SANDERS, Bernie Sen

see BERNIE 2only socialist in congr

run pres 2016mod on inequality, student debt etc, // eliz warren

<div></div><div><a href="https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/watch-this-historian-call-out-davos-elite-to-their-faces-stop-talking-about-philanthropy-and-pay-higher-taxes/">https://www.alternet.org/2019/01/watch-this-historian-call-out-davos-elite-to-their-faces-stop-talking-about-philanthropy-and-pay-higher-taxes/</a></div><div>
</div><div>
</div><div><div>While the private jets have mostly left the airport outside of Davos, Switzerland following the conclusion of this year’s World Economic Forum, a little noticed exchange that took place during the annual gathering has picked up steam in recent days showing what it looks like when some of the world’s richest people are confronted by someone willing to call literal “bullshit” on the we-can-save-the-world-with-charity mantra that dominates among the global elite.</div><div>
</div><div>If the world’s richest and most powerful are worried about a so-called popular “backlash” in response to the global economic system they defend—and largely control—Rutger Berman, a Dutch historian and author of the book Utopia for Realists, during a panel last week titled “The Cost of Inequality,” said the pathway is not complicated. “The answer,” he said, “is very simple: Just stop talking about philanthropy, and start talking about taxes.”</div><div>
</div><div>“I mean we can talk for a very long time about all these stupid philanthropy schemes,” Bregman added. “We can invite [U2 frontman] Bono once more. But, come on, we’ve got to be talking about taxes. That’s it. Taxes, taxes, taxes. All the rest is bullshit in my opinion.”</div><div>
</div><div>Watch the following clip put out by Now This:</div><div>
</div><div> Embedded video</div><div>
</div><div>NowThis</div><div>?</div><div>@nowthisnews</div><div> ‘It feels like I’m at a firefighters conference and no one’s allowed to speak about water.’ — This historian wasn’t afraid to confront the billionaires at Davos about their greed</div><div>
</div><div>88.1K</div><div>4:33 PM - Jan 28, 2019</div><div>
</div><div>Also on the Davos panel with Bregman was Winnie Byanyima, executive director of Oxfam International. Just last week, as the WEF summit was just opening, Oxfam released a report on global inequality showing that just 26 billionaires now own as much wealth as the world’s 3.8 poorest billion people.</div><div>
</div><div>“We have a tax system that leaks so much, that allows $170 billion of money every year to be taken to tax havens and to be denied the developing countries that need that money most,” said Byanyima during the panel. “So we have to look at the business model, and we have to look at the role of governments to tax and plow back money into people’s lives.”</div><div>
</div><div>As the video clip began to go viral in the wake of the Davos’ gathering, the media team for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—who has continued to put global inequality and the idea of a “rigged” economy at the heart of his political message—snagged the central claims of Bregman’s remarks and on Tuesday put out this version:</div><div>
</div><div> Embedded video</div><div>
</div><div>Bernie Sanders</div><div>?</div><div>@SenSanders</div><div> We have a rigged tax code that has essentially legalized tax-dodging for large corporations and the world's wealthiest individuals. It is time to end these egregious loopholes and make the wealthy pay their fair share.</div><div>
</div><div>11.1K</div><div>12:18 PM - Jan 29, 2019</div><div>4,349 people are talking about this</div><div>Twitter Ads info and privacy</div><div>“We have a rigged tax code that has essentially legalized tax-dodging for large corporations and the world’s wealthiest individuals,” said Sanders. “It is time to end these egregious loopholes and make the wealthy pay their fair share.”</div></div><div>
</div><div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"></div></div><a href="http://www.alternet.org/economy/bernie-sanders-right-wing-ideology-rules-our-economy">http://www.alternet.org/economy/bernie-sanders-right-wing-ideology-rules-our-economy</a><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/sanders-energy-bill-2464667836.html">https://www.ecowatch.com/sanders-energy-bill-2464667836.html</a><h1 class="widgetheadline h1" style="margin: 10px 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; cursor: pointer; word-wrap: break-word; line-height: 22px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a class="widgetheadline-text custom-post-headline" href="https://www.ecowatch.com/sanders-energy-bill-2464667836.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-break: break-word; word-wrap: break-word; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; line-height: 31px;">Senators Urged to Join Bernie Sanders in Opposing Dirty Energy Bill</a></h1><div class="body js-expandable clearfix js-listicle-body js-update-url expanded" data-url="https://www.ecowatch.com/sanders-energy-bill-2464667836.html" data-headline="Senators Urged to Join Bernie Sanders in Opposing Dirty Energy Bill" data-elid="2464667836" style="margin: 10px; line-height: 24px;"><div class=" body-description"><div class="widget__brief">By Jessica CorbettAs Senate Democrats stay silent on an <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/senate-energy-bill-2462640079.html" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">energy bill</a> that environmental groups <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/21/advocates-praise-sen-sanders-and-call-senate-dems-follow-his-lead-opposing-dirty" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">call</a> "a pro-fracking giveaway to oil and gas interests that would commit America to decades more of dangerous fossil fuel dependence," <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/bernie-sanders" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Sen. Bernie Sanders</a> (I-Vt.) is receiving applause for speaking out against it."As a nation, our job is to move away from fossil fuels toward sustainable energy and energy efficiency. This bill does the opposite," Sanders <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/21/advocates-praise-sen-sanders-and-call-senate-dems-follow-his-lead-opposing-dirty" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">said</a> in a statement.</div><div class="js-appear-on-expand" style="transition: all 350ms; height: auto; overflow: hidden; opacity: 1;">Sanders' opposition to the bill was praised by environmental advocates who continue to pressure Democrats with thousands of phone calls to their Congressional offices."Once again, Bernie Sanders shows that he is a champion of the American people by reminding the Senate that clean renewable energy, not obedience to industry executives, is the future of our country," <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/21/advocates-praise-sen-sanders-and-call-senate-dems-follow-his-lead-opposing-dirty" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">said</a> Bill Snape, senior counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity.Food & Water Watch executive director Wenonah Hauter <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/21/advocates-praise-sen-sanders-and-call-senate-dems-follow-his-lead-opposing-dirty" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">called</a> on others lawmakers to follow Sanders' lead."By coming out in opposition to the dirty energy bill currently looming before the Senate, Senator Sanders has once again demonstrated the real progressive leadership that is too often hard to find in Washington," Hauter <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/21/advocates-praise-sen-sanders-and-call-senate-dems-follow-his-lead-opposing-dirty" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">said</a>. "With our climate and a livable future hanging in the balance, Senate Democrats need to wake up, state their sensible opposition to this foolish energy bill now, and ensure it doesn't see the light of day."Earlier this month, more than 350 green groups <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/10/350-groups-oppose-dirty-senate-energy-bill-would-promote-fossil-fuels-pollute" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">sent</a> a <a href="https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/organizational_sign-on_letter_opposing_senate_bill_1460_the_energy_and_natural_resources_act_of_2017.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">letter</a> to pressure Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) to oppose the bill. However, according to recent <a href="https://www.bna.com/democrats-caught-green-n73014461860/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">reporting</a> by Bloomberg, "no Democrat has publicly voiced opposition" to the legislation, which is nearly 900 pages, even though it "would entrench natural gas into the U.S. energy portfolio for years to come."The bill, Sanders said, "would make us more reliant on <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/fracking/" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">fracking</a> for natural gas for decades to come by expediting the review process for natural gas pipelines and liquefied natural gas. It would also provide millions of taxpayer dollars to research new offshore natural gas extraction techniques."Supporters of the legislation are quick to point to its power grid updates, as well as cyber security, public lands, and energy efficiency provisions. Some senators also see it as an opportunity to work across the aisle.Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), often considered one of the Senate's major <a href="http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Sheldon_Whitehouse_Environment.htm" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">advocates</a> for the environment, told <a href="https://www.bna.com/democrats-caught-green-n73014461860/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">Bloomberg</a>: "There's been no slaking of the thirst for bipartisan work because none's been available, and I think in energy, there are areas where we can work together… We're not going to agree on everything, but it's worth a try."Environmental advocates and organizations disagree, and said in their <a href="https://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/sites/default/files/organizational_sign-on_letter_opposing_senate_bill_1460_the_energy_and_natural_resources_act_of_2017.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">letter</a> to Schumer:<blockquote style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 1em 0px 1em 25px; border-left: 5px solid rgb(82, 149, 70); padding: 0px 0px 0px 25px;">No energy legislation is better than bad energy legislation that serves to increase our dependence on dirty fossil fuel production instead of advancing energy efficiency to reduce the amount of energy we utilize and building on successful policies to expand clean energy sources such as solar and wind.... In light of the current administration's overt efforts to make it easier for the fossil fuel industry to pollute our air and water, it is more essential than ever that Congress resist efforts to increase fossil fuel production.
</blockquote>"The Senate dirty energy bill would further Trump's extreme agenda by increasing fracking. Resisting Trump means resisting fossil fuels," <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/21/advocates-praise-sen-sanders-and-call-senate-dems-follow-his-lead-opposing-dirty" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">said</a> Ben Schreiber, a senior political strategist at Friends of the Earth."By opposing this bill, Senator Sanders continues to be a real climate leader in Congress," <a href="https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2017/07/21/advocates-praise-sen-sanders-and-call-senate-dems-follow-his-lead-opposing-dirty" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; word-wrap: break-word;">said</a> actor and environmental advocate Mark Ruffalo. "There can be no more trading off a few good conservation provisions in a bill for increased coal projects and fracking. We must transition swiftly to renewable clean energy. Our time is running out."</div></div></div>http://www.alternet.org/environment/senators-and-movement-leaders-introduce-100-percent-clean-energy-billhttps://mediamatters.org/research/2017/03/23/how-broadcast-networks-covered-climate-change-2016/215718...Bernie Sanders Brought Up Climate Change Four Times As Much As Hosts Did On ABC, CBS, And NBC Sunday Shows. On every Sunday show except Fox News Sunday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) brought up climate change significantly more often than the hosts themselves did. ABC’s This Week, CBS’ Face the Nation, and NBC’s Meet the Press aired a combined five segments in which the hosts brought up climate change, while Bernie Sanders brought up climate change 21 times during his appearances on those shows. Because our study counted only those segments where a media figure brought up or discussed climate change, those 21 segments were not counted in this study's overall network tallies....
http://www.alternet.org/education/education-victories-democrats-can-rally-around  =One high-profile politician who has displayed such ambition is Vermont senator and Democratic presidential candidate <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=bernie+sanders" style="text-decoration: none;">Bernie Sanders</a>. After politicians in Paris claimed triumph at the end of the UN summit, <a href="https://berniesanders.com/press-release/paris-climate-accord-goes-nowhere-near-far-enough-sanders-says/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">Sanders issued a press release with another view</a>: “While this is a step forward it goes nowhere near far enough. The planet is in crisis. We need bold action in the very near future and this does not provide that," Sanders declared. “We've got to stand up to the fossil fuel industry and fight for national and international legislation that transforms our energy system away from fossil fuel as quickly as possible."Two days before sending out the press release, Sanders had announced a <a href="https://berniesanders.com/press-release/sanders-releases-people-before-polluters-climate-plan/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">"People Before Polluters" climate action plan</a> to cut U.S. carbon pollution 40 percent by 2030, and more than 80 percent by 2050, by taxing carbon polluters, repealing fossil-fuel subsidies and making huge investments in clean energy.Cities can and have taken the lead where federal policy lags. San Diego, California made a trailblazing move shortly after the summit when it passed an ordinance <a href="http://www.kpbs.org/news/2016/jan/08/how-will-san-diego-reach-its-100-renewable-energy-/" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">vowing to move to 100 percent renewable energy</a> in 20 years. Portland, Oregon <a href="http://insideclimatenews.org/news/13112015/portland" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">passed a resolution in November</a> that opposes local expansion of any new fossil-fuel storage or transportation projects, and Boulder, Colorado has been working to dump its investor-owned energy utility and launch a <a href="https://bouldercolorado.gov/energy-future" target="blank" style="text-decoration: none;">public municipal utility </a>that would have an easier time moving away from <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/" style="text-decoration: none;">fossil fuels</a> and toward<a href="http://ecowatch.com/business/renewables/" style="text-decoration: none;">renewable sources</a>.on the issues hmn<a href="http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Corporations.htm" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">http://www.ontheissues.org/2016/Bernie_Sanders_Corporations.htm</a>BERNIE:<h3 style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><center style="text-align: left;">Corporations do not have First Amendment rights</center></h3>In my view, a corporation is not a person. In my view, a corporation does not have first amendment rights to spend as much money as it wants, without disclosure, on a political campaign. In my view, corporations should not be able to go into their treasuries and spend millions and millions of dollars on a campaign in order to buy elections.I do not believe that is what American democracy is supposed to be about.In my view, history will record that the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision is one of the worst decisions ever made by a Supreme Court in the history of our country. While the campaign finance system we had before Citizens United was, in my view, a disaster, as a result of Citizens United, that bad situation has become much worse<center style="text-align: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Source: <a href="http://www.ontheissues.org/Essential_Sanders.htm" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">The Essential Bernie Sanders, by Jonathan Tasini, p. 73</a> , Dec 8, 2011</center><center style="text-align: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">...</center><center style="text-align: left; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><h3><center>Corporate political spending is not free speech.</center></h3>Sanders sponsored Constitutional Amendment to overturn Citizens UnitedConstitutional Amendment<ol><li>Whereas the right to vote in public elections belongs only to natural persons, so shall the ability to make contributions and expenditures to influence the outcome of public elections belong only to natural persons.</li><li>Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to restrict the power of Congress and the States to protect the integrity and fairness of the electoral process, limit the corrupting influence of private wealth in public elections, and guarantee the dependence of elected officials on the people alone by taking actions which may include the establishment of systems of public financing for elections, or the imposition of requirements to ensure the disclosure of [election] contributions and expenditures.</li><li>Nothing in this Article shall be construed to alter the freedom of the press.</li></ol>Opponents recommend voting NO because:[Supreme Court majority opinion in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, for which the Constitutional Amendment is proposed as a remedy. The FEC had ruled that the movie "Hillary", released in 2008 to persuade voters against Hillary Clinton, was illegal because it was a disguised campaign contribution made by a corporation. The Supreme Court overruled the FEC]:Modern day movies might portray public officials in unflattering ways. Yet if a covered transmission [is broadcast] during the blackout period, a felony occurs solely because a corporation, [instead of a candidate or donors, paid] in order to engage in political speech. Speech would be suppressed in the realm where its necessity is most evident: in the public dialogue preceding a real election. Governments are often hostile to speech, but it seems stranger than fiction for our Government to make this political speech a crime. Some members of the public might consider Hillary to be insightful and instructive; some might find it to be [unfair]; those assessments, however, are not for the Government to make.<center>Source: H.J.RES.34 / S.J.RES.11 <a href="http://www.ontheissues.org/Notebook/Note_14_SJR11.htm" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">14_SJR11</a> on Mar 13, 2013</center></center>--2012<a href="http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/6095:the-problem-with-citizens-united-is-not-corporate-personhood" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none;">http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/6095:the-problem-with-citizens-united-is-not-corporate-personhood</a>2x?The Problem With Citizens United Is Not Corporate PersonhoodTuesday, 17 January 2012 By James Marc Leas and Rob Hager, Truthout | News AnalysisVermont Sen. Bernie Sanders and Florida Rep. Ted Deutch introduced a <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c112:sj33:" target="blank" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" outline="outline" none="none" text-decoration="text-decoration" background-color="background-color" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; line-height: 1.467em;">constitutional amendment </a>in December to overturn<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/08-205.ZS.html" target="_blank" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" outline="outline" none="none" text-decoration="text-decoration" background-color="background-color" style="text-decoration: none; font-weight: bold; outline: none; line-height: 1.467em;"> Citizens United</a>, one of five decisions since 2006 by which a closely divided Supreme Court vastly increased the amount of corrupting corporate money in elections.<div class="itemFullText" times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" serif="serif" font-size="font-size" px="px" line-height="line-height" background-color="background-color" rgb="rgb" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div class="article_content">In an opinion piece critical of the decision in Citizens United, Senator Sanders wrote:<blockquote style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 20px; padding-left: 25px !important; margin: 0px !important; border-left: 0px !important; line-height: 1.467em !important;">When the Supreme Court says that for purposes of the First Amendment, corporations are people, that writing checks from the company's bank account is constitutionally-protected speech and that attempts by the federal government and states to impose reasonable restrictions on campaign ads are unconstitutional, when that occurs, our democracy is in grave danger.</blockquote>The joint Sanders-Deutch Resolution proposes an amendment to the constitution "to expressly exclude for-profit corporations from the rights given to natural persons." The first section of the amendment states:<blockquote style="padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 20px; padding-left: 25px !important; margin: 0px !important; border-left: 0px !important; line-height: 1.467em !important;">The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons and do not extend to for-profit corporations, limited liability companies, or other private entities established for business purposes or to promote business interests under the laws of any state, the United States, or any foreign state.</blockquote>While Senator Sanders and Representative Deutch correctly characterize the danger to democracy and the need for strong action in response, a close reading of Citizens United shows that constitutional rights of corporations played no role whatsoever in the Citizens United decision.</div></div>
<a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/bernie-sanders-this-election-is-about-climate-change-1944551338.html">http://www.ecowatch.com/bernie-sanders-this-election-is-about-climate-change-1944551338.html</a>
http://www.alternet.org/food/sanders-takes-stand-against-senate-bill-would-undermine-vermonts-new-gmo-labeling-law-videolegslators appear ruthless in keeping Americans in the dark about what they eat—literally. While 90 percent of Americans support mandatory GMO labeling, H.R. 1599—otherwise known as the Deny Americans the Right to Know, or DARK Act—introduced by Sen. Pat Roberts, would have "preempted states from requiring the labeling of GMO foods," according to <a href="http://www.justlabelit.org/dark-act/" style="text-decoration: none; line-height: 32px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Just Label It</a>.
<ul><li>

    <h4 class="subheader">
    <font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="http://www.democracynow.org/2016/5/16/chomsky_on_supporting_sanders_why_he" data-clicky-href="#widget/most_popular/most_viewed/link" data-clicky-title="Widget : Most viewed link" title=" Chomsky on Supporting Sanders & Why He Would Vote for Clinton Against Trump in a Swing State "> Chomsky on Supporting Sanders & Why He Would Vote for Clinton Against Trump in a Swing State </a>

</h4>

    <font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><strong class="dateCategory">May 16, 2016</strong>

</li></ul>=<a href="http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-sanders-us-treasury-block-pfizers-tax-evasion">http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/bernie-sanders-us-treasury-block-pfizers-tax-evasion</a>Bernie Sanders urged U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Jack Lew to block a move by pharmaceutical company Pfizer that would create a major tax evasion. In a<a href="http://www.sanders.senate.gov/download/sanders-treasury-pfizer-letter?inline=file" style="text-decoration: none;">letter</a> to the Treasury Department on Friday, Sanders explained why the planned $160 billion merger between Pfizer and Allergan would evade U.S. taxation when the headquarters moved from America to Ireland, where Allergan is based.The potential for Pfizer's tax inversion, or corporate relocation to a tax haven, has a deadline, as the merger would be created in the second half of 2016, the<a href="http://www.wsj.com/articles/sanders-urges-treasury-to-set-tax-restrictions-on-inversion-deals-1458316802" style="text-decoration: none;">Wall Street Journal</a> reports....<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;">==<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; float: none; display: inline !important;"><a href="http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/02/03/senators-introduce-merchants-doubt-amendment-energy-bill-call-fossil-fuel-industry-end-denial-and-deception">http://www.desmogblog.com/2016/02/03/senators-introduce-merchants-doubt-amendment-energy-bill-call-fossil-fuel-industry-end-denial-and-deception</a>
Democratic U.S. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), Ed Markey (MA) and Brian Schatz (HI)

introduced an amendment into the energy bill yesterday intended to

express Congress’s disapproval of the use of industry-funded think tanks

and misinformation tactics aimed at sowing doubt about climate

change science.

The <a target="_blank" href="http://www.desmogblog.com/sites/beta.desmogblog.com/files/2016-02-02%20Merchants%20of%20Doubt%20Energy%20Bill%20Amendment%20%28%233200%29.pdf">amendment</a>

evokes the history of notorious anti-science efforts by the tobacco and

lead industries to avoid accountability for the damage caused by their

products, focusing similar ire on the fossil fuel industry’s

decades-long climate cover-up.

Although it doesn’t name specific companies, the amendment is surely

inspired by recent revelations about ExxonMobil’s early and advanced

knowledge of the role of fossil fuels in driving climate change — which

was followed by the company’s subsequent, unconscionable climate science

denial efforts.

Just as tobacco and lead companies sowed doubt about the dangers of

their products through the use of front groups and third-party experts,

so did ExxonMobil — through its funding of a sophisticated network of

denialists — work to deceive the public about climate science and the

need for political action to end the fossil fuel era.

The most recent and damning #ExxonKnew revelations were published late in 2015 in investigative articles by both <a target="blank" href="http://insideclimatenews.org/content/Exxon-The-Road-Not-Taken">InsideClimate News</a> and the <a target="blank" href="http://graphics.latimes.com/exxon-research/">Los Angeles Times</a> in collaboration with the Columbia School of Journalism.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) joined the amendment as a co-sponsor once it was introduced.==
The spirited exchange also revealed important differences between the two candidates:

<ul><li>Sanders <a href="http://ecowatch.com/2016/03/07/dem-debate-clinton-sanders-fracking/">called for</a> a ban on <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/fracking-2/">fracking</a>,

Clinton said natural gas was a “bridge fuel,” a concept that even

natural gas’ strongest supporters in the environmental community have

all but abandoned.</li></ul>

<ul><li>Sanders pushed for a price on carbon, while Clinton has not clearly endorsed the policy.</li></ul>

<ul><li>Sanders has refused to take money from the fossil fuel industry, while Clinton has <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RO9EV_NAenY" target="_blank">said</a>

that she’ll “look into the matter” but has yet to follow up on that

pledge. Sanders highlighted his refusal to accept fossil fuel donations

on Wednesday, while Clinton stayed silent on the issue.</li></ul>
http://www.globalpossibilities.org/noam-chomsky-why-the-republican-party-is-a-threat-to-human-survival/

<a href="http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/12/11/abc-world-news-tonight-has-devoted-less-than-on/207428">The Tyndall Report</a>, a non-partisan media monitoring firm that has been tracking the nightly news broadcasts of ABC, CBS, and NBC, found that Trump is tromp, tromp, tromping over the airtime of everyone else.

From last January through November, these dominant flagship news shows devoted 234 minutes of prime-time coverage to the incessant chirping of the yellow-crested birdbrain, with no other contender getting even a fourth of that.

Take Bernie Sanders, who’s stunning the political establishment with a fiery populist campaign that’s drawing record crowds. Indeed, Sanders’ upstart campaign is commanding a <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/president/">comparable share</a> of support within the Democratic Party’s voting base to what Trump is enjoying from the Republican electorate.

And — get this — polls also show Bernie <a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/poll-against-bernie-sanders-donald-trump-would-get-schlonged-20151223">trouncing The Donald</a> if they face each other in November’s presidential showdown. So surely he’s getting a proportional level of media coverage by the networks on our public airwaves, right?

Ha, just kidding! The big networks’ devotion of 234 minutes to all-things-Trump was “balanced” by less than 10 minutes for Sanders. Most egregious was ABC, the Disney-owned network. ABC’s World News Tonight awarded 81 minutes of national showtime to Trump last year — and for Bernie: 20 seconds.

How self-serving of the media moguls. The one candidate who is effectively rallying large numbers of voters to oppose the rise of corporate oligarchy — including in the media — has the plug pulled on him.

Of course, this only amplifies the truth of what Sanders is saying about the villainy of corporate profiteers, and it fuels a greater determination by his millions of grassroots supporters to end the reign of greed in America.

<div class="author-bio"><a href="http://www.jimhightower.com/">Jim Hightower</a> is a national radio commentator, writer, public speaker, and author of the new book, "<a href="http://jimhightower.com/store/swim_against_the_current">Swim Against the Current: Even a Dead Fish Can Go With the Flow</a>." (Wiley, March 2008) He publishes the monthly "<a href="http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/">Hightower Lowdown</a>," co-edited by Phillip Frazer.</div>

</div>

==

http://ecowatch.com/2015/11/17/sanders-climate-terrorism-connection/

==

RW_

<div>

<p class="item-summary" style=" line-height: 1.5em; margin: 0px 0px 15px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204); clear: both; font-style: italic; width: 585px; padding: 0px 30px 15px; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Right-wing media mocked Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for linking climate change to terrorism during the November 14 CBS Democratic presidential debate. Sanders explained that if climate change continues to go largely unaddressed, "you're going to see all kinds of international conflict." Right-wing media called Sanders "insane" and "someone who doesn't understand what the real subject is." However, major studies and reports from foreign policy and defense experts support Sanders' assessment that climate change was a significant factor contributing to the rise of ISIL (or ISIS).

<h2 style=" margin: 15px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 2px; clear: both; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 153, 255); line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">During Debate, Bernie Sanders States That Climate Change Is Linked To Terrorism.</h2>

Bernie Sanders: Climate Change "Related To The Growth Of Terrorism," And Not Acting Will Lead To "All Kinds Of International Conflict." During the November 14 CBS Democratic presidential debate, moderator John Dickerson asked Sanders about a previous statement that "the greatest threat to national security was climate change." Sanders reaffirmed his position, stating: "Absolutely. In fact, climate change is directly related to the growth of terrorism. And if we do not get our act together and listen to what the scientists say, you're going to see countries all over the world -- this is what the CIA says -- they're going to be struggling over limited amounts of water, limited amounts of land to grow their crops and you're going to see all kinds of international conflict. [CBS, CBS Democratic Presidential Debate, <a href="http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2015/11/16/43187/cbs-democraticdebate-climatechangeterror" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/14/15</a>]

Sanders Expanded On The Link Between Climate Change And Instability: "People All Over The World Are Going To Be Fighting Over Limited Natural Resources." On the November 15 edition of CBS' Face The Nation, Sanders expanded on the link between climate change and terrorism, as The Washington Post reported:

On Sunday, Dickerson followed up with Sanders as the senator made an appearance on CBS's "Face the Nation," which Dickerson hosts. Sanders said the CIA and the Defense Department back up the notion that climate change can lead to terrorism.

"If we are going to see an increase in drought, flood and extreme weather disturbances as a result of climate change, what that means is that people all over the world are going to be fighting over limited natural resources," Sanders said. "If there is not enough water, if there is not enough land to grow your crops, then you're going to see migrations of people fighting over land that will sustain them, and that will lead to international conflicts."

"But how does drought connect with attacks by [the Islamic State] in the middle of Paris?" Dickerson asked.

"When you have drought, when people can't grow their crops, they're going to migrate into cities, and when people migrate into cities and they don't have jobs, there's going to be a lot more instability, a lot more unemployment and people will be subject to the types of propaganda that al-Qaeda and ISIS are using right now," Sanders said, using an alternative name for the Islamic State. "So where you have discontent, where you have instability, that's where problems arise, and certainly, without a doubt, climate change will lead to that." [The Washington Post, <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/11/15/bernie-sanders-explains-connection-between-climate-change-and-paris-attacks/" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/15/15</a>]

</blockquote>

<h2 style=" margin: 15px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 2px; clear: both; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 153, 255); line-height: 1.5em;">Right-Wing Media  Mock Sanders And Call His Assessment "Crazy"</h2>

Mark Steyn: Sanders' Comments About Climate Change Are "Insane" And Show A Level Of "Delusion And Denial." During the November 16 edition of Fox Business' Varney & Company Mark Steyn mocked Sanders' statements on climate change stating, "al-Baghdadi would be sawing Bernie Sanders' head off, and he'll be saying as his neck is being sliced, "If only we'd had an emissions trading scheme.'" Stein continued by calling Sanders' position "insane" and claiming it shows a level of "delusion and denial":

STUART VARNEY: Here's one for you. Bernie Sanders, well he's doubling down on his claim that there is a link between climate change and terrorism.

[...]

VARNEY: Alright Mark, climate change?

MARK STEYN: Yeah, he's brilliant that guy. I mean, al-Baghdadi will be sawing Bernie Sanders' head off, and he'll be saying as his neck is being sliced, 'If only we'd had an emissions trading scheme.' This is insane and it shows the level of delusion and denial among the Western political leadership.

VARNEY: Okay. [Fox Business, Varney & Company, <a href="http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2015/11/16/43201/fbn-vc-20151116-steinclimatechange1" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/16/15</a>]

</blockquote>

Wall Street Journal's Peggy Noonan: Sanders Sounded "Slightly Daffy, Like Someone Who Doesn't Understand What The Real Subject Is." On the November 15 edition of CBS' Face The Nation, Noonansaid that Sanders linking climate change to terrorism sounded "slightly daffy,"  as if he "doesn't understand what the real subject is":

PEGGY NOONAN: Working against him was, I believe, the fact that last night -- and more strikingly today on your show -- Bernie Sanders essentially said a major problem with all of this ISIS stuff and terrorism and what's going in the West is climate change and global warming. Which makes him -- to many people -- look slightly daffy, like someone who doesn't understand what the real subject is, and is leaning outside to sort of leftist or progressive nostrums that he can talk about. This is about terrorism. It isn't about climate change and deserts and people migrating 'cause it's hot. [CBS, Face The Nation, <a href="http://mediamatters.org/video/2015/11/15/wsjs-peggy-noonan-says-bernie-sanders-looked-da/206851" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/15/15</a>]

</blockquote>

Fox's Allen West: Sanders "Should Be Completely Discounted" Because Of His Climate Change Comments. On the November 16 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, contributor Allen West derided Sanders for saying "that he still believes that climate change is the greatest threat that we have out there," citing it as a reason why he and the other two Democratic presidential candidates "should be completely discounted. They're not ready for leadership of this country at this time." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, <a href="http://mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2015/11/16/43199/fnc-fandf-20151116-sandersclimate" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/16/15</a>]

Fox's Todd Starnes: "Icebergs Aren't Blowing People Up, Sir." Fox News radio host Todd Starnes swiftly dismissed Sanders' argument, writing in a tweet that "[i]cebergs aren't blowing people up, sir":

[Twitter.com, <a href="https://twitter.com/toddstarnes/status/665715117221240832" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/14/15</a>]

Ben Shapiro Calls Sanders "Insane." In a series of tweets during the CBS debate, Breitbart News editor Ben Shapiro called Sanders "insane," dismissing his position by joking, "it's not like the f*ing desert has been hot for hundreds of thousands of years":

itter.com, <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/665714501405179905?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" style="line-height: 1.5em; outline: none medium; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">11/14/15</a>;Twitter.com, <a href="https://twitter.com/benshapiro/status/665714918528651265?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" style="line-height: 1.5em; outline: none medium; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">11/14/15</a>]

PJ Media Equates The Link Between Climate Change AndTerrorism To A "Piece Of Magic." After the CBS Democratic debate, PJ Media mocked Sanders in a November 15 blog post equating the link between climate change and terrorism to a "piece of magic":

1. Bernie Sanders thinks climate change causes terrorism.

How this piece of magic works, he didn't get to explain, so we can only imagine. Maybe it 's a hot desert wind making normal people go to extremes, as in the famous opening of Raymond Chandler's "Red Wind":

There was a desert wind blowing that night. It was one of those hot dry Santa Ana's that come down through the mountain passes and curl your hair and make your nerves jump and your skin itch. On nights like that every booze party ends in a fight. Meek little wives feel the edge of the carving knife and study their husbands' necks. Anything can happen. You can even get a full glass of beer at a cocktail lounge.

That global warming -- it will get you every time.  ISIS-shmicis.  Forget Islam having anything to do with it.  Bernie doesn't even want to pronounce the word. But neither, it seems, do any Democrats.  I have a suggestion for them.  When talking about World War II, don't, under any circumstances, refer to our enemies as Nazis. It's terribly un-PC.  Call them National Socialists... oh, wait. [PJ Media, <a href="http://pjmedia.com/diaryofamadvoter/2015/11/15/look-ma-no-islam-the-stupefying-democratic-debate/" style=" outline: none; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/15/15</a>]

</blockquote>

The Weekly Standard's Michael Golfarb: No GOP Candidate "Said Anything As Crazy As 'Climate Change To Blame For Terrorism.'" In response to Sanders' answer about ISIL and climate change, The Weekly Standard's Michael Golfarb wrote on twitter that Sanders' argument was "crazy" beyond anything said during the GOP debate:

[Twitter.com, <a href="https://twitter.com/thegoldfarb/status/665714206482763778?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/14/15</a>]

The Federalist's Brandon Morse: "Who Is Voting For These Nut Jobs" Who Believe Climate Change Causes Terrorism. The Federalist's Brandon Morse mocked Sanders in a tweet, asking, "Who is voting for these nut jobs?":

[Twitter.com, <a href="https://twitter.com/TheBrandonMorse/status/665714345549033472?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/14/15</a>]

<h2 style=" margin: 15px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 2px; clear: both; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 153, 255); line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">TIME Reports That "Many Academics And National Security Experts Agree" With Sanders</h2>

TIME: "Experts Agree That Climate Change Contributes To An Uncertain World Where Terrorism Can Thrive." Following the CBS debate, TIME reported that although Sanders' comments "attracted ridicule across the political spectrum, many academics and national security experts agree that climate change contributes to an uncertain world where terrorism can thrive":

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders used the terrorist attacks in Paris to call for action to address climate change at a primary debate Saturday. But, while the plea attracted ridicule across the political spectrum, many academics and national security experts agree that climate change contributes to an uncertain world where terrorism can thrive.

U.S. military officials refer to climate change as a "threat multiplier" that takes issues like terrorism that would pose a threat to national security and exacerbates the damage they can cause. A 2014 Department of Defense report identifies climate change as the root of government instability that leads to widespread migration, damages infrastructure and leads to the spread of disease. "These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism," the report says.

The parallels between the situation described in the government report and the situation on the ground in Syria are striking. The worst drought on record in the Middle Eastern country has created instability for farmers and threatened the food supply. At the same time, the government has struggled to hold on to power across the country in the face of militant groups and millions of Syrians have fled their homeland. [TIME, <a href="http://time.com/4113801/climate-change-terrorism/" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">11/15/15</a>]

</blockquote>

<h2 style=" margin: 15px 0px; padding: 0px 0px 2px; clear: both; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: dotted; border-bottom-color: rgb(0, 153, 255); line-height: 1.5em; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Major Research Studies And Experts Back Up Sanders' Assessment That Climate Change Played Direct Role In Syrian Crisis</h2>

Study In National Academy Of Sciences Journal: Climate Change Likely Worsened Syrian Drought, Which Helped Cause Civil War. A study from scientists at the University of California, Santa Barbara and Columbia University published in the scientific journal, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), detailed the likely role climate change played in catalyzing civil unrest in Syria. The authors determined that climate change significantly increased the likelihood of a severe drought like the one that afflicted the region from 2007 to 2010, which was "the worst drought in the instrumental record, causing widespread crop failure and a mass migration of farming families to urban centers." The study found that human-induced climate change made a drought of such severity and persistence "2 to 3 times more likely than by natural variability alone," and concluded that "human influences on the climate system are implicated in the current Syrian conflict." From the study's abstract:

There is evidence that the 2007−2010 drought contributed to the conflict in Syria. It was the worst drought in the instrumental record, causing widespread crop failure and a mass migration of farming families to urban centers. Century-long observed trends in precipitation, temperature, and sea-level pressure, supported by climate model results, strongly suggest that anthropogenic forcing has increased the probability of severe and persistent droughts in this region, and made the occurrence of a 3-year drought as severe as that of 2007−2010 2 to 3 times more likely than by natural variability alone. We conclude that human influences on the climate system are implicated in the current Syrian conflict. [Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2015/02/23/1421533112" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">1/30/15</a>]

</blockquote>

Pacific Institute Study: "Climate Variability And Change" Played A Role In Causing Syria's Civil War. A 2014 study published in the American Meteorological Society journal Weather, Climate and Society by Pacific Institute President Peter Gleick found that climate change played a role -- among other interrelated factors -- in sparking Syria's civil war. From the study's abstract:

The devastating civil war that began in Syria in March 2011 is the result of complex interrelated factors. The focus of the conflict is regime change, but the triggers include a broad set of religious and sociopolitical factors, the erosion of the economic health of the country, a wave of political reform sweeping over the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) and Levant region, and challenges associated with climate variability and change and the availability and use of freshwater. As described here, water and climatic conditions have played a direct role in the deterioration of Syria's economic conditions. [Weather, Climate and Society, <a href="http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/WCAS-D-13-00059.1" style=" outline: none; font-weight: 700; text-decoration: none; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-bottom-style: solid; border-bottom-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);">July 2014</a>]

</blockquote>

Foreign Policy Expert William Polk: Climate Impacts Led To "Extreme Poverty" That Sparked Syrian Civil War. William Polk, a veteran foreign policy consultant, wrote in The Atlantic:

</div>

===

Senators Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), <a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=Bernie+Sanders" style=" line-height: 25.2px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Bernie Sanders</a> (D-Vt.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) announced landmark <a href="http://ecowatch.com/climate-change-news/" style=" line-height: 25.2px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">climate</a> legislation today to end new federal <a href="http://ecowatch.com/news/energy-news/" style=" line-height: 25.2px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">fossil fuel</a>leasing on public lands and oceans, and cancel existing offshore federal oil and gas leases in the<a href="http://ecowatch.com/?s=arctic" style=" line-height: 25.2px; box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Arctic</a>.

==

The vast majority of contributions to all the top presidential candidates have come from outside the Washington, D.C. metro area – except in the case of Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

More than half of the $2.5 million Paul raised between July 1 and Sept. 30 came from D.C. and its suburbs, Federal Election Commission data shows. The candidate with the second-most support from the D.C. area was former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — but Washingtonians and their neighbors accounted for only 8 percent of her donations of greater than $200.

Clinton led all her rivals in third quarter fundraising with $29.9 million raised for her presidential bid.

The candidates with the smallest share of their funds coming from D.C. are also considered outsiders in the 2016 race: Donald Trump (0.3 percent) and Ben Carson (0.8 percent). Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) was close with 0.86 percent of his third-quarter fundraising haul of $26.2 million coming from the Washington area.

Click <a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://opensecrets.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=aa7cf182bf7041258bb250f9d&id=bfcc74877e&e=44dfb36771" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; background: transparent;">here t</a><a rel="nofollow" target="blank" href="http://opensecrets.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=aa7cf182bf7041258bb250f9d&id=c9f518ba93&e=44dfb36771" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; outline: none; background: transparent;">o read the full article</a>.

==

calls out gop debate 2 on agw (they scammed on ot later)

Sanders is recognized for his <a href="http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2015/05/bernie-sanders-greenest-presidential-candidate" target="blank" style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">glowing record</a> on climate change. Last month, the Vermont senator told <a href="https://twitter.com/CNNSotu/status/637975625895010304?ref_src=twsrc^tfw" target="blank" style=" box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; text-decoration: none; transition: color 0.2s linear; line-height: 25.2px; background: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CNN’s State of the Union</a>, “I think environmentalists deserve a debate so we could talk about how we move aggressively to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel.” http://ecowatch.com/2015/09/17/climate-change-gop-debate/2/

===

Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is taking his criminal justice reform platform from the campaign trail to the Senate with a plan to introduce legislation outlawing private prisons when Congress returns from August recess.

<a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/08/19/1413392/-Bernie-I-ll-Introduce-Bill-Prohibiting-For-Profit-Prisons#" target="_blank" style=" text-decoration: none;">Daily Kos</a> first noted that at his Reno, Nevada, rally on Tuesday night, the Independent senator told a gathered crowd of 4,500 supporters that “when Congress reconvenes in September, I will be introducing legislation, which takes corporations out of profiteering from running jails.”

http://www.alternet.org/private-prisons-get-bern-ed-sanders-proposes-abolishing-profit-facilities

==

<a href="http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/20-examples-bernie-sanders-powerful-record-civil-and-human-rights-1950s">http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/20-examples-bernie-sanders-powerful-record-civil-and-human-rights-1950s</a>

----

solyndra; <a href="http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/7006">http://www.orionmagazine.org/index.php/articles/article/7006</a>

===

Despite two recent attempts, Congress has not yet been willing to deep-six subsidies to the fossil-fuel industry even though the oil industry is generating record profits and, together with the centuries-old coal industry, continuing to burden the atmosphere with carbon emissions and kill thousands of Americans a year by <a href="http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12794">pumping</a> their lungs full of toxic pollution.

These past failures aside, Sen. Bernie Sanders, the independent Senator from Vermont, joined Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) Thursday to introduce <a href="http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/051012-EndPolluterWelfare.pdf">legislation</a> that would chop more than <a href="http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/EPW_Act_Section_by_Section.pdf">$113 billion</a> out of subsidies for the oil and coal industries over the next 10 years. Here's the announcement:

As the sponsors point out, whatever else can be said about it, the fossil-fuel energy industry has no need of taxpayer subsidies. Last year, the five largest oil

companies—BP, Chevron, Exxon-Mobil, Conoco-Phillips and Shell—alone made $137 billion in profit. In the first quarter this year, their total was $33.5 billion. That's $4143 every second. Together, they spent $13.9 million lobbying Congress in that same quarter.

Although it's not included in the Sanders-Ellison bill, there is a perfect place to spend some or all of that saved money: subsidies for solar, wind, geothermal and other renewable energy sources that don't add to the atmospheric carbon load and don't create pulmonary and other health hazards. Shifting $100 billion of fossil-fuel subsidies over the next 10 years into backing for renewables would go far toward building an alternative energy infrastructure by leveraging hundreds of billions in private investment. Indeed, such subsidies have already helped Iowa to generate 19 percent of its electricity from wind turbines.

The loudest complainers about subsidies for renewable energy sources are the mouthpieces of the beneficiaries of fossil-fuel subsidies. And, as noted in <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/09/1090197/-Right-wing-memo-urges-creation-of-bogus-grassroots-effort-to-undermine-support-for-wind-energy">Right-wing memo urges creation of bogus grassroots effort to undermine support for wind energy</a>, while lobbying to maintain their own subsidies, the fossil-fuel industry is willing to do whatever it takes to obliterate subsidies for renewables. The claim is made that subsidies for renewables are somehow of a different order, an unfair arrangement that goes way beyond those accorded the fossil-fuel industry. On the contrary, you can read here how <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/06/1088228/-Solar-subsidies-follow-path-well-known-to-oil-gas-coal-and-nuclear-industries?detail=hide">solar and wind subsidies follow a path well known to the oil, gas, coal and nuclear industries</a>.