iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Sen. Bernie Sanders

GET UPDATES FROM Sen. Bernie Sanders
 

Let's Fight for a Progressive Agenda

Posted: 09/29/2012 10:04 am

There are two major economic and budgetary issues which Congress must address in the lame-duck session or soon afterward. First, how do we reverse the decline of the middle class and create the jobs that unemployed and underemployed workers desperately need? Second, how do we address the $1 trillion deficit and $16 trillion national debt in a way that is fair and not on the backs of the elderly, the children, the sick or the poor?

Both of these issues must be addressed in the context of understanding that in America today we have the most unequal distribution of income and wealth of any major country on earth and that the gap between the very rich and everyone else is growing wider. Today, the top 1 percent earns more income than the bottom 50 percent of Americans. In 2010, 93 percent of all new income went to just the top 1 percent. In terms of wealth, the top 1 percent owns 42 percent of the wealth in America while the bottom 60 percent owns just 2.3 percent.

In my view, we will not make progress in addressing either the jobs or deficit crisis unless we are prepared to take on the greed of Wall Street and big-money interests who want more and more for themselves at the expense of all Americans. Let's be clear. Class warfare is being waged in this country. It is being waged by the Koch brothers, Sheldon Adeslon, Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan and all the others who want to decimate working families in order to make the wealthiest people even wealthier. In this class war that we didn't start, let's make sure it is the middle class and working families who win, not the millionaires and billionaires.

In terms of deficit reduction, let us remember that when Bill Clinton left office in January of 2001, this country enjoyed a healthy $236 billion SURPLUS and we were on track to eliminate the entire national debt by the year 2010.

What happened? How did we go from significant federal budget surpluses to massive deficits? Frankly, it is not that complicated.

President George W. Bush and the so-called "deficit hawks" chose to go to war in Afghanistan and Iraq, but "forgot" to pay for those wars -- which will add more than $3 trillion to our national debt.

President Bush and the "deficit hawks" provided huge tax breaks to the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans -- which will increase our national debt by about $1 trillion over a 10-year period.

President Bush and the "deficit hawks" established a Medicare prescription drug program written by the pharmaceutical and insurance industries, but they "forgot" to pay for it -- which will add about $400 billion to our national debt over a 10-year period.

Further, as a result of the greed, recklessness, and illegal behavior on Wall Street, this country was driven into the worst recession since the Great Depression which resulted in a massive reduction in federal revenue.

And now, as we approach the election and a lame-duck session of Congress, these very same Republican "deficit hawks" want to fix the mess they created by cutting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and education, while lowering income tax rates for the wealthy and large corporations. Sadly, they have been joined by some Democrats.

The fiscal crisis is a serious problem, but it must be addressed in a way that will not further punish people who are already suffering economically. In addition, it is absolutely imperative that we address the needs of 23 million Americans who are unemployed or underemployed.

What should working families of this country demand of Congress in response to these crises? Let me be specific:

First, at a time when the effective tax rate for the rich is the lowest in decades, we must repeal the Bush tax breaks for the top 2 percent which will reduce the deficit by $1 trillion over the next 10 years.

Second, we must recognize that Wall Street caused the economic crisis, and that it has a responsibility to reduce the deficit. Establishing a 0.03 percent Wall Street speculation fee, similar to what we had from 1914-1966, would dampen the dangerous level of speculation and gambling on Wall Street, encourage the financial sector to invest in the productive economy and reduce the deficit by $350 billion over 10 years. Importantly, this fee, like similar levies in many other countries, would not apply to ordinary investors, retirees or parents saving to send their kids to college. Rather, it would apply to Wall Street investment houses, hedge funds and speculators who sell credit default swaps, derivatives and operate other risky financial schemes that nearly brought down the entire economy.

Third, we have got to prohibit offshore tax shelters. Each and every year, the United States loses an estimated $100 billion in tax revenues due to offshore tax abuses by the wealthy and large corporations. The situation has become so absurd that one five-story office building in the Cayman Islands is now the "home" to more than 18,000 corporations. According to a recent report by James Henry, a former chief economist at McKinsey, the wealthiest people in the world are hiding between $21 trillion to $32 trillion in offshore tax havens to avoid paying taxes. About a third of this amount, according to one estimate, is from wealthy Americans. The wealthy and large corporations should not be allowed to avoid paying taxes by setting up tax shelters in Panama, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, the Bahamas or other tax haven countries. Cracking down on these tax evaders could reduce the deficit by about $1 trillion over the next decade.

Fourth, at a time when we have almost tripled military spending since 1997 and spend nearly as much on the military as the rest of the world combined, we must reduce unnecessary and wasteful spending at the Pentagon. According to a number of experts, the Pentagon today cannot account for hundreds of billions of dollars in its budget. Even Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), perhaps the most conservative senator in this country, believes that we could reduce defense spending by $1 trillion over a 10-year period while ensuring that the United States continues to have the strongest and most powerful military in the world.

Fifth, we have got to eliminate tax breaks for companies shipping American jobs overseas. Today, the United State government, despite our losing over 55,000 factories in the last 10 years, continues to reward companies that move U.S. manufacturing jobs overseas through loopholes in the tax code. Eliminating these loopholes would raise more than $582 billion in revenue over the next ten years and bring jobs back home to America.

What else? Ending corporate welfare for big oil, gas and coal companies; requiring Medicare to negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices; taxing capital gains and dividends the same as work; establishing a progressive estate tax; and eliminating waste, fraud and abuse at every agency in the federal government would reduce spending by more than $350 billion and raise a significant amount of revenue without harming the middle class.

Taking these steps would reduce the deficit by more than $5 trillion.

Finally, and importantly, with these kinds of savings we could invest aggressively in rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, transforming our energy system away from fossil fuels and restoring our manufacturing base. That investment could create millions of decent paying jobs, make our country more productive and help us lead the world in addressing the crisis of global warming.

Despite what virtually all Republicans and some Democrats want, we must not balance the budget on the backs of a collapsing middle class or the poorest people in our society.

Despite what virtually all Republicans and some Democrats want us to ignore, we must create the millions of jobs working families still desperately need.

The American people have been very clear, in poll after poll, that they do not want to cut Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans' needs, education and other vitally important programs. They also have been clear that they do want the wealthy and large corporations to start paying their fair share of taxes. This agenda, the agenda of the American people, is what I will be taking into the lame-duck session. I ask for your support.

 

Follow Sen. Bernie Sanders on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SenSanders

FOLLOW POLITICS
There are two major economic and budgetary issues which Congress must address in the lame-duck session or soon afterward. First, how do we reverse the decline of the middle class and create the jobs t...
There are two major economic and budgetary issues which Congress must address in the lame-duck session or soon afterward. First, how do we reverse the decline of the middle class and create the jobs t...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 828
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (19 total)
08:22 PM on 10/18/2012
Because the american people want a fix but are not willing to make the sacrifices and commitments to get it done, like "tow the line". The middle class is tired of "towing the line" and no one wants to vote for anyone but the winner or the best looking best sounding candidate, instead of the one who would make a conscious effort to do something thats in the intrest of the american people rather than his or some constituents wallet. Neither Republicans or Democrats deserve the presidency at this point.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:15 PM on 10/08/2012
Senator Sanders, I, as a Ph.D. recipient in Economics, Finance, and Public Policy from The Stephen M. Ross School Of Business at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor (1978), totally agree with all of the Five Elements, which you so artfully presented in your Huffington Post Blog, "Let's Fight For A Progressive Agenda". As a senior citizen and Medicare recipient, I am especially in agreement with the comment, "requiring Medicare to negotiate with the pharmaceutical companies for lower drug prices", which you made in the paragraph ("What else"). Ever since the Bush Administration began proposing a Medicare Part D, Prescription Drug, Program, I lobbied extensively for the government to employ the VA Prescription Drug Model. However, "Quick-Draw Tex" did not want to dictate drug pricing to our "Free Enterprise" Pharmaceutical System "Robber-Barons". When I fall into the "Medi-Gap" or "Doughnut-Hole" or whatever else name that you might wish to tag this Administrative-Monstrosity, only one of my prescriptions cost me than one-half of my monthly retirement income. Therefore, I am forced to seek cost help by sourcing my prescriptions overseas. It is an economic decision of whether to pay a U.S. Pharmacy $475.00 or to pay an oversea's pharmacy $68.00 for a 30-day supply of the same drug. The result is a very simple decision. Who is the loser in this battle? The U.S. Pharmacies. Who is the winner? A Mail-Order Pharmacy in Canada.

ModernDiogenes@HuffingtonPost.com
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Teal-Nina
empathy is a virtue, not a slur
10:02 PM on 10/07/2012
Bless you Senator Sanders. you are always a voice of simple sanity,clarity and truth,awash in a sea of Spin, but there are still many of us who are nourished by your voice.
09:40 PM on 10/07/2012
Senator Sanders will be getting my vote for president.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MarkInEugene
A blasphemy a day keeps the deities away.
08:13 PM on 10/07/2012
It's so frustrating to listen to Republicans not copping to the fact that they were responsibly left with a decent economy and a surplus and trashed everything and won't admit that Obama had to first clean up their mess before he could do anything. Not only did they completely trash the economy, but they begrudge Obama spending to fix the irresponsible wrecking of it.

If they left Obama with a surplus and left the tax rates right where they were when the nation's economy was rocking under Clinton, then Obama would be able to do a much better job. But they've smothered this President, worked tirelessly to make him a 1 term president and obstructed every single one of his appointments and any legislation he tries to enact.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CL38
12:22 AM on 10/09/2012
not WE, Republicans have done that.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CL38
11:34 PM on 10/11/2012
Republicans picked an irresponsible, very risky path these past 12 years. We've finally reached the tipping point. I say no Republicans in public office from the bottom up, until they've acknowledged what they've done.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Austintatious
07:08 PM on 10/07/2012
Bernie, you get a third political party started, maybe you leading the first ticket, and we'll support you. But your, or any other, suggestion that fighting for a "progressive agenda" while the current two party, political structure is merely wasting precious time and energy on those irredeemably corrupted political parties. What's more, you know that to be true. If we do not have a new political party to fight that fight you speak of, the only change we'll see is further movement toward the corporate fascist state that the Republicans and the Democrats are taking us to.
06:14 PM on 10/07/2012
Good ideas, Bernie. But trying to get such solutions through Congress will be a tedious task when half of the Senators are on the take from one corporation or another. We need to clean house in order to make a fresh start. Restrictions need to be placed on Lobbying, Large scale contributions, and Congressmen and Senators should not have any conflicts of interest when working for the people of America. In other words, serving your country should be the one and only job you have while in congress.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CHARLESTHETENTH
04:55 PM on 10/07/2012
Preaching to the Choir. We have had Presidential candidates that offered meaningful solutions and were more attuned with the failures of our economy and were outright in saying so. The fact is people themselves do not vote for these candidates...Whether its Ralph Nader, Ross Perot or Ron Paul they just don't get the votes. We will never curb the glut and waste of Wall Street and turn this economy around if we keep voting the way we do. The current slate of Democrat or Republican in the White House will not matter...makes no difference and it will be business as usual. Hard choices have to be made but the majority of American voters will vote strict party lines and they keep putting hope ahead of common sense. There are also many voters that do not do their homework or are not capable of doing so and lacking a full understanding of what they are voting for. Money talks and unfortunately good candidates walk.
04:31 PM on 10/07/2012
"Let's Fight for a Progressive Agenda"... Do you want to give up?

Hell no!
RobertReport
ex mia sententia
02:39 PM on 10/07/2012
I like Bernie Sanders and he is great at laying out the problem which he has done on many occasions. But, Bernie is short on solutions other than simple platitudes like "we must end corporate welfare" and so on. But I don't see any plan to do that or even suggest how we might begin to change the trajectory in this country.

In my view it will take a completely different Congress and a different President. Neither Obama nor Romney has any plans or ideas how to reduce the money in politics or change the corporate dynamic. Furthermore, given the likely new Congress, there will be NO CHANGE in the present direction. The rich will get richer and the Middle class will continue to decay.
professor
Correkt the Spelling and Pick on the Moniker
02:22 PM on 10/07/2012
The real challenge is to convince people of the truth: there will never be enough jobs to go around. Automation has taken most jobs away. Think of it--100 years ago, most people worked on farms. Now almost no-one does. Robots work factories. Video surveillance operates highway tollbooths. Somehow we have to get people used to the truth that not working for a living is fine, good, patriotic, even. And also destroy the rightwing's ability to beet the opposition over the head with this "lazy" welfare nonsense. Get real. There are no jobs. Never will be again until we get rid of technology. This is one of those truths that cannot be spoken. Because it goes against all we have been trained to think. Of course, that's the definition of the truth. What you don't think.
12:57 PM on 10/07/2012
The US will need Gandhis if it has to come out of the jobs and debt mess. Currently there is none in view. Without Gandhian statesmanship, it is going to be simply impossible for the US to stay united or at least keep itself from seeing a civil war. Being a Sanders is not good enough at this late hour, most unfortunately.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
shaitan
The Devil's Advocate
02:07 PM on 10/07/2012
Unlike India, the US has a history and culture preferring guns to non-violence and aggressive behavior is usually equated to leadership and non-violence to wimpy leadership. Martin-Luther King showed that a downtrodden group can benefit from non-violence protest but more often than not aggressive leadership is rewarded.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Woodn88s
funiture maker,musician,left leaning middle
12:43 PM on 10/07/2012
somebody explain this to me.........
after living across the street from a county courthouse for 6 yrs I have a question.....why is it that ALL govt. employees get health care paid for by my tax dollars but they all whine about their tax dollars paying for mine?
I expect the typical lame responses like.....you could have been a federal employee but chose wrong.
Think of the billions of tax dollars saved by eliminating this expenditure and leveling the playing field.......and I mean all the way to the top....the prez himself.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:59 PM on 10/07/2012
Are they county (state?) employees or federal. Couldn't tell since you mentioned both. If you're complaining about federal employees, go ask them how much they pay because it isn't free.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ViktorN
12:37 PM on 10/07/2012
Any so-called "progressive agenda" that doesn't stop illegal immigration by ending business interests' use of illegal labor leaves the door open for undercutting wages and benefits for US workers and helping to keep unemployment rates high.

It's time to put American workers first for a change by stopping visas for hi-tech workers, investing in engineering education for US students, and by aggressively going after businesses that use illegal labor. One of the best ways to improve the situation of US workers is to tighten the labor supply - stopping illegal immigration and the use of illegal labor is a simple step towards that that would have far reaching effects through the whole economy.

There isn't anything "progressive" about an agenda that doesn't address these problems with solutions that improve the situation for US workers.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cornel
wuf wuf
11:27 AM on 10/07/2012
Sanders you are a very courageous Senator and will always remember how you filibustered the tax cuts for the rich in 2010 [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhOAzqfMoms ].
Bravo also for implementing a single payer system in Vermont [ http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81267.html ]