Mediaboss Marketing

Leaders of the Congressional Progressive Caucus on Wednesday reiterated their top-level priorities for the nascent reconciliation package and urged their fellow Democrats to pursue universal programs instead of "complicated methods of means-testing that the wealthy and powerful will use to divide us."

"The CPC agrees that President [Joe] Biden has made a compelling case to the American people that government can, and should, be a force for good in this country, and we agree that bold investments in good-paying union jobs, climate action, immigration reform, and caregiving are essential to uplifting families and building back better," reads a letter that the CPC's executive board sent to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif). "This is our moment to make the president's vision a reality."

The lettersigned by CPC chair Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and 26 other progressive lawmakersgoes on to outline the "five core priority areas" that the caucus has chosen to emphasize during ongoing negotiations over the reconciliation bill:

The CPC leaders also put forth the caucus' broad vision for how such programs should be crafted, pushing back against right-wing efforts to impose work requirements, income limits, and other restrictions that would limit the number of people who qualify for benefits.

"Much has been made in recent weeks about the compromises necessary to enact this transformative agenda," the CPC members write. "We have been told that we can either adequately fund a small number of investments or legislate broadly, but only make a shallow, short-term impact. We would argue that this is a false choice."

Instead of slashing the funding of key programs in order to extend their duration over 10 years and appease conservative lawmakers' demand for a lower price tag, the CPC executive board contends that Democrats should "make robust investments over a shorter window."

Speaking to reporters earlier this week, Pelosi indicated she is open to that approach.

"This will help make the case for our party's ability to govern, and establish a track record of success that will pave the way for a long-term extension of benefits," the CPC's letter reads. "We cannot pit childcare against housing, or paid leave against home- and community-based care."

The progressive Democrats also deliver a sharp warning against limiting benefits on the basis of income, a route some right-wing lawmakersincluding Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.)have advocated during recent negotiations over the Build Back Better package.

"We strongly believe that this is the moment to demonstrate to the American people that regardless of geography, race, gender, or class, Democrats believe that everyone has a right to affordable child care, pre-K, clean water, and a community college education," the CPC letter states. "We can choose to strengthen the bond Americans have to one another by proposing universal social insurance benefits that broadly benefit all Americans."

"This bill," the letter concludes, "offers us a chance to fundamentally transform the relationship between the American people and their government."

More here:
House Progressives to Pelosi: Reject Divisive Means-Testing in Favor of Universal Benefits - Common Dreams

A group of prominent global progressives on Wednesday announced a return of the Belmarsh Tribunal, where participants will put the United States government on informal trial for war crimes and demand freedom for jailed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.

"At the Belmarsh Tribunal, we will turn the world the right way up, placing crimes of war, torture, kidnapping, and a litany of other gross human rights abuses on trial."

On October 22, Progressive International's Belmarsh Tribunal, named after the notorious London prison where Assange is imprisoned as he faces possible extradition to the United States, "will try the U.S. government for its crimes of the 21st centuryfrom atrocities in Iraq to torture at Guantnamo Bay to a surveillance program."

"We are convening parliamentarians, journalists, lawyers, and investigators to fight for truth and justice against Assange's extradition to the United States," said Progressive International, which held a similar tribunal last year. "In doing so, the Belmarsh Tribunal turns the tables in the extradition hearing against Julian Assange... a case that will shape the future of journalism for decades to come."

Britain's High Court has been considering the Biden administration's appeal in the extradition case against Assange, with a full appellate hearing scheduled for October 27 and 28.

"WikiLeaks exposed the reality of the War on Terror," said Progressive International. "It revealed war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan, over 300 incidents of torture, and secret killings by the United States armed forces. For exposing the criminality of the War on Terror, the U.S. and its allies have persecuted, imprisoned, and plotted to assassinate Julian Assange."

Last month, Common Dreams reported that in 2017 the Central Intelligence Agency, under then-Director Mike Pompeo, plotted to kidnapand possibly murderAssange to avenge WikiLeaks' publication of the "Vault 7" documents exposing CIA cyber warfare and surveillance activities.

The Belmarsh Tribunal is inspired by the Russell Tribunal, a 1966 event organized by philosophers Bertrand Russell and Jean-Paul Sartre to hold the U.S. accountable for its escalating war crimes in Vietnam.

British historian and activist Tariq Ali, one of the original Belmarsh Tribunal members, will participate in this year's event.

Some of the members of the 2021 Belmarsh Tribunal include German Left Party lawmaker Heike Hnsel; Solidarity Party of Afghanistan spokesperson Selay Ghaffar; Greek lawmaker Yanis Varoufakis; former Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa; Italian investigative journalist Stefania Maurizi; ACLU attorney Ben Wizner; and British Labour parliamentarians Apsana Begum, Richard Burgon, Jeremy Corbyn, and John McDonnell.

"At the Belmarsh Tribunal, we will turn the world the right way up," Corbyn tweeted Wednesday, "placing crimes of war, torture, kidnapping, and a litany of other gross human rights abuses on trial."

Read this article:
Progressives to Put US War Crimes on Trial and Demand Freedom for Julian Assange - Common Dreams

The stench of defeat has clung to the Democrats failure to get either of their major infrastructure bills passed by Congress during the last week of September. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi had committed herself to 27 September as the date by which she would bring to a vote the smaller, bipartisan bill infrastructure package already passed by the Senate. This was going to happen, she said, even if no progress had been made on meeting the progressive Democrats key demand: passing the larger reconciliation infrastructure bill at the same time. But Pelosi held no vote that day or even that week, even as she vowed with increasing frequency (and seeming desperation) that one was imminent. The week ended not with a dramatic roll call but with plenty of Democratic handwringing and gleeful Republican predictions that the collapse of Democratic rule and, with it, of Bidens presidency, was at hand.

Treating that fateful week as the moment when the promise of the Biden presidency vanished may be too hasty a conclusion, however. The difficult challenge facing Pelosi was to unite Democrats behind a second infrastructure bill much larger and more ambitious than the first. It was never going to be easy to pass that second bill, and not just because the Democrats were holding a slim majority in the House and the thinnest of majorities in the Senate. It is also the case that a bill of this size and scope has no clear precedent. We hear a lot about FDRs remarkable accomplishment, passing 15 separate bills in the first 100 days of his New Deal administration in 1933. The Democrats second infrastructure bill, if passed, would have been equally remarkable. It is best understood as an attempt to compress the equivalent of Roosevelts fifteen separate initiatives into one giant piece of legislation.

Its exhausting simply to read through the list of the second infrastructural bills major provisions: universal preschool, subsidies for child and elder care, a program of school lunches, paid medical leave, expansion of Medicare (and Obamacare and Medicaid), massive investments in a green economy, additional investments in physical infrastructure, a Civilian Climate Corps (modelled on FDRs storied Civilian Conservation Corps), affordable housing, Native American infrastructure, support for historically black colleges and universities, and an expanded green card program for immigrant workers and their families. Weve heard a lot about the way in which the filibuster warps American democracy and about the arcane process of reconciliation that, in a few instances, allows for a filibuster workaround. Weve heard a lot less about how the Democrats, in difficult political circumstances, have come within two Senate votes of achieving a legislative breakthrough on a scale that rivals FDRs legendary 100 days.

And despite pundit declarations to the contrary, Democrats attempt at breakthrough is not yet dead. It is true that the reconciliation infrastructural bill no longer has a chance of reaching an expenditure level of $4tn. If such a bill passes, it is likely to be in the $1.5-2tn range. The many major initiatives currently contained within it may have to be shrunk by a third. That will disappoint Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and their supporters, who had originally set their eyes on a $6tn package. Yet, history offers a different perspective. The Biden administration might still deliver a package of programs across its first year totaling $5tn: an estimated $2tn for a downsized reconciliation infrastructural bill; $2tn for Americas Rescue Plan already approved; and the $1tn for the bipartisan infrastructure bill that is sure to pass the House at some point. This shrunken 2021 package as a whole would still rival (as a percentage of GDP) government expenditures during the most expensive years of the second world war. It would exceed by more than five times the size of Obamas 2009 economic recovery plan.

The ambition of Bidens spending package reveals the distance that US politics has travelled since the Great Recession, when Obama relied for economic guidance on a group of economic advisors drawn from the neoliberal world of Robert Rubin and Goldman Sachs, and of Wall Street more broadlyfigures such as Timothy Geithner, Lawrence Summers, Peter Orszag, and Michael Froman. Elizabeth Warren had not then launched her political career, and Sanders was a lonely voice in the Senate. They were certainly not regarded as Democratic Party heavyweights. They now are. That Biden ultimately sided with the progressives during the 27 September week is a sure sign of their influence.

The progressives influence is equally apparent in Bidens decision, in the days leading up to the expected vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill, to nominate Saule Omarova to be Comptroller of the Currency. Omarova, a law professor at Cornell University, is a radical who wants to democratize and nationalize finance in America in ways never done before. In her legal writings, she has argued that the Federal Reserve ought to be turned into a peoples bank where Americans would keep their deposit accounts (rather than in private banks, as is currently the case). This newly configured Fed, in her vision, would also establish a national investment authority charged with directing Federal Reserve capital to projects that serve the public interest. Omarova may not receive confirmation from the Senate; even if she does, she may simply be a pawn in Bidens campaign to get the mainstream Jerome Powell reappointed as Fed chairman. But by nominating Omarova, Biden has spurred a conversation already underway about how to restructure the Fed in ways that make it less of a cloistered institution serving elite interests and both more transparent and more responsive to the democratic will.

Omarova is hardly a singular figure in Biden circles. Stephanie Kelton, an economics professor at Binghamton University and a former chief economist for Democrats on the US Senate Budget Committee, has argued in a widely-read book (The Deficit Myth) that governments can sustain much larger deficits than conventional economic theory prescribes. High-volume government expenditures, properly targeted, she asserts, will not slow economic growth but enhance a peoples economy. Lina Khan, appointed by Biden to chair the Federal Trade Commission, believes that social media and e-commerce giants such as Amazon exercise the kind of monopoly power that damage both the economy and American democracy. She has authorized the FTC to scrutinize the practices of these corporate titans with a view toward either breaking them up or subjecting them to much stricter public regulation than they have yet known. More generally, she aims to restore a regime of public regulation of private corporate power that FDR and his New Dealers did so much to bring into beingand that the Reagan Revolution did so much to break up. The bipartisan fury directed at Facebook during congressional hearings last week suggest that Khans views may have broad popular appeal.

It is still too soon to know which of these progressive views and the governing proposals that issue from them will prevail. The Democrats are operating in a political environment far more hostile than what Roosevelt faced in 1933, when he enjoyed large majorities in the House and the Senate. If they fail to pass versions of both infrastructural bills this autumn, the Democrats will seriously damage their chances of maintaining their majorities in the House and Senate in 2022. But it is also true, as is the case with the populist mobilization that Trump has engendered on the right, that the new progressivism is not going away anytime soon. We have entered a new political era, one in which the principles and strategies that guided the party during the Clinton and Obama eras no longer suffice.

Read the original:
Progressives are now heavyweights in the Democratic party - The Guardian

When House Democrats were forced to delay their planned vote on the bipartisan infrastructure bill earlier this month, the reaction from progressives was surprising, considering it is a key part of Joe Bidens domestic agenda.

Rather than lamenting the delay of the vote, progressive groups praised the Democratic lawmakers who had demanded the scheduling change.

The Congressional Progressive Caucus a group of leftwing Democrats in Congress had argued that the infrastructure bill could not pass on its own because if it did, Democrats would lose vital momentum for passing the much larger reconciliation package, which includes huge investments in climate initiatives, affordable childcare access and healthcare and other social programs.

We applaud House Democrats who are boldly holding the line for better care for our families, our planet, and our futures, not the bottom line for big corporations, the progressive group MoveOn said.

After years of complaints that leftwing Democrats in Congress have consistently failed to wield their power effectively, the CPC is now receiving plaudits from supporters for their strategy in the infrastructure negotiations.

The progressives success has emboldened their allies and raised questions over how they may use that power in the next stage of negotiations as Biden seeks to pass an agenda that many have compared to the 1930s New Deal or the 1960s Great Society.

For progressives outside the Capitol, the CPCs success was a validation of their years-long efforts to push for more robust climate and healthcare policies.

I think often movements run into crises of powerlessness when we spend so much energy [on] an election or having a certain candidate come through in order to just fall on all of those promises, said John Paul Mejia, a spokesperson for the climate group Sunrise Movement.

Thankfully with progressives, what we have seen is that by building accountability and power with folks inside and outside of the halls of power, weve actually been able to do some pretty wild things that are in line with what our movement seeks to do in ensuring the vision of the Green New Deal.

Some progressives have said the fight felt overdue, as the CPC has long weathered criticism that its members raise objections to bills only to back down at the last minute.

Progressives were seen as caving in the ninth inning of a game, and there was a years-long need for credibility if the progressive bloc wanted to be seen as an actual bloc in future fights, said Adam Green, a co-founder of the Progressive Change Campaign Committee. And this was that moment because the stars aligned.

Green added that the victory could encourage progressives to pursue hardline tactics again, saying, Now that thats done once, [CPC chair] Pramila Jayapal and the progressive caucus will have more credibility and therefore be able to impact negotiations more in all future fights.

Progressives strategy could have a significant impact on the final version of the reconciliation package, which lawmakers continue to negotiate over.

The legislation was previously expected to cost about $3.5tn, a figure progressives already considered to be a major compromise from their ideal price tag of $10tn. But now, more centrist Democrats, including Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema, are pushing for a smaller bill. Manchin has suggested going as low as $1.5tn for the legislation.

Mejia strongly urged progressives to once again stand their ground in the next stage of negotiations, warning that a smaller bill would fail to address the serious issues facing the country.

We need investment at the $3.5tn level in order to truly begin addressing the crises that have plagued us over the past many years, Mejia said.

When we face our next hurricane or when we face floods in our homes, we wont care about how nice Joe Biden was to Joe Manchin or Kyrsten Sinema. Well care about whether he made the $3.5tn investment or not to keep our communities and families safe.

As they push for a larger reconciliation package, progressives are also seeking to shift the narrative about the lawmakers who are advocating for a less comprehensive bill, such as Manchin and the Democratic congressman Josh Gottheimer.

Progressives argue that it is incorrect to describe those politicians as moderate.

The progressive congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said in a tweet last week, Moderates make up a sizeable chunk of the party. The 4% of members threatening the full agenda of a moderate president are not moderates. How would you describe these demands: fossil fuel subsidies, protect the rich from taxes, keep prescription drug prices high? Conservative!

Indeed, some of the most vulnerable members of the House Democratic caucus have echoed their progressive colleagues in emphasizing the need to pass both the infrastructure bill and the reconciliation package.

Six of those frontline Democrats penned a Newsweek op-ed on Monday, in which they wrote, [W]e are the serious, dedicated lawmakers who earned the Democratic majority. We fight every day to deliver for our voters. And were committed to getting both the infrastructure bill and the Build Back Better Act across the finish line.

Matt Bennett, executive vice-president for public affairs of the centrist thinktank Third Way, warned that it will be moderate Democrats who suffer the consequences in next years midterm elections if the party fails to pass the reconciliation package.

We believe that, in order for them to win, theyre going to need every tool at their disposal, and theyre going to need to be running from a position of strength, Bennett said. And if the presidents agenda were somehow to fall apart in intra-party bickering, that would be a position of extreme weakness.

And while Democrats like Gottheimer have emphasized the urgent need to pass the historic infrastructure bill, Bennett argued that bill alone would not be enough to get vulnerable moderates re-elected next year.

Theres a lot of good stuff in the infrastructure bill, Bennett said. But its just not enough. We have to do more to show voters that we are listening to them and making their lives better in some fundamental ways.

The stakes could not be higher for Democrats, and progressives like Mejia are watching closely as the negotiations unfold. He condemned lawmakers such as Manchin and Sinema for their relentless will to fight for their corporate donors instead of their own constituents, and he said their actions only underscored the need to elect more progressives to Congress, potentially by supporting primary challenges to more centrist Democrats.

At the level of crisis that we are facing right now, we need no further obstructionists in power keeping us from getting to the solutions our communities desperately need, Mejia said.

And if a congressperson or a leader in any shape, way or form cant deliver on the will of the people in a democratic process, then they need to be replaced with someone who will.

See original here:
Progressive Democrats draw strength from muscle-flexing in Congress - The Guardian

The picture hasnt been pretty, but the finished portrait will paint 2021 as a proud and productive year for the president and the progressives in his party.

The American Rescue Act is already law and eventually both infrastructure bills will pass Congress in some form. Everybody wants the smaller of the two packages and House progressives have made it clear that you cant get the small one without the big bill.

The basic bipartisan infrastructure proposal is good but not good enough to fundamentally reform and revitalize the economy. Passing the basic package without the premium package would be like buying property in a pricey residential neighborhood and then putting in a foundation without spending the money to build the house.

In the face of an intense lobbying campaign by big business lobbyists, and having only a razor-thin majority in Congress, President BidenJoe BidenGruden out as Raiders coach after further emails reveal homophobic, sexist comments Abbott bans vaccine mandates from any 'entity in Texas' Jill Biden to campaign with McAuliffe on Friday MORE, Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersHow Democrats can rebuild their 'blue wall' in the Midwest Juan Williams: Women wield the power The Memo: Biden's horizon is clouded by doubt MORE (I-Vt.) and their aggressive progressive supporters are about to pull off a remarkable political miracle. Progressives wont get everything they want but they will get the tools they need for America to deal with the existential threats to the economy and the planet.

Sanders lost the battle for the presidential nomination but won the war for the heart and soul of the Democratic Party. Biden rose to the challenge to create a dynamic economy in a changing world. His extensive legislative experience as a senator for 36 years gave him the tools to negotiate the slippery slope that separated progressive and moderate Democrats.

The Progressive Caucus in the House of Representatives led by Rep. Pramila JayapalPramila JayapalJuan Williams: Women wield the power Democrats set up chaotic end-of-year stretch Ilhan Omar to Biden: 'Deliver on your promise to cancel student debt' MORE (D-Wash.) deserves credit for standing firm and to counter the leverage that moderate Democrats like Sen. Joe ManchinJoe ManchinUsing shared principles to guide our global and national energy policy Sinema's office denies report that she wants to cut 0B in climate spending Juan Williams: Women wield the power MORE (D-W.Va.) and Sen. Kyrsten SinemaKyrsten SinemaSinema's office denies report that she wants to cut 0B in climate spending Juan Williams: Women wield the power The Memo: Biden's horizon is clouded by doubt MORE (D-Ariz.) enjoy in the closely divided Senate. Progressives learned to play hardball and will probably win the game even though it required sacrifices to score.

The media has shortchanged the power of the progressives in the fight for Americas future. The spotlight has been on moderate Democratic senators Manchin and Sinema, shortchanging the attention given to progressive Democrats. But if the basic infrastructure funding and Build Back Better packages both pass, progressives in the Democratic Party will have expanded Americas capacity to meet the pressing challenges that confront the future of the United States.

The Child Tax Credit in the American Rescue Plan pumped much-needed financial aid to hard-working families with vulnerable children. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will modernize our outdated and archaic electronic and transportation infrastructure. The jewel in the crown is the Build Back Better Plan, which provides for clean energy jobs, universal pre-school and free two-year college and vocational education.

The cost of the American Rescue Plan is $1.9 trillion dollars and the price tag for the infrastructure package is about $1.2 trillion. The cost of Build Back Better will end up at just north of $2 trillion over 10 years. Manchin indicated he would be receptive to a package in the $1.9 trillion to $2.2 trillion range, while Jayapal has said the progressive bottom line is $2.5 trillion.

Most Americans will enjoy the benefits of the initiative without paying a cent. Wealthy Americans who received big and bountiful tax breaks during previous Republican administrations will shoulder the financial burden of the program.

The late 1800s German Chancellor Otto von Bismarck once said that laws are like sausages. You should never watch them being made. The mainstream media was so pre-occupied with food preparation that it failed to anticipate the feast.

The sausage-making in the fight over infrastructure hasnt been pleasant to watch. But the food will be delicious and nutritious when it is finally served.Progressive Democrats will occupy seats at the adult table, while Republicans will fume at the kids table.

Brad Bannon is a Democratic pollster and CEO of Bannon Communications Research. His podcast, Deadline D.C. with Brad Bannon,airson Periscope TV and the Progressive Voices Network. Follow him on Twitter: @BradBannon

Read more from the original source:
A proud year for Biden and progressives | TheHill - The Hill