Why President Sanders Could Actually Do Stuff: 8 reasons to vote Bernie 2016

Hello, Genossinnen und Genossen

A lot of my friends and family are wondering why one can back Bernie Sanders and expect him to be able and willing to accomplish more than Clinton (or Obama for that matter) on a whole host of matters.  So I thought I'd write up a handy argument sheet this week answering all their questions that I've yet encountered in some detail, trying to show the skeptical why a Sanders presidency would be so extremely different.

Question 1.- Why not vote for a candidate more likely to win?  

Answer- This is a primary, this is how parties choose what they want to say, and Sanders is 10 points ahead of the third place candidate (usually O'Malley).  There is no more viable challenge to Clinton, therefore the strategic thing would be for O'Malley and Chafee voters to switch to Sanders, not vice versa.  (Webb is a special case because he is actually to Clinton's right, hard as that is to pull off in the modern Democratic Party.  Suffice it to say that Sanders' route to victory doesn't run through any crowds of Confederate battle flag enthusiasts who still haven't heard that it was the Democrats who passed the Voting Rights Act.  Webb's path to the nomination on the other hand...)

Question 2: Why would President Sanders have more legislative success on matters of importance to progressives?

Answer: Clinton and Obama don't really act like they care about the particulars of many bills- Sanders does!  The records of the current president and Secretary Clinton are pretty mercurial- if the health insurance reform fight taught us anything it's that campaign contributors play the dominant role in setting the specifics of policy in the ranks of the Democratic establishment, to the point where the president embraced things like the individual mandate against which he had forcefully campaigned (and Secretary Clinton supported from Day 1) and failing to publicly support the public option he had promised.  Not only does Sanders have a record of acting on his principles on every issue from taxing carbon to keeping Burlington's streets plowed, but he also has 16 years of experience in Congress, more than any president since the Watergate era, and that's bound to impart some serious legislative gravitas and know-how.  It's also worth noting that Sanders, just by reason of being white, will have something of an easier time getting Republicans to treat him like a human being, though it may still be impossible.  (He would of course face his own share of prejudice and backlash as our first Jewish president)


Question 3 : How is Sanders a better choice for women than Clinton?  How can women vote for him instead of Clinton?

Firstly, I should acknowledge that I don't know of ANY blemishes on Clinton's record when it comes to reproductive freedom, and she's done a great deal to keep this most important issue on the table in countless conversations and campaigns, and I respect her for it.  For what it's worth though, Sanders has a perfect 100% rating on Abortion and contraceptive Rights from National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League Pro Choice America, but the important differences are economic.  

For one, minimum wage jobs are disproportionately filled by women, and Women of Color are are 2.5 times more heavily represented among minimum wage workers as they are in the workforce at large.  The minimum wage is a "women's issue" at least as much as it is an issue for all workers, and Bernie Sanders is committed to a living wage of $15 an hour.  Even without legislation from Washington fixing this, consider a president who 
     1.  Campaigns for local wage increases 
     2. Pulls us out of the TPP, necessary for even protecting existing wage laws
     3.  Issues an executive order requiring ALL federal contractors (and there are a lot of them) to pay          a living wage (Obama did this for the $10 wage which is a good but insufficient step).

That will give a huge boost to the most vulnerable in society, starting with but not limited to single mothers.

We should also consider our social safety net- since women tend to live longer and to have higher health  expenditures, we should be looking at the candidate who will best safeguard Medicare and Social Security.  Bernie is the only candidate with a realistic plan to save Social Security and Medicare- maybe it won't pass, but he's the only candidate even TALKING about what needs to be done to keep them viable without stealing pensions or healthcare from today's or tomorrow's seniors.

Finally, as I've previously written, the most important factor in determining women's economic empowerment is guaranteed access to childcare.  Even President Obama acknowledged that this is feasible with a fraction of the money we spend on mass incarceration, but Sanders has been alone in actively campaigning on a promise of federal support for preschool and daycare- We have seen in dozens of examples from the developed world that this will reduce the achievement gap among students, and massively improve the professional standing and career options of mothers.  We can only expect him to pay more attention to so called "women's issues", though Sanders is already the candidate who is most inclined to deliver a program of empowerment for all the dispossessed and marginalized

Question 4: Does Sanders support gun control?

Answer- he's not quite as progressive as I'd like on this issue, but all his support for guns is based on support of hunting rights, not militia claptrap.  He did vote for the highly successful assault weapons ban in the 90s and has generally supported moderate (but still improved) gun control since then. 

Question 5 : Does Sanders support immigrants' rights?  

Answer- Yes, he actively supported the 2013 reform bill (which narrowly passed the senate with his vote before dying in the house) including a path to legal status and citizenship for millions of undocumented workers.  


Question 6: How can Sanders pay for his proposals?

Answer- We actually have the money to accomplish what he wants to do- if we take a more cautious approach to foreign policy than the last two administrations, costs will go down, and things like who we bomb and how frequently are entirely up to the president.  If however, Sanders is able to get ANY of his program through Congress, much of it will pay for itself- things like education and infrastructure spending increase the country's productivity and tax revenue (and reduce our financial liability from accidents like bridge collapses and disaster relief), and simply making the payroll tax apply to everyone would allow us to extend the projected life of Social Security and Medicare well into the 2060s while still expanding benefits to more people in need of them.  As for abolishing tuition, a tiny, less than 1% major financial transactions tax of the style coming into force in Europe would net all the money we need from the gambling of the stock market.

Question 7: What if Congress refuses to work with him?
Answer: The structure of the federal bureaucracy means that executive orders are already the best tool we have on everything from criminal justice to wage rates to environmental policy.  Obama's entire climate plan hinges on the EPA's Supreme Court endorsed and Clean Air Act provided authority to regulate emissions of certain gases.  The reasons the current plan is insufficient are that it takes too long (2018) to go into effect and that it may be adequate to reduce our existing carbon emissions but not adequate to offset the record-setting volume of oil and gas reserves this administration has opened to drilling.  How to use this power is decided by the wishes and personal appointees of the president.  Sanders is committed to addressing Climate Change, has endorsed a tax on greenhouse gases for the entirety of the last decade, and as president will have all the power he needs to regulate (if not tax) our way out of our most dangerous national security threat.  He can protect vast tracts of land that happen to contain fossil fuels from mining, and issue game-changing emissions and efficiency standards on everything from cars to power plants.  WE DON'T NEED CONGRESS FOR ANY OF THIS

This is also a point at which I need to compare him to Clinton, who as Secretary of State facilitated massive fossil-fuel drilling proposals, including leasing inestimable acres of public ocean to BP, and approving TransCanada's climate-killing Keystone XL Pipeline on the first go around.  The fact that the administration eventually saw the light on the latter at least doesn't excuse her department from originally approving it, and showcases the power the president has to help or hurt our irreplaceable ecosystem.  Hell, Obama has shown us that the president has the power to unilaterally end the Endangered Species Act!  All of these are actions taken solely by executive power, and we can effect massive fixes to our environment by reversing them. Sanders could do that in a way that no one close to the last two Democratic administrations would really consider.

Question 8: Why do I trust him?

Answer It would have been SOOOOO much easier for Sanders to sell out already than to piss off the entire Democratic Party by daring to disagree with Obama, Clinton, Clinton. Rubin, Geithner and the entire host of neoliberal deregulators against everything from buy local provisions to keeping banks from gambling with consumer savings.  According to the Washington Post, Obama raised 22% of his massive 2008 warchest from small donations of 200 dollars or less, and nearly 50% in 2012 (if you don't count the majority of campaign spending through party and Super PAC channels.  Sanders has raised over 70% from small donations, and has no Super PAC backing or neoliberal economist think-tank support to lose.  This guy is for real, and has no incentive to sell out that he hasn't already had for the last fifty years- he stayed true after marching on Washington with Dr. King, he stayed true throughout his time as Burlington Mayor, and he has stayed true to us throughout 16 years in Congress, pushing for economic justice, Gay Rights  and environmental stability for decades.  Bernie Sanders is no Johnny-come-Lately to any of the causes that are dear to the heart of any progressive.

We must support Sanders with all we've got- if he manages to win, it will upend every wrong in our political system.  If he loses, we still get to talk about all this stuff for the next 7 months or so, and that's a win in itself.

If you like this, please forward the link (or copy and past eh text itself) to your friends.  We need to answer these questions for as many people as possible over the next few months.

Sanders 2016

Genossin Elise