truthout--2020-11-21--Wealthy Self-Financed Candidates Did Not Perform Well in the 2020 Elections

In the most expensive election cycle in U.S. history , many wealthy candidates poured ample amounts of their own cash into their campaigns .
In most cases , these candidates still lost .
Self-funders range from billionaire presidential hopefuls to perennial self-funding candidates , to wealthy Georgia businesswoman Sen. Kelly Loeffler , who is fighting in a runoff to keep the seat she was appointed to .
Loeffler self-financed $ 23.3 million , according to OpenSecrets data .
With no clear victor following Election Day , Loeffler will face Democratic challenger Rev .
Raphael Warnock , who has never held @ @ @ @ @ @ @ runoff election .
Georgia candidates must win a majority of the vote in order to claim an election , according to state laws .
With 98 percent reporting as of Wednesday according to the Associated Press , Loeffler and Warnock received 25.9 and 32.9 percent of the vote , respectively .
This placed them in the top two slots in a crowded 21-person “ jungle primary.
” On Nov. 5 , Warnock aired a satirical TV ad warning voters that “ the negative ads are coming.
” And he was right .
More @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s cash has recently gone to an expensive TV ad campaign targeting Warnock .
These ads accuse Warnock — the senior pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta , the former pulpit of Rev .
Dr. Martin Luther King , Jr. — of anti-American hatred , praising “ Marxism ” and calling police thugs and gangsters .
Republican Sen. David Perdue and Democratic rival Jon Ossoff will also go head-to-head in the Georgia runoff ; Senate races are usually staggered so that a state ’ s two seats aren ’ t up for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ between Perdue ’ s regular re-election bid and Loeffer ’ s appointment following Sen. Johnny Isakson ’ s retirement triggering a special election , the Peach State faces an unusual and decisive election cycle .
The victors of the two Georgia runoffs will determine which party will take control of the Senate .
So far , Republicans have won 50 Senate seats , and Democrats have a total of 48 .
If Democrats win both Georgia runoffs , Vice President-elect Kamala Harris would be the tiebreaking vote , giving the Democrats unified control @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to CNBC .
The biggest spender of personal funds this cycle has been Michael Bloomberg , whose bid for president was more than 99 percent self-funded .
Bloomberg shelled out roughly $ 1.1 billion of his own fortune and received only about $ 914,000 from other donors , but lost by a landslide in the Democratic primary , winning only American Samoa .
Bloomberg ’ s costly failure has been chalked up to criticism he faced for policies implemented during his run as the Republican mayor of New York City , including @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Unit , ” which spied on Kebab shops and Muslim student rafting trips at Yale .
Bloomberg was also only a part-time member of the Democratic party with a history of endorsing Republican candidates and supporting their decisions , making left-leaning voters wary to cast a ballot in his favor .
But Bloomberg is hardly an isolated case .
Tom Steyer , billionaire hedge fund investor and environmental activist , also had an unsuccessful bid for the presidency , spending $ 341.7 million and raising just over $ 3.7 million .
In the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spent more than $ 7 million on TV and digital ads , including more than $ 3.7 million in TV ad buys across the first four primary states — Iowa , New Hampshire , Nevada and South Carolina .
His campaign relied on a strong finish in the latter state , which eventually swung in Biden ’ s favor during the Democratic primary .
Republican Texas congressional candidate Kathaleen Wall lost her second consecutive bid for a House seat after self-funding $ 9.2 million — 99.8 percent of her total campaign funds .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ run for Senate in Tennessee was 99.9 percent self-financed , also lost in the Tennessee primary after shelling out about $ 5 million .
New York Democrat Adam Schleifer also lost a bit for a House seat after spending $ 5.2 million of his own cash , and Illinois independent candidate Willie Wilson ’ s losing campaign for Senate was 100 percent self-funded , costing the candidate just under $ 3.1 million .
The failure of self-financed candidates is evident on both sides of the political aisle .
One reason for this may @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are largely inexperienced campaigners who lack compelling resumes and credentials .
For others , like Bloomberg , it may be because their reputations precede them .
Still , not all candidates who self-finance are doomed to fail .
Rep. David Trone ( D-Md . )
, 86.4 percent self-funded , beat Neil Parrott with a majority vote of 58.1 percent with 99 percent reporting as of Monday morning .
Democrat Sara Jacobs , heiress to the Qualcomm fortune , secured a victory against fellow Democrat Georgette Gomez in a bid for a California @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her more-than $ 6 million came from her own wallet .

Having lots of cash on hand is clearly not sufficient to win an election.
In the most expensive election cycle in U.S. history, many wealthy candidates poured ample amounts of their own cash into their campaigns. In most cases, these candidates still lost.
Self-funders range from billionaire presidential hopefuls to perennial self-funding candidates, to wealthy Georgia businesswoman Sen. Kelly Loeffler, who is fighting in a runoff to keep the seat she was appointed to.
Loeffler self-financed $23.3 million, according to OpenSecrets data. With no clear victor following Election Day, Loeffler will face Democratic challenger Rev. Raphael Warnock, who has never held office before, in a Jan. 5 runoff election.
Georgia candidates must win a majority of the vote in order to claim an election, according to state laws. With 98 percent reporting as of Wednesday according to the Associated Press, Loeffler and Warnock received 25.9 and 32.9 percent of the vote, respectively. This placed them in the top two slots in a crowded 21-person “jungle primary.”
On Nov. 5, Warnock aired a satirical TV ad warning voters that “the negative ads are coming.” And he was right.
More than $1 million of Loeffler’s cash has recently gone to an expensive TV ad campaign targeting Warnock. These ads accuse Warnock — the senior pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, the former pulpit of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. — of anti-American hatred, praising “Marxism” and calling police thugs and gangsters.
Republican Sen. David Perdue and Democratic rival Jon Ossoff will also go head-to-head in the Georgia runoff; Senate races are usually staggered so that a state’s two seats aren’t up for re-election at the same time, but between Perdue’s regular re-election bid and Loeffer’s appointment following Sen. Johnny Isakson’s retirement triggering a special election, the Peach State faces an unusual and decisive election cycle. The victors of the two Georgia runoffs will determine which party will take control of the Senate. So far, Republicans have won 50 Senate seats, and Democrats have a total of 48. If Democrats win both Georgia runoffs, Vice President-elect Kamala Harris would be the tiebreaking vote, giving the Democrats unified control of the White House and Congress, according to CNBC.
The biggest spender of personal funds this cycle has been Michael Bloomberg, whose bid for president was more than 99 percent self-funded. Bloomberg shelled out roughly $1.1 billion of his own fortune and received only about $914,000 from other donors, but lost by a landslide in the Democratic primary, winning only American Samoa.
Bloomberg’s costly failure has been chalked up to criticism he faced for policies implemented during his run as the Republican mayor of New York City, including his police department’s “Demographics Unit,” which spied on Kebab shops and Muslim student rafting trips at Yale. Bloomberg was also only a part-time member of the Democratic party with a history of endorsing Republican candidates and supporting their decisions, making left-leaning voters wary to cast a ballot in his favor.
But Bloomberg is hardly an isolated case. Tom Steyer, billionaire hedge fund investor and environmental activist, also had an unsuccessful bid for the presidency, spending $341.7 million and raising just over $3.7 million. In the first month of his candidacy, he spent more than $7 million on TV and digital ads, including more than $3.7 million in TV ad buys across the first four primary states — Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina. His campaign relied on a strong finish in the latter state, which eventually swung in Biden’s favor during the Democratic primary.
Republican Texas congressional candidate Kathaleen Wall lost her second consecutive bid for a House seat after self-funding $9.2 million — 99.8 percent of her total campaign funds. Republican George S. Flinn Jr., whose run for Senate in Tennessee was 99.9 percent self-financed, also lost in the Tennessee primary after shelling out about $5 million. New York Democrat Adam Schleifer also lost a bit for a House seat after spending $5.2 million of his own cash, and Illinois independent candidate Willie Wilson’s losing campaign for Senate was 100 percent self-funded, costing the candidate just under $3.1 million.
The failure of self-financed candidates is evident on both sides of the political aisle. One reason for this may be that in general, these candidates are largely inexperienced campaigners who lack compelling resumes and credentials. For others, like Bloomberg, it may be because their reputations precede them. Still, not all candidates who self-finance are doomed to fail.
Rep. David Trone (D-Md.), 86.4 percent self-funded, beat Neil Parrott with a majority vote of 58.1 percent with 99 percent reporting as of Monday morning. Democrat Sara Jacobs, heiress to the Qualcomm fortune, secured a victory against fellow Democrat Georgette Gomez in a bid for a California House seat. About 88.4 percent of her more-than $6 million came from her own wallet.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-11-21--To Push Biden Left, We Must Build Movements to Challenge His Corporate Backers

Recent discussion among progressives has focused on the need to “ push Joe Biden to the left ” on health care , climate , the police , and other issues .
That can be done , but there are more and less effective ways to go about it .
It requires understanding Biden ’ s motivations , the ways that past movements have won concessions from Democratic presidents , and the reasons why we failed ( mostly ) to do so with Barack Obama .
As many commentators have suggested recently , the establishment Democrats would rather lose elections than @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appeal to voters but alienate big business .
That was a major reason for Hillary Clinton ’ s loss in 2016 , and Biden ’ s milquetoast campaign would have ensured a repeat performance if not for Donald Trump ’ s catastrophic handling of the pandemic .
Even then , Biden ’ s razor-thin victory depended largely on the efforts of progressives who mobilized voters in places like southeast Michigan , Philadelphia , Georgia and Arizona .
Biden doesn ’ t feel indebted to progressives , though .
His prospective cabinet picks come @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dedicated to fulfilling his campaign promise that “ nothing would fundamentally change ” after he was elected .
Winning progressive concessions from Biden will thus be an uphill battle .
And given establishment Democrats ’ commitment to attacking progressives , criticizing Biden or protesting outside the White House isn ’ t enough .
If we want to push policy to the left , we must attack the real sources of power in U.S. politics : the corporations and other institutions that call the shots behind the scenes .
Social movements have historically been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ threatened the profits and stability of society ’ s elites .
Recognizing that politicians are merely the servants , they ’ ve targeted the masters .
The New Deal of the 1930s owed less to Democratic politicians than to workers ’ disruption of their workplaces .
A central piece of the New Deal , the 1935 Wagner Act that guaranteed collective bargaining rights for private-sector workers , had not been on Franklin Roosevelt ’ s agenda in 1933 .
By mid-1934 , however , “ the administration found itself suddenly confronted with a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ without any policy to deal with it , ” notes historian Christopher Tomlins .
Roosevelt responded by creating a new labor negotiation board , and in 1935 , he reluctantly lent his support to Senator Robert F. Wagner ’ s labor bill .
The newly signed Wagner Act was initially ignored by employers , even after the Supreme Court upheld it .
It took another wave of worker militancy — almost 9,000 strikes between 1935 and 1937 — to force employers to agree to its implementation .
Faced with that disruption , even @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that a unionized workforce was the lesser evil if it could restore stability .
Workers ’ main strategy was to disrupt the functioning of their workplaces , which they understood could bring the economy ( and thus profits ) to a halt .
Instead of marching on Washington or calling their legislators , they just jammed their wrenches in the gears .
Business and government alike had no choice but to move left .
Black organizers working for desegregation in the South in the 1950s and 1960s succeeded for similar reasons .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Instead , they organized sustained campaigns involving boycotts , sit-ins , and other disruptions that imposed direct costs on the Southern economic elite .
In Birmingham , Alabama , a movement boycott cost white merchants millions of dollars in 1963 .
Facing the prospect of continued losses , the merchants told the city government and police to stop repressing the movement and allow integration .
It worked , because as Martin Luther King Jr. later noted , “ the political power structure listens to the economic power structure.
” The same dynamic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ John F. Kennedy had been president for almost two and a half years and had done virtually nothing constructive on civil rights .
A month after the Birmingham victory , he finally sent a civil rights bill to Congress , which passed it the following year .
Kennedy conceded not because of the skillful lobbying of civil rights leaders , nor due to direct protests against his administration , but because of the economic destabilization generated by a mass movement in the South .
The contrast with the Obama presidency is stark .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ Congress during his first two years , Obama continued most of his predecessor ’ s pro-corporate and militaristic policies , and his few progressive reforms were highly compromised from the start .
Non-electoral social movements were not large or disruptive enough to alter the calculus of elite decision-making .
Had we been able to make business pay a real price during the Obama era , as the organizers of the 1930s and 1960s did , we could have pushed government policy to the left .
Measuring ourselves against those prior generations may seem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ we ’ ll organize 9,000 strikes under Biden .
But a strategy of targeting business need not reach that scale to have a real impact .
It starts by building strong organizations in our workplaces and communities , and thinking about how we can wield collective economic pressure in conjunction with other tactics such as lawsuits .
It also means supporting others who refuse to work , or to buy , or to pay their rent .
For instance , we can donate to union strike funds or mobilize community support for workers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the most promising current examples are in the climate and Indigenous rights movements .
Disruptive protests and legal action helped stop scores of coal-fired power plants from being constructed during the Obama era , which ultimately had a far bigger impact on fighting climate change than anything Obama did .
Organizers also obstructed the building of pipelines like the Keystone XL and Dakota Access projects , using a combination of protests , economic pressure targeting the investors and lawsuits to halt construction .
( That ’ s why I said at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; there were a few bright spots . )
Believe it or not , organizers have even pushed policy to the left under Trump — not by influencing Trump himself , but by pressuring investors , businesses and judges to constrain his power .
Trump ’ s agenda of full-throttle ecocide has been hampered to a significant degree by the anti-pipeline movement , which has carried out a “ rising tide of protests , litigation and vandalism , ” as fossil fuel executives have bemoaned .
In 2018 , the CEO of Kinder @ @ @ @ @ @ @ intensity ” of the resistance “ has ramped up.… There ’ s more opponents , and it ’ s more organized.
” Earlier this year , the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project was cancelled , thanks to what Trump ’ s irate energy secretary called the “ obstructionist environmental ” movement .
Fossil fuel executives , and more importantly their investors , have even started to conclude that “ the mega-projects of the past are no longer feasible in the face of unprecedented opposition to fossil fuels and the infrastructure that supports them.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressure is having a real impact .
This doesn ’ t mean we should ignore elections entirely .
But the best way to get better electoral outcomes is , ironically , to build strong non-electoral movements .
In addition to winning immediate gains , non-electoral movements serve a powerful educational function , for both their participants and the broader society .
By organizing people around clear shared goals and by triggering resistance from entrenched elites , they throw injustice into relief in a way that electoral movements do not .
We often hear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moderate ” voters .
There is mounting evidence to the contrary .
The nationwide protests against police violence in 2020 seem to have benefited Democratic candidates in the November 3 election .
While some voters undoubtedly responded by embracing the right ’ s racist “ law and order ” message , many others responded by voting for Democrats .
The uprisings raised the public ’ s awareness of racist state violence and galvanized people ’ s commitment to do something about it , even if just by voting .
A July 2020 report @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Atlanta had been followed by “ a significant surge in turnout ” for early voting in Georgia among Black and youth voters .
The report also noted that , nationwide , new voter registrations had been skewing Democratic at a much higher rate since the protests began , including in Republican-leaning states .
It ’ s even possible that Biden would ’ ve lost to Trump without the summer ’ s uprisings .
The Biden wing of the Democratic Party probably won ’ t learn any of these lessons .
But the course @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the lessons that we ourselves have learned from the past .

Social movements are most powerful when they threaten profits, as the victories of the 1930s and 1960s demonstrate.
Recent discussion among progressives has focused on the need to “push Joe Biden to the left” on health care, climate, the police, and other issues. That can be done, but there are more and less effective ways to go about it. It requires understanding Biden’s motivations, the ways that past movements have won concessions from Democratic presidents, and the reasons why we failed (mostly) to do so with Barack Obama.
As many commentators have suggested recently, the establishment Democrats would rather lose elections than embrace a progressive agenda, which would appeal to voters but alienate big business. That was a major reason for Hillary Clinton’s loss in 2016, and Biden’s milquetoast campaign would have ensured a repeat performance if not for Donald Trump’s catastrophic handling of the pandemic. Even then, Biden’s razor-thin victory depended largely on the efforts of progressives who mobilized voters in places like southeast Michigan, Philadelphia, Georgia and Arizona.
Biden doesn’t feel indebted to progressives, though. His prospective cabinet picks come heavily from weapons companies and other institutions dedicated to fulfilling his campaign promise that “nothing would fundamentally change” after he was elected.
Winning progressive concessions from Biden will thus be an uphill battle. And given establishment Democrats’ commitment to attacking progressives, criticizing Biden or protesting outside the White House isn’t enough.
If we want to push policy to the left, we must attack the real sources of power in U.S. politics: the corporations and other institutions that call the shots behind the scenes. Social movements have historically been most powerful when they’ve directly threatened the profits and stability of society’s elites. Recognizing that politicians are merely the servants, they’ve targeted the masters.
The New Deal of the 1930s owed less to Democratic politicians than to workers’ disruption of their workplaces. A central piece of the New Deal, the 1935 Wagner Act that guaranteed collective bargaining rights for private-sector workers, had not been on Franklin Roosevelt’s agenda in 1933. By mid-1934, however, “the administration found itself suddenly confronted with a massive strike wave in mass production industries without any policy to deal with it,” notes historian Christopher Tomlins. Roosevelt responded by creating a new labor negotiation board, and in 1935, he reluctantly lent his support to Senator Robert F. Wagner’s labor bill.
The newly signed Wagner Act was initially ignored by employers, even after the Supreme Court upheld it. It took another wave of worker militancy — almost 9,000 strikes between 1935 and 1937 — to force employers to agree to its implementation. Faced with that disruption, even notoriously anti-union bosses like Henry Ford decided that a unionized workforce was the lesser evil if it could restore stability.
Winning progressive concessions from Biden will thus be an uphill battle. And criticizing Biden or protesting outside the White House isn’t enough.
Workers’ main strategy was to disrupt the functioning of their workplaces, which they understood could bring the economy (and thus profits) to a halt. Instead of marching on Washington or calling their legislators, they just jammed their wrenches in the gears. Business and government alike had no choice but to move left.
Black organizers working for desegregation in the South in the 1950s and 1960s succeeded for similar reasons. They did not focus primarily on pressuring politicians. Instead, they organized sustained campaigns involving boycotts, sit-ins, and other disruptions that imposed direct costs on the Southern economic elite.
In Birmingham, Alabama, a movement boycott cost white merchants millions of dollars in 1963. Facing the prospect of continued losses, the merchants told the city government and police to stop repressing the movement and allow integration. It worked, because as Martin Luther King Jr. later noted, “the political power structure listens to the economic power structure.”
The same dynamic played out at the national level. John F. Kennedy had been president for almost two and a half years and had done virtually nothing constructive on civil rights. A month after the Birmingham victory, he finally sent a civil rights bill to Congress, which passed it the following year. Kennedy conceded not because of the skillful lobbying of civil rights leaders, nor due to direct protests against his administration, but because of the economic destabilization generated by a mass movement in the South.
The contrast with the Obama presidency is stark. Despite Democratic control of both houses of Congress during his first two years, Obama continued most of his predecessor’s pro-corporate and militaristic policies, and his few progressive reforms were highly compromised from the start. Non-electoral social movements were not large or disruptive enough to alter the calculus of elite decision-making. Had we been able to make business pay a real price during the Obama era, as the organizers of the 1930s and 1960s did, we could have pushed government policy to the left.
Measuring ourselves against those prior generations may seem demoralizing: It’s unlikely that we’ll organize 9,000 strikes under Biden. But a strategy of targeting business need not reach that scale to have a real impact. It starts by building strong organizations in our workplaces and communities, and thinking about how we can wield collective economic pressure in conjunction with other tactics such as lawsuits. It also means supporting others who refuse to work, or to buy, or to pay their rent. For instance, we can donate to union strike funds or mobilize community support for workers who are challenging their bosses.
The best way to get better electoral outcomes is, ironically, to build strong non-electoral movements.
Some of the most promising current examples are in the climate and Indigenous rights movements. Disruptive protests and legal action helped stop scores of coal-fired power plants from being constructed during the Obama era, which ultimately had a far bigger impact on fighting climate change than anything Obama did. Organizers also obstructed the building of pipelines like the Keystone XL and Dakota Access projects, using a combination of protests, economic pressure targeting the investors and lawsuits to halt construction. (That’s why I said at the beginning that we mostly failed under Obama; there were a few bright spots.)
Believe it or not, organizers have even pushed policy to the left under Trump — not by influencing Trump himself, but by pressuring investors, businesses and judges to constrain his power. Trump’s agenda of full-throttle ecocide has been hampered to a significant degree by the anti-pipeline movement, which has carried out a “rising tide of protests, litigation and vandalism,” as fossil fuel executives have bemoaned. In 2018, the CEO of Kinder Morgan warned that “the level of intensity” of the resistance “has ramped up.… There’s more opponents, and it’s more organized.” Earlier this year, the Atlantic Coast Pipeline project was cancelled, thanks to what Trump’s irate energy secretary called the “obstructionist environmental” movement.
Fossil fuel executives, and more importantly their investors, have even started to conclude that “the mega-projects of the past are no longer feasible in the face of unprecedented opposition to fossil fuels and the infrastructure that supports them.” It’s a sign that non-electoral pressure is having a real impact.
This doesn’t mean we should ignore elections entirely. But the best way to get better electoral outcomes is, ironically, to build strong non-electoral movements. In addition to winning immediate gains, non-electoral movements serve a powerful educational function, for both their participants and the broader society. By organizing people around clear shared goals and by triggering resistance from entrenched elites, they throw injustice into relief in a way that electoral movements do not.
We often hear that disruptive and radical movements alienate “moderate” voters. There is mounting evidence to the contrary. The nationwide protests against police violence in 2020 seem to have benefited Democratic candidates in the November 3 election. While some voters undoubtedly responded by embracing the right’s racist “law and order” message, many others responded by voting for Democrats. The uprisings raised the public’s awareness of racist state violence and galvanized people’s commitment to do something about it, even if just by voting.
A July 2020 report from Democratic strategists acknowledged that protests in Atlanta had been followed by “a significant surge in turnout” for early voting in Georgia among Black and youth voters. The report also noted that, nationwide, new voter registrations had been skewing Democratic at a much higher rate since the protests began, including in Republican-leaning states. It’s even possible that Biden would’ve lost to Trump without the summer’s uprisings.
The Biden wing of the Democratic Party probably won’t learn any of these lessons. But the course of the Biden years will depend partly on the lessons that we ourselves have learned from the past.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-11-21--Ever-Growing Millions of Americans Face Eviction and Hunger. Will Congress Act?

Back in May , the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed the HEROES Act .
It was aimed at delivering trillions of dollars of additional federal funds to support health care systems , unemployment benefits , housing assistance , nutritional programs , as well as money to keep cities and states , public transit systems , schools , and other vital infrastructure functioning .
Since then , the House has passed several updated versions of the Act .
And yet , with Trump and the Senate GOP hostile to federal programs that they misleadingly claim will benefit only “ blue states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ has languished .
Through the late spring and summer , the GOP apparently hoped the pandemic would simply vanish , and the tens of millions of unemployed people would all be able to return to work .
Opposing expanded unemployment systems , senators such as Lindsey Graham argued that support-oriented measures would sabotage the labor market by providing people with disincentives to re-enter the workforce .
Once it became clear that the pandemic wouldn ’ t simply vanish of its own accord , the GOP pivoted , and , embracing much smaller financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the HEROES Act as fiscal responsibility in the face of a Democratic legislative effort to use the pandemic as an excuse to fund all of the party ’ s favorite programs .
Thus , legislative stalemate .
As a result , in the last weeks of 2020 , absent quick congressional action and with the pandemic raging worse than ever , millions of Americans are staring into an economic abyss .
Somewhere in the region of 12 million people — millions of them gig workers who don ’ t qualify , in normal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ more who are now considered to be long-term unemployed and who , again , in normal times would have maxed out their unemployment benefits — will lose their financial lifelines next month .
Unpack the economic morass , however , and the predicament of low-income Americans is far worse than just a congressional inability to extend COVID-era unemployment benefits .
The last nine months have peeled back the veneer on a society so vastly unequal — both as compared to earlier moments in U.S. history and as compared to every other advanced industrial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no longer has either the ability or the will to do right by those at the bottom of the economic pyramid .
Three billionaires now possess the same amount of wealth as the bottom half of the U.S. population .
Meanwhile , somewhere in the region of 13 million households that rent their homes are at risk of eviction once eviction moratoriums end over the coming months .
If this tsunami of evictions does occur , it will be on an even larger scale than the housing displacement that followed the 2008 financial @ @ @ @ @ @ @ homelessness crisis in America of a magnitude no other developed country comes close to experiencing .
Of course , it ’ s not only on the housing front that low-income Americans are at risk .
Over the past four years , despite low unemployment numbers prior to the pandemic , many of the health insurance coverage advances that occurred after the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 were rolled back by a relentless Trump administration campaign to sabotage the ACA .
In 2016 , according to Kaiser Family Foundation estimates , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the end of 2019 , that number had grown to 29.2 million .
This was still far lower than the 46.8 million uninsured at the time of the ACA ’ s passage , but the warning signs are clearly there : There has been a recent acceleration in the number of uninsured .
In fact , several think tanks and health care advocacy groups have estimated that the longer the pandemic lasts , the more American families will lose their health insurance .
The estimates range from a low of nearly three million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jobs to a high of 8.5 million people ending up uninsured .
Making this health situation even more precarious , groups monitoring hunger and food insecurity in the U.S. have reported extreme spikes in the numbers of Americans who struggle to put enough food on the table .
Earlier this year , that number was thought to be about 37 million .
Today , it is 54 million , or one in six Americans .
Seventeen million of these are children .
Food banks around the country are reporting unprecedented demand .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Precarious access to housing , medical care and food is magnified by structural crises in the environments that poor Americans live in .
From one city to the next , absent a congressionally funded rescue package , public transit systems — which are disproportionately relied on by poor people and people of color — are collapsing in on themselves .
In New York City , the MTA is proposing unprecedented cuts , which will likely lead to nearly 10,000 fewer transit employees and a 40 percent reduction in services .
In San @ @ @ @ @ @ @ permanently canceled .
In Los Angeles , which invested billions of dollars in a new subway system over the last decade , train and bus routes are being slashed around the city .
And from one state to the next , because of the lack of new dollars flowing in from Congress , legislators are pushing stark cut-to-the-bone budgets for K-12 schools and for public higher education institutions .
After-school programs and special education programs are being stripped down to bare essentials .
Again , disproportionately , these impact lower-income residents who are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least able to seek out alternatives once those services start to fail .
Educational inequality has been worsened by the fact that insufficient support has been provided for lower-income students to engage in remote learning ; low-income children have the least access to computers , to internet access , and to space in which to study remotely .
These crises ought not to be viewed separately from each other .
They are overlapping disasters , made far worse by congressional dysfunction , with consequences that , cumulatively , will prove devastating to many @ @ @ @ @ @ @ coming years .

Back in May, the Democratic-controlled House of Representatives passed the HEROES Act. It was aimed at delivering trillions of dollars of additional federal funds to support health care systems, unemployment benefits, housing assistance, nutritional programs, as well as money to keep cities and states, public transit systems, schools, and other vital infrastructure functioning. Since then, the House has passed several updated versions of the Act.
And yet, with Trump and the Senate GOP hostile to federal programs that they misleadingly claim will benefit only “blue states and cities,” the HEROES Act has languished. Through the late spring and summer, the GOP apparently hoped the pandemic would simply vanish, and the tens of millions of unemployed people would all be able to return to work. Opposing expanded unemployment systems, senators such as Lindsey Graham argued that support-oriented measures would sabotage the labor market by providing people with disincentives to re-enter the workforce. Once it became clear that the pandemic wouldn’t simply vanish of its own accord, the GOP pivoted, and, embracing much smaller financial stimulus packages, reframed its opposition to the HEROES Act as fiscal responsibility in the face of a Democratic legislative effort to use the pandemic as an excuse to fund all of the party’s favorite programs. Thus, legislative stalemate.
As a result, in the last weeks of 2020, absent quick congressional action and with the pandemic raging worse than ever, millions of Americans are staring into an economic abyss. Somewhere in the region of 12 million people — millions of them gig workers who don’t qualify, in normal times, for unemployment; and millions more who are now considered to be long-term unemployed and who, again, in normal times would have maxed out their unemployment benefits — will lose their financial lifelines next month.
Unpack the economic morass, however, and the predicament of low-income Americans is far worse than just a congressional inability to extend COVID-era unemployment benefits. The last nine months have peeled back the veneer on a society so vastly unequal — both as compared to earlier moments in U.S. history and as compared to every other advanced industrial democracy on Earth today — that it no longer has either the ability or the will to do right by those at the bottom of the economic pyramid.
Three billionaires now possess the same amount of wealth as the bottom half of the U.S. population. Meanwhile, somewhere in the region of 13 million households that rent their homes are at risk of eviction once eviction moratoriums end over the coming months. If this tsunami of evictions does occur, it will be on an even larger scale than the housing displacement that followed the 2008 financial collapse, and will add to a homelessness crisis in America of a magnitude no other developed country comes close to experiencing.
Of course, it’s not only on the housing front that low-income Americans are at risk.
Over the past four years, despite low unemployment numbers prior to the pandemic, many of the health insurance coverage advances that occurred after the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010 were rolled back by a relentless Trump administration campaign to sabotage the ACA. In 2016, according to Kaiser Family Foundation estimates, 26.7 million Americans were uninsured. By the end of 2019, that number had grown to 29.2 million. This was still far lower than the 46.8 million uninsured at the time of the ACA’s passage, but the warning signs are clearly there: There has been a recent acceleration in the number of uninsured. In fact, several think tanks and health care advocacy groups have estimated that the longer the pandemic lasts, the more American families will lose their health insurance. The estimates range from a low of nearly three million workers losing insurance as they lose their jobs to a high of 8.5 million people ending up uninsured.
Making this health situation even more precarious, groups monitoring hunger and food insecurity in the U.S. have reported extreme spikes in the numbers of Americans who struggle to put enough food on the table. Earlier this year, that number was thought to be about 37 million. Today, it is 54 million, or one in six Americans. Seventeen million of these are children. Food banks around the country are reporting unprecedented demand.
But the crisis goes far beyond these statistics. Precarious access to housing, medical care and food is magnified by structural crises in the environments that poor Americans live in.
From one city to the next, absent a congressionally funded rescue package, public transit systems — which are disproportionately relied on by poor people and people of color — are collapsing in on themselves. In New York City, the MTA is proposing unprecedented cuts, which will likely lead to nearly 10,000 fewer transit employees and a 40 percent reduction in services. In San Francisco, many bus routes have been permanently canceled. In Los Angeles, which invested billions of dollars in a new subway system over the last decade, train and bus routes are being slashed around the city.
And from one state to the next, because of the lack of new dollars flowing in from Congress, legislators are pushing stark cut-to-the-bone budgets for K-12 schools and for public higher education institutions. After-school programs and special education programs are being stripped down to bare essentials. Again, disproportionately, these impact lower-income residents who are most reliant on state services, and least able to seek out alternatives once those services start to fail. Educational inequality has been worsened by the fact that insufficient support has been provided for lower-income students to engage in remote learning; low-income children have the least access to computers, to internet access, and to space in which to study remotely.
These crises ought not to be viewed separately from each other. They are overlapping disasters, made far worse by congressional dysfunction, with consequences that, cumulatively, will prove devastating to many tens of millions of Americans over the coming years.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
Copyright © Truthout. May not be reprinted without permission.


truthout--2020-11-22--Don’t Let Cuomo’s “Pay Cut” Stunt Deflect Attention From His Austerity Policies

In a move that smacks of rank hypocrisy and condescension , Governor Cuomo announced on Wednesday — in the midst of a televised coronavirus briefing — that he would be foregoing his scheduled $ 25,000 raise for next year .
The decision comes after several conservative news outlets , including the New York Post and Fox News , condemned the Governor ’ s expected pay increase in the face of a growing state deficit .
Cuomo , who has a net worth of at least $ 5 million and who currently earns $ 225,000 a year — one of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did not mention the criticism , but said that he and members of his cabinet would not be receiving their raises because of the “ overall financial picture ” created by the coronavirus pandemic .
Of course , foregoing these raises will have practically zero impact on the state ’ s expected $ 14 billion budget shortfall .
It will , however , help him to deflect attention away from his brutal attacks on the working class and his record of ruthless austerity .
By taking a voluntary pay deferral he also , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ self-serving and corrosive narrative that “ we are all in this together.
” He gets to pretend that he and those like him — the wealthy and politically powerful — are somehow sharing in the economic pain and suffering that his own administration helped to create .
Cuomo ’ s scheduled eleven percent raise , it should be noted , is about five times greater than the average percentage increase that most New York State public sector workers were scheduled to receive .
At $ 25,000 , it is exactly equal to what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would make in an entire year before taxes .
While the Governor is no doubt hoping that this publicity stunt will help convince New Yorkers of the severity of the state budget crisis , the fact is he has repeatedly rejected proposals that would balance the budget through progressive taxation on the rich and super rich .
Since he was elected , Cuomo has argued that any increase in taxes on the wealthy will only lead to capital flight , concerns that have not only been shown to be largely unfounded , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ majority of people living in New York .
Instead of taxing those who can most afford it , he has instead proposed further sweeping cuts to already hard hit public services that working people rely upon , including education , transportation , and health services .
If enacted , these cuts would devastate the New York working class and likely only push the state further into an economic crisis that working people will again be forced to pay for .
Cuomo ’ s decision also comes among a wave of wage cuts and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including tens of thousands of New York City school teachers , who were told last month that their scheduled and contractually obligated back pay would be indefinitely postponed .
Although an independent arbiter eventually ruled in their favor , these teachers will still not receive the full amount of their pay until July .
Meanwhile , at the City University of New York the new Chancellor , Fellix Matos Rodriguez , following the Governor ’ s lead , unilaterally declared that faculty and staff raises won in the last contract — raises that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the elimination of step increases for part-time lecturers — would not be forthcoming .
He has said no word about when , if ever , they will be honored .
Although Cuomo has tried to portray himself as a compassionate liberal , especially since the pandemic began , he came to power as an anti-union fiscal conservative and he has governed as one ever since .
Despite this , or perhaps because of it , state and city labor unions have done little to challenge his authority or to resist the draconian cuts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , cuts that have only added to the misery of decades of previous austerity .
Now that these unions are facing even more massive budget cuts and layoffs , they seem to be even less inclined to risk triggering the wrath of the Governor , but if they hope to survive , that is exactly what they must do .
This darling of the neoliberal establishment and the party he represents have nothing to offer the working class but more attacks and hardship as capitalist profits are threatened by the recession .
As @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another two years of a deadlocked congress , it is unlikely that any federal bailout of New York will be forthcoming .
Thus , it is looking more and more possible that New York , like many other states , will have to solve its budget crisis on its own , and such a scenario can only end in one of two ways : either working people are forced to pay for the crisis , or they fight back .
Public sector unions in particular have an obligation to build the fight against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ doing that will require more than the usual lobbying efforts and bargaining for scraps on offer from the labor bureaucracy .
If labor wishes to survive , unions will have to begin to think and act as a collective political force , of and for the working class as a whole .
Nothing in New York City or New York state runs without the consent of the state workers , and building the collective capacity for a city-wide or state-wide strike against austerity has to be the priority of every public sector worker @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the country right now .

In a move that smacks of rank hypocrisy and condescension, Governor Cuomo announced on Wednesday — in the midst of a televised coronavirus briefing — that he would be foregoing his scheduled $25,000 raise for next year. The decision comes after several conservative news outlets, including the New York Post and Fox News, condemned the Governor’s expected pay increase in the face of a growing state deficit.
Cuomo, who has a net worth of at least $5 million and who currently earns $225,000 a year — one of the highest governor salaries in the country — did not mention the criticism, but said that he and members of his cabinet would not be receiving their raises because of the “overall financial picture” created by the coronavirus pandemic. Of course, foregoing these raises will have practically zero impact on the state’s expected $14 billion budget shortfall. It will, however, help him to deflect attention away from his brutal attacks on the working class and his record of ruthless austerity. By taking a voluntary pay deferral he also, once again, gets to sell the self-serving and corrosive narrative that “we are all in this together.” He gets to pretend that he and those like him — the wealthy and politically powerful — are somehow sharing in the economic pain and suffering that his own administration helped to create.
Cuomo’s scheduled eleven percent raise, it should be noted, is about five times greater than the average percentage increase that most New York State public sector workers were scheduled to receive. At $25,000, it is exactly equal to what a full-time minimum wage worker in Albany would make in an entire year before taxes.
While the Governor is no doubt hoping that this publicity stunt will help convince New Yorkers of the severity of the state budget crisis, the fact is he has repeatedly rejected proposals that would balance the budget through progressive taxation on the rich and super rich. Since he was elected, Cuomo has argued that any increase in taxes on the wealthy will only lead to capital flight, concerns that have not only been shown to be largely unfounded, but ignore the widespread economic hardship facing the majority of people living in New York. Instead of taxing those who can most afford it, he has instead proposed further sweeping cuts to already hard hit public services that working people rely upon, including education, transportation, and health services. If enacted, these cuts would devastate the New York working class and likely only push the state further into an economic crisis that working people will again be forced to pay for.
Cuomo’s decision also comes among a wave of wage cuts and raise deferrals to public sector employees, including tens of thousands of New York City school teachers, who were told last month that their scheduled and contractually obligated back pay would be indefinitely postponed. Although an independent arbiter eventually ruled in their favor, these teachers will still not receive the full amount of their pay until July. Meanwhile, at the City University of New York the new Chancellor, Fellix Matos Rodriguez, following the Governor’s lead, unilaterally declared that faculty and staff raises won in the last contract — raises that were traded for other demands such as the elimination of step increases for part-time lecturers — would not be forthcoming. He has said no word about when, if ever, they will be honored.
Although Cuomo has tried to portray himself as a compassionate liberal, especially since the pandemic began, he came to power as an anti-union fiscal conservative and he has governed as one ever since. Despite this, or perhaps because of it, state and city labor unions have done little to challenge his authority or to resist the draconian cuts that have taken place under his watch, cuts that have only added to the misery of decades of previous austerity. Now that these unions are facing even more massive budget cuts and layoffs, they seem to be even less inclined to risk triggering the wrath of the Governor, but if they hope to survive, that is exactly what they must do. This darling of the neoliberal establishment and the party he represents have nothing to offer the working class but more attacks and hardship as capitalist profits are threatened by the recession.
As the country prepares for what looks like another two years of a deadlocked congress, it is unlikely that any federal bailout of New York will be forthcoming. Thus, it is looking more and more possible that New York, like many other states, will have to solve its budget crisis on its own, and such a scenario can only end in one of two ways: either working people are forced to pay for the crisis, or they fight back. Public sector unions in particular have an obligation to build the fight against the coming wave of austerity, but doing that will require more than the usual lobbying efforts and bargaining for scraps on offer from the labor bureaucracy. If labor wishes to survive, unions will have to begin to think and act as a collective political force, of and for the working class as a whole. Nothing in New York City or New York state runs without the consent of the state workers, and building the collective capacity for a city-wide or state-wide strike against austerity has to be the priority of every public sector worker and unionist in the state and across the country right now.
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.


truthout--2020-11-22--Trump Passes on COVID Vaccine Summit as Pandemic Cases in US Exceed 12 Million

After briefly attending the virtual G20 summit from the White House ’ s Situation Room on Saturday , President Donald Trump skipped a meeting with other leaders of the world ’ s 20 largest economies where the attendees discussed the coronavirus pandemic .
The “ Pandemic Preparedness and Response ” meeting included addresses by French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel , but no American government officials were listed as speakers .
Both Macron and Merkel have been leaders in the global call for a coordinated international response to the coronavirus pandemic , with the French leader calling @ @ @ @ @ @ @ countries .
As the U.S. allies prepared to discuss the financing of vaccine collaborations at the two-day G20 summit , Trump retreated to his golf club in Sterling , Virginia .
In the U.S. , Covid-19 cases passed 12 million cases on Saturday , less than a week after reaching 11 million cases .
On Friday , the country set a new record for new cases recorded in a single day , with more than 198,500 cases confirmed .
Deaths are now higher than average in all 50 states and are peaking in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and North Dakota .
Governors , including Trump ’ s Republican allies such as Iowa Gov .
Kim Reynolds , are attempting to undo the damage done by the president and his political party ’ s widespread dismissal of public health guidance like mask-wearing and social distancing .
Earlier this week , Reynolds pleaded with Iowans to obey a new mask mandate , which she issued after months of calling such measures “ feel-good ” restrictions .
“ If Iowans don ’ t buy into this , we lose , ” Reynolds said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human life will be high.
” Despite reports of overwhelmed hospitals in states including Texas , Kansas , Tennessee , and Nevada , the president has taken no questions from reporters about the pandemic since most news outlets declared President-elect Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 election on November 7 .
Instead , the president has been largely focused on his efforts to prove the election , which Biden won by more than six million votes , was rigged and that so-called “ voter fraud ” is behind Biden ’ s victory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ G20 summit and before arriving at his golf club , Trump tweeted about unspecified “ big voter fraud information coming out concerning Georgia , ” which certified the election results on Friday after a hand recount confirmed that Biden won the state .
“ The president is not only missing from his post , but he ’ s encouraging a mutiny , ” Larry Jacobs , director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota , told The Guardian on Saturday .
“ There ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ kind of … behavior .
”

After briefly attending the virtual G20 summit from the White House’s Situation Room on Saturday, President Donald Trump skipped a meeting with other leaders of the world’s 20 largest economies where the attendees discussed the coronavirus pandemic.
The “Pandemic Preparedness and Response” meeting included addresses by French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, but no American government officials were listed as speakers. Both Macron and Merkel have been leaders in the global call for a coordinated international response to the coronavirus pandemic, with the French leader calling on Saturday for “solidarity” between countries.
As the U.S. allies prepared to discuss the financing of vaccine collaborations at the two-day G20 summit, Trump retreated to his golf club in Sterling, Virginia.
Nero fiddled. Trump golfed. — Dan Rather (@DanRather) November 21, 2020
In the U.S., Covid-19 cases passed 12 million cases on Saturday, less than a week after reaching 11 million cases. On Friday, the country set a new record for new cases recorded in a single day, with more than 198,500 cases confirmed. Deaths are now higher than average in all 50 states and are peaking in 14 states including Maine, Wisconsin, and North Dakota.
Governors, including Trump’s Republican allies such as Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds, are attempting to undo the damage done by the president and his political party’s widespread dismissal of public health guidance like mask-wearing and social distancing. Earlier this week, Reynolds pleaded with Iowans to obey a new mask mandate, which she issued after months of calling such measures “feel-good” restrictions.
“If Iowans don’t buy into this, we lose,” Reynolds said this week. “The cost in human life will be high.”
Despite reports of overwhelmed hospitals in states including Texas, Kansas, Tennessee, and Nevada, the president has taken no questions from reporters about the pandemic since most news outlets declared President-elect Joe Biden the winner of the 2020 election on November 7.
Instead, the president has been largely focused on his efforts to prove the election, which Biden won by more than six million votes, was rigged and that so-called “voter fraud” is behind Biden’s victory. On Saturday, after leaving the G20 summit and before arriving at his golf club, Trump tweeted about unspecified “big voter fraud information coming out concerning Georgia,” which certified the election results on Friday after a hand recount confirmed that Biden won the state.
“The president is not only missing from his post, but he’s encouraging a mutiny,” Larry Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota, told The Guardian on Saturday. “There’s no precedent in American history for this kind of … behavior.”
Tired of reading the same old news from the same old sources? So are we! That’s why we’re on a mission to shake things up and bring you the stories and perspectives that often go untold in mainstream media. But being a radically, unapologetically independent news site isn’t easy (or cheap), and we rely on reader support to keep the lights on.
If you like what you’re reading, please consider making a tax-deductible donation today. We’re not asking for a handout, we’re asking for an investment: Invest in a nonprofit news site that’s not afraid to ruffle a few feathers, not afraid to stand up for what’s right, and not afraid to tell it like it is.
This piece was reprinted by Truthout with permission or license. It may not be reproduced in any form without permission or license from the source.