Senator Bernie Sanders is threading the needle. Lacking the delegates to win the Democratic nomination for President, saddled with shortsighted supporters who are willing to peddle Fox News nuttiness and undermine the Democratic Party’s effort to resist Trumpism and hold the White House for four more years of progressive opportunity, Sanders is somehow parlaying what we might view as fleeting political capital into wins on the Democratic Party platform. Looking at the draft platform released yesterday by the Democratic National Committee, Jeff Stein at Vox summarizes new positions added to accommodate the Vermont Senator’s ideas:
- Keep bank executives off Federal Reserve boards;
- Stop banks from picking the credit agency that rates them;
- Close tax loopholes for hedge fund managers, fairly tax wealthy estates, and “ensure millionaires can no longer pay a lower rate than their secretaries”;
- Use revenue from those closed tax loopholes to build infrastructure and create jobs;
- Allow the United States Postal Service to offer “affordable banking options”—hey! We talked about that good idea back in October as a way that the Sanders revolution could get South Dakotans out of the traps set by the payday lenders!
Sanders may lose the nomination and come out a big winner on policy. Heck of a trick, Bernie!
He does not have as many delegates as she does so first she threw out the plank against the TPP then he thinks he can win something else but she will throw that out over time as well. We are now stuck with the Washington insider going against the outsider on a year when the public likes the outsiders. America absolutely can not get better or good this way.
Party platforms are forgotten before the ink is dry.
Story last week said the two sides were meeting to discuss platform and it did not sound like there was much animosity between the parties.
Dems need to unify all over and sweep wingnuts out the door. I haven’t seen a rethuglican pol, in the last 20 years that wasn’t completely overmatched by time and circumstances. Forget the newbies-they’re worse, yet.
Democrats need to demand these platform declarations are held. I do not see anything about a two state solution though. Without that, it is constant war.
That Post Office banking revival would be the ticket for rural areas in South Dakota in particular. We only need look at the Lakota Fund in Kyle to see how that can be a success. If these platform ideas are not put into ink, as Coyote says, but rather etched in stone, that could be the start of a successful campaign to put a Democrat into the White House. These are progressive ideas that with the full throated of all elected officials and those who want to be, could be an absolute winner. All of you Clintonites that want to see a Democrat in the White House, push your down ticket candidates to adopt while demanding your nominee and congress to follow the same.
BTW Clintonites, Clinton does not have the nomination assured yet as she does not have the delegates needed. She may not make the cut and then we would have our man from north of the Yucatan as our nominee. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/02/the-fbi-interviewed-hillary-clinton-today-the-next-two-weeks-are-huge/
What was Wild Bill trying to negotiate with Lynch in the plane? Interesting times.
jerry-the last thing Hillary wanted was for Bill to stop and chat with Lynch. There is nothing to negotiate. There will be no charges. This was an unforced error to give Trump something to talk about.
For the conspiracy theorists, why did Bill need to meet with Lynch on a tarmac to “negotiate”? Couldn’t Bill have picked up the phone and called Lynch any day of the week?
Clearly, Slick Willie was trying to have an affair with the AG. Isn’t that his M.O.? Nothing to see here.folks.
Clearly, Slick Willie was trying to have an affair with the AG. Isn’t that his M.O.? Nothing to see here, folks.
I will agree with Jerry that electing a whole raft of down-ticket Sanders Democrats is an important part of pushing the Sanders agenda. More Sanders people in positions of power at state and local levels means more Sanders people who can drive fundraising in the 2018 Congressional races and the 2020 Presidential race. Those Sanders people can push Congressional candidates and President Clinton herself when they come seeking re-election: You want us to raise money for you? Show us your action on Post Office banking, tax loopholes, and infrastructure jobs.
jerry,
Does the Lakota Fund make personal short term unsecured loans like the payday lenders?
A month from now Clinton will be behind in the polls. She will either give up her candidacy or have it taken from her at the convention. A Sanders/Warren or Warren/Sanders ticket will emerge.
I’m a Sanders Democrat. I’d love some magic to happen to make Sanders our nominee. Magic will not happen. Even Sanders does not believe that magic will happen. Like Sanders, sensible Americans will work to ensure that Donald Trump does not become President and the woman we do elect as President will carry out more of Sanders’s agenda than the next President would have if Sanders had not launched and fought his remarkable campaign within the ranks of the Democratic Party, which is the only sufficiently strong and organized vehicle to secure the change the 99% need, including the reforms mentioned in the original post that Sanders has pushed into the draft platform.
I am not looking for magic. Bill Clinton was a good politician. Hillary is not. When you have to have people from the party go out and try to convince the electorate that your candidate is honest. Well—that is a hard hill to climb. Maybe Biden will step in. But it is my feeling that a month from now there is a strong possibility that changes will be made. Just my thoughts Cory. Trump would be a disaster for our country. He is a true Republican. He says what Republicans think but have always been too scared to say and rightly so.
Magic, high drama, you name it—not happening. There is more chance that insurgents will deny Trump and nominate Ryan or Romney than there is that anyone upsets the DNC apple cart. Sanders is getting the conversation he wants.
Did Sanders ever officially register as a Democrat, or is he technically an Independent still?
It is political suicide to switch candidates in the middle of a campaign. You need to look back to when Senator McGovern dumped his vice presidential candidate Senator Thomas Eagleton in 1972. The Democrats were in an impossible position with Nixon and dumping Eagleton all but caused a civil war within the party.
Sen. McCain nearly made the same mistake with Sarah Palin when he realized who she really was and her political limitations and liability.
Switching candidates is also a reflection of not only a candidates ability to make decisions, it is a reflection of the party and their lack of leadership and unity.
Hillary has won the majority of the popular and delegate votes in this primary, do you now simply dismiss her as if she never existed without a fight from her and her supporters. How do you think Hillary supporters will vote or not vote if she is somehow knocked off the ticket.
The republican party is falling apart at the seams, heck they can’t even get convention speakers, and they will be leaving Cleveland as a severely divided party.
Democrats can’t afford to follow the path of a republican divided convention and hope to win the White House.
For those that think there will be a Sanders/Warren or Warren/Sanders ticket, forget it. Warren has already campaigned with Hillary and she hasn’t said a word about supporting Sanders, that I know of.
Doc, can we speculate you are a democrat? :)
and Hillary’s “untruth-I-ness” issue is a red herring brought to you by red blooded republicans.
PolitiFact has judged 174 statements by Trump so far, and found only 16 to be either true or mostly true. Seventy have been judged false, and another 34 rated “Pants on Fire,” referring to claims that are “not only inaccurate but also ridiculous,” according to Ms. Holan.
With Clinton, PolitiFact has judged 218 statements and rated 112 true or mostly true, 24 false, and three “Pants on Fire.”
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2016/0701/How-2016-became-the-fact-check-election
Roger C. I don’t think so, but pay day lenders are hardly unsecured. I think they may have auto-deposits from folks’ employers, followed up with garnishments of wages when 500-1500% interest gets out of control and other more responsible states to the welfare of their residents have stepped in and cold-cocked the industry.
when you don’t own anything but a little equity in a car, the wages and car are rich sources of “security” thus the industries’ dramatic state-wide efforts as we see here by unblinking erin ageton, lisa furlong and this last turkey cory featured… all shills for their bosses. gross.
Leslie…this is a blog, so of course you are free to speculate ;^).
“Too many Americans believe our political system is so flawed that their voices are no longer heard.
Demagogues are tapping into this disillusionment, twisting it into nativism, bigotry, and scapegoating — and creating more discord in our already divided country.
It’s now clearer than ever that our public institutions urgently need repair and revitalization. At this crossroads for our country, we must fight back — and put democracy reform where it belongs: at the heart of our national agenda.”
The Brennan Center for Justice
Robert: interesting! Vermont does not include party affiliation in voter registration:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/feb/23/bernie-sanders-democrat/
Hmmm. The folks working on the platform need to be Democrats….unless they are from Vermont…or perhaps Minnesota (DFL)?
According to the Politifact article I cite, Sanders identified himself as a Democrat on his FEC papers. Party affiliation is pretty much self-identification.
One small step for Sanders, one giant leap for Sanders Democrats ;^).
Roger, here is the best way I think, to describe the Lakota Fund. It may not be for everyone, but it certainly has helped many people with the way they make funds available. https://www.culturalsurvival.org/publications/cultural-survival-quarterly/united-states/lakota-fund-local-institutions-access-credit
IF, if Sanders is out, there remains a 3rd way. Two former two-term governors who’ve also successfully run businesses, and run on a platform that they and government stay out of your personal business.
http://thereformedbroker.com/2016/07/03/the-case-for-gary-johnson/
Also watch the interview.
You really want our government run postal service to become banks??? Guess what people, not everyone pays their loans back. How many more people will the government have to hire to deal with all of that?
Why not, Stu? The Postal Service offered a no-frills bank for about 55 years, through the 1960’s:
https://about.usps.com/publications/pub100/pub100_025.htm
The Postal Service inspector general estimates that offering check-cashing, ATMs, bill-pay, and maybe even low-interest loans could bring USPS $8.9 billion more in revenue:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-post-office-banking-20160102-story.html
$8.9 billion could hire plenty of loan collectors. It would also save the poor a lot of money:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2015/10/29/should-the-post-office-also-be-a-bank/
93% of the world’s postal services offer some sort of banking services:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/10/bernie-sanders-lets-turn-post-offices-into-banks/411589/
Amazing what practical solutions we can find when we set aside partisanship and look at facts.
Really, is the government efficient?? The world has changed a lot since the 60’s. I can guarantee that it would be a boondoggle of epic proportions if the Postal Service starts banking. I think it would work in rural areas, maybe, but you have small community banks that can already handle those areas if the over regulating government would let them. The reason most people take payday loans is they have fallen on hard times or have over extended themselves. Not the people you want getting many loans from the post office. There are reason for high rates, although I agree some are far too high and that is to make of for the sure losses, which would happen with the post office lending.
The USPS, while a government agency, has to fund itself through its operations. No one else delivers my letters and packages more reliably and affordably. A British study in 2012 deemed USPS the most efficient postal service among 20 major nations. You also assume the USPS will hand out loans to anyone who walks in the door without a credit check or other accountability. You also keep ignoring that the USPS banking plan isn’t just about payday loans but about providing an array of banking services that would save low-income folks significant money. Your assertion of imminent boondoggle are more talk-radio bromide without real evidence or analysis.
A big difference between you and I, is that you trust the government to be efficient far more than I do and that scares me a little for a person who is involved in politics. I also know the banking business at least the rural community banking business and I dare say they can handle things much more efficiently than our government. Would the Postal Service make bad loans, YES. Would they collect on those bad loans or would there end up being issues like with the government run student loan program? Where does it end? Would you like the government to eventually just do everything? Why not have them put up box stores to compete with Walmart? Maybe car dealerships?
The big question, is it the government’s function to take care of specific groups of people? Does the government open up other businesses to aid the low-income? Are we now crossing into a welfare program, which there seems to be plenty of already?
“You also assume the USPS will hand out loans to anyone who walks in the door without a credit check or other accountability.”
Many of the people receiving loans from same day lenders are extremely high risk, and I’d have to imagine that some will lose out on the ability to get loans as a result of the proposed shift to the USPS. One may argue that this is beneficial to them in the long term, and I agree, but how do you address their cash flow issues in the short term? Further, what sort of rates does the USPS provide that doesn’t venture into usury but at least provides taxpayers some protection from high risk loans to people with horrible credit history?
Stum makes that same old mistake – personifying “the government” and then he says he doesn’t trust this fictional being. He forgets that our “government” is run by human beings, just as private enterprises are run by human beings. While it may be true that not all human beings are competent or capable, that has absolutely nothing to do with where they work or the jobs they carry out.
To assert the human beings that we choose to run our government are for that reason alone incompetent or incapable is lazy thinking. Perhaps Stum’s inability to see other human beings who work for our government as real people with a variety of skills comes from the us-them garbage repeatedly spewed out by right wing anti-government talk show hosts.
And Stum’s labeling people as incompetent merely because they belong to a group, such as some government office like the post office, appears to be an attempt to make Stum feel better about himself by dehumanizing and marginalizing other folks based solely on their employment by his fantasy monster “government.”
Quit it!! Quit with your holier than thou crap! Walk into many government offices (especially Federal) and tell me that many of those workers would be working in the private sector, with their work habits and attitudes. Don’t just say things because you think you know what I am thinking, deal with some of these agencies and people. Do you deal with any of these agencies or government offices??? Do you work with any government programs and the regulations and bureaucracy? If you do, you can come on here an honestly say that the Postal Service can handle banking?
Dicta, I am sorry but people with horrible credit history do not deserve loans. They have proven time and time again that they are not responsible enough. Don’t lump in the smattering of people who have had a bad luck with a job as they have a period of bad credit with people who are typically getting payday loans either. Those are totally different people. Do people with horrible history of abusing kids get to work in daycares??
If you hired the appropriate people, I’m sure Burger King could handle I-Banking. The more appropriate question is whether or not the juice is worth the squeeze.
Dicta, sorry, I think I misread your post. I thought you were lobbying for people with bad credit history to get loans from the Post Office, but I don’t think that was your premise.
It wasn’t. My concern is that if the USPS becomes a sort of “new lender” for extremely high risk clientele, how does one reasonably guard against the high risk of default these people present. And what happens to those who are denied but still have short term cash flow issues?
Stumpy, did it ever occur to you that many people have bad credit because of payday loan sharks? They get taken in by smooth talkers who then give them the shaft with triple digit interest rates. Of course you didn’t.
Stum, you just don’t seem to get it. The people who work for our “government” are no better or worse than the people who work for private businesses. Each person deserves to be judged on his or her own merit, not based upon the silly personification of our “government.”
These people who take a job with the government consist of our friends, family members, and neighbors. They are not culled from whatever groups you are prejudiced against and they deserve your respect and thanks for their efforts, rather than being belittled and demonized based on a false stereotype.
Really Stum, if you try you might be able to see other people as decent hardworking folks regardless of where they happen to be employed (and regardless of their political or religious views). Try it and you might find that you actually feel better about yourself by treating people you have never met with respect rather than disdain.
Nope. Why were they seeing a payday loan shark as you stated, because they already have terrible credit and know they couldn’t get a bank loan. Of course, anytime you throw out a large net, you are going to catch something, so your statement holds true but to a very, very small percentage of people.
There is just some stupid out there that can’t be fixed.
Do you get your Social Security check on time Mr. Stumcfar? I bet you do, now that is efficient would you not agree?
Bearcreekbat, do you work with any government agencies (federal)?? I am not talking your local FSA, but the bigger city government offices? If not, your comments are just made up things to make you feel good. I deal with several of these offices and the incompetence is sad. You can hire a lot of these people if you want, but I know many of them would never make it in the private sector. That isn’t being mean, that is reality. Grudznick, thanks for pointing out Mike from Iowa. jerry, no I do not get a social security check, a lot years to work yet. Not sure how setting up SS payments has any relevance to making and collecting loans though.
Stumpy-Grudz nailed your A$$, not mine.
W/O knowing BCB’s background, I am confident saying he has been there, seen more and done more than you will ever have time for.
Stum, my personal history is really none of your business and is irrelevant to my point – people who work for local, state and federal governments are for the most part decent, competent, caring and talented human beings, no better or worse than people who work in the private sector.
That said, you might be surprised to learn that for most of my professional career I did battle with local, state and federal agencies on behalf of private citizens who were getting screwed because some bureaucrats were not inclined to obey laws that were enacted to protect citizens. I know and have met many individuals working in the government and in the private sector who were incompetent, and many more who were quite talented. I also know that an individual’s worth is not better or worse simply because he or she works for the government or engages in public service, instead of the private sector.
Seriously, if you stop stereotyping people you might find much less anger in your relationships and blog comments. Try it, you might like it.
“my personal history is really none of your business”, means I really don’t know what I am talking about, just making blind assumptions. To your point, my relationships are none of your business, but anger has no part in them. I am rather easy to get along with. I work with many different races and people of varying backgrounds, from farmers to out of work factory workers, to quite wealthy and get along with all of them. But it certainly does give me an insight to many lifestyles, priorities and work ethic along with working with Federal and State Government Agencies and it is quite easy to see the waste of money and the inefficiencies, including many workers.
Stum, good for you if you don’t treat people you deal with in your real life in a manner implied by your frequent vitriolic blog comments where you stereotype and demonize groups of other people you have never met.
But that does leave the question open as to why you treat strangers on the blog in such an angry, condemning and hostile manner, while apparently accepting and getting along with the folks you meet in real life.
If having someone disagree with your statements and calling you out on some things is hostile and condemning, then I am guilty as charged.
Stu, the problem is that you’re not really disagreeing with the things I say. You’re certainly not responding to the evidence I present you that the Postal Service has provided service like this in the past and could do so again, like most postal services around the world. The problem is that, presented with such evidence, you retreat and repeat your usual trained anti-government slogans and word games to keep anyone from noticing that you aren’t making any progress in proving your point. You’re just trying to provoke us with distractions, not trying to learn and advance the discussion.
I am pretty sure that the Postal System banking that our country once had was a savings bank and not a lending bank. The people you want the Post Office to serve would not be helped with a savings bank, so to throw out your statements that the Post Office has done this before is not correct. Lending is far more labor intensive animal than collecting savings. Would the Post Offices be regulated to death with the same rules that rural banks have to conform too? Would it become ridden with bad debt, of course it would if its true purpose would be to have a spot for those who can’t get bank funding to get their financing. Would there be a few success stories of people who pulled their life together because they got a loan that they really didn’t qualify for, sure. Does the billions of dollars invested to find space for lenders and collectors and new computer systems etc., justify how many it will truly help, I highly doubt it. Would you as an elected leader want to take that chance? It sounds like you would.
You’re still wrong, Stu, arguing with someone who isn’t saying what you’re trying to rebut. Short-term lending is one part of the entire package of basic banking services that the Postal Service can offer. Postal services around the world do it; you have yet to show anything to back up your ideological assumption that government (and don’t forget: the government is us!) can’t do anything right. You haven’t shown any hard data to refute the evidence I provided that banking services would add revenue to the USPS, not break it. USPS says they can do it; were I in Congress, I would ask for their business analysis, not just vote on my ideological assumptions. I thus would be a far better Congressman than you, Stu… if either of us were running for Congress.
Mr. Stumcfar, you were talking about how bad the government is and how bad the postal system is as well. I naturally came to the question as you must be either an old fart or just a Trumpeter or both. As you have such little faith in the way government works, maybe you should quit your job and find someplace else to work.
The people you want the Post Office to serve would not be helped with a savings bank,
Then why the hell do you wingnuts insist on medical savings accounts as a placebo for gubmint funded healthcare? If poor people had any money, they would spend it to feed and clothe themselves and their kids. Something your side can’t get through your thick heads.
No, you guys have been talking about how the Postal Service would be a place for those without bankable credit to go to instead of getting payday loans and you said earlier that Post Offices did this in the past and it worked well. I simple stated that they have never been in the lending business and pointed out all the expenses that would go with entering that niche. I am not interested in another government funded welfare program, to provide banking services for those who can not get them through regular banks. If not through lending, how would they make money? Checking account charges? ATM fees? They may as well go to a bank and get free checking. As far as lending, they would have to have rates and terms lower than competitive banks to attract the good customers and I don’t believe that is the government’s purpose. Obviously a different philosophy. You always seem to think I am like Mike in Iowa and have no background or knowledge in any of this (ideological assumptions). I have experience, both working with Federal government agencies and in the banking industry and probably know more than you when it comes to this topic. jerry, I have never once said that the postal service is bad, you are mixing me up with someone else. I can tell you that government regulations are making it much, much more difficult and time consuming for everyone to get a home loan and some of the new regulations in the hopper will make consumer borrowing far more cumbersome for everyone if they are enacted. I have worked with the SBA and have witnessed first hand the inefficiencies and lack of knowledge and professionalism by numerous workers. I am not a Trump person either. I do believe he is the lesser of two evils, but not by much. You I believe must be a Sanders supporter who has great ideas with absolutely no way to pay for them!