Tuesday, December 17, 2019

Message from Our Revolution





https://ourrevolution.com/



The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) will do anything to stop progressive Democrats — even if it means supporting Republicans.

As reported by The Intercept today, the DCCC has paid millions of dollars to a consulting firm that works with Republicans. Meanwhile, their policy of “blacklisting” firms who work with candidates outside of the Democratic establishment continues to hurt progressive Democrats.

Our Revolution refuses to back down. We will continue supporting diverse and progressive candidates like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, and Rashida Tlaib by taking on the political establishment in swing states across our country.

https://ourrevolution.com/

If you’ve stored your payment information with ActBlue Express, your donation will process immediately.

https://ourrevolution.com/



Last year, the DCCC helped elect Jeff Van Drew to Congress in New Jersey. This weekend, Congressman Van Drew announced that he will be switching parties to run in 2020 as a Republican.

By supporting conservative candidates like Jeff Van Drew, the DCCC is actively hurting the Democratic Party. Our only way of fighting back is to hold competitive primaries where we can elect candidates who will represent the popular progressive policies that voters actually want to support in the general election.

Our Revolution is going to keep fighting — with, or without them.


https://ourrevolution.com/


In solidarity,

The whole team at Our Revolution


As Buttigieg Attends Fundraisers of Ultra-Rich, Sanders Reminds Voters Billionaires Not Donating 'Through Goodness of Their Hearts'




"Why would many, many billionaires be contributing to candidates if they didn't think they were getting something out of it?"

Monday, December 16, 2019




Just as images emerged of 2020 Democratic candidate Pete Buttigieg dining with wealthy donors at a high-dollar weekend fundraiser, Sen. Bernie Sanders on Monday delivered a fresh indictment of a "rotten" system in which the wealthy back candidates in order to buy access and influence.
Sanders, in comments to CBS News, took a critical view of the super-rich donating large sums to political campaigns. 
"Why would many, many billionaires be contributing to candidates if they didn't think they were getting something out of it?" said Sanders. "They're not doing it through the goodness of their hearts."
Buttigieg, whose campaign had already by 2019's third quarter attracted the support of 39 billionaires, came under fire from progressives on social media after pictures surfaced from a fundraiser on Sunday in Napa, California's Hall Rutherford wine caves which appeared to show the mayor dining with elites. 
The Associated Press described the scene of the dinner in an article Friday:
The Hall Rutherford wine caves in the hills of California's Napa Valley boast a chandelier with 1,500 Swarovski crystals, an onyx banquet table to reflect its luminescence, and bottles of cabernet sauvignon that sell for as much as $900.
It is also where Pete Buttigieg, the Democratic presidential candidate, will dine privately with donors following a Sunday fundraiser hosted by Craig and Kathryn Hall, the winery's billionaire owners, according to an invitation obtained by The Associated Press.
"Looks like a really good Black Mirror episode about the luxurious life in a billionaire's bunker as a climate apocalypse unfolds up on the surface," said Sanders speechwriter David Sirota. 
According to Recode, a separate Buttigieg fundraiser on Monday was expected to be attended by a who's-who of Silicon Valley's powerful:
A host list circulated to prospective donors for an event on Monday morning in Palo Alto, California, features individuals with family ties to some of the most prominent people in Big Tech. Netflix CEO and co-founder Reed Hastings is listed as a co-host of the event, as is Nicole Shanahan, the wife of Google co-founder Sergey Brin; Wendy Schmidt, the wife of former Google CEO Eric Schmidt; and Michelle Sandberg, the sister of Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, sources say.
On Saturday, Buttigieg faced tough questions from labor reporter Mike Elk, who asked the mayor to disavow Monday fundraiser host Hastings over the CEO's support for charter schools. Buttigieg declined to do so, claiming that his positions would not be affected by big money.
In his comments to CBS News, Sanders expressed doubt that billionaire donors get nothing for their cash.
"I think what history tells us is that the big donors, the people who make large contributions, do get access," said Sanders. "They get tax breaks, they get deregulated. That's the way the unfortunate system is working."





'Astonishing' Trump Rule Could Let Banks Classify NFL Stadium Investments as Aid to Poor Communities





The financial institutions would get significant tax breaks for their investments, thanks to the 2017 Republican tax law.

Monday, December 16, 2019





Rule changes proposed by the Trump administration last week could let banks classify investments in professional sports stadiums as aid to the poor, and then give the financial institutions a significant tax break for their efforts.
The changes are part of an Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) plan to overhaul the Community Reinvestment Act of 1977, which requires banks to invest in low-income communities.
Both bank regulators are run by appointees of President Donald Trump.
As Bloomberg reported Monday, "the agencies drafted a long list hypothetical ways banks could seek to meet their obligations [under the Community Reinvestment Act], including this sentence on page 100 of their proposal: 'Investment in a qualified opportunity fund, established to finance improvements to an athletic stadium in an opportunity zone that is also [a low- or moderate-income] census tract.'"
"There are well over a dozen NFL venues nestled in so-called opportunity zones," Bloomberg noted. "They include M&T Bank Stadium in Baltimore, home of the National Football League's Ravens, which this year completed $120 million in upgrades such as a new sound system... There also are facilities for professional baseball, basketball, soccer, and hockey teams in the zones."
Under the 2017 tax law signed by President Donald Trump, real estate developers and financial institutions that invest in "opportunity zones" receive a capital gains tax cut.
The tax incentive sparked criticism from lawmakers including Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who warned in a statement last month that "there are no safeguards to ensure taxpayers are not simply subsidizing handouts for billionaires with no benefit to the low-income communities this program was supposed to help."
"Republicans who support the program should work with Democrats to ensure it does not become a boondoggle," Wyden said.
Critics reacted with incredulity to the Trump administration's proposed rule changes.
"The proposed credit for financing 'improvements' to stadiums soon raised eyebrows among policy wonks," Bloomberg reported. "That may put pressure on regulators to clarify whether banks really can satisfy CRA obligations by, say, funding a 200-foot video screen."
Daily Beast reporter Lachlan Markey said the proposal is "simply astonishing."
Pat Garofalo, managing editor of Talk Poverty and author of the "Boondoggle" newsletter, tweeted that the proposed rule changes are "truly wild."
"A potential change to the Community Reinvestment Act—the federal anti-redlining law—would allow banks to meet their obligations by investing in sports stadiums in Opportunity Zones," said Garofalo. "Opportunity Zones are a bad giveaway to investors gentrifying neighborhoods. Stadium subsidies are a huge waste of money."







'A National Disgrace': Trump Proposes Social Security Change That Could End Disability Benefits for Hundreds of Thousands




"Donald Trump and his advisers know that this will kill people, and they do not care. Every current and future Social Security beneficiary must band together to defeat this horrific proposal, or else all of our earned benefits will be next."

Monday, December 16, 2019





Activists are working to raise public awareness and outrage over a little-noticed Trump administration proposal that could strip life-saving disability benefits from hundreds of thousands of people by further complicating the way the Social Security Administration determines who is eligible for payments.
The proposed rule change was first published in the Federal Register last month but has received scarce attention in the national media. Last week, the Social Security Administration extended the public comment period on the proposal until January 31, 2020.
Alex Lawson, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Social Security Works, told Common Dreams that the rule change "is the Trump administration's most brazen attack on Social Security yet."
"When Ronald Reagan implemented a similar benefit cut, it ripped away the earned benefits of 200,000 people," Lawson said. "Ultimately, Reagan was forced to reverse his attack on Social Security after massive public outcry—but not before people suffered and died."
Patient advocate Peter Morley, who lobbies Congress on healthcare issues, called the proposal "a national disgrace."
"This is not over," said Morley. "We will all need to mobilize."
The process for receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is already notoriously complicated, and the Trump administration is attempting to add yet another layer of complexity that critics say is aimed at slashing people's benefits.
As The Philadelphia Inquirer reported last week, "those already receiving disability benefits are subject to so-called continuing disability reviews, which determine whether they are still deserving of compensation for an injury, illness, or other incapacitating problem as their lives progress."
Currently, beneficiaries are placed in three separate categories based on the severity of their disability: "Medical Improvement Not Expected," "Medical Improvement Expected," and "Medical Improvement Possible." People with more severe medical conditions face less frequent disability reviews.
The Trump administration's proposed rule would another category called "Medical Improvement Likely," which would subject beneficiaries to disability reviews every two years.
According to the Inquirer, "an estimated 4.4 million beneficiaries would be included in that designation, many of them children and so-called Step 5 recipients, an internal Social Security classification."
Step 5 recipients, the Inquirer noted, "are typically 50 to 65 years of age, in poor health, without much education or many job skills [and] often suffer from maladies such as debilitating back pain, depression, a herniated disc, or schizophrenia."
Jennifer Burdick, supervising attorney with Community Legal Services in Philadelphia, told the Inquirer that placing Step 5 recipients in the new "Medical Improvement Likely" category and subjecting them to reviews every two years would represent "a radical departure from past practice."
Lawson of Social Security Works said "Donald Trump and his advisers know that this will kill people, and they do not care."
"Every current and future Social Security beneficiary must band together to defeat this horrific proposal," added Lawson, "or else all of our earned benefits will be next."
In addition to lack of coverage from the national media, most members of Congress have also been relatively quiet about the Trump administration's proposal.
Two Pennsylvania Democrats—Sen. Bob Casey and Rep. Brendan Boyle—condemned the proposed rule change in statements to the Inquirer.
The proposal, said Casey, "appears to be yet another attempt by the Trump administration to make it more difficult for people with disabilities to receive benefits."
Boyle said the "changes seem arbitrary, concocted with no evidence or data to justify such consequential modifications."
"This seems like the next iteration of the Trump administration's continued efforts to gut Social Security benefits," Boyle added.





100+ Doctors Demand Julian Assange Receive Safe Passage to Australian Hospital 'Before It Is Too Late'



  

"That we, as doctors, feel ethically compelled to hold governments to account on medical grounds speaks volumes about the gravity of the medical, ethical, and human rights travesties that are taking place."

Monday, December 16, 2019





A group of over 100 doctors on Monday urged the Australian government to end its "refusal to act" in the case of Julian Assange and insist the British government release the WikiLeaks founder from prison so he can be safely sent to an Australian hospital before "it is too late."
In an open letter addressed to Foreign Minister Marise Payne, the doctors say that "the most fundamental human rights of an Australian citizen are being denied by the British government."
The international medical experts, who hail from countries including the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom, called upon Payne to abide by his "undeniable legal obligation to protect your citizen against the abuse of his fundamental human rights, stemming from U.S. efforts to extradite Mr. Assange for journalism and publishing that exposed U.S. war crimes."
Assange has been in London's Belmarsh prison since April for skipping bail seven years ago when he first took refuge at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. He's facing possible extradition to the United States for alleged violations of the Espionage Act.  His time at the embassy and at Belmarsh had led to "medical neglect and fragile health," the doctors said, adding that Assange continues to suffer psychological torture at the London jail.
It's not the first time the medical group has sounded alarm on Assange's deteriorating health conditions.
In a letter sent last month to British Home Secretary Priti Patel and Shadow Home Secretary Diane Abbott,  the group expressed "real concerns, on the evidence currently available, that Mr. Assange could die in prison." U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture Nils Melzer has also accused the U.K. government of "outright contempt for Mr. Assange's rights and integrity." In May Melzer said Assange exhibited "all symptoms typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture."
The doctors referenced Melzer's concerns as well as their letter to the U.K. authorities, saying that document fell on deaf ears.
In addendum to the new letter, the doctors wrote that Assange is essentially stuck waiting "helplessly for whatever the U.S government holds in store for him"—a situation "akin to keeping someone bound and gagged while their assailant stands by sharpening their knives."
"The Australian government has shamefully been complicit by its refusal to act, over many years. Should Mr. Assange die in a British prison, people will want to know what you, Minister, did to prevent his death."
Ongoing detention at Belmarsh, the group said, is "medically reckless at best and deliberately harmful at worst."
"We therefore urge you to insist upon the immediate transfer of Mr. Assange from Belmarsh Prison to an Australian university teaching hospital, on urgent medical grounds, so that he can receive the assessment and treatment that he requires," the doctors wrote. They added:
That we, as doctors, feel ethically compelled to hold governments to account on medical grounds speaks volumes about the gravity of the medical, ethical, and human rights travesties that are taking place. It is an extremely serious matter for an Australian citizen's survival to be endangered by a foreign government obstructing his human right to health. It is an even more serious matter for that citizen's own government to refuse to intervene, against historical precedent and numerous converging lines of medical advice.
Assange is set to face another case management hearing this week Westminster Magistrates' Court and full extradition hearing in February.







Amazon, Chevron, and Starbucks Among 91 Fortune 500 Corporations That Paid $0 in Federal Income Taxes in 2018: Report




"The 2017 tax law was a clear giveaway to corporations and their shareholders."


Monday, December 16, 2019



More than 90 large, profitable corporations on the Fortune 500 list effectively did not pay a penny in federal income taxes in 2018, according to a new report published Monday by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.
ITEP examined financial filings from 379 Fortune 500 companies that reported a profit in 2018, the first year President Donald Trump's tax cuts took effect. The Republican tax law slashed the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent.
"The 379 profitable corporations identified in this study paid an effective federal income tax rate of 11.3 percent on their 2018 income, slightly more than half the statutory 21 percent tax," ITEP said. "The 11.3 percent effective tax rate found in this study is likely the lowest effective tax rate in the last 40 years."
ITEP found that 91 of the 379 companies analyzed took advantage of loopholes to effectively not pay federal income taxes in 2018 despite making a combined profit of $101 billion. That list of companies includes prominent corporate giants such as Amazon, Halliburton, Chevron, Starbucks, and Delta Air Lines.
In a video posted on Twitter, ITEP listed all 91 corporations that payed zero dollars in federal income taxes last year:
Matthew Gardner, a senior fellow at ITEP and lead author of the report, said the 2017 Trump tax law was "destined to fail to live up to its grand promises."
"Proponents of the law claimed it would boost federal corporate tax revenue, but that is nearly impossible since the law not only reduced the corporate tax rate, it also left some of the most egregious loopholes intact," Gardner said in a statement. "The 2017 tax law was a clear giveaway to corporations and their shareholders."
Thanks to the Republican tax law, which Trump signed in 2017, Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Amazon, and Verizon raked in a combined $16 billion in tax breaks in 2018.
"The key takeaway from this study is that the 2017 tax law is working out well for profitable corporations, which are paying some of the lowest tax rates that ITEP has recorded in the nearly 40 years it has been examining corporate taxes," said Gardner.
"By enacting a law that dramatically reduced corporate tax collections, lawmakers weakened the nation's ability to adequately fund critical priorities," Gardner added. "Lawmakers will have to stop kowtowing to special interests and pretending that raising revenue doesn't matter."







Top Global Scientists Call for 'Profound Food System Transformation' to Combat Extreme Malnutrition




Unless radical changes are made, warns the lead author of a new WHO report, "the growth and development of individuals and societies for decades to come" are at risk.


Monday, December 16, 2019





A multi-part World Health Organization report published Monday in the British medical journal The Lancet detailed the need to urgently transform the world's failing food systems to combat the coexistence of undernourishment and obesity—or the "double burden of malnutrition."
Based on global data from recent decades, the WHO report estimated that more than 150 million children are stunted worldwide while nearly 2.3 billion children and adults—about 30% of the planet's human population—are overweight.
Dr. Francesco Branca, the report's lead author and director of the WHO's Department of Nutrition for Health and Development, said that "we can no longer characterize countries as low-income and undernourished, or high-income and only concerned with obesity."
As he put it: "We are facing a new nutrition reality."
This new reality "is driven by changes to the food system, which have increased availability of ultra-processed foods that are linked to increased weight gain, while also adversely affecting infant and pre-schooler diets," said co-author and University of North Carolina professor Barry Popkin. "These changes include disappearing fresh food markets, increasing supermarkets, and the control of the food chain by supermarkets, and global food, catering and agriculture companies in many countries."
Considering these changes, Branca explained that "all forms of malnutrition have a common denominator—food systems that fail to provide all people with healthy, safe, affordable, and sustainable diets."
"Changing this will require action across food systems—from production and processing, through trade and distribution, pricing, marketing, and labeling, to consumption and waste," he added. "All relevant policies and investments must be radically re-examined."
This is especially true for the more than a third of low- and middle-income countries that face "the two extremes of malnutrition." A WHO statement highlighted the following regions: sub-Saharan Africa, south and east Asia, and the Pacific.
Authors of the WHO report urged world governments, the United Nations, civil society, academics, the media, donors, the private sector, and economic platforms to pursue fundamental changes to global food systems with the aim of ending mass malnutrition. Doing so, according to the authors, means seeking assistance from grassroots groups, farmers and their unions, faith-based leaders, advocates for planetary health, leaders of green companies, local politicians, and consumer associations.
"Given the political economy of food, the commodification of food systems, and growing patterns of inequality worldwide, the new nutrition reality calls for a broadened community of actors who work in mutually reinforcing and interconnected ways on a global scale," said Branca. "Without a profound food system transformation, the economic, social, and environmental costs of inaction will hinder the growth and development of individuals and societies for decades to come."
The report acknowledged that fighting malnutrition requires successfully promoting healthier diets, which WHO defines as: optimal breastfeeding practices in the first two years; a wide variety of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, fiber, nuts, and seeds; and limited amounts of animal products—particularly processed meats—as well as foods and beverages high in sugar, saturated fat, trans fat, and salt.
"Today's publication of the WHO Series on the Double Burden of Malnutrition comes after 12 months of Lancet articles exploring nutrition in all its forms," wrote The Lancet editor-in-chief Dr. Richard Horton in an editorial accompanying the report.
"With these and other articles across Lancet journals throughout 2019, it has become clear that nutrition and malnutrition need to be approached from multiple perspectives," Horton continued, "and although findings have sometimes converged, there is still work to be done to understand malnutrition's multiple manifestations."
In January, as Common Dreams reported, more than three dozen experts with the EAT-Lancet Commission called for a "global agricultural revolution" and people worldwide to adopt a "planetary health diet" to tackle the harmful nutritional and environmental impacts of the world's unhealthy, unsustainable food system.
Co-lead commissioner Dr. Walter Willett of Harvard University explained at the time that "to be healthy, diets must have an appropriate calorie intake and consist of a variety of plant-based foods, low amounts of animal-based foods, unsaturated rather than saturated fats, and few refined grains, highly processed foods, and added sugars."