SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
democratic party
Is Bernie Sanders Launching a Third Party? 'Not Right Now, No'
"Real change in this country will come about when an organized working class leads the fight for justice," the Vermont senator said in a new interview.
Nov 27, 2024
An email Sen. Bernie Sanders sent to supporters this past weekend fueled speculation that he could be laying the groundwork for a new political party in the wake of Democrats' crushing defeat in the 2024 election.
But in an interview with The Nation's John Nichols published Tuesday, Sanders (I-Vt.) said that he's not considering forming a party to challenge the entrenched Democratic and Republican establishments—at least not at the moment.
"Not right now, no," Sanders told Nichols, who asked the senator directly about his email to supporters and whether he intends to create a new party.
The senator argued in the email it is "highly unlikely" that the Democratic leadership will "learn the lessons of their defeat and create a party that stands with the working class and is prepared to take on the enormously powerful special interests that dominate our economy, our media, and our political life."
Sanders, who caucuses with the Democrats in the Senate, told Nichols that while he's not currently backing the creation of a new party, he is making the case that "where it is more advantageous to run as an Independent, outside of the Democratic primary process, we should do that." He also emphasized the need for more working-class candidates across the country.
"Real change in this country will come about when an organized working class leads the fight for justice. We need working-class candidates to help us do that."
The senator said the upstart campaign of Independent Dan Osborn—a union steamfitter who launched an unexpectedly close challenge to two-term Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) while shunning the state's Democratic establishment—"should be looked at as a model for the future."
"He took on both political parties," Sanders said of Osborn, who outperformed Vice President Kamala Harris by 14 percentage points in Nebraska and is now launching a PAC aimed at helping working-class candidates run for office.
"He took on the corporate world," Sanders continued. "He ran as a strong trade unionist. Without party support, getting heavily outspent, he got through to working-class people all over Nebraska. It was an extraordinary campaign, and it tells me that the American people are sick and tired of seeing the rich getting richer. They think billionaires dominate both political parties. They want real change, and Dan's campaign raised those issues in a very significant way."
Since Trump's victory earlier this month, Sanders has been scathing in his assessment of the current state of the Democratic Party and its long-term trajectory as it hemorrhages working-class support.
"The Democratic Party is, increasingly, a party dominated by billionaires, run by well-paid consultants whose ideology is to tinker around the edges of a grossly unjust and unfair oligarchic system," Sanders told Nichols. "If we are ever going to bring about real change in this country, we have got to significantly grow class consciousness in America."
In his email over the weekend, Sanders wrote that Democratic leaders "are much too wedded to the billionaires and corporate interests that fund their campaigns," making them reflexively hostile to the kinds of transformative changes needed to "build a multi-racial, multi-generational working class movement" with the power to challenge the nation's deeply unequal economic and political status quo.
"How do we recruit more working-class candidates for office at all levels of government? Should we be supporting Independent candidates who are prepared to take on both parties? How do we better support union organizing?" Sanders asked in the email. "These are some of the political questions that, together, we need to address. And it is absolutely critical that you make your voice heard during this process."
"Not me. Us," he added, reprising the central message of his 2020 campaign. "That is the only way forward."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Democrats Call On Biden to Limit Marijuana Prosecutions Before End of Term
"Rescheduling marijuana and the prior round of pardons must not be the end of this administration's historic work," wrote the lawmakers.
Nov 26, 2024
Democratic lawmakers on Monday urged U.S. President Joe Biden to ensure that his administration's "historic work... to undo the damage of federal marijuana policy" would not end with the steps already taken over the past three years, calling on the president to "deprioritize" marijuana prosecutions before his term ends in January.
Led by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), 14 members of the Democratic caucus applauded Biden for issuing a directive earlier this year that led health regulators to recommend marijuana be classified as a Schedule III substance under the Controlled Substances Act. For decades it has been classified as a Schedule I drug, considered to have no medical use and high potential for abuse.
The lawmakers urged the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) "to complete that process as soon as possible," but stressed that doing so would "not end federal criminalization, resolve its harms, or meaningfully address the gap between federal and state cannabis policy. Possession and use of recreational marijuana—and much state-legal medical marijuana—will continue to be a violation of federal law."
What would help to end criminalization at the federal level, said the lawmakers, is "a memorandum that would deprioritize seizing marijuana and prosecuting individuals and businesses for state-legal marijuana activity."
The DEA persists in carrying out major raids and seizures of marijuana plants and businesses, wrote the lawmakers—including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.). They pointed to raids carried out this year in New Mexico in which state police destroyed tens of thousands of pounds of "state-legal" marijuana plants.
"The Biden administration has the opportunity to further reduce the harms of marijuana's criminalization before the end of this administration."
"We urge you to issue a memorandum that would deprioritize seizing marijuana and prosecuting individuals and businesses for state-legal marijuana activity," reads the letter. "Today, federal sentences for marijuana possession are rare, with only 13 individuals sentenced for simple marijuana possession in 2023, compared to over 2,000 in 2015. Still, the threat of a federal conviction persists."
A memorandum from the Biden administration should also direct federal law enforcement to "deprioritize prosecutions of any future marijuana offenses that have been the basis of prior federal pardons, and deprioritize prosecutions of personal cannabis activities and cannabis activities that comply with state or tribal law," the lawmakers wrote.
Biden has been applauded for issuing pardons and commutations for people convicted of marijuana-related offenses, but the lawmakers noted that at least 3,000 people remain in federal prisons for such convictions.
"The Biden administration has the opportunity to further reduce the harms of marijuana's criminalization before the end of this administration by issuing another round of clemency and an updated memorandum on prosecutorial discretion for marijuana offenses," said the lawmakers.
President-elect Donald Trump's nominations for top government positions indicate potential mixed stances on marijuana policy in the incoming administration. His attorney general nominee, former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, opposed an amendment to legalize medical marijuana in the state, and Food and Drug Administration commissioner nominee Marty Makary has called marijuana a "gateway drug."
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whom Trump has nominated to lead the Health and Human Services Department, has expressed support for medical marijuana legalization.
The lawmakers on Monday urged Biden not to leave major decision-making on cannabis policy up to Trump.
"Rescheduling marijuana and the prior round of pardons must not be the end of this administration's historic work to use its executive authority to undo the damage of federal marijuana policy," they wrote. "As we continue to work toward legislation to end the federal criminalization of marijuana and to regulate it responsibly and equitably, we urge prompt administrative action to tackle the harms of criminalization—particularly for the benefit of communities most harmed by the War on Drugs."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Shouldn’t Throw Trans Americans Under Trump’s Bus
The normalization of transphobia in American politics, and the signs of looming government repression, poses a major moral test for the political leaders for the nearly 77 million Americans, and counting, who voted against Trump’s MAGA movement.
Nov 25, 2024
Like most people in the community she fights for on a daily basis, Philadelphia’s Naiymah Sanchez didn’t sleep at all on the night of November 5. It wasn’t only because Donald Trump’s second election would intensify her work as trans justice coordinator for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania. It was also the personal anguish that the 41-year-old transgender woman felt knowing Trump had been elected, in part, by spending millions of dollars on TV ads that dehumanized her and people like her in shocking ways American voters had never seen before.
“I took it very personally,” Sanchez—who spent years as an activist around tough issues like combating prison rape before joining the ACLU-PA in 2017, right after Trump’s first election—told me this week. “They voted against me. They wanted to harm me.” She noted how many voters seemed to respond positively to the GOP’s openly anti-trans rhetoric, before adding: “We rest, and then we fight again.”
While Trump’s narrow but decisive win over Democrat Kamala Harris is still Topic A, the early fights over the president-elect’s off-the-wall cabinet picks and TV debates over just how anti-democratically the Trump regime might govern are still an abstraction to most Americans. It’s very different in the transgender community. There, leaders like Sanchez are having gut-wrenching conversations with people wondering if they need to accelerate major life moves, like gender-affirming surgery or a legal name change, before an openly hostile government arrives on January 20.
Selling out more than 1 million transgender Americans would wreck that brand, permanently—telling voters Democrats don’t stand for anything beyond surviving the next election.
Indeed, fears of what life might be like under Trump 47 for at least 1 million transgender Americans already began to hit home this week when the community’s one bright star on Election Day—avictory for the first-ever transgender member of Congress, Delaware’s Rep.-elect Sarah McBride—quickly became a symbol of the GOP’s determination to turn ugly campaign rhetoric into harsh governing reality.
It felt all too fitting that the Christian fundamentalist House Speaker Mike Johnson chose the annual Transgender Day of Remembrance—a day intendedto both memorialize past victims of violence, including at least 30 and perhaps far more murder victims every year, and to fight this scourge—to side with South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace’s vocal and bigoted efforts to prevent transgender people from using Capitol restrooms or other single-sex facilities of their chosen identity. Johnson claimed to be solving a problem that didn’t seem to exist for Capitol visitors or staffers before McBride’s arrival. More importantly, advocates like Sanchez know how such high-profile moves give license to everyday people to more openly voice anti-trans hatred.
This normalization of transphobia in American politics, and the signs of looming government repression, poses a major moral test—the first of many to come—for how the political leaders for the nearly 77 million Americans, and counting, who voted against Trump’s MAGA movement (for Harris or third-party candidates) are planning to respond.
Arguably, this is a real challenge for all of us. Can those of us not in the transgender community fully embrace the humanity of our friends, family members, or neighbors who are? Or, in the more meaningful than ever words of Sen. Bernie Sanders, be “willing to fight for a person you don’t know as much as you’re willing to fight for yourself”? How many will instead succumb to a focus-grouped temptation of blaming the anti-trans TV ads for Trump’s win and keep silent as demagogues like Trump and his attention-crazed acolyte Mace step up their attacks?
The early indications are not hopeful. Democratic Rep. Seth Moulton of Massachusetts—one of many seeking scapegoats for Harris’ electoral defeat and his party’s losses on Capitol Hill—threw down the gauntlet by saying Democrats are too worried about offending people before declaring: “I have two little girls, I don’t want them getting run over on a playing field by a male or formerly male athlete, but as a Democrat I’m supposed to be afraid to say that.”
Moulton’s campaign manager did resign in protest over those remarks, but more broadly Democrats have struggled to respond—to Moulton but also to the Trump TV ads that seemed to utterly flummox Team Harris, which turned to polling and focus groups before deciding there was no good way to aggressively respond.
And the hard data suggest that, yes, unfortunately, a transphobic message does influence some swing voters—not a huge number, but not many were needed in an election that was arguably decided by fewer than 300,000 ballots in three battleground states. Republicans spent at least $65 million and probably much more on anti-transgender ads in a dozen key states, including here in Pennsylvania, where the spot with the tagline “Kamala is for they/them, President Trump is for you” aired constantly during the Phillies’ late-season push or the evening news.
One polling group, Blueprint, reported that the third most-cited reason by voters for opposing Harris—after inflation and immigration—was this: “Kamala Harris is focused more on cultural issues like transgender issues rather than helping the middle class.” Blueprint added that this was the No. 1 reason for last-minute deciders rejecting Harris, while other polling groups argued that opposing transgender rights was far down their lists of voter concerns.
Still, the early data suggest why transgender activists fear too many Democrats think privately what Moulton voiced publicly. Thus, how hard will party leaders fight Republicans like Mace, who has already introduced a bill that would extend the Capitol bathroom restrictions endorsed by Johnson to all federal facilities across the United States?
The stakes couldn’t be higher as Trump prepares to take office. History has shown that the transgender community is often an early target of authoritarian strongmen. In the 1930s, for example, Adolf Hitler’s Nazis revoked “transvestite permits” that had been issued by the relatively liberal Weimar Republic, and shut down a transgender-friendly nightclub and research institute almost immediately upon taking power.
Today, in another fraught moment, it seems counterintuitive but the most effective voices for the idea of broadly embracing the humanity of transgender Americans seem to be Democrats who’ve also broken through in areas considered deep-red Trump country. Most famously, Kentucky’s Democratic Gov. Andy Beshear vetoed bills that banned gender-affirming surgery for minors and barred trans girls from cisgender sports, and—although his vetoes were overridden by GOP lawmakers—still won reelection in his heavily pro-Trump state.
“Number one: I talked about why,” Beshear told CBS’s “Face the Nation” last Sunday. “That’s my faith, where I’m taught that all children are children of God, and I wanted to stick up for children [who] were being picked on.” Voters—enough of them, anyway—respected Beshear for sticking to his values rather than doing what a consultant might have advised him to do.
Last week in the Capitol controversy, the maddeningly complicated Democratic Sen. John Fetterman, who won in 2022 after campaigning extensively in Pennsylvania’s reddest rural counties, responded to the attack on McBride not with platitudes but with a gesture: Telling the incoming House member she could use the bathroom in his office any time, and adding: “There’s no job I’m afraid to lose if it requires me to degrade anyone.” (I’m going to skip the obvious diatribe about how Fetterman might want to apply that thinking to Gaza.)
It seems to me that if Democrats want to have any hope of staying relevant over the next four years, let alone regaining power in the anti-small-”d”-democratic climate of the Trump regime, they need to embrace their inner Andy Beshear, and reject the shortsightedness of the Seth Moultons out there. Again, think back to history. In 1964, just months after the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech, 74% of Americans said mass demonstrations were detrimental to racial equality. President Lyndon B. Johnson knew that signing civil-rights legislation would probably mean near-future political pain for the Democratic Party, and he was right.
But think bigger picture. During that era, Democrats and their liberal base did build—however imperfectly—a brand that they were the party that had fought for civil rights and equality, not only for Black Americans but for Latinos, women, the LGBTQ community, and other groups that felt marginalized by conservatives. That brand—built around a moral belief and not the polling data—is how Democrats won the popular vote in seven of the last nine presidential elections, even including the disappointment of Nov. 5. Selling out more than 1 million transgender Americans would wreck that brand, permanently—telling voters Democrats don’t stand for anything beyond surviving the next election.
I might be naive, but I think matters like addressing the needs of literally a handful of athletes or making everyone comfortable at a rest stop aren’t so complicated that America can’t work them out by starting at the simple place where Beshear starts: That we are all God’s children, with some basic human rights.
And if Democrats, as well as all of us still dreaming of a better world than Donald Trump’s dark vision for America, instead choose to say nothing because we are not transgender, people shouldn’t be surprised when their group is targeted next.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular