From: 10514w@coos.dartmouth.edu (John Lamperti)
Subject: BERNIE SANDERS: FIRST INDEP IN CONGRESS IN 40 YEARS (INTERVIEW)
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: rich@pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: University of Missouri
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 18:40:50 GMT

		 ************************************
	    BERNIE SANDERS INTERVIEWED BY DAVID BARSAMIAN
		   CREATING A NEW POLITICAL AGENDA
		 ************************************
		    Transcribed by Joseph Woodard
		     From Z magazine, March 1992
		 ************************************

IN 1990 Bernie Sanders became the first independent elected to
Congress in 40 years. He was a four-time Mayor of Burlington,
Vermont's largest city.

==================================================================

SANDERS: 

	My major criticism of what takes place in Congress and of
	the two-party system is not simply that Congress and the
	President are not solving the enormous problems facing this
	country. They're difficult problems and not easily solved.
	My major criticism is that we are not even discussing the
	most important problems. Honest people will have differences
	of opinion as to how you resolve problems. But what is going
	on to a large degree in this country is that the enormity of
	the problem is being swept under the rug.

	The ramifications are that tens of millions of people in
	this country now have very little belief that the government
	is capable of resolving the enormous problems facing that
	country. We now have the lowest voter turnout of any
	industrialized nation on earth, ninety percent of the poor
	no longer vote, working people don't vote--not only is that
	a disaster, but it lays the groundwork for demagoguery and
	the likes of the David Dukes of this world.

	The challenge that I see is how do you bring people into the
	political process, especially working people and poor
	people, and how do you begin to resolve the enormous
	problems that people are facing. The difference between my
	politics and the politics of most of the people in the
	Congress, and certainly the President, is that my politics
	is based on a class analysis of what goes on in society. I
	think the fundamental problem is that we live in a nation
	where both political and economic life are controlled by
	very, very wealthy people and powerful institutions, and
	that politically what you end up having are two major
	political parties, both of which represent the interests of
	the wealthy. What we have been fairly successful in doing in
	Vermont and in the city of Burlington is giving people an
	alternative progressive agenda which represents them and not
	just the rich. That is what, it seems to me, people are
	crying out for on the American political scene.

	If you look issue by issue at President Bush, the
	interesting phenomenon is that on every major issue
	affecting the American people George Bush holds a minority
	position. The people of this camera want a national health
	care system guaranteeing health care to all people. Until a
	week ago, after Pennsylvania, George Bush was "studying"
	that issue. He represents the insurance companies. The
	people want change. There's Bush. Here's the people. The
	Cold War is over. The budget presented by both the Democrats
	and the Republicans and voted upon this week in Congress
	calls for a $290 billion budget for the military, over $100
	billion to defend Western Europe, money for Stars Wars,
	money for B-2 bombers. That's not what the American people
	want. George Bush wants Star Wars, B-2 bombers, a big
	military budget. The American people want to significantly
	cut military spending, use that money for education,
	environmental protection, housing, dealing with domestic
	crises.

	In terms of tax reform, in the last 12 years what we have
	seen in the richest I percent of the people in this country
	more than double their income, the rich becoming much, much
	richer. The working class middle income people have become
	poor. Their standard of living and purchasing power have
	declined. The rich have gotten richer and pay less in taxes.
	The working class has gotten poorer and pays more in taxes.
	Poll after poll shows that people want the rich to start
	paying their fair share in taxes. George Bush wants to give
	more tax breaks to the rich. So if you have Bush over here,
	representing a minority, then the obvious question is, how
	the hell does this guy become president of the United
	States? The answer is that there really is no political
	opposition. That to a large degree, not completely, you live
	in a one-party system, where the leadership of both parties
	is responsible for the problems and is not prepared to stand
	up to the people who own and control this country.

	Within the Congress there are some very, very good people,
	progressive Democrats mostly, with whom I work closely.
	There are 20 or 30 of us trying to formalize the Progressive
	Caucus where we are going to lay out a progressive agenda:
	Canadian-style national health care, tax reform, significant
	cuts in military spending, reinvestment in America,
	reindustrialization, etc. The problem is that at the
	leadership level, Democratic views are not terribly
	different from those of the Republican Party.

	So our goal is to have the courage to stand up to the big
	money interests who dominate the media, who control both
	parties, and try to bring people in on a progressive agenda.
	The coalition must include the trade unions of this country,
	women, minorities, the environmental community, the peace
	community. What happens in this country, largely because of
	television, is that we don't have a progressive political
	movement. What we have are separate single-issue groups.
	You've got the women's community over here, the peace
	community over here, the labor unions over here. Each one
	goes to the President and says, "Please help us out a little
	bit." Each one loses, because they stand separately. So the
	political task of the future is to bring those groups
	together who, if you add them up, are the vast majority of
	the people of this country. My feeling is that it should be
	outside of the two-party system. We have a very good model
	with the New Democratic Party in Canada. They have done very
	much what I would like to see us do. As you may know, the
	New Democratic Party in Canada recently won landslide
	victories in British Columbia and Saskatchewan. Earlier this
	year they won a victory in Ontario. The provinces they
	control now have over half the people in Canada. And that's
	what we have got to do. We can't continue to be single-issue
	people. If you're concerned about the environment, it's not
	enough just to be concerned about the environment. You've
	got to be concerned about the fact that people are sleeping
	out on the streets, that working people are seeing a decline
	in their standard of living. If you're concerned about the
	peace movement and what goes on in the world where we're
	spending $290 billion dollars, you've got to be concerned
	that elderly people can't afford prescription drugs. I was
	out in California with Betty Friedan a number of months ago,
	and she made the point that the women's movement will fail
	unless it is part of a broad political movement. You want to
	go out on your own and be a women's libber? Fine, no
	problem. You'll fail. Concerned about world peace? Good.
	You'll fail. Concerned about the environment? You'll fail.
	Concerned about workers' rights? You'll fail. Our job is to
	say that what the fight is about is not the environment, is
	not peace, health care, what the fight is about is power.
	They've got it. Our people do not have it.

	How do you get it? You organize politically. You bring your
	people together, both for elections and for nonelectoral
	activities. In Vermont what we have is an agenda that has
	the support of the vast majority of people. We have
	organized politically around that agenda, and we're having
	some success.

	If you want to get money from rich people, you can't talk
	about tax reform. You can't talk about the abuse of
	corporate power. You can't take from one hand and stand up
	for working people. You've got to draw the line, which side
	are you on. Unfortunately the leadership of both parties is
	on the side of big money. So our job, as I see it, is to
	organize politically the different single-issue groups to
	see if we can't create a strong movement which will make
	radical changes in the priorities of this country.


 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
"Z is an independent, progressive monthly magazine of critical thinking 
on political, cultural, social, and economic life in the United 
States.  It sees the racial, sexual, class, and political dimensions 
of personal life as fundamental to understanding and improving 
contemporary circumstances; and it aims to assist activist efforts to 
attain a better future."
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Subscriptions: One Year $25; Two Years $40; Three Years $55 
$18 student/low-income  //  Sample issue: $3.00
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Z Magazine, // 150 W Canton St., // Boston MA 02118 // (617)236-5878 
[Some 100 pages per issue, no advertisements]
[Z is a project of the nonprofit Institute for Social & Cultural Change]


Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive