Why I'm Caucusing for Sanders
Nicholas Johnson
The Gazette
January 26, 2016, p. A8
Some 40 years ago in Washington, D.C., I agreed to host a series of TV interviews with presidential candidates. Questioning the first few proved problematic. Their responses to questions seemed to come from tape cassettes implanted in their skulls. They’d heard the questions before, and we’d heard their answers.
How to make their performances more revealing? The possibilities of someone tipping over a candidate’s chair, or unexpectedly throwing them a baseball, were attractive but rejected by the producer.
The ultimate solution was found in a question I have put to presidential candidates then, and throughout the years since, often in Iowa living rooms. “Senator, let’s make two assumptions. One, those of us here think you are ‘right on the issues.’ And two, you are elected president. Now tell us, why will coal mine owners have less ability to maintain coal miners’ unsafe working conditions than they do now?” (One could substitute the military-industrial complex’s control of defense budgets, or oil company subsidies.)
Some candidates would stare blankly. Some would become angry. Apparently, few if any had ever thought about the problem, and none offered a solution.
When I put the question to Senator Barack Obama in 2007, he replied, “Well, Nick, I’ve been a community organizer.” I’d visited with Saul Alinsky and read his books. Both Obama and I were familiar with Heather Booth’s Midwest Academy in Chicago, where I’d learned community organizing. I too quickly leapt to the conclusion that Obama got it. He would become our national community organizer-in-chief! I was mistaken.
Senator Sanders not only gets it, he makes it explicit. He rejects chants of “Bernie, Bernie” by saying, “this is not about ‘me,’ it’s about ‘we.’” “This campaign is about creating a movement of millions of Americans fighting to transform our country with demands that government represent all of us,” he’s said.
Of course, like most Americans, I like his specific proposals — increased minimum wage, health care for all, higher taxes on the wealthy, avoiding unnecessary wars, tuition-free college, jobs improving infrastructure, and many more.
But far more important than the specifics is his belief that government should serve all the people, the socio-economic bottom as well as the top 1 percent. That a government of the major donors, by the lobbyists, for the wealthy is not what the founders had in mind. That when candidates of either the Democratic or Republican parties’ establishments talk of proposals, the results look a lot more like capitulation in the cause of campaign contributions than compromise on behalf of the American people.
Of course, I’m impressed with the more conventional things said about Sen. Sanders. His authenticity. His enormous, enthusiastic crowds, and millions of supporters. That he not only talks against Wall Street and PAC funding, he walks the walk by refusing their money — while raising enough from small donors. He’s had experience as a mayor, congressman and senator, one who understands the federal government’s working and impact. Up against Republican candidates, he’s as easily (or more) electable as the others. He has the best “unfavorable” numbers.
But most important to me? His lifelong advocacy that governments exist for the 99 percent. His ability to answer my 40-year-old question; his knowledge of what’s required before a government can serve the people. A campaign that’s already begun building that citizen organization.
Are you in the 1 percent? There are establishment candidates for you. If not, whether Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Green, it serves your interest and mine if Sen. Sanders’ vision and voice comes booming out of Iowa’s precinct caucuses, loud and clear across America throughout 2016. It’s up to you.
__________
Nicholas Johnson of Iowa City has held presidential appointments during the administrations of three U.S. presidents, and been involved in presidential elections since 1952. He maintains nicholasjohnson.org and FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com. Comments mailbox@nicholasjohnson.org
[This column appeared online as Nicholas Johnson, "Why I'm Supporting Bernie Sanders for President," The Gazette (online), January 26, 2016, 10:51 a.m.]
____________________
Why Support Sanders
Nicholas Johnson
The Daily Iowan
January 28, 2016, p. A4
This is the story of how I came to support Sen. Bernie Sanders. It’s a true story — or at least as true as a fading memory can provide.
Some 40 years ago in Washington, I agreed to host a series of TV interviews with presidential candidates. Questioning the first few proved problematic. Their responses to questions seemed to be coming from tape cassettes implanted in their skulls. They’d heard the questions before, and we’d heard their answers.
How to make their performances more revealing? The possibilities of someone tipping over a candidate’s chair or unexpectedly throwing them a baseball were attractive but rejected by the producer.
The ultimate solution was found in a question put to presidential candidates then, and throughout the years since, often in Iowa living rooms. “Senator, let’s make two assumptions. One, those of us here think you are ‘right on the issues.’ And two, you are elected president. Now tell us, why will coal-mine owners have less ability to maintain coal miners’ unsafe working conditions than they do now?” (One could substitute the military-industrial complex’s control of defense budgets or oil-company subsidies.)
Some candidates stared blankly. Some became angry. Apparently, few if any had ever thought about the problem, and none offered a solution.
When I put the question to Sen. Barack Obama in 2007, he replied, “Well, Nick, I’ve been a community organizer.” I’d visited with Saul Alinsky and read his books. Both Obama and I were familiar with Heather Booth’s Midwest Academy in Chicago, where I’d learned community organizing. I too quickly leapt to the conclusion that Obama got it. He would become our national community organizer-in-chief. I was mistaken.
Sanders not only gets it, he makes it explicit. He rejects chants of “Bernie, Bernie” with “this is not about ‘me,’ it’s about ‘we.’ ” “This campaign is about creating a movement of millions of Americans fighting to transform our country with demands that government represent all of us,” he has said.
I like his proposals for increased minimum wage, health care for all, avoiding unnecessary wars, tuition-free college, justice for African-Americans, and equal pay for women, among others.
I’m impressed with his authenticity, enthusiastic crowds, rejection of PACs, and funding a campaign with millions of supporters making $27 average contributions. He’s had experience as a mayor, congressman, and senator. He understands the federal government’s working and impact. Up against Republican candidates, he’s as (or more) electable than the others. He has the highest Net favorability numbers.
But most important to me? His belief that a government of the major donors, by the lobbyists, for the wealthy is not what the founders had in mind. That the establishment’s proposals, whether from Democrats or Republicans, look a lot more like capitulation in the cause of campaign contributions than compromise on behalf of the American people.
It’s his lifelong advocacy that governments exist for the 99 percent; his knowledge of what’s required before a government can serve the people — that the people must lead before their leaders will follow. His campaign has begun building that citizen organization.
Are you in the 1 percent? You have many establishment candidates to choose from. Otherwise, whether you’re a Republican, Democrat, Libertarian, or Green, it serves your interest and mine if Sanders’ vision and voice comes booming out of Iowa’s precinct caucuses, loud and clear.
[This column appeared online as Nicholas Johnson, "Why I Support Sanders," The Daily Iowan (online), January 28, 2016.
Earlier, yet a third variation of this material appeared in the Iowa City Press-Citizen as as Nicholas Johnson, "Sanders the Right Democrat for Caucus," Iowa City Press-Citizen (online), January 21, 2016, 4:04 p.m., and in the hardcopy edition as Nicholas Johnson, "Sanders the Right Democrat for Caucus," Iowa City Press-Citizen, January 22, 2016, p. A7, a copy of which is embedded in this blog site in an entry headed, "Why I'm Caucusing for Sanders and You Should Too," January 22, 2016.]
# # #
Sanders the Right Democrat for Caucus
Nicholas Johnson
Iowa City Press-Citizen, January 22, 2016, p. A7
This is the story of how I came to support Sen. Bernie Sanders. It’s a true story — or at least as true as a fading memory can provide.
Some 40 years ago in Washington, I agreed to host a series of TV interviews with presidential candidates. Questioning the first few proved problematic. Their responses to questions seemed to be coming from tape cassettes implanted in their skulls. They’d heard the questions before, and we’d heard their answers.
How to make their performances more revealing? The possibilities of someone tipping over a candidate’s chair, or unexpectedly throwing them a baseball, were attractive but rejected by the producer.
The ultimate solution was found in a question put to presidential candidates then, and throughout the years since, often in Iowa living rooms. “Senator, let’s make two assumptions. One, those of us here think you are ‘right on the issues.’ And two, you are elected president. Now tell us, why will coal mine owners have less ability to maintain coal miners’ unsafe working conditions than they do now?” One could substitute the military-industrial complex’s control of defense budgets, or oil company subsidies.
Some candidates would stare blankly. Some would become angry. Apparently, few if any had ever thought about the problem, and none offered a solution.
When I put the question to Sen. Barack Obama in 2007, he replied, “Well, Nick, I’ve been a community organizer.” I’d visited with Saul Alinsky and read his books. Both Obama and I were familiar with Heather Booth’s Midwest Academy in Chicago, where I’d learned community organizing. I too quickly leapt to the conclusion that Obama got it. He would become our national community organizer-in-chief! I was mistaken.
Sen. Sanders not only gets it, he makes it explicit. He rejects chants of “Bernie, Bernie” with “this is not about ‘me,’ it’s about ‘we.’” “This campaign is about creating a movement of millions of Americans fighting to transform our country with demands that government represent all of us,” he’s said.
Of course, like most Americans, I like his specific proposals — increased minimum wage, healthcare for all, higher taxes on the wealthy, avoiding unnecessary wars, tuition-free college, jobs improving infrastructure and many more.
But far more important than the specifics is his belief that government should serve all the people, the socioeconomic bottom 50 percent as well as the top 1 percent. That a government of the major donors, by the lobbyists, for the wealthy is not what the founders had in mind. That when candidates of either the Democratic and Republican parties’ establishment talk of proposals, the results look a lot more like capitulation in the cause of campaign contributions than compromise on behalf of the American people.
Of course, I’m impressed with the more conventional things said about Sen. Sanders. His authenticity. His enormous, enthusiastic crowds, and millions of supporters. That he not only talks against Wall Street and PAC funding, he walks the walk by refusing their money, while raising enough from small donors. He’s had experience as a mayor, congressman and senator, one who understands the federal government’s working and impact. Up against Republican candidates, he’s as equally electable as the others. He has the best “favorability” numbers.
But most important to me? His lifelong advocacy that governments exist for the 99 percent. His ability to answer my 40-year-old question; his knowledge of what’s required for a government to serve the people. A campaign that’s already begun building that citizen organization.
Are you in the 1 percent? There are establishment candidates for you. If not, whether Republican, Democrat, Libertarian or Green, it serves your interest and mine if Sen. Sanders’ vision and voice come booming out of Iowa’s precinct caucuses, loud and clear across America throughout 2016. It’s up to you.
_______________
Nicholas Johnson of Iowa City has held presidential appointments during the administrations of three U.S. presidents, and been involved in presidential elections since 1952. He maintains nicholasjohnson.org and FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com.
# # #
September 13, 2015, 8:00 a.m.
Note: Looking for the blog about the UI president search? Click here.
Note: For a documentary related to this blog post ("Three Steps to Creating a Caring Community"), see Michael Moore's "Where to Invade Next." Here is a review from the Toronto Film Festival.
Create a Caring Community
Nicholas Johnson
The Gazette, September 13, 2015, p. C3
What does it take to create a civic society, a sense of community, a preservation of culture?
Our Declaration of Independence asserts that every American is “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
The World Bank reports 2.2 billion people try to subsist on less than $2.00 a day. Our Census Bureau says 45 million Americans (half are children) live below the poverty threshold.
Poverty, whether here or abroad, can put quite a crimp in one’s life, liberty and happiness. Indeed, a Princeton study found you can buy additional happiness -- up to $75,000. (Additional income adds nothing.)
But even in a capitalist (or our corporatist) country, true happiness -- self-actualization, sense of self-worth, a sense of community – requires more than money.
We’re aware of income inequality, the gap between us and the 1%. But what of the happiness gap?
Let’s say roughly 30% of Americans confront challenges and conditions – in addition to finding too much month at the end of the money – that limit their sense of self-fulfillment.
Clearly, we provide them some government and volunteer assistance. Equally clearly, it’s not enough. And when money’s tight the support is cut. That is, in part, due to the political power of the “I’ve got mine, Jack,” “Greed is good,” “I built that” persuasion. [Photo credit: St. Elizabeth Catholic Church, Altadena, California.]
Adam Edelen, Kentucky’s state auditor of public accounts, said “it is not Christian” to cut health coverage; “maybe this side of the aisle should put down the books of Ayn Rand and pick up the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.”
The Pope and many religious leaders agree. Others draw similar conclusions from basic ethics and morality.
That ought to be enough. Unfortunately, it’s not. Little rationale beyond trickle-down is required to enact billionaires’ tax breaks. Programs for the 30% have to prove their tax savings – or increased businesses’ profits.
Fortunately, this proof is often available – even if it should not need to be. Most of Senator Bernie Sanders’ proposals are not only supported by 50-to-80% of America’s voters, they have been adopted by most industrialized nations, and found to produce more wealth than they cost.
The 30% are not just homeless drug addicts. Some belong to highly skilled trades, or hold graduate degrees, like a Ph.D. who can’t find a teaching position.
Some cities find the cost of housing for the homeless is less than the total costs of keeping them on the streets.
Mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent crimes cost taxpayers, impact families, and reduce inmates’ education and potential productivity. Tuition-free college education built our nation’s economy after World War II with the GI Bill, California and New York’s later, and Germany’s today. The cost of four years in prison would pay for four years in college. Drug courts are cheaper than prison.
The 30% includes those who can’t afford desperately needed dental and medical care. And yet universal single-payer health care costs less and returns more than emergency room visits – or even health insurance.
Concerned about the economy? It’s 70% driven with consumer spending. Minimum wage increases will be spent immediately. A full employment, federal government as employer of last resort policy, would create substantial improvements to our communities, increase the skills and self-esteem of those now welfare-dependent, and give the economy a boost.
There are similar approaches to other challenges of the 30%. Persons of color who, regardless of socio-economic status, must daily deal with systemic racism. Single mothers earning minimum wage. Persons with physical or mental disabilities. College grads, burdened with debt. Those who’ve lost homes or farms. Those addicted to alcohol or tobacco. Residents of East Los Angeles, without cars, who provide services to those in West LA – after hours on buses.
How do we create a sense of community? We focus first on “doing well by doing good” for the 30%. Then on the “middle class.” And last on the top 1%. Our only problem has been that we had it backwards.
_______________
Nicholas Johnson, a native of Iowa City and former FCC commissioner, maintains http://nicholasjohnson.org and http://FromDC2Iowa.blogspot.com. Comments: mailbox@nicholasjohnson.org
# # #
