet Union stood on the verge of nuclear war, President John F Kennedy and the Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, came together to prevent mutual destruction. Just a few months later, with the nuclear crisis as the background, President Kennedy proposed to the Soviet Union an arms reductions plan which would change the confrontational dynamic that had brought the world to the brink. Even arch anti-communists like Nixon and Reagan made bold gambits to reduce tensions, fearful of global annihilation. We face a similar dynamic today, facing collective catastrophe if we do not change course.Here is the insane dynamic that must be changed. In recent years, both the US and China have greatly increased their military budgets. The US now spends some $900bn on the Pentagon, more than the next 10 nations combined. China, with the world’s second largest military budget, spends almost $300bn. Despite spending these huge amounts on “defense”, both countries are losing the war against the climate ccrisis. The US has experienced massive floods, fires, drought and extreme weather disturbances, which have cost us hundreds of billions. The recent flooding in China alone will cost that government tens of billions. Into the future, scientists tell us that great cities like Shanghai and New York will be underwater if we do not act effectively against the climate crisis.So here’s a “radical” idea. Instead of spending enormous amounts of money planning for a war against each other, the US and China should come to an agreement to mutually cut their military budgets and use the savings to move aggressively to improve energy efficiency, move toward sustainable energy and end our reliance on fossil fuels. They should also provide increased support for developing countries who are suffering from the climate crisis through no fault of their own.Now, I know that establishment politicians in both countries will tell me how naive and unsophisticated I am to offer such a suggestion and they will provide a million reasons as to why it can’t be done. My response is this: go talk to the people in Vermont who have lost their homes because of unprecedented flooding and the families in Hawaii who lost loved ones in the recent fires. Go talk to the more than 1 million people in China who have been displaced by catastrophic floods. Go talk to the people in southern Africa who are starving because of the terrible drought and floods they are experiencing or farmers around the world who can no longer grow their crops because of water shortages.Perhaps most importantly, go talk to the hundreds of millions of young people in every country on earth who are losing hope, wondering whether they should even have children of their own, given the enormous challenges the climate crisis poses for a normal life.Nelson Mandela famously remarked; “It always seems impossible until it’s done.” If we are to save the planet, now is the time for bold action. Let’s do it.
      Bernie Sanders is a US Senator and chairman of the health, education, labor and pensions committee More

    • 213 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Our primary healthcare system is a mess. We have a plan to fix it | Bernie Sanders

      by

      The bad news is that the US healthcare system is broken and dysfunctional. We spend twice as much per capita as almost any other country, nearly $13,000 per year, while 85 million Americans remain uninsured or underinsured. In addition, our health outcomes are often worse. In terms of life expectancy, for example, we live far shorter lives than the people of many other industrialized nations.The system is failing ordinary Americans. On the other hand, the insurance and drug companies that dominate it have sky-high profits and their CEOs receive exorbitant compensation packages. The thousands of lobbyists those companies have on Capitol Hill are also doing very well.It’s time for a change.As disastrous as our overall healthcare system is, our primary care system is even worse. Tens of millions of Americans live in communities where they cannot find a doctor or dentist, even when they have insurance, while others have to wait months to get seen. Despite spending a huge amount of money on healthcare, the United States doesn’t have enough doctors, dentists, nurses, mental health practitioners, pharmacists or home healthcare workers. And that workforce shortage is getting worse.Most countries spend between 10% and 15% of their healthcare budgets on primary care. Canada spends 13%, Germany spends 15%, Spain spends 17% and Australia spends 18%. We spend less than 7%.In other words, instead of investing in disease prevention and enabling people to gain easy and timely access to the medical care they need, we spend heavily on expensive hospital and tertiary care. Our “system” is there big time when people end up in the hospital. We just don’t do much to keep them from going there.Every major medical organization agrees that our investment in primary healthcare is woefully inadequate. They understand that focusing on disease prevention and providing Americans with a medical home will not only saves lives and ease human suffering, but save money. Providing primary care to all is not only good public policy, it is cost-effective.The major backbone of our current primary care system, especially for low- and moderate-income Americans, is the Federally Qualified Community Health Center program. Today, 30 million men, women and children receive high-quality primary healthcare at community health centers in 14,000 neighborhoods located in every state in America. Many of these centers also provide dental care, mental health counseling and low-cost prescription drugs.According to a recent study by an expert at the Kaiser Permanente School of Medicine, community health centers saved Medicare and Medicaid $25bn in 2021 alone.In fact, research has shown that it is about $2,300 less expensive for a Medicaid patient to receive care from a community health center than at a private clinic and it is roughly $1,200 less expensive for a Medicare patient to receive care at a community health center than at an outpatient clinic.At a time when millions of Americans have no option but to go to an emergency room for their basic healthcare needs, it turns out that an emergency room visit is about 10 times more expensive than going to a community health center.One thing is certain. We cannot address the primary healthcare crisis unless we also address the major shortages that we have in our healthcare workforce. According to the most recent estimates, over the next decade our country faces a shortage of over 120,000 doctors – including a major shortage of primary care doctors.The nursing shortage may even be worse. Over the next two years alone it is estimated that we will need between 200,000 and 450,000 more nurses.We also have a shortage of some 100,000 dentists in America.And, despite the very serious mental health crisis we are facing, there is a massive shortage of mental health service providers – psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, counselors, addiction specialists and many more.For many years members of Congress have talked about these crises. Now is the time to act. As chairman of the US Senate health, education, labor and pensions (Help) committee I am working hard to pass bipartisan legislation which will transform our primary healthcare system so that every American, no matter where they live or what their income might be, can get the care they need when they need it.If we increased funding for primary care by $130bn over five years, through a combination of increased federal funding and the elimination of some of the enormous waste and bureaucracy in the current healthcare system, we could double the number of people using community health centers and come close to providing primary healthcare to every person in America.Further, an investment of $40bn over five years could substantially increase the number of doctors, nurses, dentists and mental health care providers we desperately need.Is this $170bn, five-year investment in our primary care system and healthcare workforce a lot of money?Yes. It is. But let’s be clear. This $34bn annual investment to improve our healthcare system would amount to less than half of the increase that Congress provided to the Pentagon last year alone.In my view, healthcare is a human right. The legislation that I am proposing would go a long way towards accomplishing that goal.
      Bernie Sanders is a US senator and chairman of the health, education, labor and pensions committee. He represents the state of Vermont, and is the longest-serving independent in the history of Congress More