Given the horrors I've been reading and hearing about today, I wouldn't have
posted this if it weren't for what it tell us about Bernie Sanders.
Miriam
Vermont Congressional Delegation Opposes Vermont Voters
By William Boardman, Reader Supported News
29 March 18
What happens when the lives of citizens get in the way of political egos?
The politics of American imperialism are alive and well in Vermont, where
elected officials are defending the military-industrial war-making machine
against voters who reject ruling class priorities. At the symbolic center of
this democratic confrontation is the notorious F-35 Joint Strike Fighter,
the world's most expensive weapons system, designed to kill in many ways,
including a nuclear first strike. And the few times Vermonters have had the
chance to vote, they've voted against basing this loud, health-harming,
housing-destroying offensive war machine in the state's most densely
populated area. Now it's coming to a head in a people versus career
politicians face-off.
At a Town Meeting on March 6, Burlington voters chose, by a 55% majority, to
ask the Air Force to base the F-35 in some other state. On March 26, the
Burlington City Council, by a 9-3 vote, forwarded that request to Secretary
of the Air Force Heather Wilson to "replace the planned basing of the F-35
with a basing of a low-noise-level plane with a proven high safety record.."
For whatever reason, the council request left out the rest of the ballot
resolution's request: ". proven high safety record appropriate for a densely
populated area" (perhaps because that densely populated area is NOT
Burlington). The City Council asked Secretary Wilson to respond by May 1.
Vermont's quisling Congressional delegation - Democratic senator Patrick
Leahy, Independent senator Bernie Sanders, and Democratic congressman Peter
Welch - made what looks like a cheap shot effort to influence the council
vote at the last minute. Late on the afternoon of March 26, Vermont's
"representatives" issued a joint statement saying they stood by their years
of pushing for the F-35 basing at the Burlington Airport, which is in South
Burlington (which has no voice in the decision).
Unable to justify their decision, the Vermont delegation stonewalls
Consistent with the delegation's past behavior, their pro-F-35 statement
addressed none of the substantive issues, and none of the three would answer
questions from the media. The imperious attitude of these three is also
consistent with the rest of Vermont's bi-partisan leadership for the past
decade. They have all behaved with imperial detachment, refusing to ask
sensible questions, refusing to listen to opponents in any field (medical,
educational, social, even military). They continue to act as if this were an
imperial polity, in which they announce their decision, refuse to explain it
or justify it, but expect everyone else to accept it. For Vermont, this
anti-democratic policy-making has worked surprisingly effectively for a
surprisingly long time.
And it's not over yet. Before the city council resolution can go to the Air
Force, Burlington mayor Miro Weinberger has to sign off on it, and the
notoriously weaselly Democrat continues to ponder what, if anything, he will
do in accord with the clear wish of his voters. Although the F-35 issue is
many years old, Weinberger hasn't indicated what new concerns could possibly
be troubling him. He has till April 16 to sign or veto the resolution. In
the event of a veto, the city council's 9-3 vote would be enough for an
override, if the votes hold.
As Mayor, Weinberger is at the crossroads of powerful contending forces. As
a Democrat, he is among those talked about as a possible successor to
Senators Welch and Sanders as they age out of office. How he goes on the
F-35 could alienate either the Vermont electorate or the Democratic
establishment and its military-industrial base, especially the vocal and
endlessly self-serving Vermont Air National Guard. The mayor also owes his
office partly to the power brokers of real estate and development in
Burlington (that overlap with the Leahy circle).
Say it ain't so, Bernie!
For Bernie Sanders to be aligned with forces he has railed against on the
campaign trail is especially odd. When Sanders was Mayor of Burlington in
the 1980s the city was affectionately known as "the People's Republic of
Burlington." That was exaggeration for effect, but also reflected a basic
human decency of the time and place. Now, as one Burlington voter put it at
an F-35 hearing: "People have had enough of putting the interests of rich
white dudes over average citizens."
Sanders, whose record on issues of war and military has never been strong,
is up for re-election this year (with no apparent opposition). He recently
led a futile effort to get the Senate to pay attention to US participation
in the US-Saudi genocidal war on Yemen, though he didn't frame it that
strongly. Why he has been so timid and quiet about the F-35 for all these
years is a mystery. Like Leahy, Sanders voted for the 2001 Authorization to
Use Military Force (AUMF), the legislation that still serves as the legal
basis for all the wars the US is waging today. Only Rep. Barbara Lee, a
Democrat from Oakland, California, voted against that AUMF.
Like Sanders, Peter Welch is also up for re-election with a $2.1 million
campaign fund already (he was unopposed in 2014). He hasn't had serious
opposition since 2006. This year Welch has two primary campaign opponents
who have raised less than $30,000 between them. But Welch is also in the
supposed line-of-succession for Vermont's Senate seats, even though at 71 he
is only slightly younger than Leahy, 77, and Sanders, 76. Welch's official
website says nothing whatsoever about the F-35, but he does have a 2013
story about his favoring regulation of private unmanned drones as a danger
and a nuisance. Residents of South Burlington and Winooski might appreciate
the irony of his unconcern for danger and nuisance that the F-35 will
inflict on them.
All three members of Vermont's Congressional delegation seem strangely
unable or unwilling to challenge the political intimidation of the Vermont
Air National Guard (VTANG). Their worshipful public adoration of VTANG is
out of all proportion to any real-world accomplishments. VTANG, for reasons
never satisfactorily explained, has fetishized the F-35, attempting to
render it beyond criticism. But the Air Force never wanted to base the F-35
in South Burlington in the first place. Only the obsessive insistence of
Leahy and guard leaders has brought it this close, and that requires
considerable lying and disinformation along the way.
What did VTANG know and when did VTANG know it?
The city council's March 26 resolution illustrates the dishonesty of the
process that has surrounded the F-35 for years. The city council appends
questions to its resolution that would not be questions at the end of a
process that has any integrity. After years of supposed conscientious
investigation by the Air Force and others, the city council still has no
reliable information about how loud the F-35 is. The city council doesn't
know if there is an alternative mission for VTANG because VTANG says there's
not, but the Air Force has told the court there is (and common sense allows
the obvious inference that the Air Force can make a new mission for VTANG
any time it chooses). The city council doesn't know what flying time the
F-35 will have, what fuel it uses, or how dangerous its material components
are to the environment. The city council is ignorant because the supporters
of the F-35 have deliberately avoided objective, truthful answers to the
hard questions. That's the way it is in a corrupt system.
Have any of the responsible officials involved in the decision-making done
due diligence on the F-35 over the past five years? Available evidence
suggests not. They would rather force their totemic F-35 onto a community
with no voice and take their chances with the consequences. Such political
shuck and jive as the Vermont Congressional delegation, VTANG, the Pentagon,
and others continue to peddle would be criminal negligence in any
conscientious civil society.
William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV,
print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont
judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation
for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination
from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission
to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader
Supported News.
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner