Ralph welcomes Bishop William Barber from the Poor People's Campaign to discuss their March 2nd mass moral march on State Assemblies and their efforts to mobilize millions of poor and low-wage voters. Then, Ralph is joined by Washington Post health reporter Dan Diamond to discuss his team's recent report on a $2 billion Medicare fraud scheme.
"If you are not for ending policies that perpetuate poverty and low wages, then you are an accessory to the crime of human beings' lives being taken."
He is also correct that mobilizing these citizens to vote is an important part of addressing the problem.
But none of the issues he raised will be solved by voting for politicians if those politicians campaigns are financed by the big money interests as the big money politicians only pass legislation that primarily benefits the big money interests that have no interest in ending policies that perpetuate poverty and low wages.
It does no good to get politicians to promise to do something while campaigning they have already told you they won't do when they took the big money.
So what Bishop Barber (and Ralph) should do is encourage citizens to demand small donor candidates and enforce that demand with our votes by casting a write in vote in the primaries and general election in 2024 if there are no small donor candidates on their ballot. This will register a vote against the big money candidates and create and demonstrate demand for small donor candidates in 2026.
The Michigan primary shows people are willing to cast this kind of vote to send a message. What better message is there to send then if the politicians want our vote then the politicians should not take big money?
In slogan form: Take Big Money- Lose Our Votes
Voting for big money politicians is a vote to continue policies that perpetuate poverty and low wages and makes you an accessory to the crime of human beings' lives being taken.
I'm grateful for Rev. Dr. Barber's leadership. However, I can't help but think that the Poor People's Campaign would get better results if they paired their demands with a credible vote-withholding campaign.
Michigan voters were "uncommitted" tens times more than was asked of them. Then, yesterday, Genocide Joe went to the Southern border to gain "other" support, instead of calling for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, by showing his policies are just like tRump's and announced his right wing, xenophobic declaration to resume tRump's previous policy. I wonder if thousands more Latin American children will be kidnapped, then disappeared without a trace.
Dr. West’s candidacy was not discussed with Rev. Barber.
Dr. West went on Poverty tour with Tavis Smiley several years ago.
With the exception of very few nobody wants to talk about Dr.West. See Michael Albert, Election 2024: Dealing With Devils, Znet Ralph interview with Amy Goodman on his birthday.
41% of Americans are low income living with hardship or poverty. 2 out of 5. Using the number 135 million is not clear enough. 2 out of 5 is not an exaggeration, the ALICE report from United Way charity asserts the 41% figure. (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed = ALICE) Also the Supplemental Poverty Measure, U.S. Census, shows that 41% live with income below 200% of the Official Poverty Measure. 19% live with incomes below 150% the OPL, which many say is "poor". Kathleen Short, who designed the SPM for the US Census, said that below 140% people are unable "to achieve a safe and decent standard of living." She wrote that in 2011 when 29.9% lived below 140%, so today with 19% under 150% shows the economy has improved. But not enough. $170,000 per household is the "average" household income in the U.S.; $170K time 133 million households equals $2.2 trillion, which several agencies say is the "national income", the BEA.gov, the Fed's Flow of Funds, the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. About 5 in 6 households are below "average". The Oxfam report "The Crisis of Low Wages in the U.S.", 2022, spells out the details. My blog also: http://benL88.blogspot.com -- The "average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers", or employees, about 80% of everyone who works, were higher in 1969 than in 2023, about 54 years and stagnant wage growth, while the inflation adjusted "real disposable personal income" increased by 180%, nearly tripled. About 60% of workers live paycheck to paycheck, and the differential in pay, CEO to median worker, is 603 to 1 in the lousiest paying 100 corporations shows the report Executive Excess, 2023 (author Sarah Anderson). The economy is not serving the ordinary family or worker. The Poor People's Campaign is the only major movement to rectify this major impediment to prosperity for all. Thanks for the interview.
It's good to see Rev. Barber in dialogue with Ralph. Ralph is right that not nearly enough progressive organizations are working together with the Poor People's Campaign, a movement that began in 1967 with Rev. Dr. King and colleagues. It would be wise to connect the movement with the growing moral movement against ethnic cleansing in Gaza. For those interested in some historical context on the original poor people's campaign check out my piece "From FDR to Coretta Scott King: Economic Rights and the New Poor People's Campaign" https://jeffreynall.substack.com/p/from-fdr-to-coretta-scott-king-economic-a1d
My 92 year old dad received a statement from his Anthem BCBS medigap provider showing $19,000 in "incontinence supplies" which were never prescribed for him. Thanks to your podcast, I knew what to do. I reported the fraud!
One of the most important statements made on the topic of poverty in the United States came in one of the most famous moments of US history. Sadly, this has largely forgotten. The event where Dr. King delivered his famous “I have a dream” speech is often shortened to the 1963 ‘March on Washington’, but the actual name of the event is the ‘March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom’. UAW president Walter Reuther was one of the featured speakers of the event and he delivered a quote which should be another rallying call for progressives, but this has sadly become forgotten by almost everyone.
Walter Reuther: “I am here today…because the struggle for civil rights and the struggle for equal opportunity is not the struggle of Negro Americans but the struggle for every American to join in. If we can have full employment…for the negative end of war then why can’t we have a job for every American in the pursuit of peace?”
There are economic models out there which show how full employment can be achieved and achieved in conjunction with achieving the pursuit of peace. For example, I’ve mentioned repeatedly in the comments here at the RNRH how the defense industry can be nationalized and transformed into a flexible national industrial industry pursuing both legitimate defense needs and peace needs in a manner similar to how Robert Pollin described the nationalization of the fossil fuel industry here on the RNRH several months back. Sadly, many modern progressives seem to take the position that economics is a bad word. That’s nonsense, knowledge of economics is fundamental to achieving Reuther’s vision and really the vision of everyone speaking at that famed 1963 event.
Much is said describing the problems of poverty, but not much is said about what can be done to solve poverty even though there are excellent models in the economic literature. With this lack of dialogue, is it really a mystery why political candidates, from the major parties, minor parties, and independents, also ignore the topic or come up with follies for solutions?
I've just sent a letter to Representative Thomas Kean Jr. requesting that he Co-Sponsor H.Res.438 or explain why he chooses not to support it. I'm confident he will never co-sponsor such a resolution, but he does usually respond to constituent letters, even if his responses consist of bland generalities. I'm curious as to how he will attempt to explain his opposition to this.
"If you are not for ending policies that perpetuate poverty and low wages, then you are an accessory to the crime of human beings' lives being taken."
He is also correct that mobilizing these citizens to vote is an important part of addressing the problem.
But none of the issues he raised will be solved by voting for politicians if those politicians campaigns are financed by the big money interests as the big money politicians only pass legislation that primarily benefits the big money interests that have no interest in ending policies that perpetuate poverty and low wages.
It does no good to get politicians to promise to do something while campaigning they have already told you they won't do when they took the big money.
So what Bishop Barber (and Ralph) should do is encourage citizens to demand small donor candidates and enforce that demand with our votes by casting a write in vote in the primaries and general election in 2024 if there are no small donor candidates on their ballot. This will register a vote against the big money candidates and create and demonstrate demand for small donor candidates in 2026.
The Michigan primary shows people are willing to cast this kind of vote to send a message. What better message is there to send then if the politicians want our vote then the politicians should not take big money?
In slogan form: Take Big Money- Lose Our Votes
Voting for big money politicians is a vote to continue policies that perpetuate poverty and low wages and makes you an accessory to the crime of human beings' lives being taken.
I'm grateful for Rev. Dr. Barber's leadership. However, I can't help but think that the Poor People's Campaign would get better results if they paired their demands with a credible vote-withholding campaign.
Michigan voters were "uncommitted" tens times more than was asked of them. Then, yesterday, Genocide Joe went to the Southern border to gain "other" support, instead of calling for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem, by showing his policies are just like tRump's and announced his right wing, xenophobic declaration to resume tRump's previous policy. I wonder if thousands more Latin American children will be kidnapped, then disappeared without a trace.
Dr. West’s candidacy was not discussed with Rev. Barber.
Dr. West went on Poverty tour with Tavis Smiley several years ago.
With the exception of very few nobody wants to talk about Dr.West. See Michael Albert, Election 2024: Dealing With Devils, Znet Ralph interview with Amy Goodman on his birthday.
41% of Americans are low income living with hardship or poverty. 2 out of 5. Using the number 135 million is not clear enough. 2 out of 5 is not an exaggeration, the ALICE report from United Way charity asserts the 41% figure. (Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed = ALICE) Also the Supplemental Poverty Measure, U.S. Census, shows that 41% live with income below 200% of the Official Poverty Measure. 19% live with incomes below 150% the OPL, which many say is "poor". Kathleen Short, who designed the SPM for the US Census, said that below 140% people are unable "to achieve a safe and decent standard of living." She wrote that in 2011 when 29.9% lived below 140%, so today with 19% under 150% shows the economy has improved. But not enough. $170,000 per household is the "average" household income in the U.S.; $170K time 133 million households equals $2.2 trillion, which several agencies say is the "national income", the BEA.gov, the Fed's Flow of Funds, the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation. About 5 in 6 households are below "average". The Oxfam report "The Crisis of Low Wages in the U.S.", 2022, spells out the details. My blog also: http://benL88.blogspot.com -- The "average weekly earnings for production and nonsupervisory workers", or employees, about 80% of everyone who works, were higher in 1969 than in 2023, about 54 years and stagnant wage growth, while the inflation adjusted "real disposable personal income" increased by 180%, nearly tripled. About 60% of workers live paycheck to paycheck, and the differential in pay, CEO to median worker, is 603 to 1 in the lousiest paying 100 corporations shows the report Executive Excess, 2023 (author Sarah Anderson). The economy is not serving the ordinary family or worker. The Poor People's Campaign is the only major movement to rectify this major impediment to prosperity for all. Thanks for the interview.
It's good to see Rev. Barber in dialogue with Ralph. Ralph is right that not nearly enough progressive organizations are working together with the Poor People's Campaign, a movement that began in 1967 with Rev. Dr. King and colleagues. It would be wise to connect the movement with the growing moral movement against ethnic cleansing in Gaza. For those interested in some historical context on the original poor people's campaign check out my piece "From FDR to Coretta Scott King: Economic Rights and the New Poor People's Campaign" https://jeffreynall.substack.com/p/from-fdr-to-coretta-scott-king-economic-a1d
My 92 year old dad received a statement from his Anthem BCBS medigap provider showing $19,000 in "incontinence supplies" which were never prescribed for him. Thanks to your podcast, I knew what to do. I reported the fraud!
One of the most important statements made on the topic of poverty in the United States came in one of the most famous moments of US history. Sadly, this has largely forgotten. The event where Dr. King delivered his famous “I have a dream” speech is often shortened to the 1963 ‘March on Washington’, but the actual name of the event is the ‘March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom’. UAW president Walter Reuther was one of the featured speakers of the event and he delivered a quote which should be another rallying call for progressives, but this has sadly become forgotten by almost everyone.
Walter Reuther: “I am here today…because the struggle for civil rights and the struggle for equal opportunity is not the struggle of Negro Americans but the struggle for every American to join in. If we can have full employment…for the negative end of war then why can’t we have a job for every American in the pursuit of peace?”
Link: https://www.jfklibrary.org/sites/default/files/2020-04/Speech%20excerpts.pdf
There are economic models out there which show how full employment can be achieved and achieved in conjunction with achieving the pursuit of peace. For example, I’ve mentioned repeatedly in the comments here at the RNRH how the defense industry can be nationalized and transformed into a flexible national industrial industry pursuing both legitimate defense needs and peace needs in a manner similar to how Robert Pollin described the nationalization of the fossil fuel industry here on the RNRH several months back. Sadly, many modern progressives seem to take the position that economics is a bad word. That’s nonsense, knowledge of economics is fundamental to achieving Reuther’s vision and really the vision of everyone speaking at that famed 1963 event.
Much is said describing the problems of poverty, but not much is said about what can be done to solve poverty even though there are excellent models in the economic literature. With this lack of dialogue, is it really a mystery why political candidates, from the major parties, minor parties, and independents, also ignore the topic or come up with follies for solutions?
I've just sent a letter to Representative Thomas Kean Jr. requesting that he Co-Sponsor H.Res.438 or explain why he chooses not to support it. I'm confident he will never co-sponsor such a resolution, but he does usually respond to constituent letters, even if his responses consist of bland generalities. I'm curious as to how he will attempt to explain his opposition to this.