The Clinton Campaign Is Obstructing Change to the Democratic Platform
Published on
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
by
Politico
The Clinton Campaign Is Obstructing Change to the Democratic Platform
As one of Bernie's delegates, I'm disappointed so far. But we're still
fighting hard.
by
Bill McKibben
The Clinton delegates to the platform committee, writes McKibben, have been
"ready to acknowledge serious problems," but when it came to adopting
specific policy changes, they balk. (Photo: AP)
The Democratic platform process is finally underway, and the main issue is
this: Did the campaign of Bernie Sanders really alter the Democratic Party?
The answer is not yet entirely clear, but on many key issues so far the
Hillary Clinton campaign has been unwilling to commit to delivering
specifics about fundamental change in America, which have been at the heart
of Sanders' campaign.
I've had a front-row seat to the first round of the process, as 1 of 5
delegates Sanders named to draft the platform. (The Clinton campaign named
six, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the Democratic National
Committee, added four more.) We spent two weeks listening to powerful
testimony from citizens around the country, and then on Friday in St. Louis
we started taking votes.
"We need not platitudes but a platform. Not aspirations but commitments."
And it was there that the essential dynamic quickly emerged. The Clinton
campaign was ready to acknowledge serious problems: We need fair trade
policy, inequality is a horrible problem, and unchecked climate change will
wreck the planet. But when it came to specific policy changes, they often
balked. Amendments against the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement and
backing Medicare for all failed, with all the Clinton delegates voting
against.
At which point we got (about 11 p.m., in a half-deserted hotel ballroom) to
the climate section of the platform, and that's where things got
particularly obvious. We all agreed that America should be operating on 100
percent clean energy by 2050, but then I proposed, in one amendment after
another, a series of ways we might actually get there. A carbon tax? Voted
down 7-6 (one of the DNC delegates voted with each side). A ban on fracking?
Voted down 7-6. An effort to keep fossils in the ground, at least on federal
land? Voted down 7-6. A measure to mandate that federal agencies weigh the
climate impact of their decisions? Voted down 7-6. Even a plan to keep
fossil fuel companies from taking private land by eminent domain, voted down
7-6. (We did, however, reach unanimous consent on more bike paths!)
In other words, the Clinton campaign is at this point rhetorically committed
to taking on our worst problems, but not willing to say how. Which is the
slightly cynical way politicians have addressed issues for too long-and just
the kind of slickness that the straightforward Sanders campaign rejected.
Happily, the process is only one-third complete. And Team Sanders has
claimed some victories: a strong stand against the death penalty, for
instance, and remarkable in-depth language on Native American rights. Now
the platform discussion heads to Orlando, where 187 delegates will weigh it
in more depth. And the issues on which they still can't agree can then be
raised on the convention floor in Philadelphia.
To some, the point of the whole exercise is unclear. Platforms don't matter,
right? But this is a new kind of election: The Sanders campaign has been
about issues, issues, issues. I mean, the guy gives 90-minute speeches every
day that are entirely about actual things that need to change. It seems
weird in an American political context, which is normally about posturing
and spin, but for many of us it's refreshing.
To others, pushing for a strong platform seems risky. Won't it somehow help
Donald Trump if we keep airing these questions? Shouldn't we just shut up
and fall in line behind Hillary?
No one wants Trump to win. But many of us look at the Brexit vote and see
that unenthusiastic centrism has a hard time beating zealous craziness. We
need unions and working people and environmentalists fully engaged this time
around, backing the Democrats with passion and energy. Above all we need
young people, who voted for Bernie by a 7-to-1 proportion.
Which is why we need not platitudes but a platform. Not aspirations but
commitments. Not happy talk, but the fully adult conversation that Sanders
engaged the country in for the past year. Cornel West, with his usual
succinct eloquence, said that in the end the platform debate came down to
telling the truth. The truth is, we're in a world of hurt. That
hurt-economic, social, environmental-is driving the unsettling politics of
our moment. That hurt needs to be addressed.
Orlando and Philly are the two places left where that can happen; I'm
willing to bet the platform will get substantially stronger before all is
said and done, because I think the Sanders run really has changed the party,
and very much for the better.
C 2016 Politico
Bill McKibben
Bill McKibben is the Schumann Distinguished Scholar at Middlebury College
and co
Skip to main content
//
. DONATE
. SIGN UP FOR NEWSLETTER
Wednesday, June 29, 2016
. Home
. World
. U.S.
. Canada
. Climate
. War & Peace
. Economy
. Rights
. Solutions
. What 'Our Revolution' Wants
. Texas Abortion Law Struck Down
. Brexit!
. Election 2016
The Clinton Campaign Is Obstructing Change to the Democratic Platform
Published on
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
by Politico
The Clinton Campaign Is Obstructing Change to the Democratic Platform
As one of Bernie's delegates, I'm disappointed so far. But we're still
fighting hard.
by
Bill McKibben
. 79 Comments
.
. The Clinton delegates to the platform committee, writes McKibben,
have been "ready to acknowledge serious problems," but when it came to
adopting specific policy changes, they balk. (Photo: AP)
. The Democratic platform process is finally underway, and the main
issue is this: Did the campaign of Bernie Sanders really alter the
Democratic Party? The answer is not yet entirely clear, but on many key
issues so far the Hillary Clinton campaign has been unwilling to commit to
delivering specifics about fundamental change in America, which have been at
the heart of Sanders' campaign.
. I've had a front-row seat to the first round of the process, as 1 of
5 delegates Sanders named to draft the platform. (The Clinton campaign named
six, and Debbie Wasserman Schultz, chair of the Democratic National
Committee, added four more.) We spent two weeks listening to powerful
testimony from citizens around the country, and then on Friday in St. Louis
we started taking votes.
. "We need not platitudes but a platform. Not aspirations but
commitments."
. And it was there that the essential dynamic quickly emerged. The
Clinton campaign was ready to acknowledge serious problems: We need fair
trade policy, inequality is a horrible problem, and unchecked climate change
will wreck the planet. But when it came to specific policy changes, they
often balked. Amendments against the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade
agreement and backing Medicare for all failed, with all the Clinton
delegates voting against.
At which point we got (about 11 p.m., in a half-deserted hotel ballroom) to
the climate section of the platform, and that's where things got
particularly obvious. We all agreed that America should be operating on 100
percent clean energy by 2050, but then I proposed, in one amendment after
another, a series of ways we might actually get there. A carbon tax? Voted
down 7-6 (one of the DNC delegates voted with each side). A ban on fracking?
Voted down 7-6. An effort to keep fossils in the ground, at least on federal
land? Voted down 7-6. A measure to mandate that federal agencies weigh the
climate impact of their decisions? Voted down 7-6. Even a plan to keep
fossil fuel companies from taking private land by eminent domain, voted down
7-6. (We did, however, reach unanimous consent on more bike paths!)
https://secure.actblue.com/contribute/page/myj16-articlehttps://secure.actbl
ue.com/contribute/page/myj16-article
In other words, the Clinton campaign is at this point rhetorically committed
to taking on our worst problems, but not willing to say how. Which is the
slightly cynical way politicians have addressed issues for too long-and just
the kind of slickness that the straightforward Sanders campaign rejected.
Happily, the process is only one-third complete. And Team Sanders has
claimed some victories: a strong stand against the death penalty, for
instance, and remarkable in-depth language on Native American rights. Now
the platform discussion heads to Orlando, where 187 delegates will weigh it
in more depth. And the issues on which they still can't agree can then be
raised on the convention floor in Philadelphia.
To some, the point of the whole exercise is unclear. Platforms don't matter,
right? But this is a new kind of election: The Sanders campaign has been
about issues, issues, issues. I mean, the guy gives 90-minute speeches every
day that are entirely about actual things that need to change. It seems
weird in an American political context, which is normally about posturing
and spin, but for many of us it's refreshing.
To others, pushing for a strong platform seems risky. Won't it somehow help
Donald Trump if we keep airing these questions? Shouldn't we just shut up
and fall in line behind Hillary?
No one wants Trump to win. But many of us look at the Brexit vote and see
that unenthusiastic centrism has a hard time beating zealous craziness. We
need unions and working people and environmentalists fully engaged this time
around, backing the Democrats with passion and energy. Above all we need
young people, who voted for Bernie by a 7-to-1 proportion.
Which is why we need not platitudes but a platform. Not aspirations but
commitments. Not happy talk, but the fully adult conversation that Sanders
engaged the country in for the past year. Cornel West, with his usual
succinct eloquence, said that in the end the platform debate came down to
telling the truth. The truth is, we're in a world of hurt. That
hurt-economic, social, environmental-is driving the unsettling politics of
our moment. That hurt needs to be addressed.
Orlando and Philly are the two places left where that can happen; I'm
willing to bet the platform will get substantially stronger before all is
said and done, because I think the Sanders run really has changed the party,
and very much for the better.
C 2016 Politico
/author/bill-mckibben
