truthout--2020-04-17--COVID-19 Was a Trigger, But Capitalism Caused the Economic Crash

After the dot-com crash in 2000 , economic policy aimed to “ get us back to normal.
” It sought to recreate or re-establish the U.S. economy as it was before the crisis hit .
After the subprime mortgage crisis , economic policy likewise proceeded to “ recovery.
” That meant returning to how the economy was before 2008-2009 .
Now , as we sink into an economic depression by reacting so poorly to the coronavirus , Federal Reserve and Trump Treasury policies seek to return us to that “ great economy ” Trump boasted about before March 2020 .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ grasping the basic problems of the U.S. capitalist economy before each of the three crashes dogging the first two decades of the new century .
Those problems were key contributors to those crashes , more important than the events that triggered them .
We should not be fooled by the desperate efforts of capitalism ’ s defenders who name crashes after their triggers , which just distracts attention from how and why capitalism ’ s vulnerabilities helped turn triggers into crashes .
Policy aimed to return U.S. capitalism to its status quo ante @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the next crash .
Tendencies toward ever-greater inequality and instability have haunted capitalism throughout its history .
Capitalism ’ s leaders and ideologues therefore tried everything they could think of to end , tame and distract from those tendencies that periodically threatened the system itself .
Against inequality , capitalism experimented with progressive tax structures , minimum wages , redistributive schemes , welfare states , universal basic incomes , and so on .
Yet , as Thomas Piketty ’ s work shows , capitalism ’ s tendencies to perpetuate greater inequality persist .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ succeeded in stopping or even reversing those tendencies , the stoppages or reversals proved temporary .
Against its likewise intrinsic instability , capitalism has repeatedly tried Keynesian monetary and fiscal policies plus all sorts of reforms , regulations , stabilizers , and so on .
However , all failed to stop capitalism ’ s business cycle , the system ’ s recurring accumulation of imbalances and weaknesses culminating in sharp declines ( crashes ) in employment , production and economic activity generally .
The events that trigger each capitalist crash differ as do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , the role of the capitalist system itself in periodically reproducing crashes is glaringly evident in the historical record .
Before the coronavirus hit the U.S. in March 2020 , our economic system was not “ great , ” as Trump boasted during his re-election efforts .
The corporate sector was lumbering under an immense load of accumulated debt .
As the crashes of 2000 and 2008 had ushered in Federal Reserve policies reducing interest rates , U.S. businesses of all sizes found they could borrow limitless monies at historically low @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and cheapest way to solve each and every business problem that arose .
Thus , monetary policies to try and cope with one capitalist crash helped set in motion responses building to the next crash .
By closing businesses down , the coronavirus stopped the profits that enabled accumulated corporate debts to be paid .
Defaults then undermined and froze credit markets that traded securitized corporate debt , the derivative instruments insuring that debt and those securities , and so on .
The U.S. economy before COVID-19 hit was also home to a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ profit calculations led firms in that complex decision to not produce or stockpile the masks , tests , ventilators , beds , etc .
needed to combat a pandemic .
The U.S. government , staffed and ideologically controlled by leaders borrowed from the corporate sector , did not compensate for the private sector ’ s failure to produce or stockpile what was needed for a dangerous virus .
Efficiency in generating profits trumped efficiency in securing public health .
Losses in wealth since March 1 , 2020 , far exceed the costs of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and combat the virus .
Capitalism ’ s profit-driven decisions proved monumentally inefficient .
Trump ’ s “ great economy ” had worsened the income and wealth inequalities that existed in 2016 .
Obama ’ s government presided over deepening inequalities too .
These inequalities constrained mass consumer purchasing power and that in turn constrained investment in production .
The Fed ’ s new money creation and record low interest rates in the post-2008 “ recovery ” brought stock price inflation to the stock market .
The exploding distance between the stock market @ @ @ @ @ @ @ services production accumulated an imbalance ( bubble ) just waiting for a trigger to unravel ( burst ) .
The post-2008 recovery lasted longer than the average such period ( four to seven years historically ) after a capitalist crash .
Longer-than-average periods usually meant that the next crash ( what we are in now ) would be worse than the average crash ( as it is now ) .
The post-2008 recovery also witnessed extreme measures to avoid any basic changes in the capitalist system .
For example , efforts to re-establish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a banking reform in the wake of the 1929 crash ) were successfully resisted , watered-down and delayed by the big private banks .
This helped return the economy to its pre-2008 economy “ normal.
” With Trump ’ s arrival in 2016 , that return to normal became a rush backwards to an ever-less regulated private capitalism .
All these developments helped steer the economy toward its next crash now .
To cope with the current crisis , massive direct interventions to transform the economy are needed .
In the first place @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the relief programs developed in the 1930s Great Depression – is needed .
Bernie Sanders has developed a solid outline for doing that .
Beyond relief ( and just as important ) , production and distribution need to be reorganized to respect conditions of social distancing alongside ongoing medical testing and monitoring of a threatened population , and monitoring of all populations immediately upon outbreaks of new , dangerous viruses anywhere in the world .
Public health must be the priority — far more important than private profits and employer interests .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ from — and in many ways , a challenge to — the economy that existed before March 2020 .
Because the shared dominant policy goal of Trump , the Republicans and the Democrats aims to return to a pre-virus “ normal , ” what needs to be done was not and is not being done .
Employers did not and do not now want to pay the costs of making workplaces safe against coronavirus , yet they want employees back on the job as they were before the pandemic .
That goal is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this pandemic , it is also a direct economic threat .
The U.S. establishment ’ s preferred policies prioritize returning to a capitalist economy with immense , dangerous weaknesses over serving public health now .
Those bipartisan establishment policies respond to the current crash in ways that launch capitalism toward its next crash .

Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
After the dot-com crash in 2000, economic policy aimed to “get us back to normal.” It sought to recreate or re-establish the U.S. economy as it was before the crisis hit. After the subprime mortgage crisis, economic policy likewise proceeded to “recovery.” That meant returning to how the economy was before 2008-2009. Now, as we sink into an economic depression by reacting so poorly to the coronavirus, Federal Reserve and Trump Treasury policies seek to return us to that “great economy” Trump boasted about before March 2020.
The repeated policy flaw lay in not grasping the basic problems of the U.S. capitalist economy before each of the three crashes dogging the first two decades of the new century. Those problems were key contributors to those crashes, more important than the events that triggered them. We should not be fooled by the desperate efforts of capitalism’s defenders who name crashes after their triggers, which just distracts attention from how and why capitalism’s vulnerabilities helped turn triggers into crashes. Policy aimed to return U.S. capitalism to its status quo ante each crash only guaranteed passage straight into the next crash.
Tendencies toward ever-greater inequality and instability have haunted capitalism throughout its history. Capitalism’s leaders and ideologues therefore tried everything they could think of to end, tame and distract from those tendencies that periodically threatened the system itself. Against inequality, capitalism experimented with progressive tax structures, minimum wages, redistributive schemes, welfare states, universal basic incomes, and so on. Yet, as Thomas Piketty’s work shows, capitalism’s tendencies to perpetuate greater inequality persist. Periodically, when mass uprisings against inequality succeeded in stopping or even reversing those tendencies, the stoppages or reversals proved temporary.
Against its likewise intrinsic instability, capitalism has repeatedly tried Keynesian monetary and fiscal policies plus all sorts of reforms, regulations, stabilizers, and so on. However, all failed to stop capitalism’s business cycle, the system’s recurring accumulation of imbalances and weaknesses culminating in sharp declines (crashes) in employment, production and economic activity generally. The events that trigger each capitalist crash differ as do specific features distinguishing one crash from another. However, the role of the capitalist system itself in periodically reproducing crashes is glaringly evident in the historical record.
Before the coronavirus hit the U.S. in March 2020, our economic system was not “great,” as Trump boasted during his re-election efforts. The corporate sector was lumbering under an immense load of accumulated debt. As the crashes of 2000 and 2008 had ushered in Federal Reserve policies reducing interest rates, U.S. businesses of all sizes found they could borrow limitless monies at historically low interest costs. Borrowing became the easiest and cheapest way to solve each and every business problem that arose. Thus, monetary policies to try and cope with one capitalist crash helped set in motion responses building to the next crash. By closing businesses down, the coronavirus stopped the profits that enabled accumulated corporate debts to be paid. Defaults then undermined and froze credit markets that traded securitized corporate debt, the derivative instruments insuring that debt and those securities, and so on.
The U.S. economy before COVID-19 hit was also home to a private, capitalist medical-industrial complex. Private profit calculations led firms in that complex decision to not produce or stockpile the masks, tests, ventilators, beds, etc. needed to combat a pandemic. The U.S. government, staffed and ideologically controlled by leaders borrowed from the corporate sector, did not compensate for the private sector’s failure to produce or stockpile what was needed for a dangerous virus. Efficiency in generating profits trumped efficiency in securing public health. Losses in wealth since March 1, 2020, far exceed the costs of producing and stockpiling needed supplies to contain and combat the virus. Capitalism’s profit-driven decisions proved monumentally inefficient.
The U.S. establishment’s preferred policies prioritize returning to a capitalist economy with immense, dangerous weaknesses over serving public health now.
Trump’s “great economy” had worsened the income and wealth inequalities that existed in 2016. Obama’s government presided over deepening inequalities too. These inequalities constrained mass consumer purchasing power and that in turn constrained investment in production. The Fed’s new money creation and record low interest rates in the post-2008 “recovery” brought stock price inflation to the stock market. The exploding distance between the stock market and the underlying economy of goods and services production accumulated an imbalance (bubble) just waiting for a trigger to unravel (burst).
The post-2008 recovery lasted longer than the average such period (four to seven years historically) after a capitalist crash. Longer-than-average periods usually meant that the next crash (what we are in now) would be worse than the average crash (as it is now). The post-2008 recovery also witnessed extreme measures to avoid any basic changes in the capitalist system. For example, efforts to re-establish some version of the Glass-Steagall Act (a banking reform in the wake of the 1929 crash) were successfully resisted, watered-down and delayed by the big private banks. This helped return the economy to its pre-2008 economy “normal.” With Trump’s arrival in 2016, that return to normal became a rush backwards to an ever-less regulated private capitalism. All these developments helped steer the economy toward its next crash now.
To cope with the current crisis, massive direct interventions to transform the economy are needed. In the first place, a massive relief program – patterned on the relief programs developed in the 1930s Great Depression – is needed. Bernie Sanders has developed a solid outline for doing that. Beyond relief (and just as important), production and distribution need to be reorganized to respect conditions of social distancing alongside ongoing medical testing and monitoring of a threatened population, and monitoring of all populations immediately upon outbreaks of new, dangerous viruses anywhere in the world. Public health must be the priority — far more important than private profits and employer interests. The resulting economy will be very different from — and in many ways, a challenge to — the economy that existed before March 2020.
Because the shared dominant policy goal of Trump, the Republicans and the Democrats aims to return to a pre-virus “normal,” what needs to be done was not and is not being done. Employers did not and do not now want to pay the costs of making workplaces safe against coronavirus, yet they want employees back on the job as they were before the pandemic. That goal is not only dangerous to our health in this pandemic, it is also a direct economic threat. The U.S. establishment’s preferred policies prioritize returning to a capitalist economy with immense, dangerous weaknesses over serving public health now. Those bipartisan establishment policies respond to the current crash in ways that launch capitalism toward its next crash.
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--2020-04-16--COVID-19 May Increase Heat Extremes This Summer

The massive global economic shutdown in response to COVID-19 is clearing the skies as less pollution is being emitted from the burning of fossil fuels , including emissions of fewer colorless greenhouse gases .
But emitting fewer greenhouse gases alone will not cool Earth , only reduce extra warming that would have otherwise taken place .
And counterintuitively , as fossil fuel pollutants are reduced , global average temperatures warm even more due to the loss of global cooling aerosols ( air pollution ) that are emitted alongside greenhouse gases when fossil fuels are burned .
These aerosols are short-lived @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or soot and sulfate particles .
They can cool by reflecting light back into space if they are bright aerosols ( sulfate ) or warm by absorbing light and turning it into heat if they are dark aerosols ( soot ) .
So many cooling aerosols are involved that they have been masking nearly a third of the planetary warming that should have occurred to date .
Halting their emissions is like turning off the air conditioner on a hot summer day .
But this hidden warming is only part of the story @ @ @ @ @ @ @ waves and droughts are more likely today on a warmer Earth than they have been in the past .
It ’ s these extremes that matter most : Averages don ’ t kill that often , but extremes do .
Reports of greenhouse gas emissions reductions of up to 25 percent from January to February in China , if extended for six months and applied globally , would reduce future emissions of carbon dioxide in the sky 0.3 percent total , slowing the overall rate of planetary warming .
Like after 9/11 and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rebound eventually erases the effects of reduced emissions .
In the meantime , however , we benefit from the clean air and fewer people die from respiratory challenges .
An article in Forbes even speculates that the decreased death toll from fossil fuel pollution might rival or exceed the death toll from COVID-19 .
The World Health Organization says total global deaths from outdoor air pollution are 4.2 million annually .
Worst-case-scenario COVID-19 mortality rates in just the U.S. are 2.2 million , according to the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ collapsed health care system .
The likelihood that global fossil fuel use will remain substantially below historic levels is pretty high for at least a few weeks to a few months .
This creates a significant risk that the reductions of global cooling aerosol emissions will reveal abrupt warming during the Northern hemisphere ’ s summer , plausibly creating heat wave and drought conditions beyond anything we have experienced .
The risks are two-fold : from reduction of global cooling pollution and from drought/heat wave feedback loops .
Aerosols mask 31.8 percent of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already with the concentrations of greenhouse gases currently in our atmosphere , according to the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report .
This cooling works in two ways : by blocking sunlight , creating global dimming ; and by enhancing cloud formation that does the same .
The aerosols mostly disappear after a few weeks to a few months .
When they disappear , it ’ s like pulling down a giant canopy in mid-summer at the park .
The sun ’ s rays bear down in all their ferocity and strike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s skin or plants , built objects or water , and that light energy is transformed into infrared energy or heat , where it is then trapped on Earth by greenhouse gases instead of being harmlessly reflected back into space as cold light energy .
The heat wave feedback is the other factor that needs to be considered .
A little more warming may not sound like much , but the vast majority of how our weather responds to planetary warming is due to such feedback loops .
The drought/heat feedback is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ directly tied to the biggest greenhouse gas of all : water vapor .
Heat dries the atmosphere .
The drier it gets , the hotter it becomes because less-humid air heats up more than humid air .
Then , the increased heat makes it drier still .
An article in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society by David Rup and Philip Mote , for instance , reported that the 2011 drought in Texas was made 20 times more likely because of global warming .
Similarly , Texas State Climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ caused by the drought/heat feedback loops .
The bottom line is that climate extremes are far from well-understood , and it ’ s these extremes that are the most important .
The way they work is full of such feedback loops .
Some are known , but others haven ’ t even been discovered yet .
If they were , climate scientists would likely be able to model them to better predict when they will occur and just exactly how extreme they will be.A little bit of extra warming can create impacts that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
This is one of those laws of physics climate scientists have been warning us about for 30 years now .
Physics doesn ’ t generally happen linearly , especially where heat is concerned .
With heat , physics happens like the spread of COVID-19 , nonlinearly and exponentially .
The short-term projections of weather and extremes are still too difficult to predict with total accuracy , in contrast to longer-term climate patterns that have so far been unnervingly accurate .
It ’ s the short-term events — the extreme events — that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Short-term extreme weather events can change the direction of the future on a dime .
An example would be a tropical storm event striking during the summer as a major drought is unfolding .
Because it is much more difficult for nature to heat up humid air after a hurricane , drought and heat waves are much more likely to be stopped , or at least reduced , in severity by a tropical rain event .
Because hurricane intensity , formation and landfall remain difficult to predict , some of us will be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ maybe .
The rest of us , whoever we may be , should likely add another thing to our lists to keep us awake at night .

Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
The massive global economic shutdown in response to COVID-19 is clearing the skies as less pollution is being emitted from the burning of fossil fuels, including emissions of fewer colorless greenhouse gases. But emitting fewer greenhouse gases alone will not cool Earth, only reduce extra warming that would have otherwise taken place. And counterintuitively, as fossil fuel pollutants are reduced, global average temperatures warm even more due to the loss of global cooling aerosols (air pollution) that are emitted alongside greenhouse gases when fossil fuels are burned.
These aerosols are short-lived, and consist of things like smoke or soot and sulfate particles. They can cool by reflecting light back into space if they are bright aerosols (sulfate) or warm by absorbing light and turning it into heat if they are dark aerosols (soot). So many cooling aerosols are involved that they have been masking nearly a third of the planetary warming that should have occurred to date. Halting their emissions is like turning off the air conditioner on a hot summer day. But this hidden warming is only part of the story. Warming feedbacks creating especially worrisome heat waves and droughts are more likely today on a warmer Earth than they have been in the past. It’s these extremes that matter most: Averages don’t kill that often, but extremes do.
Reports of greenhouse gas emissions reductions of up to 25 percent from January to February in China, if extended for six months and applied globally, would reduce future emissions of carbon dioxide in the sky 0.3 percent total, slowing the overall rate of planetary warming. Like after 9/11 and the Great Recession in 2008, economic rebound eventually erases the effects of reduced emissions. In the meantime, however, we benefit from the clean air and fewer people die from respiratory challenges.
An article in Forbes even speculates that the decreased death toll from fossil fuel pollution might rival or exceed the death toll from COVID-19. The World Health Organization says total global deaths from outdoor air pollution are 4.2 million annually. Worst-case-scenario COVID-19 mortality rates in just the U.S. are 2.2 million, according to the Imperial College COVID-19 Response Team in the U.K., excluding possible deaths from a collapsed health care system.
The likelihood that global fossil fuel use will remain substantially below historic levels is pretty high for at least a few weeks to a few months. This creates a significant risk that the reductions of global cooling aerosol emissions will reveal abrupt warming during the Northern hemisphere’s summer, plausibly creating heat wave and drought conditions beyond anything we have experienced. The risks are two-fold: from reduction of global cooling pollution and from drought/heat wave feedback loops.
Aerosols mask 31.8 percent of the planetary warming we should have experienced already with the concentrations of greenhouse gases currently in our atmosphere, according to the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report. This cooling works in two ways: by blocking sunlight, creating global dimming; and by enhancing cloud formation that does the same.
A little bit of extra warming can create impacts that are far greater than the original warming.
The aerosols mostly disappear after a few weeks to a few months. When they disappear, it’s like pulling down a giant canopy in mid-summer at the park. The sun’s rays bear down in all their ferocity and strike an object, whether that be one’s skin or plants, built objects or water, and that light energy is transformed into infrared energy or heat, where it is then trapped on Earth by greenhouse gases instead of being harmlessly reflected back into space as cold light energy.
The heat wave feedback is the other factor that needs to be considered. A little more warming may not sound like much, but the vast majority of how our weather responds to planetary warming is due to such feedback loops. The drought/heat feedback is one of the biggest because it is directly tied to the biggest greenhouse gas of all: water vapor. Heat dries the atmosphere. The drier it gets, the hotter it becomes because less-humid air heats up more than humid air. Then, the increased heat makes it drier still.
An article in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society by David Rup and Philip Mote, for instance, reported that the 2011 drought in Texas was made 20 times more likely because of global warming. Similarly, Texas State Climatologist John Nielsen-Gammon said that 74 percent of that drought was caused by the drought/heat feedback loops.
The bottom line is that climate extremes are far from well-understood, and it’s these extremes that are the most important. The way they work is full of such feedback loops. Some are known, but others haven’t even been discovered yet. If they were, climate scientists would likely be able to model them to better predict when they will occur and just exactly how extreme they will be.A little bit of extra warming can create impacts that are far greater than the original warming. This is one of those laws of physics climate scientists have been warning us about for 30 years now. Physics doesn’t generally happen linearly, especially where heat is concerned. With heat, physics happens like the spread of COVID-19, nonlinearly and exponentially.
Short-term extreme weather events can change the direction of the future on a dime.
The short-term projections of weather and extremes are still too difficult to predict with total accuracy, in contrast to longer-term climate patterns that have so far been unnervingly accurate. It’s the short-term events — the extreme events — that remain the challenge for climate scientists. Short-term extreme weather events can change the direction of the future on a dime.
An example would be a tropical storm event striking during the summer as a major drought is unfolding. Because it is much more difficult for nature to heat up humid air after a hurricane, drought and heat waves are much more likely to be stopped, or at least reduced, in severity by a tropical rain event. Because hurricane intensity, formation and landfall remain difficult to predict, some of us will be spared extra heat because of COVID-19 … maybe.
The rest of us, whoever we may be, should likely add another thing to our lists to keep us awake at night.
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--2020-04-18--Attorney General Barr Refuses to Release 9/11 Documents to Victims’ Families

Months after President Donald Trump promised to open FBI files to help families of the 9/11 victims in a civil lawsuit against the Saudi government , the Justice Department has doubled down on its claim that the information is a state secret .
In a series of filings just before a midnight court deadline on Monday , the attorney general , William Barr ; the acting director of national intelligence , Richard Grenell ; and other senior officials insisted to a federal judge in the civil case that further disclosures about Saudi connections to the 9/11 plot would imperil national @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court filings that even its justification for that secrecy needed to remain secret .
Four statements to the court by FBI and Justice Department officials were filed under seal so they could not be seen by the public .
An additional five , including one from the CIA , were shared only with the judge and can not be read even by the plaintiffs ’ lawyers .
Barr insisted to the court that public discussion of the issue “ would reveal information that could cause the very harms my assertion of the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What the various security agencies are trying to hide remains a mystery .
Since the plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in federal district court in New York in 2017 , their primary focus has been on the relationship between the hijackers and relatively low-level Saudi officials .
Those include at least two Saudis who crossed paths in Southern California with the first two Al Qaeda operatives who were sent to the United States by Osama bin Laden in January 2000 .
Yet the broad outlines of the hijackers ’ connections to those two Saudi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s Los Angeles consulate and a suspected Saudi spy living as an exchange student in San Diego — have been publicly known for years .
The FBI shared thousands of pages of its files on the plot with the bipartisan 9/11 Commission , which explored them in its 2004 report .
“ The extraordinary lengths that they ’ re going to here suggest that there must be some deep , dark secret that they ’ re still trying very hard to hide after almost 20 years , ” said a lawyer for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ But who are they protecting ?
Something might be a Saudi government secret .
But how can these be secrets that still need to be kept from the American people after all this time ?
” The Justice Department has declassified some information about the Saudi role in 9/11 and shared it with lawyers for the plaintiffs under a protective order that allows them to read it but not make it public .
But the department has not asked the lawyers to obtain security clearances to view other material , as is fairly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and foreign citizens whose constitutional rights are at issue .
The chorus of senior national security officials who wrote in support of the Trump administration ’ s secrets claim appeared to respond in part to Justice Department guidelines set down by the Obama administration in 2009 .
Those rules were intended to restrain overly aggressive use of the privilege , which the administration of George W. Bush had often cited after 9/11 to block legal challenges to its policies on torture , extraordinary rendition and warrantless surveillance .
Barr cited those more restrictive @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court , noting that they prohibited the government from asserting a state secrets claim in order to conceal illegalities or potential embarrassment .
He assured the magistrate judge in the case , Sarah Netburn , that those guidelines had been met .
At a ceremonial gathering at the White House last Sept. 11 , representatives of the families of those killed in the attacks repeatedly asked Trump for fuller access to the FBI ’ s secret files in the case .
According to more than a half-dozen people who were at the meeting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ would help .
“ He looked us in the eye on 9/11 , he shook our hands in the White House and said , ‘ I ’ m going to help you — it ’ s done , ’ ” recalled one of those present , Brett Eagleson , a banker whose father was killed in the World Trade Center .
“ I think the 9/11 families have lost all hope that the president is going to step up and do the right thing .
He ’ s too beholden to the Saudis.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ not immediately respond Wednesday to a request for comment on the families ’ characterizations of the meeting .
One day after that encounter , Justice Department officials agreed to release the name of one mid-level Saudi religious official who had been tied to the case in an FBI document that had been partially declassified earlier .
At the same time , however , Barr asserted the state secrets privilege to protect other FBI documents sought by the families .
The latest flurry of statements supporting that claim responded to challenges from the plaintiffs @ @ @ @ @ @ @ United States and the Saudi kingdom has survived countless moments of tension , it has frayed in recent months in ways that could prove helpful to plaintiffs in the 9/11 lawsuit .
In recent weeks , Republican senators from states that have been hard hit by the collapse of world oil prices have criticized the Saudi government with growing intensity .
On March 25 , before the Trump administration negotiated a cut in Saudi oil production , Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska cited the law under which the 9/11 families were allowed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the levers of pressure that the United States could use if the kingdom did not take account of American concerns .
In a letter on Monday , three other influential senators asked the Justice Department ’ s inspector general to examine in depth why the FBI has refused to disclose more information about Saudi connections to the plot in response to a subpoena filed by the 9/11 families in 2018 .
Those senators , Charles Grassley , the Iowa Republican , and two Democrats , minority leader Charles Schumer of New York and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ recent investigative report by ProPublica and The New York Times Magazine that raised new questions about the FBI ’ s inquiry into the Saudi role in the attacks .
“ The September 11 attacks represent a singular and defining tragedy in the history of our Nation , ” the senators wrote to the Justice Department inspector general , Michael Horowitz .
“ Nearly 20 years later , the 9/11 families and the American public still have not received the full and transparent accounting of the potential sources of support for those attacks to @ @ @ @ @ @

Barr says he cannot even explain why the material must stay secret without putting national security at risk.
Months after President Donald Trump promised to open FBI files to help families of the 9/11 victims in a civil lawsuit against the Saudi government, the Justice Department has doubled down on its claim that the information is a state secret.
In a series of filings just before a midnight court deadline on Monday, the attorney general, William Barr; the acting director of national intelligence, Richard Grenell; and other senior officials insisted to a federal judge in the civil case that further disclosures about Saudi connections to the 9/11 plot would imperil national security.
But the administration insisted in court filings that even its justification for that secrecy needed to remain secret. Four statements to the court by FBI and Justice Department officials were filed under seal so they could not be seen by the public. An additional five, including one from the CIA, were shared only with the judge and cannot be read even by the plaintiffs’ lawyers.
Barr insisted to the court that public discussion of the issue “would reveal information that could cause the very harms my assertion of the state secrets privilege is intended to prevent.”
What the various security agencies are trying to hide remains a mystery.
Since the plaintiffs filed their lawsuit in federal district court in New York in 2017, their primary focus has been on the relationship between the hijackers and relatively low-level Saudi officials. Those include at least two Saudis who crossed paths in Southern California with the first two Al Qaeda operatives who were sent to the United States by Osama bin Laden in January 2000.
Yet the broad outlines of the hijackers’ connections to those two Saudi officials — a diplomat at the kingdom’s Los Angeles consulate and a suspected Saudi spy living as an exchange student in San Diego — have been publicly known for years. The FBI shared thousands of pages of its files on the plot with the bipartisan 9/11 Commission, which explored them in its 2004 report.
“The extraordinary lengths that they’re going to here suggest that there must be some deep, dark secret that they’re still trying very hard to hide after almost 20 years,” said a lawyer for the families, Steven Pounian. “But who are they protecting? Something might be a Saudi government secret. But how can these be secrets that still need to be kept from the American people after all this time?”
The Justice Department has declassified some information about the Saudi role in 9/11 and shared it with lawyers for the plaintiffs under a protective order that allows them to read it but not make it public. But the department has not asked the lawyers to obtain security clearances to view other material, as is fairly common in national security cases involving American and foreign citizens whose constitutional rights are at issue.
The chorus of senior national security officials who wrote in support of the Trump administration’s secrets claim appeared to respond in part to Justice Department guidelines set down by the Obama administration in 2009. Those rules were intended to restrain overly aggressive use of the privilege, which the administration of George W. Bush had often cited after 9/11 to block legal challenges to its policies on torture, extraordinary rendition and warrantless surveillance.
Barr cited those more restrictive guidelines in his statement to the district court, noting that they prohibited the government from asserting a state secrets claim in order to conceal illegalities or potential embarrassment. He assured the magistrate judge in the case, Sarah Netburn, that those guidelines had been met.
At a ceremonial gathering at the White House last Sept. 11, representatives of the families of those killed in the attacks repeatedly asked Trump for fuller access to the FBI’s secret files in the case. According to more than a half-dozen people who were at the meeting, he assured several of them he would help.
“He looked us in the eye on 9/11, he shook our hands in the White House and said, ‘I’m going to help you — it’s done,’” recalled one of those present, Brett Eagleson, a banker whose father was killed in the World Trade Center. “I think the 9/11 families have lost all hope that the president is going to step up and do the right thing. He’s too beholden to the Saudis.”
The White House press office did not immediately respond Wednesday to a request for comment on the families’ characterizations of the meeting. One day after that encounter, Justice Department officials agreed to release the name of one mid-level Saudi religious official who had been tied to the case in an FBI document that had been partially declassified earlier. At the same time, however, Barr asserted the state secrets privilege to protect other FBI documents sought by the families. The latest flurry of statements supporting that claim responded to challenges from the plaintiffs.
Although the close alliance between the United States and the Saudi kingdom has survived countless moments of tension, it has frayed in recent months in ways that could prove helpful to plaintiffs in the 9/11 lawsuit.
In recent weeks, Republican senators from states that have been hard hit by the collapse of world oil prices have criticized the Saudi government with growing intensity. On March 25, before the Trump administration negotiated a cut in Saudi oil production, Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska cited the law under which the 9/11 families were allowed to sue the Saudi government as one of the levers of pressure that the United States could use if the kingdom did not take account of American concerns.
In a letter on Monday, three other influential senators asked the Justice Department’s inspector general to examine in depth why the FBI has refused to disclose more information about Saudi connections to the plot in response to a subpoena filed by the 9/11 families in 2018.
Those senators, Charles Grassley, the Iowa Republican, and two Democrats, minority leader Charles Schumer of New York and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, cited a recent investigative report by ProPublica and The New York Times Magazine that raised new questions about the FBI’s inquiry into the Saudi role in the attacks.
“The September 11 attacks represent a singular and defining tragedy in the history of our Nation,” the senators wrote to the Justice Department inspector general, Michael Horowitz. “Nearly 20 years later, the 9/11 families and the American public still have not received the full and transparent accounting of the potential sources of support for those attacks to which they are entitled.”
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--2020-04-18--Postal Workers Union Leader Warns the USPS Could Be Dead in Three Months

Among the most prominent victims of the coronavirus financial crisis is the United States Postal Service , which could quite literally run out of money to operate if the federal government does not approve a rescue package for it soon .
The Trump administration—which , like much of the GOP , has long advocated for cutbacks and privatization of the postal service—actively prevented the USPS from being bailed out in the CARES Act , even as Donald Trump has made a show of publicly thanking Fedex and UPS for their work .
Not very subtle .
Fifty years ago last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ unprecedented and historic eight-day strike , backing down the Nixon administration and winning the right to collective bargaining .
A half century later , Mark Dimondstein , the leader of the 200,000-strong American Postal Workers Union , says that the Trump administration is using today ’ s crisis as an opportunity to destroy the postal service as a public entity once and for all .
In These Times spoke to Dimondstein about the existential peril facing postal workers , and what they plan to do about it .
Hamilton Nolan : What specifically @ @ @ @ @ @ @ now ?
Mark Dimondstein : The pandemic is having a huge economic impact on mail .
The Post Office is not taxpayer funded , so it normally runs on revenue from postage and services .
And if 40 to 50 % of that dries up in this pandemic—which is what looks like it ’ s happening , in a very quick and precipitous way—then that money has to be made up .
So the Postal Board of Governors is asking for $ 25 billion for relief , and another $ 25 billion for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ modernize the fleet .
This is a relief for every single person in the country .
It ’ s not a relief for a private entity .
We had bipartisan support for some real relief [ in the CARES Act ] , and it was actually stopped by Secretary of the Treasury Mnuchin , representing this administration .
What do you think is the source of the Trump administration ’ s hostility towards rescuing the Post Office ?
I think it ’ s pretty straightforward .
In June of 2018 , an Office @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the White House—openly called for an opportunity to sell off the Post Office to private corporations .
Their agenda is to enrich a few of their private sector friends at the expense of the people of our country .
What makes it even more shameful is , we have massive unemployment at a rate that ’ s never been seen , even during the Great Depression of the 1930s .
And there are 600,000 good , living-wage jobs in the Post Office .
That they would dare come after these jobs makes it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is , they ’ re coming after a right of the people .
If the Post Office is privatized and sold off to private corporations , then who gets mail will depend on who we are , where we live , and how much it would cost .
How urgent is the situation at the Post Office right now ?
If the rescue package doesn ’ t happen , when could people start seeing an impact on their mail ?
The Post Office has done some modeling , so there are estimates of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ July and September , the Post Office will likely run out of money .
And when they run out of money , their operations will cease .
There isn ’ t any way to put fuel in the trucks , there isn ’ t any way to pay workers , there isn ’ t any way to keep the lights on .
We had bipartisan support in the House and Senate [ to fund the Post Office in the CARES Act ] .
And a Wall Street , Goldman Sachs Secretary of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You will not have an incentive package that the Post Office is in.
” Even though they gave $ 500 billion to the private sector .
So we have to flip it .
We now need Congress to tell Mnuchin , “ There will be no incentive package that you want without the Post Office in it.
” Are you afraid that they might try to come after your collective bargaining rights as some sort of tradeoff ?
The presidential task force that Mnuchin headed up actually called for an end to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s on their agenda too .
Since 2010 , our workers made great sacrifices , and made huge concessions worth billions and billions of dollars a year to the Post Office .
So we ’ ll vigorously oppose any effort to tie any strings to it—no strings should be tied to anything that happened Covid-related .
You ’ ve got postal workers on the front lines , doing essential work .
We ’ ve had over 30 postal workers die from the coronavirus .
Thousands have been sick , thousands more have been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ na talk about coming after our wages and benefits ?
No way .
Your union has a fairly large membership .
Since you find yourself in this borderline existential situation right now , are there any more militant actions you might take as a union , if it comes down to life or death for the Post Office ?
We haven ’ t given a lot of thought to that right now .
Right now we ’ re focused on worker health and safety primarily , and focused on getting Congress to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how people will react if Congress doesn ’ t , we ’ ll cross that bridge when we come to it .
But I am sure that workers will be highly upset .
Their families will be highly upset .
Their communities will be highly upset .
And I would think that certainly there would be escalating efforts on the part of the people of this country to make sure that the Post Office is saved .
I want to mention one other thing : The whole question of whether the ballot is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ have a situation where people are unable to come vote physically .
Poll workers are unable to come and be safe in their civic duties .
Poll by mail is safe , there ’ s a paper trail , it ’ s working in states that do it by law , it ’ s working in states that do it voluntarily .
It increases participation .
And look , there are those in this country who would rather not have people coming to the ballot box .
The work of the ballot box @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
So again , the public Post Office is the civic life of this country .
Your union endorsed Bernie .
What are your thoughts on how the primary turned out ?
I think Senator Sanders did a terrific job over the last number of years , 2016 and 2020 , boldy raising issues that needed to be raised .
And that ’ s why people responded so well .
Sanders has raised up single-payer healthcare , i.e .
Medicare for All .
It was a fringe issue .
Now it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what this pandemic says to us : We live in a society .
If we ’ re going to be healthy , everybody has to have health insurance .
If you ’ re sick , guess what ?
You may give it to somebody else .
I think what happened was , and Sanders put it this way himself : He lost the electability argument .
That ’ s unfortunate , because I think Sanders was the most electable .
I think this pandemic underscores that we have to have a more collective @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s on paid sick leave , whether it ’ s on Medicare for All , whether it ’ s on child care , whether it ’ s on the ability of the federal government–I mean , the idea that this government couldn ’ t figure out in advance to have tests for people , and to be able to get it done quickly ?
That ’ s an absurdity .
What do you think this crisis is going to mean for the labor movement going forward ?
Will it damage unions , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If we ’ re really gon na be a movement , I think this is the time when workers are saying to each other , “ We have to have a true voice at work.
” Workers all over this country are absolutely vulnerable in this pandemic .
I think it ’ s a valuable lesson for workers of this country that we need stronger unions , and we need stronger societal and collective benefits .
I would hope—and there ’ s certainly some sentiment out there , in the articles I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ workers , to the Walmart workers , the Amazon workers , all sorts of warehouse workers and so on—that they have felt much more vulnerable without having an organization to defend themselves .
The labor movement has to act like a movement .
The labor movement needs to be much more clearly , in my view , fighting for all workers , whether they ’ re in unions or not .
That means fighting for societal-based health insurance , not employer-based health insurance .
Societal-based sick leave , not employer-based sick leave .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a great opportunity to be at the forefront of the entire working class in those negotiations .

The leader of the American Postal Workers Union says privatizing the USPS would be an attack on “a right of the people.”
Among the most prominent victims of the coronavirus financial crisis is the United States Postal Service, which could quite literally run out of money to operate if the federal government does not approve a rescue package for it soon. The Trump administration—which, like much of the GOP, has long advocated for cutbacks and privatization of the postal service—actively prevented the USPS from being bailed out in the CARES Act, even as Donald Trump has made a show of publicly thanking Fedex and UPS for their work. Not very subtle.
Fifty years ago last month, U.S. postal workers staged an unprecedented and historic eight-day strike, backing down the Nixon administration and winning the right to collective bargaining. A half century later, Mark Dimondstein, the leader of the 200,000-strong American Postal Workers Union, says that the Trump administration is using today’s crisis as an opportunity to destroy the postal service as a public entity once and for all. In These Times spoke to Dimondstein about the existential peril facing postal workers, and what they plan to do about it.
Hamilton Nolan: What specifically are you asking for from Congress right now?
Mark Dimondstein: The pandemic is having a huge economic impact on mail. The Post Office is not taxpayer funded, so it normally runs on revenue from postage and services. And if 40 to 50% of that dries up in this pandemic—which is what looks like it’s happening, in a very quick and precipitous way—then that money has to be made up. So the Postal Board of Governors is asking for $25 billion for relief, and another $25 billion for modernization, which gives them money to modernize the fleet. This is a relief for every single person in the country. It’s not a relief for a private entity.
We had bipartisan support for some real relief [in the CARES Act], and it was actually stopped by Secretary of the Treasury Mnuchin, representing this administration.
What do you think is the source of the Trump administration’s hostility towards rescuing the Post Office?
I think it’s pretty straightforward. In June of 2018, an Office of Management and Budget report—that’s the White House—openly called for an opportunity to sell off the Post Office to private corporations. Their agenda is to enrich a few of their private sector friends at the expense of the people of our country.
What makes it even more shameful is, we have massive unemployment at a rate that’s never been seen, even during the Great Depression of the 1930s. And there are 600,000 good, living-wage jobs in the Post Office. That they would dare come after these jobs makes it much more shameful.
The underlying thing is, they’re coming after a right of the people. If the Post Office is privatized and sold off to private corporations, then who gets mail will depend on who we are, where we live, and how much it would cost.
How urgent is the situation at the Post Office right now? If the rescue package doesn’t happen, when could people start seeing an impact on their mail?
The Post Office has done some modeling, so there are estimates of what would happen. Some time between July and September, the Post Office will likely run out of money. And when they run out of money, their operations will cease. There isn’t any way to put fuel in the trucks, there isn’t any way to pay workers, there isn’t any way to keep the lights on.
We had bipartisan support in the House and Senate [to fund the Post Office in the CARES Act]. And a Wall Street, Goldman Sachs Secretary of the Treasury said to both parties,”You will not have an incentive package that the Post Office is in.” Even though they gave $500 billion to the private sector. So we have to flip it. We now need Congress to tell Mnuchin, “There will be no incentive package that you want without the Post Office in it.”
Are you afraid that they might try to come after your collective bargaining rights as some sort of tradeoff?
The presidential task force that Mnuchin headed up actually called for an end to our collective bargaining rights. So that’s on their agenda too. Since 2010, our workers made great sacrifices, and made huge concessions worth billions and billions of dollars a year to the Post Office. So we’ll vigorously oppose any effort to tie any strings to it—no strings should be tied to anything that happened Covid-related.
You’ve got postal workers on the front lines, doing essential work. We’ve had over 30 postal workers die from the coronavirus. Thousands have been sick, thousands more have been quarantined. And they’re gonna talk about coming after our wages and benefits? No way.
Your union has a fairly large membership. Since you find yourself in this borderline existential situation right now, are there any more militant actions you might take as a union, if it comes down to life or death for the Post Office?
We haven’t given a lot of thought to that right now. Right now we’re focused on worker health and safety primarily, and focused on getting Congress to do the right thing. In terms of how people will react if Congress doesn’t, we’ll cross that bridge when we come to it. But I am sure that workers will be highly upset. Their families will be highly upset. Their communities will be highly upset. And I would think that certainly there would be escalating efforts on the part of the people of this country to make sure that the Post Office is saved.
I want to mention one other thing: The whole question of whether the ballot is going to be protected. Here you have a situation where people are unable to come vote physically. Poll workers are unable to come and be safe in their civic duties. Poll by mail is safe, there’s a paper trail, it’s working in states that do it by law, it’s working in states that do it voluntarily. It increases participation. And look, there are those in this country who would rather not have people coming to the ballot box. The work of the ballot box is largely going to become the mail. So again, the public Post Office is the civic life of this country.
Your union endorsed Bernie. What are your thoughts on how the primary turned out?
I think Senator Sanders did a terrific job over the last number of years, 2016 and 2020, boldy raising issues that needed to be raised. And that’s why people responded so well. Sanders has raised up single-payer healthcare, i.e. Medicare for All. It was a fringe issue. Now it’s not a fringe issue. Look at what this pandemic says to us: We live in a society. If we’re going to be healthy, everybody has to have health insurance. If you’re sick, guess what? You may give it to somebody else.
I think what happened was, and Sanders put it this way himself: He lost the electability argument. That’s unfortunate, because I think Sanders was the most electable. I think this pandemic underscores that we have to have a more collective, take-care-of-each-other approach, whether it’s on paid sick leave, whether it’s on Medicare for All, whether it’s on child care, whether it’s on the ability of the federal government–I mean, the idea that this government couldn’t figure out in advance to have tests for people, and to be able to get it done quickly? That’s an absurdity.
What do you think this crisis is going to mean for the labor movement going forward? Will it damage unions, or will it be a big opportunity?
If we’re really gonna be a movement, I think this is the time when workers are saying to each other, “We have to have a true voice at work.” Workers all over this country are absolutely vulnerable in this pandemic. I think it’s a valuable lesson for workers of this country that we need stronger unions, and we need stronger societal and collective benefits.
I would hope—and there’s certainly some sentiment out there, in the articles I’ve been reading, from the Instacart workers, to the Walmart workers, the Amazon workers, all sorts of warehouse workers and so on—that they have felt much more vulnerable without having an organization to defend themselves.
The labor movement has to act like a movement. The labor movement needs to be much more clearly, in my view, fighting for all workers, whether they’re in unions or not. That means fighting for societal-based health insurance, not employer-based health insurance. Societal-based sick leave, not employer-based sick leave. The AFL-CIO and the other unions have a great opportunity to be at the forefront of the entire working class in those negotiations.
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 article was originally published at In These Times.


truthout--2020-04-18--Ilhan Omar Bill Would Cancel Rent and Mortgage Payments for Duration of Pandemic

Rep. Ilhan Omar on Friday unveiled legislation aimed at providing relief to “ the millions of Americans currently at risk of housing instability and homelessness ” by canceling all rent and home mortgage payments for the duration of the Covid-19 pandemic .
“ The coronavirus crisis is more than just a public health crisis—it ’ s an economic crisis , ” Omar , a Minnesota Democrat , said in a statement .
“ Minnesotans are losing jobs , getting their hours reduced , and struggling just to put food on the table .
We must take major action to protect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ most vulnerable.
” “ Congress has a responsibility to step in to stabilize both local communities and the housing market during this time of uncertainty and crisis , ” said Omar .
“ In 2008 , we bailed out Wall Street .
This time , it ’ s time to bail out the American people who are suffering.
” Omar ’ s legislation , titled the Rent and Mortgage Cancellation Act , would not merely suspend rent payments temporarily and require tenants to pay back-rent when the coronavirus subsides .
The bill , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a summary , “ would constitute a full payment forgiveness , with no accumulation of debt for renters or homeowners and no negative impact on their credit rating or rental history.
” “ The legislation will establish a relief fund for landlords and mortgage holders to cover losses from the cancelled payments and create an optional fund to fully finance the purchase of private rental properties by non-profits , public housing authorities , cooperatives , community land trusts , and states or local governments—in order to increase the availability of affordable housing during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Omar outlined her new bill in a live-streamed press conference on Friday with fellow members of Congress , housing activists , and tenants .
The Rent and Mortgage Cancellation Act is co-sponsored by Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D-N.Y. ) , Rashida Tlaib ( D-Mich. ) , Pramila Jayapal ( D-Wash. ) , Mark Pocan ( D-Wis. ) , Ayanna Pressley ( D-Mass . )
, Veronica Escobar ( D-Texas ) , Jesús García ( D-Ill. ) , and Grace Meng ( D-N.Y. ) .
The bill was also endorsed by dozens of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s Action , the Center for Popular Democracy , and the National Coalition for the Homeless .
“ The Rent and Mortgage Cancellation act offers the only solution that can meet the scale and depth of our immediate needs related to housing , and establish a new framework for longterm recovery , ” Tara Raghuveer , Homes Guarantee Campaign Director at People ’ s Action , said in a statement .
“ Congress must act to suspend rents and mortgages , and to prevent a 2008-style disastrous real estate bonanza .
”

The Rent and Mortgage Cancellation Act would not just freeze rent payments but also forgive them entirely.
Rep. Ilhan Omar on Friday unveiled legislation aimed at providing relief to “the millions of Americans currently at risk of housing instability and homelessness” by canceling all rent and home mortgage payments for the duration of the Covid-19 pandemic.
“The coronavirus crisis is more than just a public health crisis—it’s an economic crisis,” Omar, a Minnesota Democrat, said in a statement. “Minnesotans are losing jobs, getting their hours reduced, and struggling just to put food on the table. We must take major action to protect the health and economic security of the most vulnerable.”
“Congress has a responsibility to step in to stabilize both local communities and the housing market during this time of uncertainty and crisis,” said Omar. “In 2008, we bailed out Wall Street. This time, it’s time to bail out the American people who are suffering.”
Omar’s legislation, titled the Rent and Mortgage Cancellation Act, would not merely suspend rent payments temporarily and require tenants to pay back-rent when the coronavirus subsides.
The bill, as Omar’s office emphasized in a summary, “would constitute a full payment forgiveness, with no accumulation of debt for renters or homeowners and no negative impact on their credit rating or rental history.”
“The legislation will establish a relief fund for landlords and mortgage holders to cover losses from the cancelled payments and create an optional fund to fully finance the purchase of private rental properties by non-profits, public housing authorities, cooperatives, community land trusts, and states or local governments—in order to increase the availability of affordable housing during this downturn,” the summary states.
Omar outlined her new bill in a live-streamed press conference on Friday with fellow members of Congress, housing activists, and tenants.
Watch:
The Rent and Mortgage Cancellation Act is co-sponsored by Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Mark Pocan (D-Wis.), Ayanna Pressley (D-Mass.), Veronica Escobar (D-Texas), Jesús García (D-Ill.), and Grace Meng (D-N.Y.).
The bill was also endorsed by dozens of progressive advocacy groups, including People’s Action, the Center for Popular Democracy, and the National Coalition for the Homeless.
“The Rent and Mortgage Cancellation act offers the only solution that can meet the scale and depth of our immediate needs related to housing, and establish a new framework for longterm recovery,” Tara Raghuveer, Homes Guarantee Campaign Director at People’s Action, said in a statement. “Congress must act to suspend rents and mortgages, and to prevent a 2008-style disastrous real estate bonanza.”
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--2020-04-18--COVID-19 Exposes the Delicate Economic Balance We All Live in Under Capitalism

We live on a crisis-struck planet where surplus lives are struggling to survive in the wastelands of a rapidly shrinking economic order .
The specter of a wageless life now befalls the billions .
COVID-19 , just beginning its rampage , is battering our feeble institutions , revealing and exacerbating preexisting social and racial vulnerabilities , and laying bare the inadequacies of even the most robust social safety nets .
The U.S. is staring at its sharpest unemployment rise in history .
As reported by Markets Insider , just in the three weeks leading up to April 11 , more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 22 million ) have filed for unemployment .
Across the globe , the virus is profaning all that is sacred .
Among the piles of bodies and financial debris , the legitimacy of capitalism is surely in doubt .
Still , capitalism is remarkably tenacious .
Its deadly lunges between boom and bust — such as the 2008 financial crisis — though wreaking tremendous havoc for vast swathes of humanity , rarely open up possibilities for more dignified futures .
Cracks in the system should present political opportunities , no doubt , but @ @ @ @ @ @ @ quo they are soon extinguished .
Elites , backed up by a corporate and acquiescent media , scramble to return society to “ normal.
” Meanwhile , our imaginations are so caged by what British political theorist Mark Fisher termed “ capitalist realism ” that alternatives to “ business as usual ” are unthinkable .
Herein lies the tragedy of our conjuncture , one repeated time and time again .
Capitalism is built upon inequities , contradictions and crises .
Billions live under the most depressing and violent of systems , where the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wage labor bleed together .
But capitalism , under an impressive sleight of hand , only ever presents “ more capitalism ” as a solution to its discontents .
In a world without waged labor , where a growing number are now thrown into the garbage heap of capital , the logic of the system still preserves the vaulted status of “ waged labor ” as the eternal aspirational goal .
Though workers are left in a world without work , any imaginaries that might produce alternative arrangements are placed off-limits .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Europe and around the world are now attempting to prop up the waged labor system with remarkable consensus and speed , printing money out of thin air .
The ruling classes are simply unable to accommodate any change to the holy link between waged labor and capital .
The planetary crises we face — an Earth on fire , and now an Earth in lockdown — yield political solutions that can only entrench our collective misery .
Among desperate scenes of mass unemployment , hunger , economic meltdown , social unrest and authoritarian @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on pretending that the only solution to wageless life is waged labor — that the solution to capitalism is more capitalism ?
To invoke the now appallingly appropriate health care terminology : Why should we try to resuscitate the very system that constantly produces the preexisting ( and existential ) conditions of precarity and misery ?
We must unpack the “ business-as-usual ” model that global elites are desperate to protect .
Capitalism endlessly produces what philosopher Karl Marx termed “ surplus populations.
” Particularly through technological advancement , Marx explains , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the accumulation of capital produced by it , the means by which it itself is made relatively superfluous , is turned into a relative surplus population ; and it does this to an always increasing extent.
” Industrializing England was the beating heart of this mass expulsion .
The factories were spewing out textiles , smoke , slag and a disposable humanity .
In turn , these surplus populations helped depress wages for capitalists .
Our era is defined as one in which surplus populations no longer provide a residual function for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sociologist and philosopher Zygmunt Bauman argues , is that recyclability has , in many cases , turned into outright disposability .
That is , for many workers , being thrown out of the labor force is no longer a temporary condition : They have become eternally redundant , and thus disposable .
Surplus populations are not simply occupied in the figures of the homeless , refugees or the destitute .
As the COVID-19 outbreak demonstrates , we are all potentially surplus .
One paycheck separates us from pauperdom .
Pauperism is the destination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work .
As Marx and philosophical partner Friedrich Engels wrote , “ The modern laborer … sinks deeper and deeper below the conditions of his own class .
He becomes a pauper , and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth.
” The figure of the pauper in the history of English capitalism was regarded as a social disease .
Yet the dramatic rise of pauperism was inseparable from capitalist accumulation .
“ Only in the mode of production based in capital does pauperism appear as the result of labour itself , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of labour , ” Marx wrote .
The worker and the pauper are not so distinct .
In fact , “ It is already contained in the concept of the free labourer , that he is a pauper : virtual pauper , ” Marx writes .
In short , to become surplus , one must always already be surplus .
Under capitalism , and as the current pandemic is demonstrating most emphatically , most of us exist as virtual paupers .
Deprived of land , deprived of liberty and deprived of our own @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the very system responsible for our pain .
Wages are little compensation for the basic denial of our free humanity .
Before we are laborers , we are paupers .
In fact , we are laborers because we are paupers .
As American cultural historian and professor Michael Denning argues , “ wageless life , not wage labour , is the starting point in understanding the free market.
” The status quo that elites are scrambling to protect is mass pauperdom .
It always has been .
Many of us are actual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our back — but most of us are virtual paupers , teetering on the edge of disaster , unable to pay next month ’ s rent .
Each of us is always soon-to-be surplus to capitalism .
The pauper , with no home , no job , no security , now exists in staggering numbers .
It presents a menace to both capitalism and human dignity .
A war of all against all is a very real future of our lockdown world .
Hoarding , social unrest and a desperate scramble for waged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” are grim portents of a future that may yet pass .
Nothing is certain .
Yet , as that most unlikely of guides for progressives , right-wing economist Milton Friedman reminded us , in times of crisis , “ the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around.
” As more of us join the swelling ranks of the planet ’ s surplus populations , perhaps our commonalities as virtual paupers will unite us .
We can talk about solutions beyond wage labor , beyond more of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ very conditions that produce a world of pauperdom : land , liberty and livelihood .

This pandemic makes it clear that under capitalism, the worker is not that far removed from the pauper.
Part of the Series Despair and Disparity: The Uneven Burdens of COVID-19
We live on a crisis-struck planet where surplus lives are struggling to survive in the wastelands of a rapidly shrinking economic order. The specter of a wageless life now befalls the billions.
COVID-19, just beginning its rampage, is battering our feeble institutions, revealing and exacerbating preexisting social and racial vulnerabilities, and laying bare the inadequacies of even the most robust social safety nets. The U.S. is staring at its sharpest unemployment rise in history.
As reported by Markets Insider, just in the three weeks leading up to April 11, more than 17 percent of U.S. workers (22 million) have filed for unemployment. Across the globe, the virus is profaning all that is sacred. Among the piles of bodies and financial debris, the legitimacy of capitalism is surely in doubt.
Still, capitalism is remarkably tenacious. Its deadly lunges between boom and bust — such as the 2008 financial crisis — though wreaking tremendous havoc for vast swathes of humanity, rarely open up possibilities for more dignified futures.
Cracks in the system should present political opportunities, no doubt, but pose such a threat to the status quo they are soon extinguished. Elites, backed up by a corporate and acquiescent media, scramble to return society to “normal.” Meanwhile, our imaginations are so caged by what British political theorist Mark Fisher termed “capitalist realism” that alternatives to “business as usual” are unthinkable.
Herein lies the tragedy of our conjuncture, one repeated time and time again. Capitalism is built upon inequities, contradictions and crises. Billions live under the most depressing and violent of systems, where the lines between slavery, naked survival and wage labor bleed together. But capitalism, under an impressive sleight of hand, only ever presents “more capitalism” as a solution to its discontents.
In a world without waged labor, where a growing number are now thrown into the garbage heap of capital, the logic of the system still preserves the vaulted status of “waged labor” as the eternal aspirational goal. Though workers are left in a world without work, any imaginaries that might produce alternative arrangements are placed off-limits. They simply become “nonsense.”
Among desperate scenes of mass unemployment, hunger, social unrest and authoritarian dictates, how long can we keep on pretending that the solution to capitalism is more capitalism?
Governments across Europe and around the world are now attempting to prop up the waged labor system with remarkable consensus and speed, printing money out of thin air. The ruling classes are simply unable to accommodate any change to the holy link between waged labor and capital. The planetary crises we face — an Earth on fire, and now an Earth in lockdown — yield political solutions that can only entrench our collective misery.
Among desperate scenes of mass unemployment, hunger, economic meltdown, social unrest and authoritarian dictates, how long can we keep on pretending that the only solution to wageless life is waged labor — that the solution to capitalism is more capitalism? To invoke the now appallingly appropriate health care terminology: Why should we try to resuscitate the very system that constantly produces the preexisting (and existential) conditions of precarity and misery? We must unpack the “business-as-usual” model that global elites are desperate to protect.
Capitalism endlessly produces what philosopher Karl Marx termed “surplus populations.” Particularly through technological advancement, Marx explains, “The laboring population therefore produces, along with the accumulation of capital produced by it, the means by which it itself is made relatively superfluous, is turned into a relative surplus population; and it does this to an always increasing extent.” Industrializing England was the beating heart of this mass expulsion. The factories were spewing out textiles, smoke, slag and a disposable humanity. In turn, these surplus populations helped depress wages for capitalists.
For many workers, being thrown out of the labor force is no longer a temporary condition: They have become eternally redundant, and thus disposable.
Our era is defined as one in which surplus populations no longer provide a residual function for capitalism. What has changed, Polish-British sociologist and philosopher Zygmunt Bauman argues, is that recyclability has, in many cases, turned into outright disposability. That is, for many workers, being thrown out of the labor force is no longer a temporary condition: They have become eternally redundant, and thus disposable.
Surplus populations are not simply occupied in the figures of the homeless, refugees or the destitute. As the COVID-19 outbreak demonstrates, we are all potentially surplus. One paycheck separates us from pauperdom.
Pauperism is the destination for the unemployed in a world without work. As Marx and philosophical partner Friedrich Engels wrote, “The modern laborer … sinks deeper and deeper below the conditions of his own class. He becomes a pauper, and pauperism develops more rapidly than population and wealth.”
The figure of the pauper in the history of English capitalism was regarded as a social disease. Yet the dramatic rise of pauperism was inseparable from capitalist accumulation. “Only in the mode of production based in capital does pauperism appear as the result of labour itself, of the development of the productive force of labour,” Marx wrote. The worker and the pauper are not so distinct. In fact, “It is already contained in the concept of the free labourer, that he is a pauper: virtual pauper,” Marx writes. In short, to become surplus, one must always already be surplus.
Under capitalism, and as the current pandemic is demonstrating most emphatically, most of us exist as virtual paupers.
Under capitalism, and as the current pandemic is demonstrating most emphatically, most of us exist as virtual paupers. Deprived of land, deprived of liberty and deprived of our own livelihood, we are at the mercy of the very system responsible for our pain. Wages are little compensation for the basic denial of our free humanity. Before we are laborers, we are paupers. In fact, we are laborers because we are paupers. As American cultural historian and professor Michael Denning argues, “wageless life, not wage labour, is the starting point in understanding the free market.”
The status quo that elites are scrambling to protect is mass pauperdom. It always has been. Many of us are actual paupers, with only the shirts on our back — but most of us are virtual paupers, teetering on the edge of disaster, unable to pay next month’s rent. Each of us is always soon-to-be surplus to capitalism. The pauper, with no home, no job, no security, now exists in staggering numbers. It presents a menace to both capitalism and human dignity.
A war of all against all is a very real future of our lockdown world. Hoarding, social unrest and a desperate scramble for waged labor at an “Amazon Fulfillment Center” are grim portents of a future that may yet pass. Nothing is certain.
Yet, as that most unlikely of guides for progressives, right-wing economist Milton Friedman reminded us, in times of crisis, “the actions that are taken depend on the ideas that are lying around.”
As more of us join the swelling ranks of the planet’s surplus populations, perhaps our commonalities as virtual paupers will unite us. We can talk about solutions beyond wage labor, beyond more of the same. That would involve reclaiming the very conditions that produce a world of pauperdom: land, liberty and livelihood.
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.