The following is the transcript of a
speech Sen. Bernie Sanders delivered at Georgetown University on November 19th
outlining what the term democratic socialism means to him, as well as his plans
to deal with the national security threat posed by ISIS.
In his inaugural remarks in January
1937, in the midst of the Great Depression, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt
looked out at the nation and this is what he saw. He saw tens of millions of
its citizens denied the basic necessities of life. He saw millions of families
trying to live on incomes so meager that the pall of family disaster hung over
them day by day. He saw millions denied education, recreation, and the
opportunity to better their lot and the lot of their children. He saw millions
lacking the means to buy the products they needed and by their poverty and lack
of disposable income denying employment to many other millions. He saw
one-third of a nation ill-housed, ill-clad, ill-nourished.
And he acted. Against the ferocious
opposition of the ruling class of his day, people he called economic royalists,
Roosevelt implemented a series of programs that put millions of people back to
work, took them out of poverty and restored their faith in government. He
redefined the relationship of the federal government to the people of our
country. He combated cynicism, fear and despair. He reinvigorated democracy.
He transformed the country. And that is what we have to do today.
And, by the way, almost everything he
proposed was called “socialist.” Social Security, which transformed life for
the elderly in this country was “socialist.” The concept of the “minimum wage”
was seen as a radical intrusion into the marketplace and was described as
“socialist.”
Unemployment insurance, abolishing child labor, the 40-hour work
week, collective bargaining, strong banking regulations, deposit insurance, and
job programs that put millions of people to work were all described, in one way
or another, as “socialist.” Yet, these programs have become the fabric of our
nation and the foundation of the middle class.
Thirty years later, in the 1960s,
President Johnson passed Medicare and Medicaid to provide health care to
millions of senior citizens and families with children, persons with
disabilities and some of the most vulnerable people in this county. Once again
these vitally important programs were derided by the right wing as socialist
programs that were a threat to our American way of life. That was then. Now is
now.
Today, in 2015, despite the Wall Street
crash of 2008, which drove this country into the worst economic downturn since
the Depression, the American people are clearly better off economically than they
were in 1937. But, here is a very hard truth that we must acknowledge and
address. Despite a huge increase in technology and productivity, despite major
growth in the U.S. and global economy, tens of millions of American families
continue to lack the basic necessities of life, while millions more struggle
every day to provide a minimal standard of living for their families. The
reality is that for the last 40 years the great middle class of this country
has been in decline and faith in our political system is now extremely low.
The rich get much richer. Almost
everyone else gets poorer. Super PACs funded by billionaires buy elections.
Ordinary people don’t vote. We have an economic and political crisis in this
country and the same old, same old establishment politics and economics will
not effectively address it.
If we are serious about transforming
our country, if we are serious about rebuilding the middle class, if we are
serious about reinvigorating our democracy, we need to develop a political
movement which, once again, is prepared to take on and defeat a ruling class
whose greed is destroying our nation. The billionaire class cannot have it all.
Our government belongs to all of us, and not just the one percent.
We need to create a culture which, as
Pope Francis reminds us, cannot just be based on the worship of money. We must
not accept a nation in which billionaires compete as to the size of their
super-yachts, while children in America go hungry and veterans sleep out on the
streets.
Today, in America, we are the
wealthiest nation in the history of the world, but few Americans know that
because so much of the new income and wealth goes to the people on top. In
fact, over the last 30 years, there has been a massive transfer of
wealth—trillions of wealth—going from the middle class to the top one-tenth of
1 percent—a handful of people who have seen a doubling of the percentage of the
wealth they own over that period. Unbelievably, and grotesquely, the top
one-tenth of 1 percent owns nearly as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent.
Today, in America, millions of our
people are working two or three jobs just to survive. In fact, Americans work
longer hours than do the people of any industrialized country. Despite the
incredibly hard work and long hours of the American middle class, 58 percent of
all new income generated today is going to the top one percent.
Today, in America, as the middle class
continues to disappear, median family income is $4,100 less than it was in
1999. The median male worker made over $700 less than he did 42 years ago,
after adjusting for inflation. Last year, the median female worker earned more
than $1,000 less than she did in 2007.
Today, in America, the wealthiest
country in the history of the world, more than half of older workers have no
retirement savings—zero—while millions of elderly and people with disabilities
are trying to survive on $12,000 or $13,000 a year. From Vermont to California,
older workers are scared to death. “How will I retire with dignity?” They ask?
Today, in America, nearly 47 million
Americans are living in poverty and over 20 percent of our children, including
36 percent of African American children, are living in poverty—the highest rate
of childhood poverty of nearly any major country on earth.
Today, in America, 29 million Americans
have no health insurance and even more are under-insured with outrageously high
co-payments and deductibles. Further, with the United States paying the highest
prices in the world for prescription drugs, 1 out of 5 patients cannot afford
to fill the prescriptions their doctors write.
Today, in America, youth unemployment
and underemployment is over 35 percent. Meanwhile, we have more people in jail
than any other country and countless lives are being destroyed as we spend $80
billion a year locking up fellow Americans.
The bottom line is that today in
America we not only have massive wealth and income inequality, but a power
structure which protects that inequality. A handful of super-wealthy campaign
contributors have enormous influence over the political process, while their
lobbyists determine much of what goes on in Congress.
In 1944, in his State of the Union
speech, President Roosevelt outlined what he called a second Bill of Rights.
This is one of the most important speeches ever made by a president but,
unfortunately, it has not gotten the attention that it deserves.
In that remarkable speech this is what
Roosevelt stated, and I quote: “We have come to a clear realization of the fact
that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and
independence. Necessitous men are not free men.” End of quote. In other words,
real freedom must include economic security. That was Roosevelt’s vision 70
years ago. It is my vision today. It is a vision that we have not yet achieved.
It is time that we did.
In that speech, Roosevelt described the
economic rights that he believed every American was entitled to: The right to a
decent job at decent pay, the right to adequate food, clothing, and time off
from work, the right for every business, large and small, to function in an
atmosphere free from unfair competition and domination by monopolies. The right
of all Americans to have a decent home and decent health care.
What Roosevelt was stating in 1944,
what Martin Luther King, Jr. stated in similar terms 20 years later and what I
believe today, is that true freedom does not occur without economic security. People
are not truly free when they are unable to feed their family. People are not
truly free when they are unable to retire with dignity. People are not truly
free when they are unemployed or underpaid or when they are exhausted by
working long hours. People are not truly free when they have no health care.
So let me define for you, simply and
straightforwardly, what democratic socialism means to me. It builds on what
Franklin Delano Roosevelt said when he fought for guaranteed economic rights
for all Americans. And it builds on what Martin Luther King, Jr. said in 1968
when he stated that; “This country has socialism for the rich, and rugged
individualism for the poor.” It builds on the success of many other countries
around the world that have done a far better job than we have in protecting the
needs of their working families, the elderly, the children, the sick and the
poor.
Democratic socialism means that we must
create an economy that works for all, not just the very wealthy. Democratic
socialism means that we must reform a political system in America today which
is not only grossly unfair but, in many respects, corrupt. It is a system, for
example, which during the 1990s allowed Wall Street to spend $5 billion in
lobbying and campaign contributions to get deregulated.
Then, ten years later,
after the greed, recklessness, and illegal behavior of Wall Street led to their
collapse, it is a system which provided trillions in government aid to bail
them out. Wall Street used their wealth and power to get Congress to do their
bidding for deregulation and then, when their greed caused their collapse, they
used their wealth and power to get Congress to bail them out. Quite a system!
And, then, to add insult to injury, we
were told that not only were the banks too big to fail, the bankers were too
big to jail. Kids who get caught possessing marijuana get police records. Wall
Street CEOs who help destroy the economy get raises in their salaries. This is
what Martin Luther King, Jr. meant by socialism for the rich and rugged
individualism for everyone else.
In my view, it’s time we had democratic
socialism for working families, not just Wall Street, billionaires and large
corporations. It means that we should not be providing welfare for
corporations, huge tax breaks for the very rich, or trade policies which boost
corporate profits as workers lose their jobs. It means that we create a
government that works for works for all of us, not just powerful special
interests. It means that economic rights must be an essential part of what
America stands for.
It means that health care should be a
right of all people, not a privilege. This is not a radical idea. It exists in
every other major country on earth. Not just Denmark, Sweden or Finland. It
exists in Canada, France, Germany and Taiwan. That is why I believe in a
Medicare-for-all single payer health care system. Yes. The Affordable Care Act,
which I helped write and voted for, is a step forward for this country. But we
must build on it and go further.
Medicare for all would not only
guarantee health care for all people, not only save middle class families and
our entire nation significant sums of money, it would radically improve the
lives of all Americans and bring about significant improvements in our economy.
People who get sick will not have to
worry about paying a deductible or making a co-payment. They could go to the
doctor when they should, and not end up in the emergency room. Business owners
will not have to spend enormous amounts of time worrying about how they are
going to provide health care for their employees.
Workers will not have to be
trapped in jobs they do not like simply because their employers are offering
them decent health insurance plans. Instead, they will be able to pursue the
jobs and work they love, which could be an enormous boon for the economy. And
by the way, moving to a Medicare for all program will end the disgrace of
Americans paying, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription
drugs.
Democratic socialism means that, in the
year 2015, a college degree is equivalent to what a high school degree was 50
years ago—and that public education must allow every person in this country,
who has the ability, the qualifications and the desire, the right to go to a
public colleges or university tuition free. This is also not a radical idea. It
exists today in many countries around the world. In fact, it used to exist in
the United States.
Democratic socialism means that our
government does everything it can to create a full employment economy. It makes
far more sense to put millions of people back to work rebuilding our crumbling
infrastructure, than to have a real unemployment rate of almost 10 percent. It
is far smarter to invest in jobs and educational opportunities for unemployed
young people, than to lock them up and spend $80 billion a year through mass
incarceration.
Democratic socialism means that if
someone works forty hours a week, that person should not be living in poverty:
that we must raise the minimum wage to a living wage—$15 an hour over the next
few years. It means that we join the rest of the world and pass the very strong
Paid Family and Medical Leave legislation now in Congress. How can it possibly
be that the United States, today, is virtually the only nation on earth, large
or small, which does not guarantee that a working class woman can stay home for
a reasonable period of time with her new-born baby? How absurd is that?
Democratic socialism means that we have
government policy which does not allow the greed and profiteering of the fossil
fuel industry to destroy our environment and our planet, and that we have a
moral responsibility to combat climate change and leave this planet healthy and
inhabitable for our kids and grandchildren. Democratic socialism means, that in
a democratic, civilized society the wealthiest people and the largest
corporations must pay their fair share of taxes.
Yes. Innovation,
entrepreneurship and business success should be rewarded. But greed for the
sake of greed is not something that public policy should support. It is not
acceptable that in a rigged economy in the last two years the wealthiest 15
Americans saw their wealth increase by $170 billion, more wealth than is owned
by the bottom 130 million Americans. Let us not forget what Pope Francis has so
elegantly stated; “We have created new idols. The worship of the golden calf of
old has found a new and heartless image in the cult of money and the
dictatorship of an economy which is faceless and lacking any truly humane
goal.”
It is not acceptable that major
corporations stash their profits in the Cayman Islands and other offshore tax
havens to avoid paying $100 billion in taxes each and every year. It is not
acceptable that hedge fund managers pay a lower effective tax rate than nurses
or truck drivers. It is not acceptable that billionaire families are able to
leave virtually all of their wealth to their families without paying a
reasonable estate tax. It is not acceptable that Wall Street speculators are
able to gamble trillions of dollars in the derivatives market without paying a
nickel in taxes on those transactions.
Democratic socialism, to me, does not
just mean that we must create a nation of economic and social justice. It also
means that we must create a vibrant democracy based on the principle of one
person one vote. It is extremely sad that the United States, one of the oldest
democracies on earth, has one of the lowest voter turnouts of any major
country, and that millions of young and working class people have given up on
our political system entirely.
Every American should be embarrassed that in our
last national election 63% of the American people, and 80% of young people, did
not vote. Clearly, despite the efforts of many Republican governors to suppress
the vote, we must make it easier for people to participate in the political
process, not harder. It is not too much to demand that everyone 18 years of age
is registered to vote – end of discussion.
Further, it is unacceptable that we
have a corrupt campaign finance system which allows millionaires, billionaires
and large corporations to contribute as much as they want to Super Pacs to
elect candidates who will represent their special interests. We must overturn
Citizens United and move to public funding of elections.
So the next time you hear me attacked
as a socialist, remember this: I don’t believe government should own the means
of production, but I do believe that the middle class and the working families
who produce the wealth of America deserve a fair deal. I believe in private
companies that thrive and invest and grow in America instead of shipping jobs
and profits overseas. I believe that most Americans can pay lower taxes—if
hedge fund managers who make billions manipulating the marketplace finally pay
the taxes they should.
I don’t believe in special treatment for the top 1
percent, but I do believe in equal treatment for African-Americans who are
right to proclaim the moral principle that Black Lives Matter. I despise
appeals to nativism and prejudice, and I do believe in immigration reform that
gives Hispanics and others a pathway to citizenship and a better life. I don’t
believe in some foreign “ism”, but I believe deeply in American idealism.
I’m not running for president because
it’s my turn, but because it’s the turn of all of us to live in a nation of
hope and opportunity not for some, not for the few, but for all. No one
understood better than FDR the connection between American strength at home and
our ability to defend America at home and across the world. That is why he
proposed a second Bill of Rights in 1944, and said in that State of the Union: “America’s
own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and
similar rights have been carried into practice for all our citizens.
For unless
there is security here at home there cannot be lasting peace in the world.” I’m
not running to pursue reckless adventures abroad, but to rebuild America’s
strength at home. I will never hesitate to defend this nation, but I will never
send our sons and daughters to war under false pretense or pretenses or into
dubious battles with no end in sight.
And when we discuss foreign policy, let
me join the people of Paris in mourning their loss, and pray that those who
have been wounded will enjoy a full recovery. Our hearts also go out to the
families of the hundreds of Russians apparently killed by an ISIS bomb on their
flight, and those who lost their lives to terrorist attacks in Lebanon and
elsewhere.
To my mind, it is clear that the United
States must pursue policies to destroy the brutal and barbaric ISIS regime, and
to create conditions that prevent fanatical extremist ideologies from
flourishing. But we cannot—and should not—do it alone.
Our response must begin with an
understanding of past mistakes and missteps in our previous approaches to
foreign policy. It begins with the acknowledgment that unilateral military
action should be a last resort, not a first resort, and that ill-conceived
military decisions, such as the invasion of Iraq, can wreak far-reaching
devastation and destabilize entire regions for decades.
It begins with the
reflection that the failed policy decisions of the past—rushing to war, regime
change in Iraq, or toppling Mossadegh in Iran in 1953, or Guatemalan President
Árbenz in 1954, Brazilian President Goulart in 1964, Chilean President Allende
in 1973. These are the sorts of policies do not work, do not make us safer, and
must not be repeated.
After World War II, in response to the
fear of Soviet aggression, European nations and the United States established
the North Atlantic Treaty Organization—an organization based on shared
interests and goals and the notion of a collective defense against a common
enemy. It is my belief that we must expand on these ideals and solidify our
commitments to work together to combat the global threat of terror.
We must create an organization like
NATO to confront the security threats of the 21st century—an organization that
emphasizes cooperation and collaboration to defeat the rise of violent
extremism and importantly to address the root causes underlying these brutal
acts. We must work with our NATO partners, and expand our coalition to include
Russia and members of the Arab League.
But let’s be very clear. While the U.S.
and other western nations have the strength of our military and political
systems, the fight against ISIS is a struggle for the soul of Islam, and
countering violent extremism and destroying ISIS must be done primarily by
Muslim nations—with the strong support of their global partners.
These same sentiments have been echoed
by those in the region. Jordan’s King Abdallah II said in a speech on Sunday
that terrorism is the “greatest threat to our region” and that Muslims must
lead the fight against it. He noted that confronting extremism is both a
regional and international responsibility, and that it is incumbent on Muslim
nations and communities to confront those who seek to hijack their societies
and generations with intolerance and violent ideology.
And let me congratulate King Abdallah
not only for his wise remarks, but also for the role that his small country is
playing in attempting to address the horrific refugee crisis in the region. A new and strong coalition of Western
powers, Muslim nations, and countries like Russia must come together in a
strongly coordinated way to combat ISIS, to seal the borders that fighters are
currently flowing across, to share counter-terrorism intelligence, to turn off
the spigot of terrorist financing, and to end support for exporting radical
ideologies.
What does all of this mean? Well, it
means that, in many cases, we must ask more from those in the region. While
Jordan, Turkey, Egypt, and Lebanon have accepted their responsibilities for
taking in Syrian refugees, other countries in the region have done nothing or
very little.
Equally important, and this is a point
that must be made—countries in the region like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar,
UAE—countries of enormous wealth and resources—have contributed far too little
in the fight against ISIS. That must change. King Abdallah is absolutely right
when he says that that the Muslim nations must lead the fight against ISIS, and
that includes some of the most wealthy and powerful nations in the region, who,
up to this point have done far too little.
Saudi Arabia has the 3rd largest
defense budget in the world, yet instead of fighting ISIS they have focused
more on a campaign to oust Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen. Kuwait, a
country whose ruling family was restored to power by U.S. troops after the
first Gulf War, has been a well-known source of financing for ISIS and other
violent extremists.
It has been reported that Qatar will spend $200 billion on
the 2022 World Cup, including the construction of an enormous number of
facilities to host that event—$200 billion on hosting a soccer event, yet very
little to fight against ISIS. Worse still, it has been widely reported that the
government has not been vigilant in stemming the flow of terrorist financing,
and that Qatari individuals and organizations funnel money to some of the most
extreme terrorist groups, including al Nusra and ISIS.
All of this has got to change. Wealthy
and powerful Muslim nations in the region can no longer sit on the sidelines
and expect the United States to do their work for them. As we develop a
strongly coordinated effort, we need a commitment from these countries that the
fight against ISIS takes precedence over the religious and ideological
differences that hamper the kind of cooperation that we desperately need.
Further, we all understand that Bashar
al-Assad is a brutal dictator who has slaughtered many of his own people. I am
pleased that we saw last weekend diplomats from all over world, known as the
International Syria Support Group, set a timetable for a Syrian-led political
transition with open and fair elections. These are the promising beginnings of
a collective effort to end the bloodshed and to move to political transition.
The diplomatic plan for Assad’s
transition from power is a good step in a united front. But our priority must
be to defeat ISIS. Nations all over the world, who share a common interest in
protecting themselves against international terrorist, must make the
destruction of ISIS the highest priority. Nations in the region must commit –
that instead of turning a blind eye — they will commit their resources to
preventing the free flow of terrorist finances and fighters to Syria and Iraq.
We need a commitment that they will counter the violent rhetoric that fuels
terrorism – rhetoric that often occurs within their very borders.
This is the model in which we must
pursue solutions to the sorts of global threats we face. While individual
nations indeed have historic disputes—the U.S. and Russia, Iran and Saudi
Arabia—the time is now to put aside those differences to work towards a common
purpose of destroying ISIS. Sadly, as we have seen recently, no country is
immune from attacks by the violent organization or those whom they have
radicalized.
Thus, we must work with our partners in Europe, the Gulf States,
Africa, and Southeast Asia—all along the way asking the hard questions whether
their actions are serving our unified purpose. The bottom line is that ISIS
must be destroyed, but it cannot be defeated by the United States alone. A new
and effective coalition must be formed with the Muslim nations leading the
effort on the ground, while the United States and other major forces provide
the support they need.
Bernie Sanders
(I-Vt.) was elected to the U.S. Senate in 2006 after serving 16 years in the
House of Representatives. He is the longest serving independent member of
Congress in American history. Elected Mayor of Burlington, Vt., by 10 votes in
1981, he served four terms. Before his 1990 election as Vermont's at-large
member in Congress, Sanders lectured at the John F. Kennedy School of
Government at Harvard and at Hamilton College in upstate New York. Read more at
his website.
From In These Times: BernieSanders: My Vision for Democratic Socialism in America
God, if there is one, bless Bernie Sanders. Why can't we have HIM as president?
ReplyDeleteGreat speech........... Exactly what should be done.................will he be able to accomplish those lofty goals if elected? of course not. Is he sincere? Possibly. He wants to win an election. Obama had me buffaloed. I really thought he was the guy! He talked a good game too.
ReplyDeleteThe powers that be (corporate america) that Bernie speaks of are deeply entrenched in the fabric of our government and our country now. One man or woman cannot undo what has been done to this once great country.
The only hope I held on to was a judicial branch beyond reproach. Was I being naive? Probably. It was more of a hope I held on to rather than being naive. I held on to that hope until they showed their true colors by voting to allow corporations to be treated the same an individuals. My jaw literally dropped when I heard their decision. Talk about paving the way to having our government sold to the highest bidders. What is most disturbing to me is the average American had no clue or paid attention for that matter what that decision meant to the quality of their lives from that day forward. Obviously our judicial system is already in the fold.
The Roman Empire crumbled from within from greed, immorality and power mad self interest with no thought of tomorrow. That, I believe is where we are headed. I hope to God, for the sake of our young I'm wrong and that it can be diverted somehow. Unfortunately, I think that train has left the station.