Corporate Democrats side with Cheney psychopaths on war for profits

Why Are House Democrats Siding With Liz Cheney to Prolong Endless War in Afghanistan?



A small "left-right anti-war coalition," warns The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald, remains "no match for the war machine composed of the establishment wings of both parties."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer




https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/07/03/why-are-house-democrats-siding-liz-cheney-prolong-endless-war-afghanistan







Democratic members of the House Armed Services Committee teamed up with Republicans this week to pass an amendment co-sponsored by Wyoming Republican Rep. Liz Cheney—daughter of notorious "war on terror" architect Dick Cheney—that prohibits Congress from spending money to pull U.S. troops out of Afghanistan without first meeting a series of vague conditions that critics said appear designed to prevent withdrawal.

The amendment (pdf)—co-sponsored by freshman Rep. Jason Crow (D-Colo.)—states that before the number of U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan can be reduced below 8,000, the Pentagon must certify that the withdrawal "will not increase the risk for the expansion of existing or formation of new terrorist safe havens inside Afghanistan" and "is in the best interest of the United States national security and in furtherance of United States policy toward Afghanistan for achieving an enduring diplomatic solution."


Just three Democrats on the Armed Services Committee—Reps. Khanna, Tulsi Gabbard (Hawaii), Anthony Brown (Md.)—voted against the Cheney-Crow amendment, which would also restrict President Donald Trump's attempt to withdraw over 9,000 troops from Germany. The full roll call vote can be viewed in two parts here and here.Despite a small bipartisan effort by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) and Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) to defeat the amendment, the measure easily passed by a vote of 45-11 and was added to the committee's version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The amended $740.5 billion bill then passed out of committee Wednesday by a unanimous vote of 56-0.

"This left-right anti-war coalition is no match for the war machine composed of the establishment wings of both parties and the military and intelligence community," The Intercept's Glenn Greenwald wrote Thursday, referring to the alliance between Khanna and Gaetz as well as outside groups that share their concerns.

"It should come as absolutely no surprise," added Greenwald, "that House Democrats are finding common cause with Liz Cheney and other GOP warmongers to block any efforts to reduce even moderately the footprint of the U.S. military in the world or its decades-long posture of endless war."


Greenwald derided the argument advanced by Cheney, Crow, and other supporters of the amendment that an unconditional withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan would be dangerously "rapid."




"Only the U.S. could malign a troop withdrawal plan after a 19 year-old war as 'rapid,'" Greenwald wrote.


The House Armed Service's Committee's passage of the Cheney-Crow amendment came just after 16 Senate Democrats joined nearly the entire Republican caucus in voting to kill an amendment that would have withdrawn all remaining U.S. troops from Afghanistan within a year and repealed the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force.

In his Too Much Information newsletter Friday, journalist David Sirota—a former speechwriter for Sen. Bernie Sanders' (I-Vt.) 2020 presidential campaign—wrote that "the first rule for every incoming freshman Democrat in Congress should be that you never work with a Cheney on war policy."

"The second rule for every freshman Democrat," Sirota added, "should be: re-read the first rule and make damn sure to follow it."

Sirota warned that the conditions imposed by the Cheney-Crow amendment "are designed to make the Afghanistan deployment permanent."

"In practice, nobody can predict with 100 percent certainty what will ensue once a 19-year military occupation ends. What we can know is that it's a bad idea to continue a policy that isn't working—and there's plenty of evidence that it isn't," Sirota wrote, pointing to the "Afghanistan Papers" investigation published last year by the Washington Post.

"House and Senate Democrats could still use their power to strip the Crow-Cheney amendment out of the final NDAA," Sirota noted. "Keep your eye on whether or not they do."

CUBA’S TWO PANDEMICS: THE CORONAVIRUS AND THE US EMBARGO

By Josefina Vidal Ferreiro, Resumen English.

July 3, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/cubas-two-pandemics-the-coronavirus-and-the-us-embargo/







As soon as the first cases of COVID-19 were detected in Cuba, our country mobilized all its resources to contain the spread of the virus.

Our healthcare workers go door to door checking people for possible symptoms. Those with symptoms are transferred to specially designated centers to receive treatment, mostly with medication developed by Cuba’s own pharmaceutical and biotech industry. The medical examinations and treatments are all provided free of charge.

As of June 20, 85 people have died of COVID-19 in Cuba. Our mortality rate of 3.9 percent is very low compared to the rest of the world. We reached the peak of the disease on April 24, but we are still encouraging people to respect physical distancing, isolation and sanitary measures.

Internationally, Cuba has responded to requests for collaboration from more than 20 countries, mainly in Latin America and the Caribbean, but also in Europe, Africa and the Middle East.

Cuba has a long history and tradition of international solidarity with other countries in the health sector that dates back to the 1960s, when we started sending healthcare workers to help other countries. From then on, more than 400,000 Cuban doctors and health professionals have provided services in 164 countries. We have helped strengthen local healthcare systems, provided services in remote areas and trained doctors.

Based on this long experience, in 2005 Cuba decided to create the Henry Reeve International Medical Brigade to respond to natural disasters and serious epidemics across the world. Since then, this brigade of over 7,000 doctors, nurses and other health specialists has provided services in more than 20 countries.

We sent doctors and nurses to staff 32 field hospitals after the 2005 earthquake in Pakistan. We sent a medical team to Indonesia in 2006 after the devastating tsunami. We sent more than 1,700 health workers to Haiti in 2010 after the catastrophic earthquake and the ensuing cholera epidemic. In 2014, we sent brigades to Liberia, Guinea and Sierra Leone to combat Ebola.

Even Samantha Power, former US President Barack Obama’s UN Ambassador, praised Cuba for its outstanding role in the fight against Ebola.

We even had brigades ready to assist Louisiana after New Orleans was hit by Hurricane Katrina but the US government rejected our cooperation.

Assisting others has always been part of who we are as a country and part of the ethical training Cuban doctors and health professionals receive.

In response to the current pandemic, Cuba has dispatched 28 contingents of the Henry Reeve Brigade to help 26 countries. This is in addition to the more than 28,000 Cuban doctors, nurses and health professionals who were already overseas before the pandemic.

Unfortunately, Cuban doctors and the Henry Reeve Brigade, in particular, have come under increasing attacks by the Trump administration, which has gone so far as to falsely accuse Cuba of human trafficking through its doctor program.

It is a shame that the United States government has been trying to discredit Cuba’s international assistance, including using pressure and threats against countries to force them to cancel these medical cooperation agreements.

They have even tried to pressure governments to reject Cuba’s help during the coronavirus pandemic. They claim the Cuban government is exploiting these doctors because in the case of countries that can afford to provide monetary compensation, a portion of it is kept by the Cuban government.

However, working overseas is completely voluntary, and the portion the Cuban government keeps goes to pay for Cuba’s universal health system. It goes to purchasing medical supplies, equipment and medication for Cuba’s 11 million people, including for the families of the doctors who are providing their services abroad. This is how we are able to provide free, high-quality healthcare for the Cuban people.

Instead of exacerbating conflict during a pandemic, our countries need to work together to find solutions. For years, Cuba has been developing pharmaceuticals and vaccines to treat different diseases, from psoriasis and cancer to heart attacks. Now we are helping patients recover from COVID-19 with Interferon Alfa2b Recombinant, one of 19 medications being developed or under clinical trial in Cuba by our biotech and pharmaceutical industries to treat different stages of COVID-19. Globally, we have received more than 70 requests for pharmaceuticals developed by Cuba.

This would be a clear avenue for Cuba-US cooperation but unfortunately, the Trump administration is wasting this opportunity by dismantling the limited progress made by Cuba and the US during the Obama administration.

President Trump strengthened the 60-year US blockade against my country, implementing 90 economic measures against Cuba between January 2019 and March 2020 alone. These measures have targeted the main sectors of the Cuban economy, including our financial transactions, tourism industry, energy sector, foreign investments – which are key for the development of the Cuban economy – and the medical cooperation programs with other countries.

These unilateral coercive measures are unprecedented in their level of aggression and scope. They are deliberately trying to deprive Cuba of resources, sources of revenue and income needed for the development of the Cuban economy. The effects of these measures are being felt in Cuba, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic. The blockade is stopping Cuba from getting much-needed medical supplies. For example, if more than 10 percent of the components in the medical equipment or medications we want to buy are of US origin, then Cuba is not allowed to purchase them.

In addition, the US has imposed restrictions on banks, airlines and shipping companies to stop Cuba from receiving materials that other countries are donating or sending to Cuba.

In April, the Alibaba Foundation of China tried to donate masks, rapid diagnostic kits and ventilators to Cuba, but the airline contracted by Alibaba to transport those items to Cuba refused to take the goods because they were afraid the US would sanction them.

A ship recently arrived in Cuba with raw materials to produce medications but it decided not to unload because the bank involved in the transaction decided not to make the payment out of fear it would be sanctioned by the US government.

So this is why we say we are suffering from two pandemics: COVID-19 and the US blockade. For that reason, it is so important that people of goodwill around the world continue to raise the demand to end the blockade of Cuba and to forcefully assert that these are times for solidarity and cooperation, not sanctions and blockades. In the meantime, Cuba, as a country that understands the value of solidarity, will continue to do our best to stop the spread of coronavirus at home and globally.

TRUMP USED LOOTED VENEZUELAN PUBLIC MONEY TO BUILD BORDER WALL

https://popularresistance.org/trump-used-looted-venezuelan-public-money-to-build-border-wall/






An Estimated $24 Billion Of Venezuelan Public Money Has Been Looted.

The Trump administration has used at least $601 million of it to construct a militarized wall on the US-Mexico border.

Since the United States initiated a coup attempt against Venezuela’s elected leftist government in January 2019, up to $24 billion worth of Venezuelan public assets have been seized by foreign countries, primarily by Washington and member states of the European Union.

President Donald Trump’s administration has used at least $601 million of that looted Venezuelan money to fund construction of its border wall with Mexico, according to government documents first reviewed by Univision.

During his 2016 presidential campaign, Trump insisted countless times that he would “make Mexico pay” to build a gargantuan wall covering all of the roughly 2,000 miles (3,145 kilometers) of its northern border.

Unable to force the country to fund his $18 billion pet project, which has already cost an estimated $30 million per mile in southern Texas, Trump has turned to other questionable sources of financing.

Univision reviewed US congressional records and court documents and found that the Trump administration tapped into $601 million of the Treasury Department’s “forfeiture fund” to supplement the wall construction.

The United States has seized at least $1 billion of Venezuelan public funds that Washington in turn claimed were supposedly being stolen by government officials, according to Univision. This is in addition to the billions more worth of Venezuelan state assets that have been illegally taken over by the Trump administration, the most important of which is Caracas’ crown jewel, the oil refinery Citgo.

“None of that money… has been returned to the Venezuelan people,” Univision reported. “Instead, most of the money is being collected by the U.S. Justice and Treasury Departments and held in special forfeiture funds used mostly to fund law enforcement investigations.”
Right-Wing Opposition Upset Trump Didn’t Give Guaidó Gang All Stolen Venezuelan Money

The Trump corruption scandal has been almost entirely ignored by mainstream corporate media outlets. Univision buried its own scoop deep in a report that advanced the talking points of Venezuela’s US-backed right-wing opposition and referred to the elected government of President Nicolás Maduro as a “widely repudiated regime.”

Univision, the largest corporate media network in the United States that focuses on Latino issues, is owned by billionaire-controlled private equity firms, one of the most prominent of whom is the Israeli-American oligarch Haim Saban.

Based in Miami, the de facto capital of the Latin American right, this massive media conglomerate acts as a mouthpiece for conservative forces and corporate interests across Central and South America.

The Univision article, titled “Legal battle over Venezuela’s looted billions heats up,” refers to unelected US-appointed coup leader Juan Guaidó as the leader of the country’s supposed “interim government.”

Univision also absolved the US and European countries of stealing billions of dollars of Venezuelan public money, justifying the theft with allegations of Venezuelan government corruption.

However, the fact that the report saw the light of day reflects a growing schism between supporters of the Venezuelan opposition and their imperial patrons in Washington. Univision was clearly upset that the Trump administration had not given the self-declared “Guaidó government” the money that it stole from Caracas.

“When it comes to who gets to keep the money from those looted assets, the U.S. appears unwilling to relinquish the cash,” Univision wrote in frustration.
The Guaidó Gang’s Blatant Corruption

What Univision did not mention in the report was that the Juan Guaidó coup administration had already been exposed for numerous acts of corruption.

Top Guaidó operatives spent hundreds of thousands of dollars of supposed “humanitarian aid” money on fancy hotels, nightclubs, dinners, and clothes during a US-led coup attempt on the Colombia-Venezuela border in February 2019.

The Grayzone’s Anya Parampil also exposed how Guaidó allies oversaw a scam to liquidate Citgo, Venezuela’s most valuable foreign asset, essentially selling it off to North American corporations.

As for the billions of dollars of Venezuelan public assets stolen by Western governments, there is no sign of that money ever being returned to the Venezuelan people.

In his new book “The Room Where It Happened,” former Trump administration national security advisor John Bolton boasted that the British government “was delighted to cooperate on steps they could take” to assist in Washington’s coup efforts, “for example freezing Venezuelan gold deposits in the Bank of England, so the regime could not sell the gold to keep itself going.”

The Bank of England still holds approximately $1 billion of gold that it stole from the Venezuelan government, and has refused to give it back.

AUSTRALIAN JOURNALIST THREATENED WITH PROSECUTION FOR EXPOSING WAR CRIMES

By Oscar Grenfell, WSWS.

July 3, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/australian-journalist-threatened-with-prosecution-for-exposing-war-crimes/



The Assange Precedent In Action.

In another major assault on press freedom, Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) journalist Dan Oakes has been threatened with prosecution for his role in exposing war crimes committed by the country’s Special Forces soldiers in Afghanistan.

The Australian Federal Police (AFP) issued a statement last night, confirming that they had sent a brief of evidence to the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), following a protracted investigation targeting the ABC.

The AFP indicated that the probe began after it received “a referral on 11 July, 2017, from the Chief of the Defence Force and then-Acting Secretary for Defence in relation to the broadcast and publication of information assessed as classified material.”

The statement confirmed that the investigation included the unprecedented AFP raid of the ABC’s Sydney headquarters in June last year. It was later revealed that the AFP had been seeking evidence in relation to Oakes, his colleague Sam Clarke and their reports of illegal activities by the Australian army in Afghanistan.

ABC management has stated that the AFP brief relates to Oakes, but not Clarke.

While the AFP statement is scanty and vague, it leaves little doubt that Oakes faces charges for his publishing activities. A brief is sent at the conclusion of a police probe. It is essentially a recommendation that the DPP proceed with a criminal prosecution of the individual who has been investigated.

The AFP’s reference to the “publication of information assessed as classified material,” moreover, indicates that Oakes faces charges for his work as a journalist, and not some other offence.

For a prosecution to proceed, it would need to be signed off by both the DPP and the federal Liberal-National government’s Attorney-General Christian Porter. Such a prosecution of a journalist would be unprecedented in Australia.

In a comment on Twitter, Oakes wrote: “Would just like to point out at this moment that whether or not we are ever charged or convicted over our stories, the most important thing is that those who broke our laws and the laws of armed conflict are held to account.”

The articles Oakes has been targeted for are a series published in early 2017, dubbed the “Afghan Files.” They exposed alleged war crimes by Australian Special Forces troops, including extrajudicial killings, some of them targeting unarmed civilians, and the desecration of corpses.

In the three years since the “Afghan Files” were published, government and military authorities have been unable to refute their contents. Reports since, by the ABC and Nine Media publications, have provided further evidence of systematic illegality on the part of Special Forces troops in Afghanistan.

In March, for instance, the ABC published a 2012 video of a Special Forces raid near the village of Deh Jawz-e Hasanzai in southern Afghanistan. It showed an Australian soldier confronting a young man who was cowering on the ground in a field. The soldier repeatedly shot the villager at point blank range, killing him. The Special Forces unit claimed that the Afghan civilian had been armed, but that assertion was disproved by the video.

Such is the weight of evidence that senior military commanders have admitted war crimes were committed. It was revealed this week that Special Forces chief Major-General Adam Findlay told a group of soldiers in Perth that “there are guys who criminally did something.”

The authorities have responded to the raft of exposures by establishing closed-door investigations, including one involving the AFP. These are aimed at limiting the damage of the revelations, and ensuring that they do not disrupt the Australian imperialism’s predatory operations, including in the Asia-Pacific. A long-running military inquiry is due to report later this year.

At the same time, those involved in exposing the war crimes are being persecuted. Former military lawyer David McBride, who allegedly provided the information that the “Afghan Files” were based on, has been charged with a raft of offences over alleged violations of official secrecy. His trial is proceeding under a shroud of secrecy.

Yesterday’s AFP statement makes clear that very shortly after the “Afghan Files” were published, the police and the government began plotting a prosecution of the journalists involved.

In April, 2019 Oakes and Clarke received letters from the AFP asking that they “consent to a forensic procedure being the copying of your finger and palm prints.”

The correspondence revealed that both journalists were suspected of three crimes. One was under s79 (6) of the Crimes Act 1914 relating to the “receipt of prescribed information,” another cited s73A (2) of the Defence Act 1903 concerning ‘unlawfully obtaining information,’ and the third was under s132 1 (1) of the Criminal Code.”

In June 2019, the investigation was ramped-up with the raid on the ABC’s Sydney headquarters. Senior ABC staff stated at the time it was clear the officers were looking for material relating to the “Afghan Files,” along with Oakes and Clarke.

Demonstrating that the ABC probe is part of a broader assault on press freedom, just 24 hours later the home of News Corp political editor Annika Smethurst was also raided. She was targeted over a story that revealed federal government plans to expand domestic spying by the Australian Signals Directorate. Only last month did the authorities confirm that Smethurst would not be prosecuted. The documents seized from Smethurst, however, will not be returned.

There were other indications last year that Oakes and Clarke faced potential prosecution. These included revelations that McBride, the whistleblower, had been questioned by the AFP about whether the journalists knew it was an “offence” for them to possess classified information. Chillingly, he was also asked if Oakes had “mentioned the prospect of jail time… in relation to himself.”

Unlike the US and a number of other countries, Australia does not possess a bill of rights enshrining press freedom. Under the federal Crimes Act, it is an offense to receive or communicate a secret government document without permission, punishable by up to seven years imprisonment. However, these laws, which have been on the books for decades, have not been used against publishers.

The threat to prosecute Oakes is part of a broader criminalisation of publishing activities. Draconian foreign interference legislation passed in 2018 by the Liberal-National government with Labor Party support makes it an offence to even receive information that has been classified.

While journalists have condemned the attack on Oakes, most of them have ignored the elephant in the room. If Oakes is prosecuted for publishing evidence of war crimes in Afghanistan, it will be based on the playbook established by the US-led campaign against Julian Assange.

The WikiLeaks founder is currently imprisoned in Britain’s maximum-security Belmarsh Prison. He faces extradition to the US, where the Trump administration has issued 18 charges against him, including 17 under the Espionage Act. They are over WikiLeaks publications revealing mass civilian killings in Iraq and Afghanistan, other war crimes and global diplomatic conspiracies.

Assange has been abandoned by the Australian government and all of the official parties, despite the fact that he is an Australian citizen and journalist. Shamefully, much of the corporate media has joined the campaign against the WikiLeaks founder, publishing the smears of the intelligence agencies to legitimise his persecution.

Labor has cynically adopted a posture of concern over the attack on Oakes, calling on Attorney-General Porter not to sign-off on a prosecution. Labor, however, spearheaded Australian government involvement in the persecution of Assange, and has either implemented or supported all of the measures undermining democratic rights over the past two decades.

The Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA), the journalists’ union, has also condemned the attacks on the ABC. It has done virtually nothing to fight for Assange’s freedom, though, in line with its close collaboration with governments and the media conglomerates, paving the way for further assaults on journalists.

When the US unveiled its charges against Assange in May 2019, the WSWS and WikiLeaks stated that they were the prelude to a stepped-up offensive against press freedom.

In June, after the AFP raids in Australia, the WSWS wrote: “By targeting journalists, as well as the individuals leaking the damning information, the Australian government is directly following the lead of the Trump administration’s charging of Assange.” The threat to prosecute Oakes vindicates that assessment.

It underscores the need for journalists, along with all workers and young people, to fight for Assange’s immediate freedom and to prevent his extradition to the US, as part of a broader struggle in defence of democratic rights and against imperialist war.

UK DENIES VENEZUELA ACCESS TO ITS GOLD FOR FOOD AND MEDICINE

By Telesur English.

July 3, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/uk-denies-venezuela-access-to-its-gold-for-food-and-medicine/







On May 14, The Central Bank Of Venezuela Sued The Bank Of England To Obtain Its Gold Bars.

The United Kingdom’s High Court Thursday decided that opposition lawmaker Juan Guaido can access 31 tons of Venezuelan gold held in the Bank of England, which prevents President Nicolas Maduro’s administration from using those resources to fight the pandemic.

The ruling about this monetary reserve valued at over US $ 1 billion occurs after months of disputes between Venezuela and the Bank of England, which denied the constitutionally constituted government access to its own resources

On May 14, the Central Bank of Venezuela (BCV) sued the Bank of England to obtain and sell the Venezuelan gold bars.

The South American country intends to sell the resources to the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), and so gain food and medicine needed amid pandemic.




The Bank of England justified its attitude by claiming that they would first clarify who Venezuela’s legitimate representative is and then debate the resources’ release.

U.K. justice’s decision opens the gates for Guaido to appropriate the resources held in that European country and other international banks.

“Every minute a person can die in Venezuela because of COVID-19. We need our resources to mitigate its impact on our people,” Venezuela’s Vice President Delcy Rodriguez insisted.

The announcement comes days after President Donald Trump’s former advisor John Bolton said in a memoir that Guaido is perceived as weak, against a strong and smart Maduro.


Tags

SHELL: LATEST OIL COMPANY TO DO A BELLY FLOP

By Brian Kahn, Gizmodo.

July 3, 2020




https://popularresistance.org/shell-latest-oil-company-to-do-a-belly-flop/







We’re halfway through 2020, and I think we can all safely say it’s been a pretty terrible year. There’s been so much terrible stuff in the past two months alone, I can’t even remember the bad stuff that happened in January. But I’m sure it sucked.

So I’ll take minor bits of good news where I can get it. And the latest is Shell writing down $22 billion on its balance sheets, making it the latest oil company to acknowledge that things are probably not going back to the way they were.

The company announced it expected the dip in value to be driven by both its oil and gas sides of the business on Tuesday. The problem, for Shell and other fossil fuel companies big and small, is that the pandemic has cratered demand. The price of oil dipped into negative territory for a hot second in April, and the fallout has continued. Shell follows in the footsteps of BP, which did the whole write down thing in mid-June to the tune of $17.5 billion. The Shell announcement came the same week Chesapeake Energy, the company that led the fracking boom in the U.S., declared bankruptcy after years of riding high on debt.

While the coronavirus has certainly spurred the industry’s free fall, there are signs this may be the start of a permanent decline. Even before the pandemic, the fracking industry was looking at some bills coming due that it was in all likelihood going to be unable to pay. And Big Oil stocks that have traditionally led the stock market had lost ground. That was underscored this week when Tesla’s stock price surpassed Exxon’s. Symbolic? Sure. But these are signs in the real world oil ain’t coming back.

In May, Shell foreshadowed what was to come when its C-suite level executives told investors the coronavirus has caused “major demand destruction that we don’t even know will come back.” When the pandemic recedes, the climate crisis still looms large (hell, it’s looming large even as the pandemic rages). Digging up more oil and gas is simply not an option in the coming decade, and the world—and the oil industry—is increasingly waking up to that.

Watching the oil industry’s rapid decline is a marvel to behold after decades of climate activist pressure did almost nothing to budge it. While it’s good news in the sense that it edges the world closer to keeping the climate habitable, it’s bad news for oil and gas workers. Shell and BP are among oil companies trying to become “energy” companies. What exactly the shape of an energy company looks like remains to be seen, though it’s worth noting oil companies’ climate plans are of questionable repute at best. The one thing that is clear: People will lose their jobs.

Shell has been offering voluntary buyouts. BP also announced it was laying off 10,000 workers. While the company was nice enough to give them laptops, that a laptop is not a job, nor is it a long-term solution. Letting capitalism do its thing is a surefire way to screw workers (see: coal, cars, history). Governments need to stop trying to bring oil back by funding a dirty recovery and come up with a plan to help fossil fuel workers transition to the economy-to-be. Shell is only the latest oil company to flail, but it certainly won’t be the last.

60+ Groups Demand Senate Pass Sanders Amendment to Slash 'Out of Control' Pentagon Budget by $74 Billion

"The current moment should force us to confront the reality that, for too long, we have invested in the wrong priorities, the wrong tools, and the wrong solutions."


by
Jake Johnson, staff writer




https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/06/30/60-groups-demand-senate-pass-sanders-amendment-slash-out-control-pentagon-budget-74




More than 60 progressive advocacy groups representing millions of members across the U.S. are pressuring senators to pass an amendment led by Sen. Bernie Sanders that would cut the proposed Pentagon budget by 10% and redirect the $74 billion in savings toward funding healthcare, education, jobs, and housing in impoverished and neglected communities.

"Our militarism budget is out of control," a coalition of 61 advocacy groups wrote in a letter (pdf) to senators on Monday. "In 2019, the United States spent more money on our military than the next nine countries combined. The Department of Defense's budget eclipses that of federal courts, education, the State Department, local economic development, public health, and environmental protection combined, yet the Pentagon is incapable of passing a basic audit."


Reps. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) and Mark Pocan (D-Wis.) have introduced a companion amendment in the House. Lee has also introduced a resolution proposing up to $350 billion in cuts to the Pentagon budget by closing U.S. military bases overseas, ending funding for ongoing wars, and slashing private service contracting.The National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) currently under consideration in the Senate calls for a $740.5 billion military budget for fiscal year 2021. Last week, Sanders and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) unveiled an amendment that would reduce the proposed outlay by 10% and use the savings to "create a federal grant program to fund healthcare, housing, childcare, and educational opportunities for cities and towns experiencing a poverty rate of 25% or more."


The coalition of progressive advocacy groups—which includes Public Citizen, RootsAction, CodePink, and Win Without War—wrote Monday that "common-sense steps" like "eliminating redundant and unusable weapons systems, ending wars, ceasing reliance on expensive contractors, and rejecting new nuclear weapons development" would "allow us to properly focus our investments on our most urgent and pressing human needs."

"The jarring recent images of police with weapons of war in our streets is a stark reminder of how militarism and white supremacy drive misplaced spending priorities both at home and abroad," the groups wrote. "Meanwhile, all over the country, millions have lost their jobs and access to healthcare as the novel coronavirus pandemic rages on. The current moment should force us to confront the reality that, for too long, we have invested in the wrong priorities, the wrong tools, and the wrong solutions."

In a virtual "Putting People Over Pentagon" town hall Monday night, some of the organizations behind the letter joined progressive lawmakers to discuss the urgent need to reduce America's bloated military budget and invest in key domestic priorities.

"This 10% cut is eminently doable and reasonable," Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said during the event. "But it's not going to be easy... As progressives, it is our job to redefine and reimagine what it is to be strong. Strong means an end to endless wars and a return to robust diplomacy and international coalition building."


Read the full letter:


The undersigned organizations, representing our millions of members across the country, write to you in strong support of the proposed amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 that would reallocate 10 percent of the bloated Pentagon budget toward severely underfunded human needs priorities—many of which are more critical than ever as our country continues to confront the Covid-19 pandemic. We urge you to co-sponsor Amendment 1788 introduced by Senators Sanders and Markey, and vote in support should it reach the Senate floor.

Our militarism budget is out of control. In 2019, the United States spent more money on our military than the next nine countries combined. The Department of Defense's budget eclipses that of federal courts, education, the State Department, local economic development, public health, and environmental protection combined, yet the Pentagon is incapable of passing a basic audit.

Multiple analyses have determined that U.S. and collective security would not suffer, and in fact would improve by, cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from the runaway Pentagon budget through common-sense steps, like eliminating redundant and unusable weapons systems, ending wars, ceasing reliance on expensive contractors, and rejecting new nuclear weapons development. These overdue steps would instead allow us to properly focus our investments on our most urgent and pressing human needs. Polling demonstrates that this is a popular idea, and most American voters want to see money redirected from the Pentagon to invest in human security.

The jarring recent images of police with weapons of war in our streets is a stark reminder of how militarism and white supremacy drive misplaced spending priorities both at home and abroad. Meanwhile, all over the country, millions have lost their jobs and access to healthcare as the novel coronavirus pandemic rages on. The current moment should force us to confront the reality that, for too long, we have invested in the wrong priorities, the wrong tools, and the wrong solutions.

As a point of comparison: last year, the Centers for Disease Control budget was $7 billion, just 7 percent of the national policing budget, and less than 1 percent of the Pentagon budget. Those three figures alone tell a tragic story about what and who this country prioritizes and values.

We should no longer tolerate unchecked spending on systems that fuel violence and corporate greed at the expense of the basic needs of our people. This amendment is a crucial step toward a federal budget that actually aligns with our values. We strongly urge you to support it.