 Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez speaking in front of the US Capitol, 2022. (Nathan Posner / Anadolu Agency via Getty Images) BY BRANKO MARCETIC As with any elected official, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the Squad should be criticized when needed. But left-wing vitriol is unwarranted: it ignores the Squad’s many progressive accomplishments and their legislation’s aid to activist campaigns. JACOBIN. It’s tough being a member of the “Squad” these days. Once the darlings of the American left, the group of progressive and socialist House members that includes Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Jamaal Bowman, and others are as likely to be savaged these days from the Left as they are from the Right. Popular YouTube commentators regularly denounce them as “sellouts,” protesters interrupt their meetings calling them warmongers, and even committed socialists question what the point of the Squad has been. The lion’s share of this ire has been trained on Representative Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who’s faced relentless criticism since winning office from all sides, sometimes over substantive issues (once failing to show up for an Amazon union rally, casting a vote that denied railworkers the ability to strike), sometimes over remarkably petty ones (conciliatory rhetoric, the positioning of her hands while being arrested). Much of this was crystallized in a recent critical analysis of Ocasio-Cortez’s record in New York magazine by Freddie deBoer, who charged she has drifted “from radical outsider to Establishment liberal,” making mere “token gestures of resistance to solidify the illusion that she is a gadfly,” and argued that her and the rest of the Squad’s entry into Congress has been entirely fruitless. Read more. https://jacobin.com/2023/08/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-aoc-the-squad-left-criticism-policy-accomplishments Photo Jacobin
0 Comments
As the Georgia indictments make all too clear.
by Harold Meyerson. With 19 indicted conspirators and 30 unindicted conspirators, there are now almost as many Republicans caught up in Fulton County’s wheels of justice as there are Republican candidates for president. At some point, we may want to indict those candidates (among whom only Chris Christie and, lately and reluctantly, Mike Pence have noted that Trump appears to have broken the law), too. On the charge of contributing to the erosion of American democracy, any number are guilty as sin. The sheer length of Fulton County DA Fani Willis’s bill of criminal particulars makes clear that it takes a village to seize the presidency, even when that seizure is thwarted. Nor is it only in Georgia that those villagers are being hauled into court. Those Georgians who posed as the state’s electors have company in Michigan, where that state’s attorney general has indicted those Michiganders who swore, falsely, that they were that state’s authorized electors. According to a report in today’s Arizona Republic, both groups may yet be joined by Arizona’s electoral poseurs. Such is the genius of federalism. Some law school professors (not a lot) have argued that taking Trump to trial, much less convicting him, would do so much damage to our system of government and/or be so divisive that we shouldn’t go through with it. The question they don’t address, however, is what we should do about his co-conspirators who also broke fundamental laws—by, for instance, swearing falsely that they were their state’s electors and thereby depriving the voters of their state of their right to choose a president. Should people who violated the very laws on which the nation is based also be let go? And if not, how can we hold them responsible for such violations but exempt the person entirely responsible for their lawbreaking? This is the kind of thing that could give double standards a bad name. If we’re to scrap the very idea of equal justice under the law, in the most glaring and democracy-eroding way imaginable, tens of millions of Americans are certain to conclude that our legal system is a (bad) joke and a fraud. (Those Americans who keep abreast of the Supreme Court may well have already done that, of course.) I can only presume that those legal eagles who counsel us to cease the prosecutions of our former president don’t wish that to be the consequence. If they don’t, however, they’d have to support dropping the charges not just against Trump but against every knave and fool who broke the law on his behalf, including those who stormed the Capitol on January 6th. Of course, if we’re actually serious about equal justice under the law, we’d scrap the Electoral College and the Senate, but I digress. From: the American Prospect http://americanprospect.bluelena.io/social/01894d6f048493d2cacde3c579c315a3.2302 The Steering Committee of DSA North Star unanimously calls for convention delegates to DEFEAT Amendment B to NPC Recommendation #8.
Update, the convention agenda has been amended. This topic is back on the agenda for discussion. Amendment B would bring back the resolution rejected by the survey of Delegates, to "Make DSA an anti-Zionist Organization" and expel all members found to be "Zionists", which was proposed by adherents of the DSA Boycott Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) Working Group. There are three reasons why the DSA convention must defeat this proposal: 1. SOLIDARITY WITH THE PALESTINIAN STRUGGLE FOR NATIONAL SELF-DETERMINATION A cardinal principle of solidarity is respecting the right of an oppressed people to democratically choose their own representatives. Yet in a resolution which purports to support the Palestinian struggle, there is no mention of the Palestinian BDS National Committee, the broad organization of Palestinian civil society which is the coordinating body for the BDS campaign. Instead, the resolution proposes that DSA should work with the Palestinian Youth Movement, which is not affiliated with the BDS National Council, and which proclaims, “It Is Time for the Palestinian Leadership to Go.” The Palestinian BDS National Committee issued a statement separating itself from the unprincipled campaign the DSA BDS WG conducted against Comrade Bowman and the DSA NPC. DSA has no business taking sides in the internal affairs of Palestinians. 2. BUILDING THE BROADEST, STRONGEST OPPOSITION TO THE OCCUPATION AND ISRAELI STATE VIOLENCE AGAINST PALESTINIANS Building the broadest and strongest opposition to the Israeli occupation and state violence is a vital solidarity task. Yet in this resolution, the authors attack prominent DSA members, including Congressman Jamaal Bowman, who are among the most vocal public opponents in the United States of the Israeli occupation and state violence. Moreover, they single out by name as a prohibited “Zionist lobby” group a Jewish organization, J Street, which has been the strongest lobby on Capitol Hill against the occupation. Proposed amendment B would undermine vital coalition work against the occupation and Israeli state violence and must be defeated. 3. TURNING AWAY FROM A SELF-DESTRUCTIVE PATH OF PURGES The bulk of the resolution lays out an apparatus for conducting purges of DSA members who do not submit to the DSA BDS Working Group’s view of the Palestinian struggle. It leaves no doubt that its primary targets are prominent elected officials who are DSA members. There is another proposal to amend NPC Recommendation 8, Amendment A, without a mandate to purge DSA members and elected officials. However, amendment A also has the central, overriding flaw of prioritizing the issue of Palestine over all other issues in the world, by officially making DSA an "Anti-Zionist Organization". DSA is already an anti-racist and anti-imperialist organization. DSA's existing policy of opposing Israel's occupation by supporting BDS should not be replaced by either of these divisive factional statements, especially Amendment B. If adopted, Amendment B would contribute to the destruction of DSA as a relevant political organization by fomenting attacks on and expulsion of elected DSA members who are respected as progressive leaders.  Finally, I want to share my candidate statement and other writings on my Medium site here: https://medium.com/@xanderhernander
The Steering Committee of DSA North Star Caucus calls on our members and all convention delegates to support member-submitted resolution #18 enthusiastically. It expresses our highest political priority: placing DSA squarely in the ranks of the pro-democracy, anti-fascist coalition which is emerging to fight the ultra-Right. Here are the reasons this resolution is so important: 1. Right-wing victories are destroying democracy and fundamental human rights in the United States. The ultra-Right has mobilized a racist, xenophobic, anti-worker coalition which is smashing voting rights, reproductive justice, climate and environmental progress, gun control, public health, LGBTQ rights, religious freedom, and labor rights. This coalition is well organized, funded, and media savvy. A large and militant sector of voters support it. However an effective opposition to this virulent movement is emerging as a network of people of color, unions, community organizers, educators, and like-minded patriots. DSA must step up and take its place in this anti-fascist resistance. 2. DSA can play a historic role as an openly socialist force in this emerging ,left- center movement. As socialists, we know the ultra-right attacks on our hard-won rights are rooted in capitalists’ opposition to social benefits and reforms. Their efforts to destroy even the partial and deeply flawed political system we have in the United States exposes their hatred for democracy. Representative democracy is a precious tool for protecting these hard-won reforms. DSA must commit to defending and extending working people’s rights until a more equitable and universal socialist democracy can be achieved. Enemies of the working class describe even modest measures of social and economic justice as socialist. By standing up to their attacks with other progressives in electoral and community-based struggles, we can claim socialists’ part in these victories. DSA’s electoral and community action in unity with all political tendencies who are battling to protect and increase equity and justice is essential in this crisis. 3. If DSA refuses to stand in solidarity with all anti-authoritariananti- MAGA forces, we will isolate ourselves from the very base we aspire to lead. While many DSA chapters and members are collaborating with the anti-authoritarian movement in their areas, disciplined forces in DSA have discouraged this vital solidarity. Hostility toward the Democratic Party, non-profit social justice organizations, and the liberal wing of the progressive movement have thrown up serious obstacles to DSA building relationships with our natural allies. Some DSA chapters have even refused to support the election of progressives endorsed by local or statewide progressive coalitions. This damages DSA’s reputation and feeds the narrative that the Left is the enemy of real-world victories. Resolution #18 “Uniting Against the Ultra Right” calls for DSA to embrace a leadership role in the emerging anti-authoritarian movement. building relationships and collaborating with our allies in emerging progressive and center-left coalitions. In this endeavor, DSA should be guided by the following principles: a. Class struggle is happening within the Democratic Party. DSA members and other candidates elected by left organizations are demonstrating that progressives elected to public office can make a concrete difference in working people’s lives. Working people look to Democrats to support candidates and measures that offer social justice in local, state, and national arenas. Of course there are corporate and reactionary forces in the Democratic Party too. Our job is to resist those elements and support the voices of Labor, BIPOC forces and all progressives who are turning the party’s agenda toward the left. b.Disparaging DSA members or other progressives elected to public office damages DSA’s reputation. Charges that members of the “Squad” or other openly leftist representatives are not radical enough or make too many compromises feeds anti-leftist forces within the Democratic Party and the media. Once a DSA member or a progressive is elected, we owe them critical support in addition to demanding accountability. Elected representatives must act based on their constituencies and best political judgement without being threatened or attacked. c. Workers, people of color, independent voters, women, community activists, and members of the LGBTQ family will not respect DSA if it stands apart from their struggles, demanding a higher standard of political purity than can be expected in the context of today’s political reality. DSA must embody what socialists offer the working class: effective strategies to win. We must meet our allies with humility and provide the practical solidarity we all need to defeat the ultra-Right. Participation in community or electoral struggles from a purist, ideological position is a recipe for irrelevance. For these reasons, North Star Caucus urges convention delegates to campaign and vote for Member-Submitted Resolution #18 “Uniting Against the Ultra-Right.” Uniting Against the Ultra-Right Let’s Get Real vs. Let’s Get Small An argument in support of the "Uniting Against the Ultra-Right" resolution at the upcoming national convention. BY MAX B. SAWICKY - 2023 DSA NATIONAL CONVENTION DISCUSSION In Socialist Forum. https://socialistforum.dsausa.org/issues/2023-dsa-national-convention-discussion/lets-get-real-vs-lets-get-small/ Democracy in the US is under direct threat from the Republican Party, which Noam Chomsky has called “the most dangerous organization in the history of the world.” The ascendance of this organization to national power will mean the destruction of all progressive politics. We see such embryonic scenarios playing out in Florida, Texas, and other states. Indeed, our would-be Führer Donald Trump pledges to liquidate any socialist presence in the U.S. It’s not as if it has never happened before. The Palmer Raids and McCarthyism are cautionary tales. The threat of fascism leads me to stress broad unity in support for Democratic candidates in the national elections in November 2024 as an essential way to block the Right’s road to power. Formal DSA endorsements are beside the point. What matters for the election is material support, and what matters for DSA growth is a visible contribution to that support. Prior to November, primary campaigns that showcase DSA ideas are fine, but third-party efforts or electoral abstention in November can only help rightists gain elective office. …. gains will depend on keeping Donald Trump and his neo-fascist party out of the White House, expanding the Democratic majority in the Senate, and flipping party control of the House of Representatives. DSA’s reputation and political prospects depend on being part of that effort. Hence, I urge the convention to adopt our resolution “Uniting Against the Ultra-Right.” read more here. https://socialistforum.dsausa.org/issues/2023-dsa-national-convention-discussion/lets-get-real-vs-lets-get-small/ Here is an excerpt from the North Star sponsored resolution Uniting Against the Ultra-Right. Democratic socialists must take seriously the threat to our democracy posed by the extremist right-wing elements in the US that have coalesced around the MAGA movement and its allies and gained control of the Republican Party to the point where it is barely distinguishable from them. The ultra-right’s rule would undermine our already inadequate constitutional order in favor of authoritarian rule by the propertied classes, combined with weakening of the federal government and the suppression of basic civil rights, environmental protection and public services. To say that the ultra-right is the principal enemy does not mean that it is the only enemy. It means, however, that we must focus on uniting democratic socialists, progressives and all those willing to build towards a majority which can defeat this threat. This broad front must be multi-racial and cross-class. It cannot be an alignment of the Left alone nor can it be limited to those who are in total agreement with a left/progressive agenda. We are aware that the necessary organized nucleus of such a broad front does not exist and that DSA is not a part of such an alliance. Therefore, we are taking the first steps toward its formation and also addressing the issue that the democratic left is splintered among many organizations that often act with little coordination. Improvement should start by DSA approaching its nearest sister organizations. North Star is supporting this resolution. We invite all to contact their convention delegates and ask them to support the resolution. Defeat Member-Submitted Resolution # 12:
“Make DSA an Anti-Zionist Organization in Principle and Praxis” The Steering Committee of DSA North Star calls for convention delegates to defeat Member-Submitted Resolution # 12, which has been submitted by adherents of the DSA Boycott Divestment & Sanctions (BDS) Working Group. There are three reasons why the DSA convention must defeat this resolution. 1. SOLIDARITY WITH THE PALESTINIAN STRUGGLE FOR NATIONAL SELF-DETERMINATION The first and cardinal principle of solidarity is respecting the right of an oppressed people to democratically choose their own representatives. Yet in a resolution which purports to support the Palestinian struggle, there is no mention of the Palestinian BDS National Committee, the broad organization of Palestinian civil society which is the coordinating body for the BDS campaign. Instead, the resolution proposes that DSA should work with the Palestinian Youth Movement, which is not affiliated with the BDS National Council and which proclaims “It Is Time for the Palestinian Leadership to Go.” https://twitter.com/BDSmovement/status/1466490844475797506 DSA has no business taking sides in the internal affairs of Palestinians. 2. BUILDING THE BROADEST, STRONGEST OPPOSITION TO THE OCCUPATION AND ISRAELI STATE VIOLENCE AGAINST PALESTINIANS There is no solidarity task more important than building the broadest and strongest opposition to the occupation and Israeli state violence. Yet in this resolution, the authors attack prominent DSA members, including Congressman Jamaal Bowman, who are among the most vocal public opponents of the Israeli occupation and state violence in the United States. Moreover, they single out by name as a prohibited “Zionist lobby” group a Jewish organization, J Street, which has been the strongest lobby against the occupation on Capitol Hill. It was precisely this counter-productive use of purist litmus tests that led the Palestinian BDS National Committee to issue a statement separating itself from the unprincipled campaign the DSA BDS WG conducted against Comrade Bowman and the DSA NPC. The resolution undermines vital coalition work against the occupation and Israeli state violence and must be defeated. 3. TURNING AWAY FROM A SELF-DESTRUCTIVE PATH OF PURGES The bulk of the resolution lays out what can only be described as an apparatus for conducting purges of DSA members who do not submit to the DSA BDS Working Group’s view of the Palestinian struggle. It leaves no doubt that its primary targets are prominent elected officials who are DSA members. There is a proposed amendment to the primary resolution. However this proposed amendment cannot completely fix a resolution that has these central, overriding flaws. The basic resolution needs to be entirely reconceived and rewritten. If adopted, this resolution would contribute to the destruction of DSA as a relevant political organization by fomenting attacks and expulsion of elected DSA members who are respected as progressive leaders.  DSA North Star Caucus NPC Candidate Endorsement of Alexander Hernández We are pleased to endorse our comrade Alexander Hernández who is running for a seat on DSA’s National Political Committee (NPC). We encourage delegates to rank him #1 on their ballots. While North Star has made recommendations for NPC candidates in the past, this is the first time we are endorsing one of our own. We believe that Alexander will bring a much-needed perspective to national DSA and contribute hard work to strengthen our organization.. Alexander agrees with North Star’s central political position: defeating the ultra-right and the MAGA Republican agenda is the most pressing political priority facing the U.S. Left today. We believe that electing Alexander to the NPC is crucial because DSA today lacks an agreed-upon political strategy to expand the power of the Left, to defend democracy, and build a viable governing majority. Alexander’s background in the labor and immigrants’ rights movements and his work in DSA is valuable experience. He will increase representation of DSA’s core political constituencies in the socialist movement, the membership, and chapters both big and small. Alexander grew up In the immigrants’ rights movement. He is the child of Mexican parents. Living in Chicago, Alexander and his family heard from Dolores Huerta at church, and participated in the immigrants rights demonstrations in 2006 along with 100,000 others in Chicago and millions more nationally. Alexander also grew up in the labor movement. His father is a retired ILA Local 1969 member. Having been active around labor issues growing up, he organized his own workplace and joined IATSE Local 44, where he was elected to leadership in his union. Alexander is now on staff as a union representative in the entertainment industry. Upon joining DSA, Alexander continued this work by organizing for immigrants’ rights in Atlanta and as a co-chair of the national DSA Immigrants’ Rights Working Group (IRWG). Including serving as national IRWG coordinator for a time, working with staff and other national leadership. Our comrade Alexander has also helped build a new DSA chapter in a rural Florida community where one did not exist. Alexander’s pledges are to:
We believe Alexander will work towards a stronger and more united DSA to win the world we all want to see. Our caucus goal for this convention is to add democratic socialist political maturity, common sense, and respect for a diversity of viewpoints to all NPC discussions and decisions. Alexander will help ground our organizing in struggles where democratic socialists are winning today, struggles that can honor the different tendencies in DSA. He made the argument for this position clearly in his Socialist Forum article, “The Case for Realignment.” https://socialistforum.dsausa.org/issues/fall-2022/the-case-for-realignment/. This North Star Caucus goal is also expressed through our proposed convention resolutions “Unite Against the Ultra-Right,” and the resolution to “Defend Immigrants and Refugee Rights.” We encourage delegates to advance these goals by electing Alexander Hernández to the National Political Committee of DSA. _____________ The North Star Caucus is a group of DSA members and democratic socialists who share a broad outlook around the political questions that face DSA and the wider US left. We are not a faction or a group wanting to take over DSA and remake it in our own image. (See our statement of principles. An argument against a number of resolutions concerning electoral politics for the upcoming national convention.
BY SAM LEWIS - 2023 DSA NATIONAL CONVENTION DISCUSSION Since DSA’s contemporary era started in 2016, the organization’s “big tent” approach has evolved to encompass a broad range of organizing tactics and strategies. Most energy in the organization has been at the local level, and chapters have pursued elections, protests, mutual aid, new publications and media strategies, labor organizing, tenant organizing, coalition building and legislative campaigns, all in pursuit of growing the socialist movement and building power. Much of DSA’s internal political development, including the evolution of its caucuses and factions, has been less about clear ideological differences than about which of these projects members see as most important. If these different projects all exist within DSA’s big tent, conflict at the national level has largely not been about trying to halt or constrain any particular type of work, but about competition over prioritization and resources. While the organization has had worthwhile debates over our approaches to labor strategy or mutual aid, there has not to date been any effort to seriously clamp down on the diversity of tactics being deployed by DSA locals. The lone exception to this admirably humble and open-minded approach has been electoral politics. This year, delegates will be once again asked to consider at convention massive, disruptive changes to DSA’s electoral work that could undo much of what has been accomplished by DSA members since 2015, and halt the development of the electoral project within DSA. In some ways, for those of us involved in electoral work the recurring focus on dictating DSA’s electoral approach from above is flattering. It amounts to an acknowledgement that electing socialists to office has a central role in keeping socialism relevant to the lives of everyday people in our present moment. DSA members and delegates are right to take our electoral strategy seriously, and should indeed be focused on how it unfolds. The stunning success of the two Sanders campaigns, and the election of hundreds of locally and nationally endorsed DSA candidates to office, as well as hundreds more non-endorsed DSA members, are all part of an important development: for the first time in a century, democratic socialism is once again a meaningful current in US politics. DSA’s growth over the same period is intimately tied to this development, as are our prospects for advancing the socialist cause. We cannot take those developments for granted, or think that our leading role in shaping the program and politics of democratic socialist electoral politics is something to which we are entitled. This means delegates must read the proposals at convention carefully to understand their potential impacts, and reject those that could use noble sentiments to justify self-defeating ends. Many of the proposals on offer at the 2023 convention would have precluded endorsing Bernie Sanders and most of the socialists who are currently advancing our cause in city councils, state houses, and Congress. Too many of the resolutions focus on elevating abstract principles, devoid of political context, as litmus tests that can be used to punish elected officials–for the most part with no argument for how such an approach will advance the cause of socialism. Many of the resolutions focus not on DSA’s endorsed candidates who we actually worked to put in office, but on any DSA member who holds elected office, setting up pointless conflicts and potential purges that are divorced from the source of our political power. Worst of all, some of these resolutions would pull DSA out of the fight against the growing right-wing authoritarian threat in the US, and have us cede leadership of the working-class opposition to liberals by allowing them to be the most effective opponents of right-wing attacks on abortion, trans lives, labor, and democratic rights. Building an elected bloc that can advance our politics and policies means DSA must keep building our electoral threat and keep building public support for our positions–discipline applied robotically by resolution, devoid of context, is a shortcut that is doomed to fail. Abstract litmus tests don’t build our power Read more. https://socialistforum.dsausa.org/issues/2023-dsa-national-convention-discussion/dont-dsocialistforum.dsausa.org/issues/2023-dsa-national-convention-discussion/dont-derail-dsas-electoral-project/ State Rep. Mike Connolly has decided to leave the Boston chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America, he announced Monday.
Connolly’s decision comes after Boston DSA introduced a motion last week to expel him. In the motion, a group charged Connolly with a variety of offenses, including endorsing Gov. Maura Healey and not participating in the organization’s endorsement process. Boston DSA would have voted on the expulsion July 23 at its monthly general meeting. Rather than fighting these charges for much of July, a particularly busy time for the Massachusetts General Court, Connolly said, he will devote his energy toward serving his constituents in Cambridge and Somerville. He has been a reliably progressive candidate and legislator, pushing for electoral reform, criminal justice reform and affordable housing, including rent control and the new notion of “social housing.” “I need to focus on continuing to represent our community on Beacon Hill and delivering for my constituents,” he said. The charges against him were largely incoherent, Connolly said, making an example of the first charge accusing him of not engaging with DSA’s already opaque endorsement process: The chapter does not have a bylaw requiring members in elected office to seek the endorsement of the organization. The DSA motion to expel him cited a 2021 chapter bylaw for endorsed officials, using it to condemn actions Connolly took in 2020. “As you recall from your fifth-grade social studies class, that’s what they call an ex post facto,” Connolly said. The motion also accused Connolly of endorsing public officials who “are fundamentally opposed to socialist reforms.” These officials include Healey, State House speaker Ron Mariano and Somerville city councilor Matthew McLaughlin. Connolly said the was disappointed to see that some in Boston DSA do not understand the necessity of cooperation. “For all of us who want to transform society, we need to understand that it’s going to take building broader coalitions, and it’s going to take working with and persuading those in positions of state leadership,” he said. In-fight draws national attention The clash drew national media attention, with Ryan Grim at The Intercept noting “a sizable portion” of local progressives supporting Connolly publicly. Left-leaning local journalist Jason Pramas was critical of the move in an essay published in Cambridge Day, saying the attempt at ideological purity just divided and diminished an already dwindling movement. “The tiny faction of the shrinking chapter of the smallish group in question is trying to purge Connolly as if it is somehow in leadership of not just a political party, but a ruling political party – in some kind of Soviet-style communist regime that is the antithesis of the beloved community DSA is supposed to be trying to build in what their members believe will be the better socialist and democratic future to come,” Pramas said. Politico called Connolly’s departure “a setback for the Boston-area democratic socialists who, after years of making gains on local city councils, are now watching their state legislative ranks dwindle from two representatives to one.” Its remaining representative is Somerville’s Erika Uyterhoeven. https://www.cambridgeday.com/2023/07/10/state-rep-connolly-walks-away-from-the-dsa-organization-criticizing-political-compromises/ https://www.cambridgeday.com/2023/07/10/state-rep-connolly-walks-away-from-the-dsa-organization-criticizing-political-compromises/ A recent conference brought together democratic socialist elected officials from across the United States—including Bernie Sanders—to collaborate and strategize on advancing progressive public policy. DAVID DUHALDE JUNE 29, 2023  Democratic socialist conference attendees outside Gallaudet University in Washington, DC. on the weekend of June 16, 2023. (POLINA GODZ / JACOBIN) Over the weekend of June 16, 80 democratic socialist elected officials and their aides from across the country came together for the first U.S. socialist policy conference since the 1980s. The event, titled “How We Win: The Democratic Socialist Policy Agenda in Office,” was held at the Gallaudet University in Washington, DC and was hosted by Jacobin, The Nation and the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) Fund, an educational sister 501©3 nonprofit of national DSA that is focused on pushing progressive policy, preserving socialist history and supporting left-wing activism.
Read more: https://inthesetimes.com/article/democratic-socialist-dsa-conference-bernie-sanders-cori-bush https://www.dsausa.org/democratic-left/dsa-fund-brings-together-socialists-in-office-for-d-c-conference/ https://prospect.org/politics/2023-06-21-socialist-emergence-democratic-tradition/ More info: https://prospect.org/politics/2023-06-21-socialist-emergence-democratic-tradition/ BY TOM GALLAGHER
“The unfortunate fact is that a third party campaign in America just won’t add up” In announcing that “We’re talking about empowering those who have been pushed to the margins because neither political party wants to tell the truth about Wall Street, about Ukraine, about the Pentagon, about Big Tech,” West expresses a quite understandable “plague on both your houses” perspective of the sort that generally underlies third party efforts – and not just in the U.S. But what may be a viable political option in one country might not be one in another; it all depends upon the rules and laws that govern politics in the respective nations. Nothing illustrates the importance of the differences better than the contrasting experiences of the aforementioned Greens, who find themselves continuously embroiled in defending against charges of facilitating Republican presidencies, and that of their German namesake, arguably the foreign “third party” most familiar to Americans, a party that has successfully entered governments – on both the state and national level – on numerous occasions. Put in the most basic terms, we could say that the difference lies in the fact that where Germans operate within an “additive” political system, we Americans live in a “subtractive” one. ….. In our case, on the other hand, should West persist in running a third party presidential campaign, his potential voters will have no such option. Whether West actually considers a second Biden term as bad an outcome as a second for Trump – or a first for DeSantis – I can’t say, but I feel fairly certain that most voters open to his ideas do not. However, under our plurality-winner-take-all system of apportioning a state’s share of the Electoral College, after the voters have cast their votes for different parties there is no way that they can be recombined to block a Trump return. And while a third-party West vote might contribute to an anti-Republican majority in a particular state, it could also contribute to creating a Trump (or DeSantis) plurality in that same time. The system is in that sense “subtractive,” in that a voter who considers Trump (or DeSantis) the worst possible outcome but opts for a third-party subtracts a vote from the only anti-Trump vote count that matters in the end – that of the largest non-Republican party, which will be the Democrats, however welcome or unwelcome that may be to said voter. Read more. https://stansburyforum.com/2023/06/22/cornel-west-the-primaries-call  The former Berkeley mayor's record of accomplishments from civil rights activism to groundbreakin g political initiatives to far-sighted community economic development programs to global solidarity and elder statesman leadership could fill volumes. Gus Newport, left, and Danny Glover speaking at a 2016 rally for Sen. Bernie Sanders in Oakland. , (Photo: National Nurses United/flickr) Former Berkeley, California Mayor Gus Newport, a titan of progressive politics in the late 20th Century, social justice champion who worked with Malcolm X, and a lifelong humanitarian and internationalist, died June 17 in San Francisco. He was 88. Gus was the embodiment of the adage of a life well lived. His record of accomplishments from civil rights activism to groundbreaking political initiatives to far-sighted community economic development programs to global solidarity and elder statesman leadership could fill volumes. Gus Newport, as Mayor of Berkeley, 1979–1986 “The beauty of Gus,” said actor Danny Glover in an interview, “is that I trust him to elevate our story. When you spend time with someone with Gus’s history and character and listen to his stories, you are changed. I hope that a little of my story could resonate with others the way Gus’s stories have resonated with me and so many around the world.” As a young activist in 1962, leading the Monroe County Nonpartisan League, the largest civil rights group in his hometown of Rochester, NY, Gus shepherded the first successful police brutality case in federal court after the beating of a Black gas station attendant Rufus Fairwell who would win a financial settlement from the city. Daisy Bates, who led the NAACP campaign to integrate Little Rock’s Central High School in the late 1950s and now organizing in Rochester for the NAACP, introduced him to Malcolm X by phone. Gus and Malcolm worked to defend nine Black Muslims assaulted and arrested in a police raid on a Black Muslim Mosque in Rochester during a worship service. When Malcolm flew into Rochester, and landed on the tarmac on a cold February day, Gus was waiting in the airport surrounded “by a lot of white men in felt hats and white shirts and ties. When Malcolm walked in and asked, ‘who is Gus Newport.’ I raised my hand and said, “I am.” He said, “Young blood, you got the best-tapped telephone in America. This is all FBI around you.” He would go on to count Malcolm and Harlem Congress member Adam Clayton Powell as mentors. He assisted Malcolm in founding his Organization of Afro American Unity (OAAU). In February 1965, after Malcolm’s house was firebombed, Malcolm asked him to join him for a speech in Rochester about his situation. Returning to New York, “when we landed at LaGuardia, we were met by the chief of police of New York and the fire marshal. They accused him of firebombing his own home.” Four days later Malcolm was assassinated. Later Gus would help Malcolm’s widow Betty Shabazz with burial and financial support, including with a fundraiser for the family headlined by Dizzy Gillespie, Miles Davis, and Max Roach at the home of Sidney Poitier. Malcolm, Gus would later say, was “the greatest person I think I ever knew,” a “great teacher” and “one of the dearest friends I ever had.” Gus would move west after leaving a Department of Labor stint assigned to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, due to a distaste for the politics of President Nixon. A cousin helped him get work for the city of Berkeley, developing youth employment service programs and as a senior analyst in the City Manager’s office and Parks and Recreation department. In 1979, Gus was elected Berkeley Mayor, with the backing of the progressive Berkeley Citizens Action coalition on a platform of community economic control, serving two terms until 1986. “I never aspired to run for mayor,” he would relate. “I was talked into it by John George, the first African American elected to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, and Congressman Ron Dellums. Danny Glover (who met Gus while interning with the city of Berkeley) and Harry Belafonte (who he had known in New York) helped with my campaigns.” More tributes. Excellent article about Gus “in it for the long haul” published in 2020. Tribute to Gus in a Berkeley, California publication. Gus was the mayor of Berkeley from 1979-1986 and protected housing rights and established commercial rent control, was the first mayor to establish domestic partnership benefits, compared policy notes with contemporaries like Harold Washington and Bernie Sanders, and divested city funds from all companies that supported apartheid South Africa. Gus in conversation with Danny Glover about the Beloved Community, moderated by Rev. Dr. Dorsey Odell Blake, recorded February 13, 2023. Gus was an active leader in DSA. An Honorary Co-Chair. Read much more. Common Dreams. DSA is not in crisis, but we are in a new political moment. Will we keep building together or head back to the political wilderness?
By Emmett McKenna https://socialistforum.dsausa.org/issues/spring-summer-2023/is-dsa-really-in-crisis/ James Mumm
And Scot Nakagawa https://convergencemag.com/articles/toward-a-people-powered-democracy/ Concern about the mounting MAGA threat is percolating through left and progressive movements, and conversations and convenings are brewing. One such is the 22nd Century Conference: Forging a People-Powered Democracy, set to take place in Minneapolis, MN on July 6 – 9, 2023. Here, the conference organizers reflect on the strategies, alliances, stories and political imagination needed “to turn back the authoritarian tide and create a resilient and inclusive multiracial, feminist, and pluralistic democracy.” This is the latest in the Convergence “Organizing Against Autocracy” series. The struggle between authoritarian minority rule––largely by white Christian nationalists with a reactionary patriarchal, xenophobic, and racist agenda––and multiracial majorities committed to a pluralistic democracy is playing out at every level in the United States from school boards to statehouses, the US House of Representatives and the Supreme Court of the United States. The US is two years away from the possibility of federal autocracy if the MAGA-controlled Republican Party succeeds in electing the next president and taking control of the US Senate. Such an outcome would consolidate the last 60 years of authoritarian gains that have already eroded majority rule, and lead to sweeping structural changes cementing minority rule for years to come. The questions at the heart of this struggle between authoritarian minorities and multiracial majorities are fourfold: who is in, and who is out of, our democracy and economy; who deserves dignity; and who gets to decide? In a pluralistic democracy these questions are decided in free and fair elections, where majorities decide policy and minority opinions are protected by the courts without bias and the threats of state violence or extrajudicial violence. Issues addressed:
Read more; https://convergencemag.com/articles/toward-a-people-powered-democracy/  It’s meaningful to me when my colleagues in Congress take a stand for Palestinian rights, because it requires a lot of political courage in the face of attacks from those who want to maintain the unjust status quo. My colleague Rep. Jamaal Bowman has really stepped up, including by leading a recent letter calling on President Biden and the State Department to ensure that U.S. taxpayer dollars don’t fund human rights abuses by the Israeli government against the Palestinian people. While visiting the West Bank in 2021, Jamaal met with my sity (grandmother) and was then blocked at a military checkpoint near her house. He experienced in-person what it’s like for Palestinians to live in fear under constant military presence. And he connects it to his own experience as a Black man in the U.S. growing up with intimidating police forces targeting Black communities. Black people and Palestinians are criminalized just for existing. Our struggles for justice and liberation are interconnected, from the U.S. to Palestine and beyond. We all deserve human dignity and freedom. Human rights organizations around the world have recognized what Palestinians have said for decades: the Israeli government is oppressing the Palestinian people and systematically denying equal rights to Palestinians—in what constitutes apartheid and ethnic cleansing. And we know that the U.S. is complicit, sending billions of dollars each year to the Israeli military and silencing criticism of Israeli policies. That’s why we need to keep building power in the U.S. Congress to advocate for change. Let’s start by supporting members of Congress like Jamaal Bowman, who are taking the lead despite being targeted for speaking up. Thank you so much. In solidarity, Rashida June, 2023. Please note; At the request of a reader, the following notice has been added. The above post was from fund raising letter from the Congresswoman. We did not include the asking for funds because we do not wish to engage in the requirements of of finance regulations for funding. We are not a 501 c3. We believe the above use is appropriate. And, we find that the above qualifies as Fair Use as described in law and the regulations of our blog. 10. Fair Use Guidelines for Quoting Other Articles and Posts If you are ever unsure about whether you are on weak ground regarding fair use guidelines and quoting others’ writing, you should check out the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s discussion of copyright laws. The EFF writes: Short quotations will usually be fair use, not copyright infringement … if you are commenting on or criticizing an item someone else has posted, you have a fair use right to quote. The law favors ‘transformative’ uses — commentary, either praise or criticism, is better than straight copying — but courts have said that even putting a piece of an existing work into a new context (such as a thumbnail in an image search engine) counts as ‘transformative.’ We have transformed the post by eliminating the fundraising, The Electronic Frontier Foundation also has a broader legal guide for bloggers posted on its site More Democrats than Republicans voted for the Biden-McCarthy deal. Here’s why.
By Harold Meyerson American Prospect JUNE 1, 2023 - There are nine more Republicans in the House of Representatives than there are Democrats, but last night, there were 16 more Democrats who voted for the debt ceiling deal than there were Republicans. Seventy-eight percent of House Democrats voted to pass it, while just 68 percent of the Republicans did. Of the many ways to look at this disparity, let’s start with this one: The deal did far less than the Democrats had feared, while, correspondingly, it did far less than the Republicans had hoped. Perhaps the more historically illuminating contrast, though, is that between where the Democrats were at during the last debt ceiling deal, in 2011, and where they’re at today. The 2011 deal was an economic disaster that Democrats joined Republicans in abetting. Despite unemployment having only inched down from its double-digit 2009 apogee, the Obama administration had become committed to debt reduction, and came to agreement with Republicans on a deal that mandated cutting close to a trillion dollars over the next ten years. The deal ensured that the recovery from the 2008 financial crash would proceed by dribs and drabs, condemning millennials, in particular, to stumble through the decade with far less purchasing power and life options than their elders had when they were young. And yet, it was the political pushback from the young that prompted the Democrats’ escape from the straitjacket of fiscal orthodoxy. It provided a forum for Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren to call for new versions of New Deal economics, a call to which Biden and most congressional Democrats responded by backing the neo-Rooseveltian Build Back Better bill and, when they couldn’t pass that, at least passing massive public investments in green energy production and infrastructure construction. Which is why Biden’s approach to the Republicans’ demands was nothing like Obama’s. Instead of a decade of cuts, the current deal goes for just two years, at a vastly smaller dollar amount. That creates the possibility that should the Democrats hold the White House and Senate in 2024 and win back the House, they can (and surely will) return to the still-to-be-enacted agenda of 2021, on which they will be campaigning next year as well (with the signal addition of national legislation re-legalizing abortion). Biden and the Dems will still have to put the concessions made in yesterday’s deal into a broader context if they’re to hold the party’s progressive base. The Pipeline Payoff to Joe Manchin can be justified to those who pay attention to such things as a key to helping the Democrats hold on to their Senate majority in the next election, but to the majority of voters who aren’t political junkies, that will fall flat. A more effective case is to acknowledge it was a noxious deal, but when put against Biden’s overall climate-related record—in particular, the new spending on green energy—it is a fetid but small potato. Unfortunately, Biden has little if any rhetorical capacity to articulate how transformative his achievements have been, which just makes surrenders and shortcomings like the Manchin deal stand out all the more. My sense is that all the Democrats who voted last night—the Againsts as well as the Fors—felt some level of relief that the concessions were markedly short of what they could have been, and that the default was being avoided. My sense is also that all the Republicans who voted last night felt a corresponding frustration that they had labored so loudly and brought forth such a mouse. That may begin to explain why there were fewer Republican yes votes than Democratic ones last night; the other reasons—gerrymandered districts, right-wing media, white straight male Christian nationalist panic, [your suggestion here]—await further elucidation. ...Read More https://prospect.org/blogs-and-newsletters/tap/2023-06-01-why-democrats-rescued-debt-ceiling-deal/ What Could’ve Happened Here
A high profile new graphic novel asks the question, ‘What if the attack on the U.S. Capitol succeeded?’ BY PAUL BUHLEMAY 26, 2023 The first installment of a four-issue, foundation-funded, high-profile comic series bears the subtitle, “What if the attack on the U.S. Capitol succeeded?” That pretty much capsulizes the storyline. I am a little surprised, and not just as a nonfiction comics editor and critic, that so little discussion of that dark possibility seems to still linger in the air. Perhaps we all breathed such a deep sigh of relief when the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol failed that we chose not to think in those terms. The pursuit of criminal indictments against at least some of the perpetrators seems to have taken up all the oxygen. In 1/6: The Graphic Novel, we have a well-paced narrative in the superhero or noir styles of mainstream comic books today, which makes sense, given the graphic novel’s creators—Alan Jenkins, Gan Golan, and Will Rosado. That it comes with publicity urging the reader to check out additional resources available in a study and action guide underlines the seriousness of the project, but it also points to a certain limitation: the absence of anything like humor or irony. The Adventures of Unemployed Man (2012), by Golan and Erich Origen, a projection of superheroes out of work, had an abundance of both and proved str See it here. https://progressive.org/magazine/what-couldve-happened-here-buhle/ MAY 24, 2023
Today, the Democratic Socialists of America is issuing a freedom advisory for the people of Florida in opposition to the fascist actions of its politicians. We recognize the travel advisory issued by Florida Senator Rick Scott as part of a continued pattern of red-baiting and attacks against Black organizations like the NAACP in our country’s history. Scott’s “socialist travel advisory” is a mocking response to the NAACP rightfully warning people about the openly hostile laws created and upheld by Florida Senator Rick Scott and Governor Ron DeSantis that target African Americans, people of color, and LGBTQ+ individuals. While we disagree that the Biden administration is attempting to erase capitalism, the Democratic Socialists of America openly acknowledge our goal of replacing capitalism with a more just and democratic social and economic system. The billionaire class cuts essential social services such as education and social security, demands workers work harder for less pay, pollutes our air and water and drives climate change, promotes racist police violence, and uses a culture of hyper-individualism that puts us against each other and alienates us from the kinds of collective, democratic organizations necessary to challenge those in power and win the rights we all deserve. Reactionaries like Senator Scott have always opposed democratic socialists like Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, who fought for the civil rights and dignity of Black people, poor people, and workers of all races. Under the authority of elected officials like Senator Scott and Governor DeSantis, Florida has:
We know that capitalism is inherently opposed to freedom. A society where the vast majority of our lives is spent working for someone else’s profit is not free. A society where a person can only have food, housing, or healthcare if it is profitable for someone else to provide it to them is not free. A society where humans are powerless to fight an ongoing mass extinction and where our movement across land is criminalized is not free. They fear us because of the future we promise. Join us in the fight for our lives and against the fascism that promises to destroy everything we hold dear. Another world is possible. Review by Leo Casey
Excerpt. Related flaws Strategic Thinking, Past and Present Womack’s theory is not without insights. It is important to think strategically about labor organizing, and to prioritize organizing work and drives that can have the greatest impact. Disruption can create leverage for working people, and disruption on a mass scale, affecting various sectors of the economy, can yield greater leverage. Serious thought should be given on how to amass and deploy leverage won through disruptive strikes and job actions. None of this is entirely new or foreign to the U.S. labor movement. There have been numerous organizing initiatives over the last two decades—undertaken by Change to Win, the Teamsters, UNITE HERE, the Communications Workers of America, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, the United Food and Commercial Workers, the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union, and more recently, independent unions—that focused on the logistics sectors: transportation, distribution, and communications. What is missing is not a theory of why it is important to organize Amazon, Apple, Google, Microsoft, and Walmart, but a critical inventory of these efforts—what successes they have had, where and why they have fallen short, and what could be done to move them forward. Similarly, the most forward-looking contemporary union organizing employs strategic planning and campaigns rooted in the insights found in Labor Power and Strategy, with an eye to identifying and exploiting the vulnerabilities of recalcitrant employers. Disruptive strikes and job actions are key points of exposure for an employer. But they are by no means the only potential weaknesses that unions can target. Strategic campaigns build community support, employ political leverage, attack brand reputations, generate consumer boycotts, organize shareholder revolts against management, and use social media pressure. The more of these tactics that can be brought to bear, and the more they work in tandem, the greater the pressure on the employer, and the more likely a campaign will end in victory. One of the responses in Labor Power and Strategy, “Thirty-Two Thousand Hogs and Not a Drop to Drink” by Gene Bruskin, provides a brief account of one successful strategic campaign in this vein, undertaken by the UFCW and workers in the world’s largest slaughterhouse against the meat processing and packing corporation Smithfield. After many years of unsuccessful efforts to win union recognition against an employer that flouted labor law, the UFCW organized a strategic campaign using many of the tactics listed above, which led to an employer agreement to halt its anti-union actions and victory. This example highlights the limitations of Womack’s singular focus on creating leverage through disruptions of production: strategic campaigns are designed to employ many different types of leverage against employers, most of which are external to the production in Womack’s theory are revealed when it is applied to labor history, including the two historic strikes that demarcate the period of U.S. labor strength. The 1936–37 sit-down strike targeted factories that were indispensable for the manufacture of cars across General Motors’ operations. Womack discusses at some length the UAW’s organization of the strike—especially its decision to focus on the factory in Flint—as an illustration of how his theory works in practice. Read more in Dissent. Spring, 2023. Leo Casey is a veteran teacher union leader and the author of The Teacher Insurgency: A Strategic and Organizing Perspective. Published in Dissent. Spring. 2023.
We, the North Star Steering committee are asked to discuss ( and potentially endorse) the convention resolutions transforming the size of the NPC, and of the Steering Committee of the NPC. We share this excerpt for your consideration and interest. The Resolution is here. ( In two parts) Proposal Compendium The initial 2023 Convention Compendium is now available. DSA members can now review all of the Convention proposals in the Compendium and submit Amendments to proposals. Amendments are due June 28, 2023. Proposed amendment. Article VIII. National Political Committee Section 1. The National Political Committee (NPC) shall be the collective leadership and the highest decision-making body of the organization between meetings of the Convention. It shall meet at least four times a year. Section 2. The members of the NPC shall be one three representatives of the Youth Section and 1648 delegates elected at the national convention. Of the elected members, no more than eight twenty-five shall be men and at least fiveseventeen shall be racial or national minority members of DSA. In the event that these minority positions are not filled at the Convention, the position(s) shall be filled by the NPC, except that only minority members of DSA may be elected to fill such vacancies. In case of other such vacancies, except a vacancy of the Youth Section Representative, the NPC shall appoint a member of the organization in good standing to serve until the next Convention. No person shall serve simultaneously on the National Staff and the NPC. Section 3. The National Political Committee shall elect a Steering Committee (SC) and may remove members of the SC or elect a new SC for any reason. It shall be constituted as follows: It shall be composed of the five thirteen people who shall be elected by the NPC from among its at-large members, and the including at least one Youth Section representative to the NPC. It shall include no more than three seven men and at least three people one person of color. The National Director and the Youth Section Organizer shall be ex officio members, without vote, of the SC. The SC shall be responsible for decision-making between meetings of the NPC and for the supervision of all offices and staff of the organization. It shall be responsible for planning meetings and agendas for the NPC and for coordinating the work of the committees of the NPC. A quorum of the SC shall be half of its voting members. It shall meet at least bimonthly, in person or by conference call. In person meetings of the SC shall be open to all members of the organization. However, the SC may hold executive sessions if 60% of its members vote to do so in order to discuss personnel and related financial matter Section 4. The at-large members of the NPC shall act as liaisons to the Commissions and the Regional, State and Local organizations as prescribed by the Bylaws. The NPC shall have responsibility for staff, finances, publications, and education. Section 5. A quorum of the NPC shall be more than half of its members. The NPC shall assume office immediately upon its election to serve a two-year term or until its successors are elected. Section 6. Meetings of the NPC shall be open to all members of the organization. However, the NPC may hold executive sessions if 60% of its members vote to do so in order to discuss personnel and related financial matters. Section 7. An NPC member may be removed for malfeasance or nonfeasance by a two-thirds vote of the NPC, with nonfeasance defined to include unexcused absences from two or more consecutive meetings. Section 8. The NPC SC shall be responsible for hiring and discharging staff as necessary no more than three men and at least one person of color. The National Director and the Youth Section Organizer shall be ex officio members, without vote, of the SC. The SC shall be responsible for decision-making between meetings of the NPC and for the supervision of all offices and staff of the organization. It shall be responsible for planning meetings and agendas for the NPC and for coordinating the work of the committees of the NPC. A quorum of the SC shall be half of its voting members. It shall meet at least bimonthly, in person or by conference call. In person meetings of the SC shall be open to all members of the organization. However, the SC may hold executive sessions if 60% of its members vote to do so in order to discuss personnel and related financial matters. The meetings of the SC shall be chaired by one of the National Co-Chairs of the DSA. Democratize DSA 2023 Authors: Sam L., New York City & Renée P., East Bay Companion Constitution and Bylaws Change Whereas, the proposed “Democratize DSA” constitutional change would, if it passes, increase the size of the NPC from 17 to 51, which would create 34 new vacancies upon the adjournment of the 2023 DSA Convention, Whereas, in the event of NPC vacancies, DSAʼs constitution provides that the NPC should “appoint . . . member[s] of the organization in good standing to serve until the next Convention,” Whereas, the 2023-2025 NPC will be tasked by the DSA constitution with filling the vacancies that would be created by the passage of the “Democratize DSA” constitutional change if it is enacted by this Convention, Whereas, the purpose of the “Democratize DSA” constitutional change is to make DSAʼs national leadership more democratic, deliberative, accountable, and representative of DSAʼs membership, which purposes will only be served if the expanded NPC is elected in the same way as the NPC members elected at this convention; Therefore, be it resolved, in the event of the passage of the “Democratize DSA” constitutional change, within 90 days of the adjournment of the 2023 DSA Convention, the NPC shall fill the newly created vacancies in a manner as close as possible to that used by delegates at the 2023 National Convention to elect the seventeen sitting NPC members. This method shall be:
Be it additionally resolved that in the event of the passage of the “Democratize DSA” constitutional change, the powers and duties given to the National Political Committee by Resolution 33 of the 2017 National DSA Convention, as amended by the 2021 National DSA Convention, shall be reassigned to the Steering Committee of the National Political Committee. The entire resolution is here. Proposal Compendium The initial 2023 Convention Compendium  About Immigration
Regardless of where we come from, what our color is, or how we worship, every family wants the best for their children. But today, certain politicians and their greedy lobbyists are putting all of our families at risk. They rig the rules to enrich themselves and avoid paying their fair share of taxes, while they defund our schools and threaten seniors with cuts to Medicare and Social Security. Then they turn around and point the finger for our hard times at new immigrants—even tearing families apart and losing children. When we reject their scapegoating and come together across racial differences, we can make this a nation we’re proud to leave all of our kids—whether we’re white, Black, or brown, from down the street or across the globe. Ian Haney-Lopez. Merge Left. Weaponizing the debt limit should not be normalized
President Biden should do “whatever it takes” to avoid an economic catastrophe Recent reports indicate that the debt limit “X-date” could come as early as June 1. On this X-date, the U.S. Treasury will no longer have enough cash in its accounts at the Federal Reserve to meet all the legal spending obligations legislated by Congress. These obligations include paying holders of U.S. Treasury debt, Social Security checks, and reimbursements to doctors treating patients covered by Medicare and Medicaid. The normal way of dealing with such a cash shortfall—selling new debt issues and depositing the proceeds into the Treasury’s account—is exactly what the debt limit will make impossible on that date. If the X-date comes and nothing is done except the federal government fails to fulfill its spending obligations, economic calamity will ensue: People who depend on programs like Social Security and food stamps will suffer, and the spillover effects on the larger economy would certainly cause a recession—and a truly horrible one if the stalemate lasted for any significant amount of time. The factor forcing this terrible outcome would not be any implacable economic reality, it would simply be Congressional Republicans weaponizing the absurd political institution that is a statutory debt limit that can only be adjusted through acts of Congress. With a responsible Congress, the debt limit would be a silly inconvenience to policymaking. But twice in the past 12 years, Republican-led efforts in Congress have brought the nation to a near-crisis—and the current near-crisis could still graduate into a real crisis in coming weeks. In 2011 (the last instance of protracted debt limit brinkmanship), the GOP demands for large spending cuts did mammoth damage to the living standards of U.S. families by sabotaging the economic recovery from the Great Recession and financial crisis of 2008–09. This time around, the GOP demands are not just for recovery-damaging spending cuts, but also for a complete do-over on already passed legislation; Speaker McCarthy’s recently released list of demands includes rolling back student debt relief as well as the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) climate provisions and enhanced enforcement against the nation’s rich tax cheats. The cuts to IRA climate provisions would be literally catastrophic—the act’s climate provisions are the only thing keeping the U.S. economy on a path of needed emissions reductions to contain the worst damages of climate change. Further, hundreds of billions of dollars of planned private investment have already begun based on the incentives provided in the IRA. Stripping these climate provisions away would snap the economy back to a path toward climate catastrophe and be a huge waste of society’s resources. |
Principles North Star caucus members
antiracismdsa (blog of Duane Campbell) Hatuey's Ashes (blog of José G. Pérez) Authory and Substack of Max Sawicky Left Periodicals Democratic Left Socialist Forum Washington Socialist Jacobin In These Times Dissent Current Affairs Portside Convergence The Nation The American Prospect Jewish Currents Mother Jones The Intercept New Politics Monthly Review n+1 +972 The Baffler Counterpunch Black Agenda Report Dollars and Sense Comrades Organizing Upgrade Justice Democrats Working Families Party Poor People's Campaign Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism Progressive Democrats of America Our Revolution Democracy for America MoveOn Black Lives Matter Movement for Black Lives The Women's March Jewish Voice for Peace J Street National Abortion Rights Action League ACT UP National Organization for Women Sunrise People's Action National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights Dream Defenders |
RSS Feed