HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Wasserman Schultz Has a C...

Wed Jun 8, 2016, 11:33 AM

Wasserman Schultz Has a Change of Heart, But Too Little, Too Late by Bill Moyers and Michael Kinship


Return with us now to the saga of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the soul of the Democratic Party. First, a quick recap: Rep. Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), chair of the Democratic National Committee, also has been an advocate for the payday loan industry. The website Think Progress even described her as the “top Democratic ally” of “predatory payday lenders.” You know — the bottom-feeding bloodsuckers of the working poor. Yes, them.


Low-income workers living from paycheck to paycheck, especially women and minorities, are the payday lenders’ prime targets — easy pickings because they’re often desperate. Twelve million Americans reportedly borrow nearly $50 billion a year through payday loans, at rates that can soar above 300 percent, sometimes even beyond 500 percent. Bethany McLean at The Atlantic recently reported that the government’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) studied millions of payday loans and found that “67 percent went to borrowers with seven or more transactions a year and that a majority of those borrowers paid more in fees than the amount of their initial loan.”


Yet when the CFPB was drawing up new rules to make it harder for payday predators to feast on the poor, Rep. Wasserman Schultz co-sponsored a bill to delay those new rules by two years. How, you ask, could the head of the party’s national committee embrace such an appalling exploitation of working people? Just follow the money. Last year, the payday loan industry spent $3.5 million lobbying; and as we wrote two weeks ago, in Wasserman Schultz’s home state, since 2009, payday lenders have bought protection from Democrats and Republicans alike by contributing $2.5 million or so to candidates from both parties, including her. That’s how “Representative” Wasserman Schultz, among others, wound up representing the predators instead of the poor. ...


Democratic insiders like Wasserman Schultz, however, continued to whistle past the graveyard, believing that the well-funded and well-connected Clinton machine — and general fear of a Trump regime — were enough to carry them to victory in November, despite the grass-roots disgust with a party that reeks of rot from the top. Once the champions of people who came home from work with hands dirty from toil and sweat, too many establishment Democrats went over to the dark side, taking up the cause of the well-manicured executives (think: Goldman Sachs) who write the checks and the mercenaries who deliver them (for a substantial cut, of course).


The lust for loot which now defines the Democratic establishment became pronounced in the Bill Clinton years, when the Clinton-friendly Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) abandoned its liberal roots and embraced “market-based solutions” that led to deregulation, tax breaks, and subsidies for the 1 percent. Seeking to fill coffers emptied by the loss of support from a declining labor movement, Democrats rushed into the arms of big business and crony capitalists. ...


All well and good, but if she survives her primary to return to Washington, be sure to keep the lights on in those rooms where the final version of the rules are negotiated. A powerful member of Congress with support from a Democrat in the White House could seriously weaken a law or a rule when the outcome is decided behind closed doors and money whispers in the ear of a politician supplicant: “I’m still here. Remember. Or else.”


But the times, they really may be a-changing, as the saga of Wasserman Schultz reveals. You can be deaf to the public’s shouts for only so long. The insurgency of popular discontent that has upended politics this year will continue no matter the results in November. For much too long now it’s been clear that money doesn’t just rule democracy, it is democracy.


Until we prove it isn’t.


http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/06/08/wasserman-schultz-has-change-heart-too-little-too-late

6 replies, 1213 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 6 replies Author Time Post
Reply Wasserman Schultz Has a Change of Heart, But Too Little, Too Late by Bill Moyers and Michael Kinship (Original post)
kadaholo Jun 2016 OP
democrattotheend Jun 2016 #1
Raster Jun 2016 #2
Exilednight Jun 2016 #3
bvar22 Jun 2016 #4
Orsino Jun 2016 #5
vintx Jun 2016 #6

Response to kadaholo (Original post)

Wed Jun 8, 2016, 11:34 AM

1. Why is this in GDP?

I know that a DWS is controversial along candidate lines, but this seems like an issue story that belongs in GD.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kadaholo (Original post)

Wed Jun 8, 2016, 11:36 AM

2. Bravo!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kadaholo (Original post)

Wed Jun 8, 2016, 11:46 AM

3. poetic and to the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kadaholo (Original post)

Wed Jun 8, 2016, 01:04 PM

4. In order to have a "change of heart",

one must first have a heart.
That excludes DWS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kadaholo (Original post)

Wed Jun 8, 2016, 01:19 PM

5. I would love to credit Sanders for a piece of this apparent remorse...

...but I think it and his candidacy are symptoms of the broader movement.

The times, they are a-changing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kadaholo (Original post)

Wed Jun 8, 2016, 01:55 PM

6. K&R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread