Here Is The Draft Of The 2016 Democratic Platform

[brooklynite]

Source: Huffing ton Post

The Democratic Party released the final draft of its 2016 platform Friday, giving activists and party members a chance to see it before the full platform committee approves it in Orlando, Florida, July 8-9. It will then head to the floor of the full convention in Philadelphia to be ratified by the delegates.

Income inequality has a leading role in the document, reflecting the influence of Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) with his oft-used phrase “rigged economy.”

“Democrats believe we must restore the basic bargain that built America’s mighty middle class: If you work hard and play by the rules, you can get ahead and stay ahead, provided we break down certain barriers,” reads the document. “The system isn’t working when we have a rigged economy in which ordinary Americans work longer hours for lower wages, while most new income and wealth goes to the top one percent. In contrast, Donald Trump has shown time and again that he cannot be trusted to secure the basic economic dignity of Americans.”

The platform also advocates a $15 minimum wage, which has been a key part of the senator’s presidential primary campaign.

Read more: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/2016-democratic-platform_us_5776c9a9e4b09b4c43c06bb5

---

Full Draft Platform

[drray23]

1. very good so far. Seems to be a nice compromise

I am still reading it in detail but this looks very good. Apparently there are obvious influences from both the Hillary and Sanders camps which is a good thing.

You can almost lift some paragraphs directly from campaign stump speechs:

We believe that today’s extreme level of income and wealth inequality—where the majority of
the economic gains go to the top one percent and the richest 20 people in our country own more
wealth than the bottom 150 million—makes our economy weaker, our communities poorer, and
our politics poisonous.

which is of course, a familiar Sanders statement.

We believe a good education is a basic right of all Americans, no matter what zip code they live
in. We will end the school-to-prison pipeline and build a cradle-to-college pipeline instead,
where every child can live up to his or her God-given potential.

The "zipcode" phrase is how Hillary used to put it in her speeches on the trail.

[drray23]

2. and indeed the $15.00 is in

Minimum Wage
Democrats believe that the current minimum wage is a starvation wage and must be increased to
a living wage. No one who works full time should have to raise a family in poverty. We believe
that Americans should earn at least $15 an hour and have the right to form or join a union. We
applaud the approaches taken by states like New York and California. We should raise and index
the minimum wage, give all Americans the ability to join a union regardless of where they work,
and create new ways for workers to have power in the economy. We also support creating one
fair wage for all workers by ending the sub-minimum wage for tipped workers and people with
disabilities.

So Senator Sanders, what about endorsing Secretary Clinton ?

[Jester Messiah]

5. It is a promising start. n/t

[DCBob]

3. Sounds good.

Hopefully this is good enough for Bernie.

[BlueMTexpat]

14. .

If I said what I want to say here, my post would likely be hidden.

[DCBob]

21. Whathehey.. go for it..

What's the worse that can happen?

[pangaia]

22. It is not good enoough for me and I hope it is not good enough for Bernie.

And it should not be good enough for Hillary.

But most importantly, It is not good enough for human beings.

[phazed0]

4. TPP still worrisome IMO. nt

[drray23]

8. so I am of two minds about it

I recognize that we do not want to leave our workers at a disadvantage with uncontrolled free trade, but it is also evident that protectionism does not work either. We found out the hard way in the 19th century. I was looking that up and found this very interesting quote from Ulysse Grant. Amazing that he was such a visionary:

For centuries England has relied on protection, has carried it to extremes and has obtained satisfactory results from it. There is no doubt that it is to this system that it owes its present strength. After two centuries, England has found it convenient to adopt free trade because it thinks that protection can no longer offer it anything. Very well then, Gentlemen, my knowledge of our country leads me to believe that within 200 years, when America has gotten out of protection all that it can offer, it too will adopt free trade.

Some more interesting perspective on it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protectionism_in_the_United_States

[sulphurdunn]

17. Declining to enter into a trade agreement

that disadvantages your country's workforce, laws and environmental protection is not protectionism.

[modestybl]

18. These aren't really trade deals...

...tho countries like Korea have built up their industrial base by protecting their industries with tariffs..

NAFTA, TPP are mostly about how corporations get around regulations and laws ... thwarting the democratic process.

The corporate Dems whose candidate is HRC have always backed these deals.

[sheshe2]

6. Thanks~

[FailureToCommunicate]

7. Here's a portion of progressive ideas left OUT of the compromise platform (so far)...

From an article two day ago:

https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2016/06/the-psychology-of-why-hillary-clinton-supporters-a.html

"On the other hand, the Sanders camp was out-gunned on many big issues. A measure to oppose the Trans-Pacific Partnership—a position taken by both Sanders and Clinton in the primary campaign—was voted down along “party lines,” 10-5, with the justification that it would “undermine” President Obama’s situation…a clear indication that Clinton’s opposition was purely opportunistic—a way to out-flank Sanders on the left, rather than a position she intended to hold beyond the primary. Nor did the Clinton/Wasserman-Schultz bloc support a carbon tax, a ban on fracking and new fossil fuel drilling leases on federal land and water (all by 7-6 votes), medicare-for-all, or an end to the Israeli occupation of Palestine.

If you’re a progressive Democrat, these last few results are pretty heartbreaking. What it means is that if you support the party establishment, you also support fracking, carbon emissions, free trade, an aggressive Israeli state, and limited health care—at least in the sense that you’ve vowed not to fight against any of these things, which already enjoy prominence within the status quo and are certainly not disappearing on their own. When you consider the fact that there are no other realistic progressive options in the American political landscape with a prayer of winning major national elections, the situation starts to look pretty bleak."

[ciaobaby]

9. thanks so much for providing this.

Tthe last paragraph is exactly why I have such a problem with Hillary and co.

it also bothers me that the line about TPP is that the party doesn't want to go against Obama.
However, this should not be about Obama. We a looking to the future and how we want to shape the future.
I know we are all thankful for all Obama has achieved under such difficult circumstances (repubs) but this is the time to look forward and do what is right for the American worker, and TPP is not it.
It was written by and for the corporate world.

[OnDoutside]

16. In fairness that is your opinion and a minority of the party. Clearly a majority believe otherwise,

that Trade Agreements are good. The problem in America is that there has been no willingness to address those in the Rust Belt (& elsewhere) who were left behind and not upskilled. Both Republicans & Democrats are to blame for that.

[Gman]

15. Stop taking the platform so seriously

The platform committee is only about a half step above the resolutions committee. The thing has to be written to compromise and attract as wide an array of voters as possible. People were going broke in areas until the oilfields opened up jobs. A lot of union members depend on coal mines and oilfields. It's about attracting middle class voters. Not alienating them.

[Vote2016]

29. This is a weak platform. I'm losing faith that the Democrats are a progressive party. If Kaine is

the VP, I'm leaving.

[Thinkingabout]

10. Thanks Brook for the information, this is results of negotiations.

[Android3.14]

11. Haven't you heard? It's the most progressive platform ever!

Except for key elements such as TPP condemnation, strong $15/hour, Israeli occupation, carbon tax and others.

[sangfroid]

12. Yup.

That's why I'm still...thinking.

[OnDoutside]

13. Trump will go ballistic at the Union section

"We should raise and index the minimum wage, give all Americans the ability to join a union regardless of where they work, and create new ways for workers to have power in the economy. We also support creating one fair wage for all workers by ending the sub-minimum wage for tipped workers and people with disabilities."

[Raine1967]

19. another article: 'Democratic Party Endorses Abolishing The Death Penalty'

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/democratic-platform-death-penalty_us_5776d56de4b0a629c1aa0984

I am pretty happy about this, personally, that is a very big step.

“We will abolish the death penalty, which has proven to be a cruel and unusual form of punishment. It has no place in the United States of America,” reads the document, which the Democratic National Committee released Friday afternoon.

The 2012 platform did not call for an end to capital punishment, instead saying that “the death penalty must not be arbitrary.”

The position in the new platform is at odds with what Hillary Clinton has said she supports. In October, she acknowledged significant issues with the way the punishment has been used, but said it should not be ended altogether.

[mia]

20. "Democrat believe so-called 'right to work' laws are wrong for workers and wrong for America."

Excellent!

[Feeling the Bern]

23. No stopping of fracking, no single payer health care which is better and cheaper than the ACA

No legal immigration reform, no stopping TPP.

Very centrist and very pro-corporate.

[Vote2016]

30. Eisenhower era Republicans would have rejected this as insufficienly progressive. What happened to

my party?

[4dsc]

24. Sorry but including the TPP won't win my vote

I do believe that many progressives will also think twice about backing this piss poor trade deal in the party platform.

[brooklynite]

25. Good thing Donald Trump is a big TPP opponent...right?

[askeptic]

32. Trump is NOT the only other candidate running

People unhappy with the Democrats have more than one alternative

[brooklynite]

34. Trump is the only other candidate with a chance of winning

if you're in a Solid Red or Blue State, knock yourself out; otherwise, a vote for anyone other than Clinton is a vote for Trump.

[brewens]

26. We'd hope it comes close to the republican platform when Eisenhower was running.

I think that was 1956.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

27. yep

so many have no clue

[Vote2016]

31. It's heartbreaking. The idea that this platform reflects my values is farcical. It is as if the

Democrats are actively recruiting for the Green Party as the only progressive option.

If Nate Silver says Hillary has an 80% chance of winning, she probably doesn't need my vote and, with this platform, I get the impression she doesn't want my vote.

[cannabis_flower]

28. Didn't quite say "Legalize It" but came close

2 We believe that the states should be laboratories of democracy on the issue of marijuana, and
3 those states that want to decriminalize marijuana should be able to do so. We support policies
4 that will allow more research on marijuana, as well as reforming our laws to allow legal
5 marijuana businesses to exist without uncertainty. And we recognize our current marijuana laws
6 have had an unacceptable disparate impact, with arrest rates for marijuana possession among
7 African Americans far outstripping arrest rates among whites, despite similar usage rates.

[askeptic]

33. very disappointing

There's always "business" involvement. Just legalize it like tomatoes or corn. Allow folks to grow it themselves.

Marijuana has been studied to death. Almost all studies that have been contracted by the government have recommended legalization. And this has been over at least 20 years. What's left to study? Why won't the Democrats just stand up for personal freedom in this area?

[whatthehey]

35. Have the poutrage merchants read the 2012 version they presumably voted for?

Certainly the US voted for it.