Some of the biggest names
in the video games industry, with a combined audience of 970 million players, have
formally committed to harness the power of their platforms to take action in
response to the climate crisis. Combined, these commitments from 21 companies
will result in a 30 million ton reduction of CO2 emissions by 2030, will see
millions of trees planted, new “green nudges” in game design and improvements
to energy management, packaging, and device recycling.
These voluntary commitments were
announced at UN Headquarters on the side-lines of the UN Secretary-General’s
Climate Action Summit. Under the banner of the Playing for the Planet Alliance,
CEOs from 14 platforms and games makers, including Sony Interactive
Entertainment, Microsoft, Google Stadia, Rovio, Supercell, Sybo, Ubisoft and
WildWorks, were present to showcase their commitments. The Alliance intends to
support companies in sharing learning and monitoring progress on the
environmental agenda.
“The video games industry has the
ability to engage, inspire and captivate the imaginations of billions of people
across the world. This makes them a hugely important partner in addressing the
climate emergency,” said Inger Andersen, Executive Director, UN Environment
Programme (UNEP). “We are encouraged by the commitment of these gaming
companies, which shows recognition that we all must play our role in the global
effort to lower carbon emissions and effect real change towards
sustainability.”
These commitments were facilitated by
UNEP with the support of Playmob and following the GRID-Arendal study Playing
For The Planet, which outlines how the video games
industry, which reaches 2.6 billion people globally, can support action on the
environmental agenda.
“Today at the UN Climate Summit, I am
honored and feel privileged to join leaders in the gaming industry to make
commitments to contribute to the efforts of the UN,” said Jim Ryan, President
and CEO of Sony Interactive Entertainment. “At PlayStation, we believe games
have the power to ignite social change through educating people, evoking
emotions, and inspiring hope. We could not be prouder to be part of the Playing
for the Planet Alliance and we look forward to seeing what the industry can
achieve together.”
“Climate change is impacting each
industry and every sector, and we believe technology can play a critical role
in enabling and empowering the response to this challenge,” said Phil Spencer,
executive vice president of gaming at Microsoft. “Initiatives like our
Minecraft Build a Better World Campaign and CarbonNeutral Xbox pilot provide a
great opportunity to tap into Microsoft’s technology sustainability and gaming
community to make a difference in this key area of our business.”
The commitments include:
Sony Interactive Entertainment will
unveil new progress and plans to utilize energy efficient technology (on-track
to avoid 29 million tons of CO2 emissions by 2030), to introduce low power
suspend mode for next generation PlayStation, to assess and report their carbon
footprint and to educate and inspire the gaming community to take action on
climate change.
Microsoft will announce the
expansion of its existing operational commitment to carbon neutrality,
established in 2012, into its devices and gaming work. It will set a new target
to reduce its supply chain emissions by 30 per cent by 2030 – including
end-of-life for devices – and to certify 825,000 Xbox consoles as carbon
neutral in a pilot program. In addition, Microsoft will engage gamers in
sustainability efforts in real life through the Minecraft its ‘Build a Better
World’ initiative, which has seen players take more than 20 million in-game
actions.
Google Stadia, which is set to
launch later in the year, will produce a new Sustainable Game Development Guide
as well as funding research into how “green nudges” can be effectively
incorporated into game play.
Supercell (Clash of Clans) will
offset the entire footprint of their community, Rovio (Angry Birds)
has offset the carbon impact from their players charging their devices,
and Sybo (Subway Surfer) and Space Ape (Fastlane) will
offset 200 per cent of their studio and their gamers mobile energy use.
Guidance documents will assist other companies to take similar actions.
Wild Works (Animal Jam) will
integrate restoration elements in games and, like Green Man Gaming, they
will focus on restoring some of the world’s forests with major tree-planting
initiatives
Ubisoft will develop in-game
green themes and will source materials from eco-friendly
factories and Sports Interactive will eliminate 20 tonnes of
packaging by switching from plastic to a recycled alternative for all future
Football Manager releases.
Creative Mobile’s ZooCraft will
evolve into a conservation-focused game with Reliance Games (Little
Singham) generating awareness in the fastest growing mobile gaming market
by creating awareness with kids to make them ambassadors for climate change
with in-game events and initiatives across India. The biggest independent gaming
platform in China, iDreamSky has committed to putting green nudges
into its games.
E-Line Media (Never Alone, Beyond
Blue), Strange Loop (Eco) and Internet of Elephants (Safari
Central) will share their expertise of making high impact environmentally oriented
games into the Alliance
Finally, Twitch have
committed to utilizing their platform to spread this message to the global
gaming community with Niantic Inc (Pokemon Go) committing to engage
their community to act around sustainability issues.
“Through awareness-raising
campaigns connected to our Angry Birds games and movies over the years, we know
our fans are just as angry as us about climate change,” said Kati
Levoranta, Rovio Entertainment CEO. “Considering the enormity of the
environmental challenges that face us in years to come, we as an industry must
stand with our players and be evangelists for action.”
Too often, there can be a trade-off
between games that are designed to be educational but without reaching the
masses. To address this, many of the companies will host design-jams with their
creatives to consider how they can mindfully incentivize better environmental
outcomes within the games, without limiting the fun and enjoyment for players.
Speaking in support of this
initiative, Mathias Gredal Norvig, CEO of Sybo, the organization behind Subway
Surfer, said: “Video gaming might seem like an unlikely ally in this
battle, but this Alliance is a critical platform where all of us can play our
part to decarbonize our impact and bring the issues into gameplay. I am a
strong believer in sparking curiosity and conversations wherever people are,
and with 2 billion people playing games, this platform has a reach that’s
second to none.”
Amit Khanduja, CEO of Reliance Games,
said: “The Mobile Games industry has to take the lead in the emerging
markets to raise awareness among the next billion gamers coming online to lead
the way for climate change. We are honoured to be part of this strong UN
initiative for a better tomorrow.”
Members of the Alliance that have made
commitments include: Creative Mobile, E-Line Media, Google Stadia, Green Man
Gaming, iDreamSky, Internet of Elephants, Microsoft, Niantic Inc, Pixelberry,
Reliance Games, Rovio, Space Ape, Sports Interactive, Supercell, Sony
Interactive Entertainment, Strange Loop, Sybo, Twitch, Ubisoft, WildWorks and
will be supported by Playmob.
There was the sense at the United
Nations Climate Action Summit that took place September 23, that the Trump
Administration – but not the United States – is irrelevant to the crusade to
mitigate the most devastating impacts of climate change. Indeed, the rest of
the world, American states, localities and businesses, is forging full steam
ahead to prevent the earth from warming more than 1.5 degrees Celsius – and all
the devastation that would result – within the next 12 years.
“We know why tackling climate change is important”, said Deputy
Secretary-General Amina Mohammed before the Climate Action Summit began. “The
devastation wreaked by Dorian on the Bahamas, what the Secretary-General called
a Category Hell hurricane, is a glimpse into one aspect of a future powered by
climate change – a future with super storms that grow in intensity and
frequency, where those countries with the lowest greenhouse gas emissions,
continue to feel the worst impacts of the planet’s rising temperatures.”
“The summit will present practical and new measures, speed transition from
coal to clean energy, cut pollution harming health, protect nature, unlock the potential
of nature to deliver on climate, create cleaner greener waste, speed up transition
from grey to green economies, mitigate impacts of climate change, leave no one
behind, transition must be ramped up now,” she said at a press briefing before
the summit.
The Climate Action Summit was
designed to showcase only the boldest, transformative actions – specifics, not
hyperbole or speechifying.
“We will see what climate leadership
looks like – progress toward carbon neutral future.”
Trump snubbed the summit, choosing instead to host a Religious Freedom Forum, and highlighted America’s military might but did not mention climate change once, in his address to the General Assembly. But just about every other leader did refer to the critical need and their commitment to climate action in their speech.
“Can
we afford to ignore the crisis of extinction, or will we do the right thing,
support energies and talents of all the world’s youth and drive all the
economies forward to fair and inclusive society?” Abdullah
II bin Al–Hussein, King of Jordan, declared. “What will our world
become if we do not work together for a healthy and safe climate. We already
know the dangers of climate change – how can we excuse [inaction]”
Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović, president of
Croatia, declared, “Climate
change- rising sea levels – is the greatest threat. Without protection of
waters and marine life, there will be nothing to leave.”
Russia, one of the few holdouts and
one of the world’s largest carbon emitters with an economy largely based on
fossil fuel extraction and export, used the occasion to officially adopt the
Paris Climate Agreement. The document signed by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev says
Russia will now “allocate financial resources… to developing countries
for prevention and adaptation to climate change. The threat of climate change
is (the) destruction of the ecological balance, increased risks for successful
development of key industries… and most importantly, threat to safety of
people living on permafrost and increase of natural disasters.”
Governor Janet Mills of Maine challenged
leaders of the world to take action against climate change, saying the State of
Maine will do its part and announcing that she has signed an Executive Order
committing the state to carbon neutrality by 2045.
Separately,
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo announced
New York State is pursuing partnerships with Ireland and Denmark that will lead
to improved electric infrastructure and the advancement of more renewable
energy sources, including offshore wind. The agreements were announced during
Climate Week and will advance both New York’s nation-leading plan to combat
climate change and the Governor’s Green New Deal agenda. This summer,
Governor Cuomo signed the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act,
which mandates New York’s power be 100 percent clean and carbon-free by 2040. New
York is one of 25 states including California that have formed the US Climate
Alliance (USclimatealliance.org) to
uphold the Paris Agreement. – collectively representing over 50% of the US
population and 60% of the United States’
GDP.
Mohammed acknowledged that the transition “is not one-size fits all
– in some countries, renewable energy is already cheaper than coal; others need
funding options. It’s not enough that we stop funding coal and actively move to
making renewable possible –there is tension there. We must be realistic – you can’t
click fingers and create a renewable grid overnight but we also determined there
are over 100 coal plants in pipeline and emissions are still rising – that pathway
is a serious threat to human survival.”
Informed by the perspectives of more than 130 Governments, a newly issued
report, The Heat is On – Taking Stock of Global Climate Ambition,
reveals that business as usual, is not good enough and requires more
mitigation, adaptation and finance – all which must be done quickly.
“When I look back on this Climate
Action Summit, I want us to see it as a sling shot – that helped to change our
common trajectory towards sustainability”, said Ms. Mohammed, building trust
“between this generation of adults and the next – between our children and
ourselves – that we are all working together to our fullest potential to tackle
the climate emergency”.
She recapped that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report
stressed the need to ensure that “the global temperature rise does not go
beyond 1.5 degrees Celsius” through “cutting emissions by 45 per cent by 2030”,
warning that “we have very little time to take the decisions needed to get
there”.
Those decisions should be set out in each country’s Nationally Determined
Contributions (NDCs) on climate change, which she called “the cornerstone of
the Paris
Agreement”.
“The world’s poorest 1 billion, we
are least responsible for climate crisis – emitting less than 1% of global
emissions, yet, our small gross national
incomes and limited resources means we suffer the most,” said Sonam P.
Wangdi, Secretary of the National Environment Commission, Bhutan.
The United
States, with only 5% of the population is responsible for 25% of carbon
emissions, and the present administration, which hides behind science denial in
order to preserve the status quo of their economic systems, will have a huge
impact on whether the efforts made by 190 countries succeed in preserving the
planet. But though the government was a no-show at the Climate Action Summit,
states, localities and business interests were on hand, offering their
commitments so that the United States will achieve the goals of the Paris
Climate Agreement led by Obama and rejected by Trump.
Indeed, it
was just as if the world has moved on, rendering the United States irrelevant.
The thought of holding the US accountable for reparations when an island nation
like the Bahamas is devastated by Hurricane Dorian, was discounted. “Who would
enforce a decision?” said Wilfred P.
Elrington, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Belize, a statement made from the
experience of Trinidad & Tobago which won a judgment against the US in the
World Trade Organization that has yet to be paid.
Small Island
Developing States are stepping up and striking back.
“The recent activity of Dorian in Bahamas – devastated that island, and unless you really have experience this kind of devastation it is hard to appreciate how difficult, how absolutely destructive it is,” said Elrington, recalling his own terror at the age of 4 years old when a Category 4 hurricane hit. “From one moment being in a safe, secure structure or building, the next to be completely out in environment with absolutely nothing – you have absolutely nothing – no clothes, medicine, food, completely at the mercy of God. We think of the damage to human beings and the destruction, but equally tragic is the destruction done to floral and fauna – exceedingly depressing to see the entire landscape devastated and and of course, does not come back quickly.”
Apart from saving habitats, climate
mitigation and adaptation has the added benefit of addressing poverty and
inequality, in part perpetuated by the cost – and reliance –on fossil fuels as
the basis for an economy. Shifting to clean, renewable like solar, wind, water,
geothermal, lowers the expenditure and increases the independence from
concentrated utility companies. Eliminating fossil fuels also reduces pollution
and improves health.
But with
worldwide pressure – by citizens and consumers – the private sector is being
forced to take action as well. Sixteen
countries are phasing out gasoline-powered cars over the next several years,
rendering US-manufactured cars unexportable, regardless of how Trump attempts
to overturn California’s call for higher fuel efficiency standards and lower
emissions.
Coalition for Climate Resilient Investment
Just announced, “first of its kind,” Coalition for Climate Resilient Investment “will transform mainstream infrastructure investment and drive a permanent shift toward climate resilient economy for all countries, but especially for low and mid income countries which bear the brunt,” said John Haley, CEO, Willis Towers Watson, one of the world’s largest insurance companies. One of the ways it will change the way money is invested in business ventures and infrastructure is by creating new data analytics that incorporate the cost-benefit of climate adaptation, mitigation and resiliency into the model. “Rapid advancement in data analytics, coupled in momentum of regulatory initiatives and growing pressure from global society is what allows this initiative to be as ambitious as it is.”
He said, “I come from the world of
insurance. We work on a lot of analytical tools to price the effect of climate
disasters. We will take those kind of analytical tools and build them into
understanding what kind of investments we should make in infrastructure – measure
the impacts of climate on infrastructure everywhere in the world – more
important in vulnerable communities but everywhere in the world [including US,
where former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson has been saying the very thing in
pushing for a carbon tax].
“Pricing the risks
posed by climate change will create opportunities to build a network of
resilient infrastructure in high, medium and low-income countries, enabling us
to better prevent future human and financial disasters.”
The coalition will
develop case studies to build the business case, and identify the critical
enabling environments, for climate resilient infrastructure investment.
By the end of
2020, analytical tools including a physical risk pricing framework and
methodology to prioritize national resilient investment needs, will be
developed, alongside a range of instruments to prevent capital flight from
vulnerable regions.
Biggest Names in Video Game Industry
Commit to Climate Action
And,
in a major mind-blowing commitment, 21 of the biggest names in the video games
industry, with a combined audience of 970 million players, formally committed
to harness the power of their platforms to take action in response to the
climate crisis. Combined, these commitments will result in a 30 million ton
reduction of CO2 emissions by 2030, will see millions of trees planted, new
“green nudges” in game design and improvements to energy management, packaging,
and device recycling. Equally significantly, under
the banner of Playing for the Planet Alliance, many will incorporate
sustainability and climate action into the games, themselves, letting gamers,
for example, toy with building sustainable societies.
These
voluntary commitments were announced during the UN Climate Action Summit. CEOs
from 14 platforms and games makers, including Sony Interactive Entertainment,
Microsoft, Google Stadia, Rovio, Supercell, Sybo, Ubisoft and WildWorks, were
present to showcase their commitments. The Alliance intends to support
companies in sharing learning and monitoring progress on the environmental
agenda.
A
full list of the announcements and commitments made at the Climate Summit can
be found at www.un.org/climatechange
Youth leaders including Greta Thunberg, who in an impassioned address to the UN Climate Action Summit that followed a worldwide Climate Strike that brought out 4 million people worldwide and an unprecedented UN Youth Climate Summit, said, “We will be watching,” drove home the urgency of greater action by leaders, and their determination to hold leaders to account.
By Karen Rubin, News-Photos-Features.com
Clearly the world’s leaders are finally listening to the rising tide of civic actions, including an outpouring of youth activists, not asking but demanding action on climate change – preventing the planet from heating more than 1.5 degrees Celsius, mitigating and adapting to the impacts of global warming, from rising sea levels, more frequent and violent superstorms, wildfires, droughts, floods and famines, extinction of wildlife and plants due to lost habitats, and the health impacts due to the spread of epidemics, disease and illness.
Major announcements by government and private sector
leaders during the course of the day-long United Nations Climate Action Summit,
September 23, boosted climate action momentum, and demonstrated growing
recognition that the pace of climate action must be rapidly accelerated.
77 countries committed to cut greenhouse gas
emissions to net zero by 2050, while 70 countries announced they will either
boost their national action plans by 2020 or have started the process of doing
so.
Over 100 business leaders delivered concrete actions
to align with the Paris Agreement targets, and speed up the transition from the
grey to green economy, including asset-owners holding over $2 trillion in
assets and leading companies with combined value also over $2 trillion.
Many countries and over 100 cities – including many
of the world’s largest – announced significant and concrete new steps to combat
the climate crisis.
Many smaller countries, including Small Island
Developing States and Least Developed Countries, were among those who made the
biggest pledges, despite the fact they have contributed the least to the
problem.
UN Secretary-General António Guterres, closing the
Summit, said “You have delivered a boost in momentum, cooperation and ambition.
But we have a long way to go. We need more concrete plans, more ambition from
more countries and more businesses. We need all financial institutions, public
and private, to choose, once and for all, the green economy.”
Youth leaders
including Greta Thunberg, who in an impassioned address that followed a
worldwide Climate Strike, said, “We will be watching,” drove home the urgency
of greater action by leaders, and their determination to hold leaders to
account.
• France announced that it would not enter into any
trade agreement with countries that have policies counter to the Paris
Agreement.
• Germany committed to carbon neutrality by 2050
• Russia, one of the few holdouts
and one of the world’s largest carbon emitters, with an economy largely based
on fossil fuel extraction and export, adopted the Paris Climate Agreement.
• 12 countries made financial
commitments to the Green Climate Fund, the official financial mechanism to
assist developing countries in adaptation and mitigation practices to counter
climate change. This is in addition to recent announcements from Norway,
Germany, France and the United Kingdom who have recently doubled their present
contributions.
• The United Kingdom made a major additional
contribution, doubling its overall international climate finance to L11.6
billion for the period from 2020 to 2025.
• India pledged to increase renewable energy
capacity to 175gw by 2022 and committed to further increasing to 450GW, and
announced that 80 countries have joined the International Solar Alliance.
• China said it would cut emissions by over 12
billion tons annually, and would pursue a path of high quality growth and low
carbon development.
• The European Union announced at least 25% of the
next EU budget will be devoted to climate-related activities.
• The Russian Federation announced that they will
ratify the Paris Agreement, bringing the total number of countries that have
joined the Agreement to 187.
• Pakistan said it would plant more than 10 billion
trees over the next five years. On unprecedented levels of private sector
action:
• A group of the world’s largest asset-owners —
responsible for directing more than $2 trillion in investments — committed to
move to carbon-neutral investment portfolios by 2050.
• 87 major companies with a combined market
capitalization of over US$ 2.3 trillion pledged to reduce emissions and align
their businesses with what scientists say is needed to limit the worst impacts
of climate change—a 1.5°C future.
• 130 banks – one-third of the global banking sector
– signed up to align their businesses with the Paris agreement goals On
transitioning from brown to green energy:
• Michael Bloomberg will increase the funding and
geographic spread of his coal phase out efforts to 30 countries. Already, his
work has helped to close 297 out of 530 coal plants in the US.
• Countries, including France and New Zealand,
announced that they will not allow oil or gas exploration on their lands or
off-shore waters.
• Heads of State from Finland, Germany, Greece,
Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, Portugal, and Slovakia, are among those
that announced that they will work to phase out coal. The Republic of Korea
announced it would shut down four coal-fired power plants, and six more will be
closed by 2022, as well as the doubling of its contribution to the Green
Climate Fund.
• The Summit also delivered critical platforms for
improving energy efficiency and reducing the growing energy needs for cooling,
with the “Three Percent Club” coalition working to drive a three percent annual
global increase in energy efficiency and the Cool Coalition setting ambitious
national cooling targets for its members with the potential to deliver up to 1
degree on the pathway to a 2050 net zero carbon world. On scaling up financing
and unlocking barriers to funds:
• Many countries announced new contributions to the
Green Climate Fund, the official financial mechanism to assist developing
countries in adaptation and mitigation practices to counter climate change,
with several countries, including France, Germany, Norway and the United
Kingdom, announcing that they would double their present contributions.
• Further, the Climate Investment Platform,
officially announced during the Summit, will seek to directly mobilize US$ 1
trillion in clean energy investment by 2025 in 20 Least Developed Countries in
its first year.
• The African Development Bank said it was doubling
its climate-related financing to $25 billion by 2025. Funding will go to
projects including a multi-billion initiative to develop 10,000 megawatts of
solar power from the Sahara that will provide electricity to 250 million
people. “What
a difference a green, more prosperous, resilient, peaceful and secure future
will mean,” said Dr. Akinwumi Adesina, President, African
Development Bank.
• Coalition for Climate Resilient Investment – just announced and the first of its kind – “will transform mainstream infrastructure investment and drive a permanent shift toward climate resilient economy for all countries, but especially for low and mid income countries which bear the brunt” by providing data analytical tools to price in the cost of climate resiliency into investments, said John Haley, CEO, Willis Towers Watson, one of the world’s largest insurance companies.
• The state of Maine committed to carbon
neutrality by 2045.
• Summit initiatives were designed to ensure the
actions undertaken would be fair for all, supporting jobs and clear air for
better health, and protect the most vulnerable, as well as new initiatives on
adaptation, agriculture and early warning systems that will protect 500 million
additional people against the impacts of climate change.
New initiatives announced have been designed to be scaled up to deliver
impact at the global scale needed. The Secretary-General urged governments,
businesses and people everywhere to join the initiatives announced at the
Summit, and promised to “keep pushing” for greater ambition and action.
The Secretary-General committed the UN system to
support implementation of plans presented at the Summit, with an initial report
to be delivered at COP25 in Santiago, Chile.
A full list of the announcements and commitments made at the Climate Summit can be found at www.un.org/climatechange
Pakistan’s Prime Minister Imran Khan, at a press briefing at the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday, September 24, gave a chilling depiction of prospects for Kashmir, whose 8 million inhabitants are under virtual house arrest by India. He noted multiple times that these are two nuclear powers being brought to the brink over the disputed territory, and charged the “rich countries” with ignoring the possibility of what he called a “massacre” or ethnic-cleansing by India because of their craven interest in wooing India’s market of 1 billion people. He reminded the United Nations that it was their Security Council resolution that gave Kashmir their right of self-determination.
“The main reason I came to the UN General
Assembly was to highlight highlight what is going on in Kashmir. The world
would not know the oppression going on, nor would the world understand that
this is just the beginning, it will get worse, and there is a potential that
two nuclear armed countries will come face to face at some stage.”
“For 50 days, the Kashmiri people have
been locked down –a news black out.” He said there have been mass arrests, “the
entire leadership of Kashmir, even leaders who were pro-India, even those Kashmiri
leaders are now in jail somewhere in India.
“This is unprecedented – 8 million
people in open jail is unprecedented in this day and age.”
“And this nonsense that this is part of India so the world should stay out – just to remind, there are 11 UN Security Council resolutions that recognize Kashmir as disputed territory, which gave the right of Kashmir people of self-determination through plebiscite to decide their destiny – for 70 years this plebiscite never took place, then unilaterally [the Modi] government has annexed Kashmir – revoked article 370.”
But, he said, he fears what is next: that the Modi government will change the demography of Kashmir. “Changing the demography of an occupied piece of land is against the 4th Geneva Convention –it is considered a war crime.”
He categorically blamed India and Prime
Minister Narendra Modi for a racist nationalist policy.
“My second biggest worry is what happens once the
curfew lifted – we fear with 900,000 soldiers there, there will be massacre. I
am trying to tell the world community to act.
“Another fear is that, whatever is happening
in Kashmir, India will blame Pakistan.
“Unfortunately India today is governed by a racist, a Hindu supremacist, a party that was banned in India two or three times as a terrorist organization. Unfortunately, India has been this past 6 years governed by an extremist party that believes in ethnic cleansing.
“They don’t consider Muslims or Christians equal citizens, don’t believe in Nehru-Gandhi secular society. India has changed in 6 years.
“I am alarmed and I think the world leaders need to know. I’ve spoken to world leaders – Trump, Boris Johnson – and by telephone spoke to Merkel, Macron, Muslim leaders. This is the time for the world to act before this goes too far.
“If ever the Security Council had to
act, it’s now, for two reasons: the people of Kashmir are suffering simply
because the Security Council couldn’t implement its own decision for Kashmir’s right
of self-determination.
“And second, this has the potential of the unthinkable: two nuclear armed countries face to face. Surely the Security Council came into being to stop this. This is as bad as it gets.
“I would not have come out of Pakistan, just coming out of really difficult economic situation…I am alarmed. A sane mind can’t think of a nuclear war, no sane mind can think of it. We grew up after the Cuban crisis, all of us knew what cold war was because other war unimaginable,. But what you have in India now – this is ideology, racist ideology which believes in supremacy of Hindu race. How do you reason with them, with what they’ve done in Kashmir – would you expect a civilized society to do what they have done. I worry as this goes on – that’s why the UN must act.”
“This is the first time since the
Cuban crisis that two nuclear armed countries will come face to face. What we
fear are already the statements – ‘terrorists lined up on border of Kashmir
waiting to go in’. What benefit would Pakistan have to send terrorists when
900,000 security forces – only more oppression on people of Kashmir – what would
be achieved except that Pakistan would be blamed and more oppression of people
of Kashmir.
Khan will make Kashmir the focus of his General Assembly address on Friday.
“If 8 million Europeans, or Jews, or
Americans – forget Americans – were put under siege for 50 days ,would reaction
have been same? They make statements but there is no pressure on Modi to lift
the siege so we will keep mounting the pressure. I will tell the UN that if a
massacre, I mean what are 900,000 troops doing there? 900,000 troops are not to
fight terrorists, they are to control, intimidate, subjugate a population – the
entire Muslim population – this is why this will have repercussions far beyond
Kashmir – 1.3 billion Muslims are watching.
“Where is the world community, where are laws? The UN Security Council gave them right of self-determination – this will have repercussions, will create radicalization. It will get worse. I’m flagging it now, because this is just the beginning. Once the curfew lifted, God knows what will happen- Kashmir lost 100,000 people in 30 years. Do they think because India revoked Article 370, that Kashmiris will just accept? There is every likelihood of a massacre and the world community will be responsible.”
“The UN has a responsibility – it is
a UN Security Council resolution that gave Kashmiris their right of self-determination
– but what happening now- responsibility lies on them, too. – big countries,
powerful countries, I urge them to look beyond big markets. If this thing goes
wrong, the effects will go way beyond b orders of subcontinent – this obsession
with big markets and trade, this is serious, and I again repeat, we don’t know
what will happen after curfew lifted. I fear that with 900,000 troops, will be
massacre.”
Very possibly, too, Prime Minister
Khan sees an opportunity, after years in which the Kashmiris may have become
complacent about choosing between India and Pakistan. As he said, many Kashmiri
leaders were pro-India, but after this, he would expect Kashmiris to vote to
ally with Pakistan.
“I know why the response is lukewarm
and why Modi is not (pressured)- People look at it as market of 1.2 billion
people – sadly, this is what is happening. Material comes over the human –
because it’s a big market.
“ My simple message to all those looking at a big market, is this can go very wrong… once conflict starts between two nuclear armed countries – it would go beyond us, madness. Things will only deteriorate. What will happen when lift the curfew? What do they think the Kashmiris, after they have treated them, will they quietly accept India taking over Kashmir? I fear there will be blood bath, and that’s when things deteriorate very rapidly.”
During the press briefing, Khan also
said that he was asked to play a role to deescalate the situation between the
US and Iran, and that US President Donald Trump called on him to help broker
the deal with the Taliban and the United States that was to have enabled the
American troops to leave Afghanistan, before learning by tweet that the meeting
at which the deal would have been signed was canceled. He said he still had
hopes that the deal could be resurrected, and once a deal was set between the
US and the Taliban, then the Taliban and Afghan government could make their own
deal.
Before the Iranian attacks on Saudi
Arabia’s oil facility, “Trump asked if we could deescalate the situation and
maybe come up with another deal [to replace the Nuclear deal]. I did convey
this, and trying out best, can’t reveal more than that.
“Yes, I am mediating between the
United States and Iran,” Khan acknowledged. “I spoke to [Iran President] Rouhani
yesterday, after the meeting with Trump – but can’t say more, except we are
trying to mediate.
About Afghanistan, he said, “I spoke
to Trump –I am trying to get the talks restarted between Taliban and Americans.
“On a tweet we found out the deal
was off. It’s sad because that was close and once the deal was made, progress
would have been made. There is no military solution – as I have been saying a
long time – once Afghans get together, they will find a solution. If the
government sits down with the Taliban, they will find solution.”
As for the threat to the global
supply of oil if the situation with Iran and the Mideast escalates, he said, “It
would be a tragedy not just for Pakistan but all developing countries, with
their budgets affected if war takes place and oil prices shoot up .It will
cause much more poverty.”
Kashmir for 30 years, freedom of
movement has grown – today, act of shutting people in homes for 50 years has
alienated entire spectrum of Kashmiri public – there were times when Kashmiris
were pro-india, today no one would be ever get a vote pro-India in Kashmir.
What the India government has done is to tell Kashmiris they are not equal
human beings. They are not thinking through what happens after siege is lifted.
“The only reason people of Kashmir
are being subjected to this is because they are Muslims. If Muslim countries
don’t take a stand –because of trade – that’s what leads to radicalization,
when governments don’t act on wishes of people and people see injustice.”
He said that in his meeting with
Trump, “I apprised him of the gravity of the situation – intelligent human
beings think ahead – have to hope for best but prepare for worst – worst
scenario is unthinkable – normal human beings don’t think of that….
“You could do anything as long as you brand people ‘Islamic terrorists.’ That’s what Modi is doing –and hoping to get away with it. That’s why we are telling civilized world, Send your observers, if India has nothing to worry about. Their excuse for putting people under curfew, shutting them in houses, their excuse is to ‘develop’ Kashmir, for ‘prosperity of Kashmir’ – this is the Modi position. It is important for us to tell the world so at least everyone knows. I have apprised all the world leaders.
“What Modi has done is box himself into a blind alley. There is nowhere to go except massacre of people of Kashmir when the curfew is lifted, there is no other way to go. The people of Kashmir for 30 years have been fighting for independence – 100,000 lost their lives, lost their fear of death. When 8 million lose fear of dying and freedom becomes much more important than living a life of slavery, I don’t think he will be able to stop it. I think momentum will gain pace and I know where will eventually lead: freedom for people of Kashmir.
“But for some reason countries put economic interest ahead of human beings – it is the same with climate change – because they don’t want to lose growth rate, they don’t accept the impending change that climate change brings to the world.”
Money, he said, is at the root of the evil, and the corruption. “Money laundering, from the developing world into rich countries through corruption, the ruling elites of developing world taking money out. This is plunder of poor countries. Poor countries are getting poorer, rich getting richer and criminals who plunder have an easy way of parking money, buying flats in London. Richer countries should have stronger money laundering laws. If we can identify that money is stolen, it should be given back. The problem is that the existing laws are so complicated. If the rich countries want, they can easily tighten laws to deter criminals in third world to take money out.”
There couldn’t be more divergently contrasting speeches between that of UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres and US President Donald Trump, even more stark by coming virtually on heels of each other – or then again, between Trump and every other head of state and minister who came to the podium.
“I have the privilege of addressing you today as the elected leader of a nation that prizes liberty, independence and self-government above all,” Trump declared. “The United States, after having spent over two and a half trillion dollars since my election to completely rebuild our great military, is also by far the world’s most powerful nation.”
Coming
immediately after the Youth Climate March on Friday which brought out some 4
million people around the world to demand the world’s leaders act to save the
habitability of the planet, and the United Nation’s Climate Summit in which
over 100 nations (not the United States, but states and regions were
represented) gave specifics on programs and achievements in order to prevent
the earth from heating more than 1.5 degrees more, Trump boasted that the United
States has become the world’s “Number One Producer of Oil and Gas.”
In
a body created out of the ashes of two devastating world wars to prevent such
global conflicts, Trump declared, “The
future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to patriots. The
future belongs to sovereign and independent nations who protect their citizens,
respect their neighbors and honor the differences that make each country
special and unique.”
Reprising and expanding upon his America First speech he delivered to the United Nations last year, he attacked anything that might smack of multilateralism, and urged the rest of the world to follow suit.
“If you want democracy, hold on to your sovereignty. And if you want peace, love your nation,” he declared – a statement that defies any reading of history.
Yet, Trump insisted the nations of the world adopt the
Trumpian view of “Freedom of Religion”.
“This fundamental right is under growing threat around the
world. Hard to believe, but 80 percent of the world’s population lives in
countries where religious liberty is in significant danger or even completely
outlawed. Americans will never fire or tire in our effort to defend and promote
freedom of worship and religion. We want and support religious liberty for all.
“Americans will also never tire of defending innocent life,”
he said. “We are aware that many United Nations projects have attempted to
assert a global right to taxpayer funded abortion on demand right up until the
moment of delivery. Global bureaucrats have absolutely no business attacking
the sovereignty of nations that wish to protect innocent life. Like many
nations here today, we in America believe that every child born and unborn is a
sacred gift from God.”
Defend innocent life – except when it comes to guns.
“There is no circumstance under which the United States
will allow international interests to trample on the rights of our citizens,
including the right to self-defense. That is why this year I announced that we
will never ratify the U.N. Arms Trade Treaty, which would threaten the
liberties of law-abiding American citizens. The United States will always
uphold our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. We will always uphold
our Second Amendment. The core rights and values America defends today were
inscribed in America’s founding documents.
“Our nation’s founders understood that there will always be
those who believe they are entitled to wield power and control over others.
Tyranny advances under many names and many theories, but it always comes down
to the desire for domination. It protects not the interests of many, but the privilege
of few. Our founders gave us a system designed to restrain this dangerous
impulse. They choose to entrust American power to those most invested in the
fate of our nation: a proud and fiercely independent people.”
Each year, Trump has to find a boogey-man to attack.
In his first address, he lambasted North
Korea’s “Rocket Man” Kim Jong-Un; last year he went after Venezuela. This year,
he declared “One of the greatest security threats facing peace-loving nations
today is the repressive regime in Iran. The regime’s record of death and
destruction is well known to us all. Not only is Iran the world’s number one
state sponsor of terrorism, but Iran’s leaders are fueling the tragic wars in
both Syria and Yemen.”
As the United Nations raises alarms about the greatest
numbers of displaced people around the globe since World War II, Trump tripled
down on his hostility and hatred for refugees, asylum-seekers and migrants.
“To anyone conducting crossings of our border illegally,
please hear these words: Do not pay the smugglers. Do not pay the coyotes. Do
not put yourself in danger. Do not put your children in danger. Because if you
make it here, you will not be allowed in. You will be promptly returned home.
You will not be released into our country as long as I am president of the
United States. We will enforce our laws and protect our borders. For all of the
countries of the western hemisphere, our goal is to help people invest in the
bright futures of their own nation. Our region is full of such incredible
promise, dreams, waiting to be built, and national destinies for all, and they
are waiting also to be pursued.” The United States rejected the United Nations
Global Migration Compact.
Trump’s speech to the General Assembly, just as his remarks
to the “Freedom of Religion” forum the day before, was tailored for his base
(and helps explain his eagerness to pal around with India’s Prime Minister
Modi, attending the 50,000-strong rally in Houston, despite Modi’s harsh
assault on Muslim-majority Kashmir – it is his ticket to the Indian-American
vote). In this context, his attack on Venezuela served as his foil for
attacking Democrats and their radical ideas about income inequality and
universal health care.
“One of the most serious challenges our country has faced
is the specter of socialism. It’s the wrecker of nations and destroyer of
societies. The events in Venezuela reminds us all that socialism and communism
are not about justice. They are not about equality, they are not about lifting
up the poor, and they are certainly not about good of the nation. Socialism and
communism are about one thing only: power for the ruling class. Today I repeat
a message for the world that I have delivered at home: America will never be a
socialist country. The last century socialism and communism killed 100 million
people.”
Guterres
began his speech noting that the United Nations Charter’s first words are “We
the Peoples” “It puts people at the center of our work, everyday,
everywhere…. people with rights. Those rights are an endowment.”
“Machines
take their jobs. Traffickers take their dignity. Demagogues take
their rights. Warlords take their lives. Fossil fuels take their
future”, he declared. “And because people still believe in the United Nations,
we, the leaders, must deliver. They believe as leaders we will put people
first, because we the leaders must deliver for We the Peoples…People have a
right to live in peace.”
He
cited promising developments, such as peaceful elections in Madagascar and the
Democratic Republic of the Congo; the Greece-North Macedonia name dispute
resolution; political dialogue in Sudan; and an agreement in Syria. But he
spoke of persisting conflicts, terrorism and “the risk of a new arms race
growing” across the world, and lamented unresolved situations in Yemen, Libya
and Afghanistan; an evasive solution to the Israel-Palestine conflict;
Venezuelan displacements; and “the alarming possibility of armed conflict in
the Gulf”.
And without actually naming the United States and China, he raised alarm over “a new risk looming on the horizon: the possibility of a great fracture, the world splitting in two, with the two largest economies on earth creating two separate and competing worlds, each with their own dominant currency, trade and financial rules, their own internet and artificial intelligence capacities, and their own zero sum geopolitical and military strategies”.
“We must do everything possible to avert the Great Fracture
and maintain a universal system…with strong multilateral institutions”, he
stressed.
And
he, like every other leader, pointed to the need to aggressively confront
Climate Action. Referencing Monday’s Climate
Action Summit, the UN chief underscored the importance of
adaptation.
“Even
our language has to adapt: what was once called ‘climate change’ is now truly a
“climate crisis” … and what was once called ‘global warming’ has more
accurately become ‘global heating’,” he said.
Guterres
referred to Hurricane Dorian in the Bahamas as he spoke of “unprecedented
temperatures, unrelenting storms and undeniable science”.
Though
“not fast enough”, the world is starting to move “in the right direction” –
away from fossil fuels and towards a green economy, he said.
Turning
to fundamental freedoms, the UN chief said, “we are at a critical juncture
where advances made across the decades are being restricted and reversed,
misinterpreted and mistrusted”.
The
Secretary-General pointed to new forms of authoritarianism; narrowing civic
spaces; the targeting of activists, human rights defenders and journalists; and
expanding surveillance systems that are “shredding the fabric of our common
humanity”.
And in direct contradiction to the Trumpian vision of the
world order, Guterres said that anything that is done to uphold security
and human rights “helps deliver sustainable development and peace”.
“In
the 21st century, we must see human rights with a vision that speaks to each
and every human being and encompasses all rights”, lauding the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as
a tool for social protection, a sustainable environment, education and decent
jobs.
These
themes were echoed by just about every other leader and representative – except
for Donald Trump. Indeed, the rest of the world seems more resolved than ever
to work together – basically ignoring the United States.
That is fine with Trump, who thinks of the rest of the world as children trying to tap their Dad for money.
Climate activist Greta Thunberg (c) Karen Rubin/news-photos-features.com
By Karen Rubin, news-photos-features.com
Greta Thunberg delivered a
no-holds barred, impassioned speech to
the United Nations General Assembly Climate Summit, on Monday, September 23,
flatly declaring, “My message is that we’ll be watching you.
“This is all wrong. I shouldn’t be up here. I should be back in school on the other side of the ocean. Yet you all come to us young people for hope. How dare you. You have stolen my dreams, my childhood with your empty words, and yet I am one of the lucky ones. People are suffering, dying, entire ecosystems are collapsing. We are in the beginning of a mass extinction and all you can talk about is money and fairy tales of eternal economic growth. How dare you!” the 16-year old demanded as the assembly erupted in cheers and applause.
“For more than 30 years, the science
has been crystal clear. How dare you continue to look away, then come here and
say you are doing enough when the politics and solutions needed are still no
where in sight.
“You say you hear us and
understand the urgency but no matter how sad and angry I am, I don’t want to
believe that, because if you really understood the situation and still kept on
failing to act, then you would be evil and that I refuse to believe,” a
statement that elicited a combination of shock, cheers and applause.
“The popular idea of cutting
emissions in half in 10 years only gives us a 50% chance of staying below 1.5
degrees and the risk of setting off irreversible chain reactions beyond human
control.
“50% may be acceptable to you,
but those numbers don’t include tipping points, most feedback loops, additional
warming hidden by toxic air pollution or the aspects of equity and climate justice.
It also relies on my generation sucking hundreds of billions of tons of your
CO2 out of the air with technologies that barely exist. So 50% isn’t enough to
us who have to live with the consequences,” she declared.
“How dare you pretend this can be
solved with just business as usual and some technical solutions…
“There will not be any solutions,
or plans, in line with the [CO2 emissions] figures today, because these numbers
too uncomfortable and you are still not mature enough to tell it like it is.
You are failing us, but young people are starting to understand your betrayal.
The eyes on all future generations are upon you.
“If you choose to fail us, I say
we will never forgive you.”
It
is being hailed as the biggest climate protest in history: a worldwide climate
strike that brought out over 4 million people in more than 2100 events in 175
countries, with some 600 in the United States.
New
York’s climate strike brought out more than 250,000 who overflowed Foley
Square, marched down to Battery Park, where the global climate leader, Greta
Thunberg of Sweden, laid down the gauntlet to the do-nothing world leaders:
“This is an emergency. Our house is on fire,” Thunberg
told the cheering crowd. “We will do everything in our power to stop this
crisis from getting worse.” Noting that she has withdrawn from school in order
to agitate for climate action and to take part in the strikes, children have
left school, she said “Why should we study for a future that is being taken
away from us. That is being sold for profit.”
“Everywhere I have been the situation is more or less
same. The people in power, their beautiful words are the same,” she said. “The
number of politicians and celebrities who want to take selfies with us are the
same. The empty promises are the same. The lies are the same, and the inaction
is the same.”
Virtually daring the world’s leaders to act, she declared,
“The eyes of the world” will be on the world leaders at the climate summit on
Monday for the U.N. Climate Summit. “They have a chance to prove that they too
are united behind the science, they have a chance to take leadership, to prove
they actually hear us,” she said to chants.
“It should not be that way. We should not be the ones who
are fighting for the future, and yet here we are,” she continued.
“We demand a safe future,” she said. “Is
that really too much to ask?”
The link between capitalistic greed and political
corruption was very much on view, with signs that called for “Green Jobs Not
Dirty Fuel” and even more radical calls to “Save the Planet. End capitalism.”
The demands of the strikers echoed the Green New Deal being
proposed: a 100 percent shift away from fossil fuels to clean, renewable
energy; shifts to sustainable agriculture, in such a fair and equitable way as
to “leave no one behind”; environmental, social, political and economic
justice.
“Charge
ahead toward 100 percent clean renewable
energy, protect habitat and species, hold corporations accountable, have a just
transition – leave no one behind,” stated Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, 39, a
marine biologist, policy expert, founder and CEO of Ocean Collectiv, was one of
the only adults to give a speech. “We need strong government policies that
accelerate transition, a Green New Deal.
She
argued that regenerative farming, renewable energy, electrifying transporation
necessary to mitigate or reverse the adverse impacts of climate change are
already available. “We don’t need new technology.” What is needed is government
policy.
“But
when there is failure at the national level, localities, states need to step
up.” Individuals can make a difference as well: “Plant trees, grow food, plant
a climate victory garden, choose foods that are grown regeneratively. Show up,
transform culture. Vote in every election. In 2016, 10 million registered
environmentalists failed to vote. Do not let that happen again.
“We
cannot mobilize at the scale we need unless we face the challenge head on.
Focus on solution. Build a coalition so massive, it shifts the status quo. Dig
in for the long and beautiful struggle for a new world.”
Capitalism was very much under fire – with the opposition
asserting that addressing climate change is akin to throwing the doors open to
socialism, or worse, communism, and in any case, that it would be damaging to
the economy.
But the case is made by former Vice President Al Gore and
others that the fastest growing areas for jobs are in solar and wind power;
Democratic candidate Bernie Sanders makes the case that the $1 trillion spent
to transition the economy to clean, renewable energy will create 20 million
jobs.
And in fact, the economy has already been transformed to new
energy: 150 years ago, when coal was discovered in Pennsylvania and emerging industrialists
figured out how to turn it into fuel, and petroleum extractors figured out a
way to capitalize on the waste product of processing petroleum for industrial
grease, gasoline and effectively killed the development of the electric car.
That caused a migration of workers- imported migrants and transplants – to new
villages, cities and towns based on mining, processing, and manufacturing that
had not existed before, often by displacing indigenous people.
The
worldwide climate strike comes just ahead of the United Nations Climate Summit
to be held Monday, September 23, when countries are expected to present
concrete proposals to mitigate and reverse the climb in temperature before
global warming has catastrophic impacts on food, water, public health and
habitats. The United Nations summit, though, begins with an unprecedented youth
climate summit on Saturday, September 21.
The
16-year old Thunberg, who began her climate crusade more than a year ago, holding
Friday strike, has become the world’s most recognized climate activist, who has
stood her ground against world leaders and the snarky questions of US
congressmembers.
The worldwide climate strike actions coincided with the second anniversary of Hurricane Maria’s devastation of Puerto Rico in which 2,975 people died, and New York City strike’s was held jointly with a Puerto Rico Day of Action. It also comes just days after Hurricane Dorian devastated much of the Bahamas, with Trump shutting the door on climate refugees from that catastrophe.
Here are more highlights from New York City’s Climate Strike:
The vigorous contest of Democrats seeking the 2020 presidential nomination has produced excellent policy proposals to address major issues.Ahead of her speech in Washington Square Park near the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory, in which she delineated how corruption in Washington has allowed the rich and powerful to tilt the rules and grow richer and more powerful, Senator Elizabeth Warren released her plan to end Washington corruption.
Warren has already
advanced comprehensive anti-corruption legislation in Congress, but she is
going further with a set of far-reaching and aggressive proposals. “Her plan
will end lobbying as we know it, end self-dealing in the White House, end
corporate capture of the federal government’s rule-making process, hold our
federal judiciary and the Supreme Court to the highest ethical standards, and
more.”
Warren declared, “No
matter what brings you into this fight — whether it’s child care, student
loans, health care, immigration, or criminal justice, one thing is crystal
clear: corruption is making it worse — and it’s at the root of the major
problems we face as a democracy.
“Reforming the money
game in Washington isn’t enough. We also need to comprehensively clean up our
campaign finance system. That’s why I’ve also called for a constitutional
amendment to overturn Citizens
United. It’s why we need to get rid of the Super PACs and secret
spending by billionaires and giant corporations that try to buy our democracy.
It’s why we need to break the grip that big donors have by creating a system of
exclusive public funding of our elections. But even if we solve our campaign
finance problems, comprehensive anti-corruption reforms targeted at Washington
itself are necessary to finally end the stranglehold that the wealthy and the
well-connected have over our government’s decision-making processes.
“I believe that we can
root out corruption in Washington. I believe we must make big, structural
changes that will once again restore our trust in government by showing that it
can work for all of us. And when I’m President, that’s exactly what I’ll do.”
This is from the Elizabeth Warren campaign:
In 1958, the National Election Survey first asked Americans a simple question: Do you trust the government to do the right thing most of the time? That year, 73% of Americans said yes.
In
2019, that number is just 17%. Five out of every six Americans do not trust
their government to do the right thing.
Why
have so many people lost faith in government?
It’s
true that right-wing politicians have spent a generation attacking the very
idea of government. But it’s also true that these days, our government doesn’t
work for most people. Sure, it works great for the wealthy and the
well-connected — but for everybody else, it doesn’t.
It
doesn’t work because big insurance companies and hospital conglomerates put
profits ahead of the health and well-being of the American people, and dump
piles of money into political campaigns and lobbying efforts to block any move
toward Medicare for All.
It
doesn’t work because big oil companies that have concealed climate studies —
and funded bought-and-paid-for climate denial research — bury regulators in an
avalanche of shady, bad-faith pseudoscience and then spend freely on influence
peddling in Congress to make sure nothing like a Green New Deal ever sees the
light of day.
It
doesn’t work because giant pharmaceutical companies want to squeeze every last
penny out of the people who depend on their prescriptions, while their army of
lobbyists suffocates reform any time there’s a discussion in Congress on drug
pricing.
Universal
child care. Criminal justice reform. Affordable housing. Gun reform. Look
closely, and you’ll see — on issue after issue, widely popular policies are
stymied because giant corporations and billionaires who don’t want to pay taxes
or follow any rules use their money and influence to stand in the way of big,
structural change.
We’ve got to call that out for what it is: corruption, plain and
simple.
Make
no mistake about it: The Trump Administration is the most corrupt
administration of our lifetimes.
Trump’s
tax bill is a $1.5 trillion giveaway that primarily helps large corporations and wealthy
Americans. Half of the total registered lobbyists in Washington
worked on issues involving the word “tax” the year the bill was written —
that’s eleven lobbyists for every member of Congress. And when the members of
Congress who championed it lost their elections, they got juicy gigs in the lobbying industry themselves.
Trump’s
Supreme Court Justices were hand-picked by right-wing extremist groups that
spent millions on television ads — first to hold open a Supreme Court seat in
the Obama Administration, and then to pressure the Senate to rubber stamp their
candidates of choice, even when it meant ignoring serious sexual assault charges to ram through
the confirmation.
But
these problems did not start with Donald Trump. They are much bigger than him —
and solving them will require big, structural change to fundamentally transform
our government.
That’s
why I’ve released plans to fight Washington corruption. A plan to make sure
that no president is above the law. A plan to tackle defense contractor coziness at the Pentagon.
A plan to ban private prisons and expand oversight, transparency, and
enforcement for all contractors hired by the federal government. In Congress,
I’ve previously advanced wide-ranging anti-corruption legislation.
But
we must go further.
Today, I’m announcing a comprehensive set of far-reaching and
aggressive proposals to root out corruption in Washington. It’s the most
sweeping set of anti-corruption reforms since Watergate. The goal of these
measures is straightforward: to take power away from the wealthy and the
well-connected in Washington and put it back where it belongs — in the hands of
the people.
My
plan lays out nearly a hundred ways that we can change our government to fix
this problem — from improving public integrity rules for federal officials in
every branch of government to ending lobbying as we know it, fixing the
criminal laws to hold corrupt politicians to account, and ensuring our federal
agencies and courts are free from corrupting influences.
And
I’m just getting started.
Restoring Public Integrity
If
you choose to be a public servant, you should serve the public — not your own
financial interests or the financial interests of the rich and powerful. But we
face a crisis of confidence in the ethics and public integrity of federal
officials in America. The revolving door in and out of the Trump Administration
is spinning out of control, and wave after wave of people in Trump’s orbit are
trying to profit personally from his presidency — including him.
But
even before Trump entered the White House, our nation’s public integrity rules
were far too lax. Too many public officials can easily leverage public service
for personal gain. And the ability to walk around government with obvious and
direct personal financial conflicts reduces public faith in honest officials.
To fix this, we need a total rewrite of our ethics laws.
We must begin by rooting out financial conflicts of interest in
Washington.
Donald
Trump is a walking conflict of interest. Actually, more like 2,310 conflicts of interest — and counting.
His refusal to divest from his businesses has opened the door for giant
corporations, foreign lobbyists, and our own government officials to curry
favor with his administration and pad his own bottom line.
According
to a study by the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in
Washington, Donald Trump has visited one of his own properties for nearly a
third of the total days that he has been president. Trump’s Washington hotel
even sent the federal government a bill for $200,000 because Secret Service agents
were forced to stay there as well.
Foreign
countries have also taken the hint. Representatives from 65 foreign governments
have visited Trump properties since he took office, and embassies have begun
booking Trump’s hotels for their events. Trump has egged them on, shamelessly
floating another one of his properties as the venue for a future international summit.
Big
corporations and billionaires have also tried to curry favor with Donald Trump
by patronizing his properties. T-Mobile sent its top executives to the Trump
Hotel in DC right after the company announced a merger requiring the Trump
administration’s approval. Payday lenders held their annual meetings at Trump’s golf club in Miami, while the
Trump administration has consistently gutted restrictions and regulations on
exploitative payday lenders. And several wealthy donors who pay the $200,000
Mar-a-Lago membership fee — which doubled when Trump became President — have
exerted “sweeping influence” at the Department of Veteran’s Affairs.
Even
Trump’s own appointees and political allies have tried to suck up to Trump by
exploiting his conflicts of interest. More than 100 Republican Members of Congress have become patrons of
Trump’s businesses since he became President. Most recently, Trump’s Attorney
General William Barr spent $30,000 at Trump’s Washington Hotel, implausibly
claiming that it was the only place he could find for his holiday party in
Washington — and on an official trip to Ireland, Vice President Mike Pence
stayed at a Trump property reportedly at Trump’s instruction, even though it was three hours away from his
scheduled meetings in Dublin.
Trump
is by far the most egregious example — and we need new rules to hold leaders
accountable for this kind of conduct. But we cannot condemn this conduct
without also acknowledging that opportunities for the appearance of
self-dealing are far too easy across the federal government. Restoring public
confidence isn’t just about replacing Trump and his cronies. We need new bright
lines and clear rules to eliminate the possibility of public officials serving
private interests.
End self-dealing in the White House by applying conflict of
interest laws to the President and Vice President. Under my plan,Presidents
and Vice Presidents would be required to place their businesses into a blind
trust to be sold off. No more payoffs. No more bribes from foreign governments.
No more self-dealing.
Disclose tax returns of federal candidates and officeholders to
the public automatically. Tax return disclosure for federally elected officials
shouldn’t be optional — it should be the law. And it shouldn’t just apply to Presidents
— it should apply to everyone running for or serving in federal elected office.
Presidential candidates, in particular, should follow the standard set by
Barack Obama for releasing at least eight years of returns. (I’ve released
eleven.) And the IRS should simply put out the required tax returns for
qualified candidates themselves — so nothing like Donald Trump’s refusal to
disclose his taxes can ever happen again.
Force senior government officials to divest from privately-owned
assets that could present conflicts of interest. White House
advisers like Jared Kushner have been allowed to use their
government positions to further enrich themselves and their families, while
Cabinet Officials like Betsy DeVos have hundreds of millions held in
privately-owned accounts that make it nearly impossible to determine who could
exercise influence over DeVos and her family. The fact that such conduct could
pass any kind of ethics screen makes it clear that we need new rules. My plan
puts an end to this practice by requiring senior officials, including those who
are unpaid like Kushner, to divest from their businesses and other conflicted
assets.
Completely ban the practice of government officials trading
individual stocks while in office. Under current law, members of Congress can
trade stocks and then use their powerful positions to increase the value of
those stocks and pad their own pockets. Tom Price, Trump’s former Secretary of
Health and Human Services, purchased pharmaceutical stocks while in the
House of Representatives — then fought hard to get a return on his investment
by pushing policies that would benefit giant pharmaceutical companies. And
another member of Congress, Chris Collins, was charged for trading the same stocks based on insider information. But
prosecutions like this are rare. And even where investments don’t influence
decisions, the existence of these direct conflicts undermine public confidence
in government.
The
solution is simple — ban members of Congress and senior government officials
from owning or trading individual stocks. Instead, they can invest in conflict-free
mutual funds or funds managed by the federal Thrift Savings Program. Law firms
follow these kinds of rules to prevent the appearance of financial conflicts
with the interests of their clients — there’s no reason important public
servants and elected officials shouldn’t, too.
Shut down a raft of additional shady practices that provide
opportunities for government officials to serve their own financial
interests. My plan bans members of Congress and senior congressional staff
from serving on corporate boards — whether or not they’re paid to do so. It
also strengthens ethics requirements for presidential transition teams to
ensure that those who are shaping our government disclose any conflicts of
interest and comply with the highest ethical standards. And to ensure that
there are no questions about whether members of Congress are acting based on
financial conflicts, like lobbyist-turned-Senator-turned-lobbyist Jon Kyl, my plan requires
every member of Congress, including appointed ones, to disclose their financial
conflicts before they take office.
Finally, we must immediately end the possibility of trading on
access to insider political information. Every year, hundreds of millions of
dollars flow into so-called “political intelligence” firms that hire operatives to prowl the
halls of Congress for insider information and sell that information to Wall Street traders trying to make a buck. My plan
combats this practice by implementing strict disclosure requirements and
regulations on so-called “political intelligence consulting,” including
criminal penalties for former public officials who use insider political
information to make investments or advise others who are doing so.
Next, it’s time to close and padlock the revolving door between
government and industry.
Donald
Trump has not just enriched himself and his advisers; he has turned his White
House into a case study in the dangers of the revolving door between industry
and government.
Trump
railed against Goldman Sachs on the campaign trail in 2016. But as soon as he
was elected, he tapped more than half a dozen of the firm’s employees to fill senior
positions in his administration — enough to open a new Goldman Sachs branch
office.
One
of these people was Gary Cohn, the former President of Goldman Sachs, who
became Trump’s top economic adviser. On his way out of Goldman, the firm gave
him a whopping $285 million — $123 million in the form of cash and
stocks that he could only collect if he left the firm to work in government.
I
call that a “pre-bribe.” And it paid off, too. While cashing that $285 million
check, Gary Cohn helped rewrite our nation’s tax laws, rammed the changes
through Congress, and gave Goldman Sachs their money back — and a few billion dollars in change.
There
are countless examples like this in the Trump Administration, but it’s a
widespread problem in official Washington — and it goes far beyond obvious and
egregious quid-pro-quo bribery. When someone serves in government with plans to
immediately turn around and work in the industry they’ve been overseeing, that
individual faces obvious incentives to advance the interests of their future
employer. And when someone moves immediately from a regulated company to a job
regulating that company, the public is right to worry about the risk that such
individuals will prioritize the interests of their old bosses.
Government
must be able to benefit from tapping private sector expertise, and public
servants who leave government should be able to find post-government
employment. Similarly, volunteer and part-time government positions, which make
sense in certain situations, necessarily assume some level of outside work. But
there is a difference between expertise and graft.
It
isn’t simply a matter of replacing Trump with an honest President. We’ve seen
the issue of industry lobbyists and top execs spinning freely through the
revolving door to and from important government positions in both Democratic
and Republican administrations. Fixing the underlying problem requires us to
tighten up the rules to ensure that when government officials are making
decisions, they are considering only the public interest — and not their own
personal interests or the interests of their friends and future employers.
Here
are some obvious steps to help address this problem:
Ban “golden parachutes” that provide corporate bonuses to
executives for serving in the federal government. We can’t let big
companies get away with installing their top executives in senior government
positions and paying them pre-bribes on their way out the door. Under my plan,
this would be illegal.
Restrict the ability of lobbyists to enter government
jobs. Under my proposal, current lobbyists won’t be able to take
government jobs for 2 years after lobbying, with limited exceptions for when
the hiring is in the national interest. Corporate lobbyists will have to wait
at least 6 years — no exceptions, and no waivers. These extensive cooling off
periods will help ensure that if anyone with this background is hired into a
government role, they are being selected because of their expertise, and not
their connections.
Make it illegal for elected officials and top government
appointees to become lobbyists — ever. My plan bans Presidents, Vice Presidents,
Members of Congress, federal judges, and Cabinet Secretaries from ever becoming
lobbyists — not for one or two years, but for life. All other federal employees
will also be barred from lobbying their former office, agency, or House of
Congress after they leave government service for at least 2 years — or 6 years
for corporate lobbyists.
Restrict the ability of companies to buy up former federal
officials to rig the game for themselves. Under my plan,
companies would be banned from immediately hiring former senior government
officials whose agency or office the company has lobbied in the past two years.
And because the biggest and most market-dominant corporations in America also
exercise outsized political power, my plan blocks them from using personnel
hires to rig the game by banning giant companies, banks, and monopolies from
hiring former senior government officials for at least four years.
Next, we’ll hold our federal judiciary to the highest ethical
standards.
Giant
corporations and powerful interests haven’t limited their influence-peddling to
Congress and the White House. They’ve also turned their attention to the
courts.
There
is “no formal mechanism for review of conflicts” for Supreme Court
justices. But covering your eyes doesn’t mean there’s nothing to see. The
Federalist Society — an extremist, corporate-funded right-wing group that
hand-picked Trump’s list of Supreme Court nominees — picked up Justice Clarence Thomas’s bills to attend a
fancy retreat hosted by the Koch brothers. And for years, Justice Thomas failed
to file public disclosures indicating that his wife worked as the White House
liaison for the Heritage Foundation, a group whose
co-founder personally began the conservative push to
overturn Roe v. Wade.
It’s
not just Supreme Court Justices, either. Federal judges can do just about
anything without disclosing it, and in the rare instance where their ethical
violations are discovered and they face investigation, they can escape further
scrutiny altogether by resigning without penalty.
Our
federal court system only works if the American people have faith that it is
neutrally dispensing fair-minded justice without bias or personal interests
interfering in judicial decisions. If we want the American people to believe
this, we need some serious judicial ethics reforms.
Ensure Supreme Court Justices are held to the same standard as
the rest of the federal judiciary. Today, every federal judge is bound by a Code
of Conduct — except Supreme Court justices. It’s a recipe for corruption. We
can fix it by applying the Code of Conduct for United States Judges to Supreme
Court justices.
Strengthen ethics requirements for federal judges. Corporations and
advocacy organizations routinely provide federal judges with all-expenses-paid
trips to extravagant seminars. My plan tightens existing rules that prohibit
judges from accepting gifts and establishes a new fund to cover reasonable
expenses for participating in judicial seminars. No more big speaking fees and
no more fancy trips to hunting lodges and golf courses. My plan also bans
federal judges from owning individual stocks.
Require judges to disclose key information so the American
people can verify that their conduct is above ethical reproach. My plan requires the
Judicial Conference of the United States — the institution in charge of
administering our federal courts — to publicly post judges’ financial reports,
recusal decisions, and speeches to bring these activities out of the shadows.
This will build public confidence that cases are being heard by fair and
independent judges.
Close the loophole that allows federal judges to escape
investigations for misconduct by stepping down from their post. When Ninth Circuit
Judge Alex Kozinski was confronted with a judicial ethics investigation for
sexual misconduct towards young female law clerks, he resigned — and the investigation immediately
ended. Similarly, sexual assault and perjury complaints against Brett Kavanaugh
were dismissed when he was confirmed to the Supreme
Court, and Donald Trump’s sister Maryanne Trump-Barry resigned from the bench,
ending an investigation into the Trump family’s decades-long tax schemes, including potential fraud. Under my plan,
investigations will remain open until their findings are made public and any
penalties for misconduct are issued.
Ending Lobbying As We Know It
The
fundamental promise of our democracy is that every voice matters. But when
lobbyists and big corporations can buy influence from politicians, that promise
is broken. The first thing to do to fix it is to end lobbying as we know it.
The
Constitution guarantees the American people the right to petition their
government with grievances. Lobbying isn’t new — it’s been around for
centuries. What’s new is the weaponization of lobbying to coerce our government
into doing whatever corporate interests want. While companies have an important
role to play in our democratic conversation, the voices of corporations and
powerful interests shouldn’t be the only voices in the room. But that’s exactly
what’s happened.
Prior
to the 1970s, there was little corporate spending on lobbying. Last year,
over eleven thousand registered lobbyists roamed the halls of
government, mostly representing their powerful clients — to the tune of over $3
billion. It’s no wonder everyone else has such a hard time breaking through the
noise.
This
boom in the influence-peddling game has happened around the same time that
right-wing ideologues have slashed independent government resources and
in-house expertise, which are essential for officials to maintain their
independence from the “expertise” of self-interested corporate lobbyists.
Meanwhile, most corporate lobbying work remains hopelessly opaque — nominally
governed by a patchwork of weak definitions, few meaningful restrictions, and
inadequate reporting and disclosure requirements. And the free rein granted to
corporate lobbyists to also fundraise for political campaigns crosses the line
from influence peddling to legalized bribery.
We
can break the grip that lobbyists for giant corporations have on our
government. Together, we can end lobbying as we know it. Here’s where to start:
Expand the definition of lobbyists to include everyone who is
paid to influence lawmakers. Because of our weak laws, only individuals who meet directly
with politicians or spend more than 20% of their time lobbying are required to register as lobbyists. That means law
firms, consultancies, and even self-described lobbying firms that hire
individuals for the express purpose of influencing government may be able to
avoid these registration requirements — allowing powerful interests to
influence policy without any public accountability. This practice, endemic on
both sides of the aisle, must end.
My
plan brings this activity out of the shadows by strengthening the definition of
a lobbyist to include all individualspaid to influence government.
It also creates a new designation for corporate lobbyists to identify
individuals paid to influence government on behalf of for-profit entities and
their front-groups — and subjects these corporate hired guns to additional
restrictions.
Ban lobbying for foreign entities — period. President Trump’s
campaign chair currently sits in prison, convicted in part of
failing to properly register his shady foreign lobbying activity on behalf of
Ukraine. But what is the justification for allowing foreign governments to use
Americans as hired guns who sit in the shadows, quietly attempting to influence
our domestic political system? That’s not how diplomacy should work. Other
nations have ambassadors and diplomatic staff in the United States. If those
governments want to interact with our political process they can do so through
normal, above-board diplomatic channels. My plan categorically bans the
practice of private lobbying for foreign governments, foreign individuals, and
foreign companies. No more K Street influence-peddlers looking out for the
interests of China, Russia, or Saudi Arabia.
Impose strict rules on all lobbyists, including preventing them
from donating to or fundraising for political candidates. Paid lobbyists are
hired for one objective: to advance the interests of their clients. Allowing
individuals who are paid to influence government officials on policy to also
give gifts or funnel money to the political campaigns of those same officials
sounds like legalized bribery. My plan not only bans lobbyists from making
political contributions, it also bans them from bundling donations or hosting
fundraisers for political candidates. And it outlaws lobbying contingency fees,
where lobbyists are only paid if they successfully influence politicians to
achieve a policy outcome that serves their client’s narrow interests.
Dramatically expand the kinds of information lobbyists are
required to disclose. Our current laws require only minimal disclosure from
lobbyists of their activities. This prevents the American people from fully
understanding who is trying to influence government — and why. My plan requires
all lobbyists to report publicly all meetings with Congressional offices or
public officials, the documents they provide to those individuals, and all
government actions they attempt to influence. It also demands that all
charitable non-profit organizations, social welfare organizations, and trade
associations disclose any donors whose money was used to develop products to
influence Congressional testimony, agency rulemaking, or for lobbying purposes.
Impose a tax on excessive lobbying — and use this revenue to
give Congress and agencies the tools to fight back against the corporate
influence machine. In 2018, lobbyists spent a whopping $3.4 billion trying to influence public policy on
behalf of their clients, including $95 million from the pro-corporate Chamber of
Commerce, $73 million from the National Association of
Realtors, and $28 million from the Big Pharma lobbying group. The
right to petition our government does not allow industries to exercise
unlimited financial influence over policymakers. That’s why I will impose a tax
on any entity that spends over $500,000 per year on lobbying. The tax will
reduce the financial incentive for excessive lobbying, and its revenue will be
used to counter the effects of excessive lobbying by providing additional
financial resources for agencies to research and review regulatory actions that
are the targets of excessive lobbying activity, as well as additional funding
for the National Public Advocate, an office established to help the public
engage with the rulemaking process, and for Congressional support agencies.
Strengthen Congressional independence from lobbyists. Congressional offices
and agencies are severely underfunded, creating unnecessary pressure to rely on
lobbyists for expertise. My plan transitions Congressional staff to competitive
salaries and reinstates the nonpartisan Congressional Office of Technology
Assessment to help members of Congress understand new areas of science and
technology — because members of Congress should be able to access expertise and
information without being dependent on lobbyists.
Major
federal agencies — agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency, the
Department of Labor, and the Department of Energy — were created by Congress to
enforce and implement laws that protect the broad interests of the public
against the unrestrained exercise of corporate power. But because of the
revolving door, the avalanche of lobbyists, and the weakness of our agency
tools to fight back, agencies often find their agendas hijacked by the very
industries they are supposed to regulate. We can and should make additional
changes to strengthen agencies’ independence and their ability to act
decisively in the public interest.
Here
are some of the steps my plan takes to address this:
Stop powerful actors from peddling fake research — often funded
by undisclosed donors — and hold corporations accountable for lying to
regulators. I’ll crack down on corporations who manipulate agencies by
submitting sham research — like the climate denial studies bought and paid for by oil and gas magnates like the Koch
Brothers — by requiring individuals who submit a public comment on a proposed
rule to disclose editorial conflicts-of-interest related to any
non-peer-reviewed research they cite. Studies that are determined to have
conflicts of interest will be withheld from the rulemaking process unless the
individual offering that research certifies that they have undergone rigorous,
independent peer review. Otherwise, we’ll treat them like the bad faith junk
science that they are, excluding them from the rulemaking process and
preventing any court from considering them too. And if a company misleads an
agency with “analysis” it knows to be false, they’ll be prosecuted just like
anyone else who lies under oath to Congress or in a court of law.
End the practice of inviting corporate bigwigs to negotiate
rules their companies would have to follow and put a stop to the stall tactics
they use to kill public interest rules. My plan restricts the parties eligible to
participate in the negotiated rulemaking process so that industry no longer has
an open door to dominate the process. It also closes the loopholes that have
allowed industry and agencies to delay the implementation of rules it
disfavors, including by ending so-called informal review, reducing the review
period to 45 days, and clarifying that only Appeals Courts — not individual
Federal District judges — can temporarily block the implementation of rules.
And my plan requires agencies to publicly justify the withdrawal of any public
interest rules.
Give the public the tools to fight back against corporations who
seek to co-opt this process for their benefit. My plan establishes an
Office of the Public Advocate to help the public engage with important legal
changes made by federal agencies during the rulemaking process. I’ll also allow
private individuals to bring lawsuits against federal agencies for
unnecessarily delaying or failing to enforce agency rules — and against corporations
who have violated them.
Ensuring Access to Justice for All
Equal
justice is supposed to be the promise of the American legal system. But it’s
not delivering on that promise. Instead, we have one system for the wealthy and
the well-connected, and a different one for everyone else. It’s hard enough to
hold a powerful company accountable through our legal system, but recent developments in the law have made it even harder for
individuals to even bring those cases in the first place. We need to reform our
legal rules to make sure every person who has been harmed can have their day in
court.
Here’s
how I’ll start:
Ban forced arbitration clauses. Many companies force
their employees and consumers to sign “forced arbitration” clauses as part of
their contracts for employment or for services. These clauses mean that if
something goes wrong, individuals agree to never file a lawsuit in federal
court against the company — and instead are diverted into a private dispute
system. These provisions are often tucked in the fine print of contracts
that workers or consumers sign, and many people don’t even know that they have
signed one until they have been harmed and need our courts to help them get
justice. These provisions shouldn’t be enforceable, but the conservative
majority in the Supreme Court decided that because there was no law explicitly
against them, they could be freely enforced. So let’s pass that law. My plan
categorically bans forced arbitration clauses from blocking lawsuits related to
employment, consumer protection, antitrust, and civil rights.
Ban mandatory class action waivers. When workers or consumers
are wronged by a company, they should be able to band together and seek
justice. Taking on a big corporation’s army of lawyers takes enormous sums of
money and legal expertise. But class action waivers tucked into consumer and
employment contracts prevent individuals from suing together.
That makes it virtually impossible to pursue a lawsuit, and gives companies unlimited
license to rip you off without any consequences. These anti-worker and
anti-consumer provisions shouldn’t be enforceable, but because of a Supreme Court decision written by Justice Gorsuch, they’re
alive and well. That’s why my plan would restore the fundamental right of
workers and consumers to join together when they are wronged by banning these
provisions in employment, consumer protection, antitrust, and civil rights
cases.
Restore fair pleading standards. When you file a
lawsuit, one of the first steps of the legal process is called “discovery.”
That’s when you’re supposed to ask questions and gather facts about your case,
but a pair of recent Supreme Court decisions upended decades of pleading standards, making it difficult
to file a case without already having many of these facts. These widely
criticized cases deprive plaintiffs of their day in court, and allow
powerful defendants to successfully dismiss cases before they even begin. My
plan would undo this damage by restoring fair pleading standards so that every
person who has been harmed gets their day in court.
Holding Bad Actors Accountable
The
reforms I’ve outlined will go a long way toward cleaning up Washington. But we
also need strong enforcement mechanisms and broad transparency requirements to
make sure we can hold bad actors accountable.
Let’s start with real penalties for violating the rules.
When
Secretary Ben Carson was warned about his son participating in fancy government
events, he brushed it off. And when an independent federal ethics watchdog
determined that Kellyanne Conway should be fired for repeatedly
violating federal law, the administration barely cared.
In
Washington, corrupt actors should face penalties when they break the law — not
return to business as usual.
Here’s
how my plan would fix this:
Establish a new U.S. Office of Public Integrity and strengthen
ethics enforcement. The new office will investigate ethics complaints from the
public, impose civil and administrative penalties on violators, and refer
egregious violations to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution.
Expand and strengthen the independent Office of Congressional
Ethics. My
plan ensures this office has the proper authorities and resources to conduct
investigations, refer civil and criminal violations to the appropriate
authorities, and recommend disciplinary action to the House and Senate Ethics
Committees.
Expand the definition of “official act” in bribery statutes to
criminalize the sale of government access. When a politician
accepts gifts in exchange for government favors, that’s bribery — but thanks to
a wrong-headed Supreme Court decision in United States v. McDonnell,
our laws don’t fully recognize it. My plan plugs that tractor-sized loophole
and ensures that corrupt politicians who accept bribes can be prosecuted. It
also clarifies that a stream of benefits — rather than a single act — qualifies
as an unlawful benefit paid in exchange for a bribe.
Clarify the definition of “in-kind contributions” to ensure that
no future candidate can receive political assistance from foreign countries or
solicit large hush money payments without facing legal consequences. Politicians and
advisors like Donald Trump Jr. have reportedly tried to receive help from
foreign countries, even though it is illegal for foreign individuals to provide
in-kind contributions to campaigns. And Donald Trump directed Michael Cohen to spend $130,000 to cover
up an affair so it would not come to light before the 2016 election, despite
laws preventing him from soliciting large in-kind contributions. Although a
federal judge accepted Cohen’s guilty plea, Trump’s lawyers and defenders continued to insist that what Cohen did — and what
Trump solicited — was not a crime. My plan settles this debate and clarifies
that the rules governing in-kind contributions also apply to intangible
benefits, such as dirt on political opponents, and in-kind financial contributions,
like the payment of hush money, when those contributions are made at least in
part — even if not exclusively — for campaign purposes.
Deter Corruption Through Broad New Government Transparency
Standards
If
government is supposed to work for the people, then the people should be given
enough information to judge how well their government is working for them. Too
many government records are kept behind lock and key, making it impossible for
the public to hold their government accountable. Significant legal actions that
have implications for public health and safety can be kept secret. And the
actions of federal contractors — the companies often tasked with the
implementation of government policies and programs, like Trump’s family
separation policy — are almost completely concealed from public view, thanks to
an assortment of exemptions and loopholes.
Here’s
how my plan would shine a light on government activity:
Prohibit courts from sealing records involving major public
health and safety issues. When people were killed by ignition defects in
Chevrolet vehicles, General Motors settled the cases on the condition that all
documents related to the defects would be sealed from public view. It wasn’t an isolated
incident. Big corporations routinely use secret settlements to keep defective
products on the market so they can continue to rake in profits. That must stop.
My plan bans courts from sealing records in cases involving public health and
safety, with rare exceptions, so that corporations cannot conceal these
dangerous conditions from the American people.
Impose strict transparency standards for federal courts and
remove barriers to accessing electronic judicial records. My plan requires
federal appellate courts to livestream audio of their proceedings, share case assignment
data in bulk, and make all electronic case records — which currently must be
purchased from the government — more easily accessible and free of charge.
Strengthen federal open records laws to close loopholes and
exemptions that hide corporate influence, and increase transparency in
Congress, federal agencies, and nonprofits that aim to influence policy. The American people
have a right to know whether their elected leaders are acting in the public’s
best interest — and who is trying to influence them. Under my plan,
Congressional committees, government agencies, and federal contractors would be
required to publicly release key information so that the American people — and
the American press — can hold the federal government accountable.
Senator Elizabeth Warren, running to be the Democratic
candidate for president, began and ended her speech before some 20,000 gathered
at Washington Square Park in New York City relating the history of the Triangle
Shirtwaist Factory fire of 1911 which took place mere blocks from the Arch that
took the lives of 146 Jewish and Italian immigrant women and girls – still one
of the largest industrial accidents in US history. She spoke of Francis Perkins,
who ran from a townhouse just behind where Warren stood. Perkins was already an
activist for workers’ rights and won fire safety regulations, “but didn’t stop
there,” and other worker protections.
Even before women got the right to vote, Perkins became a
political adviser on workers rights and became the first woman Cabinet
secretary, Secretary of Labor, under FDR.
Perkins, Warren said, worked from within, while thousands of
women in the trade union movement, worked from outside – 500,000 marched in a
funeral procession up Fifth Avenue for the 146.
Speaking from a podium built of wood from the Frances
Perkins homestead in Newcastle, Maine, obtained from her grandson, Tomlin Perkins Coggeshall, Warren used the story to
prove her point of what can happen through grassroots action, that big bold
things – such as what she is proposing to make fundamental, systemic change. “Don’t
be afraid…” she declared – a not-so-subtle shout out to the Democrats who,
desperate to see Trump voted out of office, are looking for a candidate they
believe has the best chance of winning the general election, which for many
means someone who won’t rock the boat too much, rather than someone whose ideas
and proposals excite, engage and promote real structural change.
There were cheers throughout her speech delivered by a crowd
that the campaign estimated at 20,000 (Warren’s biggest to date) but especially
as she said, “Medicare for All,” and then, at the phrase, “wealth tax,” chants
of 2c, 2c, 2c rose up.
Warren, who had just been endorsed by the National Working
Families Party, said that the 2c on
every dollar after the first $50 million in wealth, would correct historic,
systemic, and “government sanctioned” racism and sexism that produced gaps in
income and also political power – redlining in housing, the pay gap between women
and men, particularly women of color, criminal justice reform, eliminating
private prisons that incentive locking people up, eliminating student debt,
providing universal pre-K. Without using the word “reparations” – she offered a
more constructive, implementable series of programs that would accomplish the
same goal of equalizing the opportunity to succeed.
“The time to hold back is over. We need structural change.”
Warren added, “I know what you are thinking – it is too
much, too big, too hard.” Then, scanning the crowd, she joked, “OK, nobody here.
I know this change is possible because others have made big structural change
before.”
And she went back to Perkins and the Triangle Shirtwaist
Factory – how factory owners, made filthy rich because of the horrendous
working conditions and wages were able to amass the wealth to buy politicians,
how greed by owners and corruption by politicians effectively negated
democracy.
“30 years old, Francis Perkins already was a human rights activist…how,
seeing the fire at the factory, she ran and watched as young women leaped to
their death rather than be consumed by the flames. 500,000 at that march. It wasn’t the first
march, but it was different.”
“While they picketed from the outside, Francis pushed from
the inside. Those women died because of the greed of business owners and the
corruption of politicians. Perkins was the lead investigator, years before
women could vote, let alone have a role in government. But Frances had a” plan –
she fought for fire safety, but she didn’t stop there.
“With Francis working from the inside and the women workers
applying pressure from the outside, they rewrote state labor laws top to bottom
to protect workers. She became the leading expert on working conditions.” President
Franklin D. Roosevelt named her his Labor Secretary through the New Deal.
“That what one woman can do.” She added, “It’s what’s
possible when we fight together.”
Warren declared, “No
matter what brings you into this fight — whether it’s child care, student
loans, health care, immigration, or criminal justice, one thing is crystal
clear: corruption is making it worse — and it’s at the root of the major
problems we face as a democracy.
“Reforming the money game
in Washington isn’t enough. We also need to comprehensively clean up our
campaign finance system. That’s why I’ve also called for a constitutional
amendment to overturn Citizens United. It’s
why we need to get rid of the Super PACs and secret spending by billionaires and
giant corporations that try to buy our democracy. It’s why we need to br”eak
the grip that big donors have by creating a system of exclusive public funding
of our elections. But even if we solve our campaign finance problems,
comprehensive anti-corruption reforms targeted at Washington itself are
necessary to finally end the stranglehold that the wealthy and the
well-connected have over our government’s decision-making processes.
“I believe that we can root out corruption in Washington. I believe we must make big, structural changes that will once again restore our trust in government by showing that it can work for all of us. And when I’m President, that’s exactly what I’ll do.”
Warren, famous now for posing for selfies with people who come out to see her, wound up staying until midnight before the line, thousands long, was through. “I stayed four hours, but so did the last guy on line,” she later said. It is an indication of the enthusiasm for her and her endurance as a candidate at a time when a big issue among Democrats is who can get out the vote.
All the Democratic candidates for 2020 have strong stands
on gun safety regulations they would implement to reduce the sick, tragic
epidemic of gun violence.
Beto O’Rourke had his break-out moment at the third
Democratic Debate, in Houston no less, forcefully declaring, “Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47. We’re
not going to allow it to be used against our fellow Americans anymore. If the
high-impact, high-velocity round, when it hits your body, shreds everything
inside of your body because it was designed to do that so that you would bleed
to death on a battlefield … when we see that being used against children.”
Senator Amy Klobuchar was joined at the Democratic Debate in Houston by gun safety activists from across the country and following the debate, issued her detailed plan for enacting gun safety measures. This is from the Klobuchar campaign:
MINNEAPOLIS, MN — Gun violence in America has cut short far too many lives, torn families apart and plagued communities across the country. This year there has been an average of about one mass shooting a week in which three or more people have died, including the shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio that killed 31 people in less than 24 hours. At the same time, everyday gun violence in this country continues to take the lives of the equivalent of a classroom of school children every week.
The gun homicide rate in the United States is 25 times higher than other developed countries and gun safety laws are long overdue. Senator Klobuchar has been standing up to the NRA and fighting for stronger gun safety measures since she was the Hennepin County Attorney, working with local law enforcement to push to ban military-style assault weapons. In the Senate, she has supported legislation to ban assault weapons and bump stocks and improve background checks.
As a member of the Judiciary Committee, she authored legislation that would prevent convicted stalkers from purchasing firearms and close the “boyfriend loophole” by expanding the definition of a domestic abuser to include dating partners. That Klobuchar legislation has now passed the House of Representatives and has been blocked by Republicans in the Senate.
Because of her leadership on gun violence prevention, Senator Klobuchar advocated for gun safety legislation at a meeting with President Trump at the White House after Parkland. Seated across from Senator Klobuchar at the meeting, President Trump publicly declared that he supported doing something on background checks nine times. The next day he then met with the NRA and folded. The legislation never was pushed by the White House.
At tonight’s debate, Senator Klobuchar is joined by gun safety activists Roberta McKelvin, Perry and Sharia Bradley, and Mattie Scott as well as the former mayor of Cedar Rapids, IA, Kay Halloran, who is a member of the Mayors Against Illegal Guns Coalition.
Instituting universal background checks by closing the gun show loophole.
Banning bump stocks that can increase a semi-automatic rifle’s rate of fire to 700 rounds per minute.
Banning high capacity magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.
Quickly raising the age to buy military-style assault weapons from 18 to 21 and fighting to ban the sale of assault weapons.
Providing grants to states to implement extreme risk provisions to empower families and law enforcement to keep guns away from people who show signs of threatening behavior.
Closing the “Charleston loophole” by giving law enforcement additional time to complete background checks.
Closing the “boyfriend loophole” by preventing people who have abused dating partners from buying or owning firearms.
Establishing a waiting period for sales of handguns and assault rifles, which law enforcement can waive in the case of an emergency.
Prohibiting the online publication of code for 3D printing firearms.
Holding manufacturers and distributors of gun kits to the same standards as those of completed firearms.
Providing funding for the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention to conduct research on firearm safety and gun violence prevention.
In addition, Senator Klobuchar has laid
out a plan for her
first 100 days that includes
executive action she can take immediately to address gun violence:
Immediately close the
“boyfriend loophole.”
Consider gun violence
as a public health issue in CDC studies.
Crack down on gun
manufacturers and dealers that break the law.
Prevent people with
severe mental illness from acquiring guns.
Prevent federal
funding from being used to arm teachers.