My Point of View by Jennifer Vogt-Erickson

The first Democratic presidential debate is tonight, and I hope people tune in to see the current field of candidates. While I will support whoever eventually wins the nomination, I am most excited about Bernie Sanders’ campaign and the issues he’s advancing.

It was Hillary Clinton’s husband whose first presidential campaign was known for the motto, “The economy, stupid.” That was 20-odd years ago, and it’s just as true today. The shifts that had been underway for about a decade at that time have become more glaring as wealth continues to be funneled upward.

Today, one family — the Waltons, who put the “Wal” in Walmart — owns more wealth than the bottom 130 million Americans combined. Together with others in the top 0.1 percent, they own almost as much as the bottom 90 percent of Americans.

This is profound inequality, surpassing the Gilded Age and the 1920s, and it’s the result of political choices. While the global economy and technological advancements have played a role, tax policies favoring the wealthy over ordinary workers have made inequality much worse than if fairer policies had been in place all this time.

A lagging minimum wage has also reduced the incomes of millions of workers. The federal hourly minimum wage of $7.25 hasn’t increased a penny since 2009. More than a quarter of the workforce earns less than $11 an hour.

A full-time job should pay more than poverty wages. Bernie’s target is a living wage of $15 an hour by 2020. A solid majority of Americans — 63 percent — favor this goal.

Bernie also calls for free tuition at public colleges and universities and a reduction in student loan interest rates. He would pay for it with a fraction of a percent transaction tax on stock market trades. This would make post-secondary education more affordable for families and reduce student debt. He wants to give people who are currently paying off student loans options to refinance at lower interest rates as well.

Bernie is committed to reducing the influence of big money in politics. U.S. elections, particularly after the Citizens United decision of 2010, have devolved into a system in which billionaires can pump huge sums of money into campaigns, directly or indirectly supporting candidates of their choosing. Bernie has introduced an amendment to overturn this disastrous Supreme Court ruling, and he favors public funding of elections. In a healthy democracy, attracting wealthy donors shouldn’t determine if a candidate is electable.

Bernie is the people’s candidate, not the plutocrat’s hand puppet. He successfully raised $26 million from a large base of small donors in the third quarter of 2015, nearly matching Hillary’s fundraising efforts of $28 million drawn from a mix of large and small donors. He eschews the support of super PACs, though that doesn’t mean none will promote him against his wishes. The main super PAC backing Hillary is Priorities USA Action, and it raised $16 million from big donors in the first half of 2015. (This is still a far cry from the $103 million that Right to Rise, Jeb Bush’s allied super PAC, raised in the same period.)

There are many other reasons I like Bernie, but most importantly, he has been pushing the government to respond to the immense challenges of climate change, which is emerging as the signature issue of our time. It threatens to inundate low-lying coastal areas (bye bye, Marco Rubio’s Miami), exacerbate flooding and droughts, and disrupt food production. Perhaps the U.S.’s developed economy can manage these impacts, but other countries will not be able to, increasing regional conflicts and displacing millions of people who had little to do with releasing heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the first place.

Bernie’s focus will be on developing green energy sources, particularly solar and wind, and increasing energy efficiency. He also favors taxing carbon and methane emissions. A carbon tax is welcomed by some of the world’s largest oil companies, including BP and Royal Dutch Shell. Even ExxonMobil’s VP of corporate strategic planning said last year, “The risk of climate change is clear, and the risk warrants action.”

The season for doubt is over, but many climate change deniers remain in office, and some are running for president. The politicians who refuse to acknowledge that climate change is a real threat are unfit to make responsible choices for our children’s and grandchildren’s futures. If they don’t change their minds, don’t vote for them.

The Democratic debates promise to have solid policy discussions rather than distracting buffoonery and showmanship. Some people won’t find it as entertaining, but I hope a lot of people find it valuable.

 

Jennifer Vogt-Erickson is a member of the Freeborn County DFL Party.