me again wrote:Sanders and Warren positions on the prison-industrial complex. On some recent history that the corporate media is ignoring:
1. Bernie Sanders introduced a Senate bill to abolish federal use of private prisons and detention centers in August 2015 (S.2054, "Justice is Not For Sale Act of 2015"), at the beginning of his first presidential run. An identical House version was introduced by Rep. Grijalva (HR.3227). At the time this was covered only in a few alternative media platforms (see link). While this means Sanders was first with such legislation on the federal level, he was responding to a popular political movement that also prompted the Obama administration to adopt reforms (see 4-5).
2. Elimination of private prisons and detention centers has always been part of the Sanders campaign's broader program for criminal justice reform (
https://www.berniesanders.com/issues/cr ... ce-reform/). The text I am quoting in the comments (below) is from the Sanders campaign's detailed and extensive policy page (
https://www.berniesanders.com/issues/).
3. The 2015 Sanders-Grijalva bill included further measures to end immigrant family detention, limit ICE actions, reinstate the federal parole program, and end overcharging prisoners for phone calls by factors of 10 to 100 (
https://www.sanders.senate.gov/download ... nline=file). The bills predictably were blocked by the Republican majorities in Congress.
4. A groundswell against the mass incarceration system and the prison-industrial complex has grown throughout the past decade. Grassroots movements like #BlackLivesMatter and the efforts to end the war on drugs were and remain at the forefront. They have played an important role in pushing politicians to advocate for decriminalizing drugs and criminal justice reform, including Sanders. The movements are why Stop and Frisk was ended as an official policy in New York City. The success of 13th, the 2016 documentary by Ava Duvernay, was one indicator of the rising public concern. The same movements achieved perhaps their greatest success so far in last year's election, when Florida voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot measure to restore the voting rights of 1.4 million disenfranchised felons who had served their time.
5. In August 2016, the Obama administration announced a policy change to end federal use of for-profit prisons (
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/oba ... te-prisons). Stock in private prison companies such as Geo plunged at the time. It was seen as the beginning of the end of the private prison industry, a signal that would lead to abolitions at the state level.
6. The new Obama policy was reversed by the Justice Department under Jeff Sessions in February 2017 (
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa- ... SKBN1622NN). Although less-noted, this should rank among the Trump-Pence-GOP regime's objectively most violent acts. Private prison corporations are among the GOP's most reliable big money donors.
7. Any politician who now chooses to support the abolition of private prisons (and the many other needed criminal justice reforms) should be welcomed to a growing fold. But the corporate media response to Elizabeth Warren's campaign roll-out of a proposal to this effect two days ago omitted all of the above background. It was presented almost as though Warren invented the issue. The celebratory news coverage not only ignored the earlier Sanders legislation (which Warren did not co-sponsor) but also omitted the Obama administration's momentous policy change. (Click to see a current search:
https://www.google.com/search?&q=warren+private+prisons)
8. For now the corporate media and a number of Democratic establishment pundits and big-money sponsors have discovered and promote Elizabeth Warren, ostensibly because her policy proposals are serious and detailed. These same entities and persons have long ignored and blasted Sanders' earlier and more detailed (and far more serious, in my opinion) policy proposals. These same entities and persons have thrown every possible smear at Sanders, plus the kitchen sink, for four years. After their decades of hard work on behalf of the status quo, their new-found enthusiasm for Warren is fake. It is not coincidental. The intent is to split the progressive vote and to favor a candidate far less likely to attempt real reform. (See Warren's retreat from a full Medicare For All single-payer system, and her support from the charter school movement.)
9. I am not blaming Warren for riding the sudden corporate media PR bonanza. No candidate really gets to control what the news conglomerates choose to do, except maybe by buying ads. But in the end, the sudden promotion of Warren by the corporate media and by some of the Democratic establishment is not aiming to help Warren but to sabotage Sanders, preferably to split and sink all of the progessive candidates. These same entities will later appear to throw their support behind whichever one of the neoliberal center-right fakers (Biden, Harris, Mayor Pete, etc.) prevails as the "ABB" (Anybody But Bernie) candidate. They will also continue to shield the Trump-Pence-GOP regime from substantive criticism of their aggressions, war crimes and other atrocities, focusing on personalized scandals, and even supporting the regime when it wages war.
10. Do you like Warren? It's okay. I have at times also, especially in regard to her work on bankruptcy reform, wealth inequality and private debt, and financial sector crime and regulation. Just be aware of the history and unfolding situation when the corporate media, the professional consultants, and various "philanthropies" and other predators swimming within the waters of the Democratic establishment (like Third Way, Brock, Tanden, Steyer, most of the on-air personalities on MSNBC, et al.) suddenly appear as though they are your friends. They are not. They don't care about you.
Remember that these are not "analysts," as they are usually pimped out. They are rarely university academics, they are usually not reporters. They are hired spokespersons, sophists, bought and sold propagandists, stenographers for the powerful. (Or else they are themselves the super-rich sponsors who expect to run the two-party monopoly as a matter of monied privilege.) They are not "liberals," they are not reformers. They are not intellectuals who struggled to arrive at a philosophy or ideals or principles. They think they already know or pretend to think they know everything that matters. They are actors on television and in the Internet gutter. Like a herd, they instantly recognize and follow predetermined PR lines. They act to please their funders, sponsors, advertisers, and/or the executives who promote them.
And they are individuals. Every one of their stories may be a
bit different, but the collective outcome of the corporate propaganda system is predictable. I am not talking about everyone who produces content for the Jeff Bezos Washington Post, or the Brookings Institution, or the CFR or all of the billionaire foundations. But something like 90 percent or more of those who draw up reporting agendas on politics, especially on foreign policy and elections, and who decide on hirings and promotions, will conform to the center-right ideology that in the United States is sold as "liberal."
I am talking about pretty much 100 percent of the content producers at the major cable networks, and among the big-money Democratic think tanks a la Third Way and CAP, and at most of the new-wave Internet politics outlets a la Politico or Vox. Those among them who play liberals and now uphold Warren while continuing to attack Sanders are not going to help end the endless wars. They will not fight to institute single-payer health care, remove the legal retrictions on labor unions, achieve public campaign finance, redistribute wealth and power, or address the ongoing planetary extinction event with a serious Green New Deal. They will always act within a strategy to prevent all of that, to cut out and discredit the left, to foreclose on alternatives to neoliberal and imperialist politics, to create the image of reform and change while selling the same old status quo. When no other argument works, they will tell you that all that matters is defeating Trump, and they will lie to you that only a corporatist center-right technocratic Democrat has any real chance of defeating Trump (which is the opposite of the truth).