EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Sanders a Growing Force on the 'Far, Far Left'
Vermont senator is gathering clout as he takes on the Fed’s Bernanke
WASHINGTON - The Senate may pride itself on a reputation as the world's most exclusive deliberative body, but it is turning into just about the only place in America where a self-described socialist can wield raw power.
Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont at a December news conference on the renomination of Ben Bernanke as Federal Reserve chairman. (Win Mcnamee/Getty Images) Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has spent his career trying to remake American capitalism in a more Scandinavian image. His favored targets of late have been top finance regulators he considers far too deferential to Wall Street. Last year, Sanders spent five months trying to block a new Commodity Futures Trading Commission chairman before securing promises from Gary Gensler to aggressively fight market excesses.
Now Sanders is aiming at the top of the regulatory pyramid, putting a hold on the renomination of Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke, whom he blames for the country's financial collapse as a "key architect of the Bush economy.''
Sanders, however, seems to be hoping that this particular adventure ends not with a peaceful detente but a spectacular confrontation.
"I'm going to do my best to defeat him,'' said Sanders.
Congress's only self-described socialist, the 68-year old Sanders gives the appearance of having stepped in from a tornado and speaks as though still trying to be heard over the noise.
His voice may finally be breaking through. Over 16 years in the House, his lonely crusades - which amount to a lifelong campaign to remake American capitalism and social policy - were usually received as little more than glitches in an otherwise well-functioning two-party system. Since his 2006 election to the Senate, however, Sanders has found that a junior senator's single vote is enough to keep him in the middle of things.
He has emerged as a one-man tea party within the Democratic ranks, an ideological purebred feeding on outsider anger while staying close enough to party leaders to win rewards for his loyalty.
"He operates as most senators do, as someone who steps up and puts up his position forcefully and starts to build a coalition around it,'' said Robert L. Borosage, president of the Institute of America's Future, which has worked closely with Sanders to defeat Bernanke. "But when you have a substantial position, rather than just an idiosyncratic one or personal pique, you can use the Senate rules to give it a significant airing.''
Sanders disappointed liberal allies who had counted on him to mount a one-man stand against the Democrats' health care bill for omitting a public insurance plan. Sanders, who had introduced an amendment to create a single-payer plan, had initially threatened to oppose any such bill without a public option.
But as the bill moved toward a vote in late December, Sanders uncharacteristically muted his criticism and began privately lobbying Democratic leader Harry Reid on behalf of a pet cause. "I didn't have to twist his arm,'' Sanders said
Sanders eventually secured $10 billion to expand a national network of rural medical clinics that he calls "perhaps the most significant and least-known public health program in America.'' (The Senate bill had one perk just for Vermont: $600 million to cover the state's previous expansion of its Medicaid program.)
Now Sanders is working the backroom negotiations between House and Senate leaders, to defend his rural health funding and possibly win a further boost.
"He deep down believes he can change American politics,'' said Larry Sanders, the senator's older brother and a county councilor in Oxford, England, representing the Green Party. "He's not afraid of being boring and making the same points for 20 years.''
This year, Sanders may settle on a fresh target: a proposed Comcast-NBC merger. He is working with staff over the winter recess to determine the best way he can wield his senatorial clout to potentially disrupt a deal he fears could establish a new monopolistic media force.
"I think in a democratic society, you don't want one or two institutions controlling the flow of information,'' said Sanders.
A longtime critic of mainstream media, Sanders controls the flow of his own information. He wrote radio ads for his congressional campaign with friends around his kitchen table. Before being elected mayor of Burlington in 1981, Sanders developed educational film strips about New England history - and one 30-minute documentary about Socialist presidential candidate Eugene V. Debs - for sale to local schools.
Last year, Sanders began working with muckraking director Robert Greenwald on weekly Web videos designed to build a national constituency around his issues. The resulting series, "Senator Sanders Unfiltered,'' set him at an ersatz anchor desk with an invitation to rant: a duly elected Andy Rooney with a grasp of monetary policy. (The series is on hiatus.)
"Bernie is one of the only voices that has the perspective to say ‘this is outrageous,' and to say it with passion and intelligence,'' said Greenwald, who previously cast Sanders as a talking head in the documentary "Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War on Journalism'' (and in an uncredited cameo in the 1988 romantic comedy " Sweet Hearts Dance,'' alongside Don Johnson and Susan Sarandon). "He conveys complex stuff in ways people can understand without neglecting the emotional content.''
Sanders has been waging a colorful war against economic policy makers well before YouTube was available as a repository for his screeds. At one 2003 House committee hearing, he sarcastically invited Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan on a trip to Vermont so he could meet "real people.''
When Greenspan said that American workers benefited from the world's highest quality of life, Sanders corrected him in the language befitting a man raised in 1950s Brooklyn. "Wrong, mister,'' Sanders said.
"You go to Scandinavia, and you will find that people have a much higher standard of living, in terms of education, health care, and decent paying jobs.''
Sanders said he had not given much thought to Bernanke's future until he faced him down at a similar hearing last fall. When the central banker dismissed his request for a full accounting of banks receiving Fed loans, Sanders - who had voted against the TARP bailout a year earlier - says he lost confidence.
"The lesson is, if you give unlimited power to people whose whole function in life is to make as much money as they can based on outrageous greed, that's what they'll do,'' Sanders said in an interview this week.
In early December, Sanders placed a hold on Bernanke's renomination, one of several, from both parties. In practical terms, they are unlikely to deny Bernanke, who was first appointed by George W. Bush, a renewal when his term ends on Jan. 31. It will, however, force Obama to secure 60 votes, rather than 50, to keep Bernanke in place.
"What I'm going to try to do with the opposition to Bernanke,'' said Sanders, "is force a debate about a new philosophy on Wall Street which is not driven by greed and self-interest.''
When Senate Republicans tried to slow Democrats from securing a health care vote before Christmas, they used parliamentary rules to demand a reading of all 767 pages of Sanders's single-payer amendment. He went to the floor to begrudgingly withdraw the amendment, condemning the opposition for a "stalling tactic'' that he said would "waste time.''
This week, Sanders insisted that he could not be accused of the same tactic.
"My goal here is not to slow down anything,'' said Sanders. "My goal is to defeat Bernanke.''
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

111 Comments so far
Show All"Far left" as a label from the US mainstream media means this senator is pretty damn near the political center and right at the moral center!
AD
You've got it! I love FAR, far left description of Bernie, who is what we back in times of more decent government and MSM would simply have called a mainstream Democrat! Amazing, isn't it? Shameful,too.
Rignt on, AD.
Why isn't the Boston Globe calling Teddy Roosevelt and Franklin Roosevelt far, far leftists?
The Roosevelts' careers included advocacy for the same ideas Sanders is promoting.
Good luck Bernie!
Bernenke needs to go! He was hand-picked by Greenspan but has learned no lessons. Even Greenspan, in the end, had to admit the evidence was against him.
A serious changing of the guard needs to happen in the Fed.
physicscitizen, I agree, but it won't happen on Obama's watch.
I realize there are some - too many - still convinced that Obama is "biding" his time (as if he's about to come out swinging), but the evidence is screaming the contrary. Not that he isn't doing some good things. He is, but when it comes to FIRE, he is solidly in their corner. Along with the MIC he's their Man! That doesn't leave much for the rest of us, except good intentions and wishful thinking. You know, like every child deserves to eat and he wishes we had the money for it. But don't even think about messing with those Goldman Sachs bonuses. I keep forgetting who's in charge. Is it our President or the Treasury Secretary? Now I remember: Obama said he didn't know much about economics. Clearly he still doesn't. Answers that question.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
How could it have been "a waste of time" to possibly get something worhwhile inserted into health deform.
He still can vote against it.
Thank you, Bernie, for your vision and your committment.
What can the people do to support you?
Call Obama? Who else is key to defeating Bernanke?
I've been asking for the replacement of Geithner, Summers & other Goldman"sacks" dudes since their appointments.
As long as someone as reasonable as Sanders is depicted as "far, far left", it will give ammunition to the right so they can picture him as "radical". He's not "far, far" anything. He's completely reasonable.
This "far, far left" language is part of the redefining of what is "centrist".
This "far, far left" language is part of the redefining of what is "centrist".
---------------------
Exactly! It says everything about Issenberg's politics and nothing at all about Sanders's.
Keep in mind the "far, far left" language appears only in headline -- it's not in the body of Issenberg's piece.
Not sure how Common Dreams settles on the headlines for its online columns, but at publications like the Boston Globe, the editors - not the writers - are typically responsible for the headlines.
This may possibly say more about the Globe's politics than about Issenberg's, though I haven't read much of his work.
Well spotted! I couldn't bear to read the article.
Absolutely Gene. The label "far, far left" means he is a true representative of the people and as such must be depicted as a radical and silenced. The people, after all, just don't know what's best for themselves.
If progressives actually gained a foothold in our leadership, sooner rather than later, the public at large would find that things are actually getting better for themselves and the conservative philosophy of present times would be very dead for a very long time. Can't have that now, can we? Bad for, er, business.
I'm proud to have voted for Bernie since his first election to public office as Mayor of Burlington, VT. Vermont, which is seen as a progressive state, is actually also a fairly conservative state. It is mostly rural and poor. However, Vermonters have seen fit to keep sending Bernie to Washington because he walks his talk. He may not be the most gregarious of people, but he has continued to donate all his pay raises to charity since his first term as Senator, he speaks truth to power, and he truly is in service to his constituents, something one cannot say about most of Congress.
Good on ya Bernie!!
I wish we could clone the guy. He is one of just a very small handful of national politicians that actually care about the average person.
Oh we can, Tom, we can. All cloning him (or someone better) would take is for us to get off our butts/buts and beat feet.
That's why I wish we had a National Citizens' Union, so we could organize a defense against corporate/financier Empire, & recruit 99 + 434 (Kucinich is good)congressional candidates to fight on the real battlefields; the primaries & nevermind about D & R, Green, democratic socialist, etc...just fulfill the Preamble:General Welfare, Justice, Common(i.e. Mainstreet, NOT imperial Wallstreet) Defense.
I've been hearing whispers.
Yeah, the far,far left of the FAR, FAR RIGHT, which puts him at center right, with not even a single-payer VOTE in show!
I agree with those who are questioning this "far, far left" description. Wow, that says a lot about the political spectrum in the US today. In Europe this would not be described as far, far, left and in Canada (until very recently) we could say the same thing. This description must be resisted.
No surprize that Europe views the U.S. as a very politically conservative nation, eh?
I believe the expression "politically conservative" is not the way very many European's would characterize us, at least not the European friends, relatives, and acquaintances I have. They think we're generally right-wing and crazy.
Bernie Sanders's life in the senate must be lonely. Surrounded by all those fascists he never falters in his courageous stand against the reactionaries who impede any progressive thought in Amerikkka.
God forbid, but his fate could be that of other progressive legislators who met with "tragic accidents."
The sociopaths who control this country have no bounds to their fanaticism and greed.
-Tom Joads fka Cavedweller
Far left is a unhelpful tag. He is a righteous politician that IS doing the peoples work and we should tell it like it is. What can we do to get on board and counter the tea bags and target a few significant issues like financial reform and health care and get our country back in a more humanitarian and just track?
Sanders was pretty much my model of the perfect Senator until the health care "reform" process demonstrated that, at heart, he's just another "politician" who will do whatever is good for his own home people (and his chances of -re-election). It just doesn't do to treat the way he traded his vote on the health care measure as an "exception" to the way he stood up for progressive (if not far far left) principles. So his rural health program was a "good thing" as was maybe what he got for Vermont on the medicaid re-imbursement issue. Fact remains that, when it really MATTERED, when ONE VOTE could have brought down the health care deform bill, he traded that vote for something else. Makes you wonder about far far left or even mildly liberal politicians. Do they only stand up for something when they think this "something" doesn't have a prayer of being enacted? (Rather like, I believe, the "safe states" electoral strategy of third parties that choose to run candidates only when they couldn't hurt a preferred candidate from the D-R duopoly, in other words when their own candidates don't make a bit of difference in the outcome.)
As I understood it, these Health Clinics were to be spread across the country, not just Vermont. Don't forget none of them has voted on the final bill. Thats when we will know for sure about each and every one of them.
You couldn't be more wrong. The clinics Bernie seeks funding for are spread throughout the country and are, in fact, the only bit of actual reform in the bill. If there were neighborhood clinics throughout the country, with steady funding, the insurance industry will gradually wither away because the clinics will put them out of business. bernie didn't go for the pork like some other legislators, he is thinking big, for the whole country.
baruchzed: I didn't and don't question the value or the national reach of the neighborhood clincs that Sanders got as the price for his support of a bill that he otherwise opposed. I do question though that he is "thinking big, for the whole country" when he furnishes the deciding vote that enables passage of a measure that will consign "the whole country" to the mercies of a health care bill written by and for the benefit of insurance companies and corporations involved in the provision of health services. He traded something that might work in the "withering away of the insurance industry" for a bill that will only bloat their already fat bottom-lines. Some "thinking big!"
Frankly it makes little difference where he is on the spectrum of the left as Pelosi and Reid with the help of the President consign the progressive and liberal agendas to the dark reaches of Hades.
By the elections this Fall these arrogant and insular knotheads will have so angered the American people, they will reject progressives at all levels.
In all my years I have never seen such fools. They have thrown the opportunity of a lifetime in the dirt for the gratification of their own ego's and history will judge them harsher than Bush and Cheney.
They disgrace the honest people like Bernie. I'm no socialist and I don't believe for a minute you can transfer the small Scandinavian model (which is faltering in any case)to a large country, but he has my respect for his honest pursuit of what he believes is right for our country. You can work with honest people like Berney, perhaps incorporate the best parts of his ideas, you can only detest and despise dishonest and selfish people like those in charge now.
It would be wise to examine problems with the Scandanavian model. But why do you think it is impossible to model on a small scale what is possible on a larger scale? And, what is your alternative to socialism and why?
Personally I think all social needs should be socialized. Beyond that, there would be room for a market for luxury goods, a very well regulated, fair one.
In the great USA many say social needs such as education are "entitlements" and that not everyone DESERVES it. !!!!!!!
We should join our voices with Bernie Sanders and anyone who is on the ethical side of the issues. Perhaps his active opposition to Bernanke will be a catalyst for public involvement.
And if Vermont ever chooses to secede and use the Constitution as its Constitution, I'm there!
donnalou
"It would be wise to examine problems with the Scandanavian model. But why do you think it is impossible to model on a small scale what is possible on a larger scale? And, what is your alternative to socialism and why?"
A business model is the easiest way to explain it I think. A start up companycan do things one way, but when it becomes a large corporation, it must change. The shipper it used at first cannot handle the volume, the personnel firm can't handle diverse needs for different cultures and different countries. Much the same way with us.
Unlike Scandanavian countries that are homogenic for all practical purposes we are a very diverse nation composed of different regions and different needs. And the numbers...for instance Sweden's whole population is a only a third the size of my state.
Socialism has been an abject failure everry single time its been tried, it is just an economic system that doesn't work. As far as I know there is no system that works within shouting distance of Capitalism.
I do not see that there is any reason socil needs could not be met by incorporating some socialistic systems . SS and Medicare are really socialist aren't they? Every citizen of our country is entitled to an education. After high school, people simply have to pay for it themselves. Everyone deserves the opportunity for anything they might wish to strive for, but there is simply no way to guarantee equality of outcome. No system can do that.
"We should join our voices with Bernie Sanders and anyone who is on the ethical side of the issues. Perhaps his active opposition to Bernanke will be a catalyst for public involvement."
As I said above, Bernie has my upmost respect and he is someone whose input is needed as we go forward. All sides have to be involved, all arttitudes and opinions need to be considered and the best taken fronm no matter where it came from if it works for our country.
I wouldn't spit on Pelosi and her type, but I'd be proud to have Bernie to my home anytime.
"Socialism has been an abject failure everry single time its been tried, it is just an economic system that doesn't work. As far as I know there is no system that works within shouting distance of Capitalism."
God you are such an idiot. After all these years, i am finally, simply, sick of you.
Really, why don't you refute the statement. I am sich of you and the folks like you that keep making unsubstaniated statements, thast cannot think past the talking points handed out to you and have so little experience in the world you simply don't know much beyond what someone told you, true or not.
The stupidity is in making rash, insulting comments rather than responding with facts or pointing out factually where someone else is wrong.
People like you simply cannot get past a narrow and insular viewpoint and I amm sorry for you.
I detest being uncivil, but no one needs to take insults from callow and thoughtless individuals.
Frankly, you don't know shit about me. i have plenty of life experience, and i am simply sick of your ignorant arrogant idiotic assertions, with zero support.
Speaking of "unsubstantiated statements" - you write "Socialism has been an abject failure everry single time its been tried."
You give ZERO SUPPORT for your statement. There is NOTHING FOR ME TO REFUTE. You don't actually say anything, just spout an idiocy as if it were some great truth.
How about YOU provide support for your statement? Say what you actually mean when you say "socialism," and what you mean by "abject failure." Then we can have a conversation.
Socialism has been an abject failure everry single time its been tried, it is just an economic system that doesn't work. As far as I know there is no system that works within shouting distance of Capitalism.
------------------------------------------
That's an amazingly thoughtless, conventional statement to make. I'd think you'd be embarrassed to say something so ignorant that's been so often and so completely discredited. Especially here.
The reality is that nearly a billion people the world around enjoy the fruits of voluntary socialism every day --about 800,000,000 at last reckoning.
Co-op grocers, community farms and factories, credit unions and cooperative banks, mutual insurance societies -- all these are socialism in action where the profit is distributed to all rather than pocketed by a few.
One of the largest conglomerates in the world --the Mondragón Corporación Cooperativa-- has grown in 60 years from a hut in the Basque country with 5 out-of-work engineers and a one-eyed socialist priest making paraffin stoves to a ca. €16G p.a. socialist network doing everything from basic research to selling retail groceries. It has its own home-grown banking system and degree-granting university. And it just recently agreed a program with the Steelworkers union to bring socialism to the USA.
Don't keep being an ignorant fool to yourself. Educate yourself! Please!
Only an ignorant fool would make a statement like that. All of the examples you gave are contained in a capitalist system, most in Social Democracies. not one is UNDER a socialist system of government.
I usually wouldn't call someone else a fool, but since you have demonstrated exactly what you accused me of, I'll make an exception.
Now that we have insulted each other, I'll ask you to be civil and list where all these socialist governments/countries are that are so sucessful? Is Spain a socialist economy/government?
Are you unaware that socialism is an *economic* system with implications for politics and social relations, but is not itself a system of government or of social relations?
The political system underlying genuine socialism is democracy. In fact, the term 'socialism' is a sort of shorthand for 'economic democracy', much as 'capitalism' is a sort of shorthand for 'economic feudalism'.
Personally I think all social needs should be socialized. Beyond that, there would be room for a market for luxury goods, a very well regulated, fair one.
--------------------------------------
I agree with you completely, DonnaLou! All our common human needs should be provided socially, with nobody making a private profit except through providing something that others *want* to trade for (books, music, art, entertainment, convenience).
Mairead
Who exactly would provide these needs? Who will pay for them? Capitalism has always worked (though our system at the moment is not capitalism...one of the prices of a free society) so if you don't have a profit structure, what system do you use?
Who exactly would provide these needs? Who will pay for them? [I]f you don't have a profit structure, what system do you use?
-------------------------------------
Imagine the world as it is today with ONE exception: nobody gets more than the value of what they personally produce with their own body and mind.
Right away we see that in such a world there is no longer a social role called 'investor', no separate role called 'owner', no role with the connotation of 'ruler', no role called 'stockbroker' or 'SEC official' or any of that other ruling-class hoo-hah. Those roles go extinct, like 'telephone sanitiser' (if you recall THGTTG).
But farmers would continue to raise a crop and get paid for it because people need to eat, people who can build/repair things would continue to do that and get paid for it because people prefer not to do everything by brute force or live in caves, medical people would continue to get paid for providing healthcare because people want to be healthy, et lengthy cetera.
EVERYthing would work just as today --except there'd be no 'leisure class' because everybody would be pocketing the full value of their work.
In such a world, the few obligative psychopaths that get produced every generation, and who are the source of *ALL* the unnatural misery in the world, would be caught early and sequestered until cured or dead.
The psychopathy of the ruling class comes through in their message that we need them in order to function: "without us you're nothing". The reality -and we prove this every day of our lives- is that we need them like we need poisonous snakes in the house: there isn't a damned thing they provide that we can't get some easier, healthier way.
With the vast majority of the US adult population steeped in their national mythology, lacking in curiosity, and with their inclination toward cultural navel-contemplation, I'm not surprised that the press that feeds whatever little they have of imagination would come up with this ridiculous characterization of Senator Sanders. Boy it feels nice to say Senator Sanders and also to say Senator Franken. I do admit that the greater part of the US (and other) citizens who move about this blog are a rarer breed, and mean not offend them or to include them among the crowd referenced in my first comment.
sierra7
The absence of Paul Wellstone is excruciatingly felt.....
Yes, and imagine Wellstone and Sanders as the one-two punch that just might have garnered enough attention to counter the idiocy of the republican/democrat fascist status-quo. The stuff of a REAL populist movement.
far left is not an accurate definition -
a majority of americans want the opportunity to buy into a "public option" when you define it as buying into medicare.
A majority of americans want an audit of the Federal reserve.
a majority of americans want to tax the wealthy more when you define the wealthy as making more than 3 million a year.
a majority of americans are getting sick and tired of endless war - and war profiteering bankrupting the government.
Only the msm and the corrupt politicians in washington like to say these are far left issues when in fact they are MAINSTREAM ISSUES!
What a tendentiously reactionary piece of propaganda masked as journalism.
Bring America Back !!!!
****If he threw our National Single Payer Healthcare under the Bus, in return for 10B of his personal Vermont public
meds clinics, what will it take for him to smooth over his anti-Bernanke stance ??? More earmarks for good ol Vermont?
****Bernanke is Wall Street's Man, King Bush' man, and now is Team Obamas man==while they still lie about being our
Main-Street folks !! Bernanke is the status quo answer to no change whatsoever for America's economy !
****Greenspan admitted that during his Clinton rule, the
big banks were unregulated, and the Big Bush Oil base was
unregulated. This big duo crashed just in time for the
Demmy takeover, and combined with the Trillion $$$ war debt
financing gives us what we have as we speak !!!
****Seems if Sanders truly wishes to dump Bernanke, he needs
to come up with a Viable , better, Czar of the New Economy, and no, not Hillary Clinton !!!! Come to think of it, can anybody even think of a good, solid
Democratic Economist to step in and radically get us on the right track,
without a Trainwreck ????
The 10 billion is for clinics throughout the US, not just for VT. In fact VT only gets 2. Might be good to get your facts right.
Ten billion in however many free clinics will barely put a dent in the number (45,000) people dying every year from not having health insurance. If Bernie Sanders voted for this insurance company giveaway bill in exchange for ten billion bucks for free clinics, this is tantamount to his selling out for little more than a few tokens. That's not to say that free clinics don't help people, it's that they're a type of charity, the function of which in a laissez faire society such as ours, is to trick the public into believing that something truly meaningful is being done to take care of a serious social problem, when, in fact, the problem for the most part remains ignored.
sierra7
I would gently remind you that we are already in a "train wreck!"
How about "untangle us from the wreckage"?