Wednesday, October 16, 2019

Young Voters Choosing Democratic Socialism

Why Some Young Voters Are Choosing Democratic Socialism Over the Democratic Party
As the presidential debate comes to Ohio, the students in a local chapter of the Young Democratic Socialists of America are defining their political identity.

In Sacramento also

Thursday, October 10, 2019

AB 32 Signed by Governor Newsom !

See post below for information.

Governor: Sign the Bill. AB 32

Signed !!!!!
Currently awaiting Governor Newsom’s signature or veto by an October 13 deadline, Assembly Bill 32 could make California the first state to ban for-profit immigration detention centers and the fifth, following Illinois, Iowa, New York and Nevada, to bar private companies from running for-profit state prisons.
Assemblyman Rob Bonta (D-Oakland), who authored the bill, argued that private prison firms are accountable to their shareholders, but not to Californians.
“They’re only looking at short-term profit. We’re looking at long-term investment in people,” Bonta said, adding that proportionally, private prisons have more assaults, higher recidivism rates and worse conditions for prison employees than public-sector lockups.
“It’s a no-brainer for me in protecting public health and safety,” Bonta said.
Aseembly Bill 32 passed the assembly on a 65-11 vote, and the senate by 33-6. Seven assembly Republicans and five GOP senators cast yes votes, while Assemblyman James Ramos (D-Highland) crossed party lines to vote no.
More than 60 immigrant and human rights groups, including the California Labor Federation and the Riverside Sheriffs’ Association, support AB 32. Private prison firms the GEO Group and CoreCivic together poured more than $150,000 into lobbying on it but, even though they stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars if the governor signs the bill, didn’t publicly oppose it.
Call the Governor's Office.  916- 445-2841.  Tell him to sign the bill. 

Wednesday, October 9, 2019

DSA Statement- Close the Camps

antiracismdsa: DSA Statement- Close the Camps: Donald Trump has used divide-and-conquer tactics to divide the working class from the first days of his campaign. And he’s used that pl...

Wednesday, October 2, 2019

How We Can Beat Trump's Racism in 2020

Choosing Democracy: How We Can Beat Trump's Racism in 2020: A road map to neutralizing the role of racism as a divide-and-conquer political weapon Ian Haney López believes that Trump wants 2020 vo...

Trump is not mentally stable

antiracismdsa: Trump is not mentally stable: By  Michael D. Shear  and  Julie Hirschfeld Davis ·         Oct. 1, 2019 · o     WASHINGTON — The Oval Office meeting th...

Thursday, September 26, 2019

The Need for a Progressive Cooperation

Sanders and Warren: The need for a progressive front

As the Democratic primaries unfolds, clear patterns are emerging in the polls. Joe Biden has held on to a steadily diminishing but still significant lead. Bernie Sanders has held a relatively steady proportion of support. Elizabeth Warren has emerged from the pack to be level or sometimes ahead of Sanders, while all other candidates lag behind. While there is much to be said about how to read these early polls, the most important takeaway is that the two candidates with the most progressive visions and campaigns have together surpassed the party’s centrist standard-bearer.

Bhaskar Sunkara, founding editor of Jacobin, wrote an opinion piece in the Guardian this past June arguing that the most important task for progressives during and in the lead up to the Democratic primaries is to build an anti-Biden front. Perhaps anticipating the possibility of a split among progressives between Sanders and Warren supporters, Sunkara noted then that even if Sanders loses, a united anti-Biden front could push the Democratic Party left and improve the odds of defeating Donald Trump. Sunkara had flagged the importance of ousting Trump in an earlier interview: “If push comes to shove and I were in a swing state in 2020, of course, I would vote for anyone in the Democratic field over Trump. I think that’s common sense. It should be hegemonic on the left.”

Wednesday, September 25, 2019

Tuesday, September 24, 2019

Jerry Brown : California Agenda for Climate Change

On Monday, Jerry Brown, the former governor of California, announced that he’s starting an institute at U.C. Berkeley aimed at tackling the climate crisis with help from what he described as a critical ally: China.
The California-China Climate Institute is intended to help spur partnerships between various state agencies and policymakers in China, as well as researchers at Tsinghua University.
The announcement comes amid a global outcry — led in part by young people — over the broad failure to adequately address climate change.
Tensions between the U.S. and China over trade have continued to bubble, and American universities, including U.C. Berkeley, have taken action against Chinese researchers and businesses over security concerns.
I talked with Mr. Brown about how he sees the institute navigating choppy geopolitical waters, and about why he’s throwing his weight behind this effort. Here’s our conversation, lightly edited and condensed for length:
Jill Cowan: To start, can you tell me about how this initiative came about?
Jerry Brown: Several years ago during the time I was governor, it became very clear that California couldn’t be an island of climate action. Our rules to reduce carbon emissions, to require renewable tech and renewable sources for electricity, our policy on low-carbon fuel, the cap-and-trade program — all these rules really need to be part of a more global undertaking.
I also saw China adopting some of the same programs and so we started sending people to China and welcoming Chinese policymakers, staffers, technicians here in California.
As part of that, I went over and met with President Xi of China, and he met with me soon after President Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement. After I left the governorship, following up on the agreement that I really made in China before, we have forged this new joint institute.
The goal is to keep open the channels of communication with China at the state level but also the national government level, to exchange ideas, bring scientists back and forth between the two countries, push for a more ambitious policy.
I’m wondering how you and others involved with this initiative are approaching working with Chinese institutions, given recent tensions. This is obviously a very open partnership with the Chinese government.

Well, look, there is a policy that is shaping up in Washington to decouple from China. I don’t think that’s the future. To me, that’s 19th-century thinking. It leads to war and economic decline.
So I believe collaboration with our eyes open — not being naïve, not being utopian, but having smart people, scientists, policymakers face the terrible prospect of a heating environment.
People are dying in the fires. People in Florida, Bangladesh, even New York City, in Shanghai they’re going to be facing rising sea level, climate disruption, drought, tropical diseases.
This transcends the age-old rivalry that national governments have. And I am one who believes we have to recognize that we have imperfections. We’re not a white knight.

I start, in one sense, with the doctrine of original sin. We were born with our intellect darkened and our wills weakened. That applies to nations.
China does a lot of stuff that I don’t like, that other people don’t like, but the answer is not to pick up your baseball bat and go home. It’s to engage and to frankly discuss.
I want to focus our best efforts on finding ways to rapidly reduce to a net zero the global emission of heat-trapping gases. To say that borders on the preposterous. But it also is absolutely necessary.
I might even say we’re doing the Lord’s work, and we’re not going to be deterred by other issues and problems and antagonisms, however they may arise.
You’ve mentioned transportation is particularly important to California. Are there ideas that the institute will be looking at that might have the fastest turnaround for implementation?