Sparks Fly Between Clinton and Sanders During Dem Debate
Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton sparred over gun control, Obamacare, taxes, Wall Street reform and their vision of how far government should go to help Americans in their final debate before 2016’s voting starts in Iowa.
Their responses—with Sanders emphasizing bigger themes and systemic corruption that must be challenged and Clinton emphasizing progress comes from pushing the existing system toward better results—showed why they are virtually tied in the opening states that will caucus and cast ballots for the Democratic Party’s nominee.
The debate also featured Martin O’Malley, who lags far behind the pair but attacked Clinton for pandering to African-Americans by siding with Barack Obama to minimize her Wall Street ties—saying she stood by the president’s achievements—at a debate sponsored by the Congressional Black Caucus Institute in Charleston, South Carolina.
“Now you bring up President Obama here in South Carolina in defense of the fact of your cozy relationship with Wall Street,” he said. “In an earlier debate, I heard you bring up even the 9/11 victims to defend it.”
But the real action and tension on Sunday night was between Sanders and Clinton. The debate was the first held in the South, where polls have repeatedly found that Clinton has a lead among African-Americans. That fact was reenforced by their opening statements where they both spoke of personal ties to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his quest for racial and economic justice.
“I … remember that he spent the last day of his life in Memphis, fighting for dignity and higher pay for working people,” Clinton said.
“This campaign is about a political revolution to not only elect a president, but to transform this country,” Sanders said.
First Clash: Gun Control
The sparring started when the debate moderator asked Sanders about Clinton's attack last week that called him “a pretty reliable vote for the gun lobby.”
“Well, I think Secretary Clinton knows that what she says is very disingenuous. I have a D-minus voting record from the NRA,” he replied, reciting where he’s opposed military-style weapons, supported background checks and President Obama’s recent executive actions to expand and enhance gun control enforcement. “We have seen in this city a horrendous tragedy of a crazed person praying with people and then coming up and shooting nine people. This should not be a political issue.”
When her turn came, Clinton replied that Sanders “has voted with the NRA, with the gun lobby numerous times. He voted against the Brady Bill five times. He voted for what we call the Charleston loophole. He voted for immunity for gun manufacturers … Let’s not forget what this is about, 90 people a day die from gun violence in this country.”
Sanders did not respond further after Clinton’s remarks, but he did say earlier that he would reconsider the law granting immunity to gun makers—even though it had provisions outlawing some ammunition that the police wanted. He also said that coming from a rural state with few gun controls that he could bridge the gap between sportsmen and gun control proponents.
Style Contrast: Criminal Justice Reform
When the topic turned to racial biases in policing, both Sanders and Clinton agreed there was systemic racism in the criminal justice system that needed to be taken seriously and fundamentally addressed. But the way that Clinton answered seemed to register more deeply with the debate audience, as it more personally acknowledged victimization in communities of color, whereas Sanders’ reply was a bit more cerebral.
“That requires a very clear agenda for retraining police officers, looking at ways to end racial profiling, finding more ways to bring the disparities that stalk our country into high relief,” she said. “One out of three African-American men may well end up going to prison. I want people here to think what we would be doing if it was one out of three white men.”
“Let me respond to what the secretary said,” Sanders said. “We have a criminal justice system which is broken. Who in America is satisfied that we have more people in jail than any other country on Earth, including China? Disproportionately African American and Latino. Who is satisfied that 51 percent of African American young people are either unemployed or underemployed? Who is satisfied that millions of people have police records for possessing marijuana when the CEO's of Wall Street companies who destroyed our economy have no police records?”
In further questioning, Sanders repeated his past statements that anyone killed by a police officer should trigger a federal Department of Justice investigation, that police officers must be held accountable for unnecessary violence, that police departments need to be de-militarized and that “we have to got to make our police departments look like the communities they serve.”
Read page 1
Defending or Replacing Obamacare?
The next big area where they clashed was over the Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare. In recent days, Clinton has attacked Sanders on several fronts that relate to the health care reform. She has said that his proposals keep changing and would end up raising taxes for the middle-class to institute health care as a right. He’s countered, as he did on the debate stage, that she was distorting his position as a Medicare-for-all system would save people money because they would stop paying insurance premiums.
Stepping back from those specifics, the debate highlighted that Clinton would seek to fine-tune the law—which she defended as one of the Democratic Party’s most historic achievements—while Sanders would seek deeper and more fundamental change.
“Here’s what I believe, the Democratic Party and the U.S. worked since Harry Truman to get the Affordable Care Act passed,” she said. “We finally have a path to universal health care. We have accomplished so much already. I do not to want see the Republicans repeal it and I don’t to want see us start over again with a contentious debate. I want us to defend and build on the Affordable Care Act and improve it.”
Sanders began his comments by calling put her campaign for distorting his views.
“What her campaign was saying—Bernie Sanders, who has fought for universal health care for my entire life, he wants to end Medicare, end Medicaid, end the children’s health insurance program—that is nonsense,” he said. “What a Medicare-for-all program does is finally provide in this country health care for every man, woman and child as a right. Now, the truth is, that Frank Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, do you know what they believed in? They believed that health care should be available to all of our people.”
Clinton, for her part, doubled down on defending Obamacare and improving it.
“The fact is, we have the Affordable Care Act,” she said. “That is one of the greatest accomplishments of President Obama, of the Democratic Party and of our country … We started a system that had private health insurance. And even during the Affordable Care Act debate, there was an opportunity to vote for what was called the public option. In other words, people could buy in to Medicare and even when the Democrats were in charge of the Congress, we couldn't get the votes for that.”
“So, what I’m saying is really simple,” she summed up. “This has been the fight of the Democratic Party for decades. We have the Affordable Care Act. Let’s make it work.”
Sanders, however, countered that health care should not be brokered by private industry.
“I believe, that a Medicare-for-all, single-payer program will substantially lower the cost of healthcare for middle class families,” he said. “What we have got to acknowledge and I hope the Secretary does, is we are doing away with private health insurance premiums.”
Later in the debate, he said this would raise taxes—but end up costing households less.
“So, instead of paying $10,000 dollars to Blue Cross or Blue Shield, yes, some middle class families would be paying slightly more in taxes, but the result would be that that middle class family would be saving some $5,000 dollars in healthcare costs,” Sanders said. “A little bit more in taxes, do away with private health insurance premiums. It’s a pretty good deal.”
Wall Street Reform
Their final major area of disagreement was over Wall Street reform, where Sanders ran an ad last week that did not mention Clinton by name but talked about two Democratic visions, “One says it’s okay to take millions from big banks and tell them what to do,” whereas he has pledged to break up the largest financial industry monopolies.
When asked about that ad, Sanders stood by it, saying, “I don’t take money from big banks. I don’t get personal speaking fees from Goldman Sachs.”
Clinton responded by saying that Sanders was not just attacking him, but he was also attacking Obama—who “has led our country out of the Great Recession.” She said, “He’s criticized President Obama for taking donations from Wall Street … Senator Sanders called him weak, disappointing.”
As was the case with Obamacare, she positioned herself with the president and sought to win the crowd’s approval by demonstrating her loyalty to him.
“I personally believe that President Obama’s work to push through the Dodd-Frank bill and then to sign it was one of the most important regulatory schemes we’ve had since the 1930s,” she said. “So I’m going to defend Dodd-Frank and I’m going to defend President Obama for taking on Wall Street, taking on the financial industry and getting results.”
Sanders countered that unlike Clinton, he has not received hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees from the large investment bank, Goldman Sachs and he would not allow them to have any influence in his administration.
“Let me give you an example of how corrupt—how corrupt this system is,” he said. “Goldman Sachs was recently fined $5 billion. Goldman Sachs has given this country two secretaries of treasury, one on the Republicans, one under Democrats. The leader of Goldman Sachs is a billionaire who comes to Congress and tells us we should cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.”
“Secretary Clinton—and you’re not the only one, so I don’t mean to just point the finger at you, you’ve received more than $600,000 in speaking fees from Goldman Sachs in one year. I find it very strange that a major financial institution that pays $5 billion in fines for breaking the law, not one of their executives is prosecuted, while kids who smoke marijuana get a jail sentence.”
Clinton responded by saying that Sanders voted for a bill in 2000 that deregulated some of the riskiest financial markets, suggesting his stance was hypocritical. He replied by inviting “anyone who wants to check my record in taking on Wall Street.”
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
By Danielle Nierenberg
Following the murder of George Floyd by police in Minneapolis, people around the United States are protesting racism, police brutality, inequality, and violence in their own communities. No matter your political affiliation, the violence by multiple police departments in this country is unacceptable.
Mangroves play a vital role in capturing carbon from the atmosphere. Mangrove forests are tremendous assets in the fight to stem the climate crisis. They store more carbon than a rainforest of the same size.
- Protecting Mangroves Can Prevent Billions of Dollars in Global ... ›
- Could the 'Mangrove Effect' Save Coasts From Sea Level Rise ... ›
Monday is World Oceans Day, but how can you celebrate our blue planet while social distancing?
- 5 Things to Know About Earth's Warming Oceans - EcoWatch ›
- Bioluminescent Waves Mesmerize California Beachgoers, Surfers ... ›
- NOAA: 2020 Could Be Warmest Year on Record - EcoWatch ›
- On June 8, We Celebrate Our Oceans, Our Future - EcoWatch ›
- 5 Things to Know About the State of Our Oceans for World Oceans Day ›
By Jacob L. Steenwyk and Antonis Rokas
From the mythical minotaur to the mule, creatures created from merging two or more distinct organisms – hybrids – have played defining roles in human history and culture. However, not all hybrids are as fantastic as the minotaur or as dependable as the mule; in fact, some of them cause human diseases.
When Looking Through a Microscope Isn’t Close Enough.<p>For the last few years, <a href="http://www.rokaslab.org/" target="_blank">our team at Vanderbilt University</a>, <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/lab/Gustavo-Goldman-Lab" target="_blank">Gustavo Goldman's team at São Paulo University in Brazil</a> and many other collaborators around the world have been collecting samples of fungi from patients infected with different species of <em>Aspergillus</em> molds. One of the species we are particularly interested in is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1006/rwgn.2001.0082" target="_blank"><em>Aspergillus nidulans</em>, a relatively common and generally harmless fungus</a>. Clinical laboratories typically identify the species of <em>Aspergillus</em> causing the infection by examining cultures of the fungi under the microscope. The problem with this approach is that very closely related species of <em>Aspergillus</em> tend to look very similar in their broad morphology or physical appearance when viewing them through a microscope.</p><p>Interested in examining the varying abilities of different <em>A. nidulans</em> strains to cause disease, we decided to analyze their total genetic content, or genomes. What we saw came as a total surprise. We had not collected <em>A. nidulans</em> but <em>Aspergillus latus</em>, a close relative of <em>A. nidulans</em> and, as we were to soon find out, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2020.04.071" target="_blank">a hybrid species that evolved through the fusion of the genomes</a> of two other <em>Aspergillus</em> species: <em>Aspergillus spinulosporus</em> and an unknown close relative of <em>Aspergillus quadrilineatus</em>. Thus, we realized not only that these patients harbored infections from an entirely different species than we thought they were, but also that this species was the first ever <em>Aspergillus</em> hybrid known to cause human infections.</p>
Several Different Fungal Hybrids Cause Human Disease.<p>Hybrid fungi that can cause infections in humans are well known to occur in several different lineages of single-celled fungi known as yeasts. Notable examples include multiple different species of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/yea.3242" target="_blank">yeast hybrids</a> that cause the human diseases <a href="https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/6218/cryptococcosis" target="_blank">cryptococcosis</a> and <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/fungal/diseases/candidiasis/index.html" target="_blank">candidiasis</a>. Although pathogenic yeast hybrids are well known, our discovery that the <em>A. latus</em> pathogen is a hybrid is a first for molds that cause disease in humans.</p>
(Left) Candida yeasts live on parts of the human body. Imbalance of microbes on the body can allow these yeasts, some of which are hybrids, to grow and cause infection. (Right) Cryptococcus yeasts, including ones that are hybrids, can cause life-threatening infections in primarily immunocompromised people. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1008315" target="_blank">Why certain <em>Aspergillus</em> species are so deadly</a> while others are harmless remains unknown. This may in part be because <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fbr.2007.02.007" target="_blank">combinations of traits, rather than individual traits</a>, underlie organisms' ability to cause disease. So why then are hybrids frequently associated with human disease? Hybrids inherit genetic material from both parents, which may result in new combinations of traits. This may make them more similar to one parent in some of their characteristics, reflect both parents in others or may differ from both in the rest. It is precisely this mix and match of traits that hybrids have inherited from their parental species that <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/14/science/14creatures.html" target="_blank">facilitates their evolutionary success</a>, including their ability to cause disease.</p>
The Evolutionary Origin of an Aspergillus Hybrid.<p>Multiple evolutionary paths can lead to the emergence of hybrids. One path is through mating, just as the horse and donkey mate to create a mule. Another path is through the merging or fusion of genetic material from cells of different species.</p><p>It is this second path that appears to have been taken by our fungus. <em>A. latus</em> appears to have two of almost everything compared to its parental species: twice the genome size, twice the total number of genes and so on. But unlike other hybrids, which are often sterile like the mule, we found that <em>A. latus</em> is capable of reproducing both asexually and sexually.</p><p>But how distinct were the parents of <em>A. latus</em>? By comparing the parts contributed by each parent in the <em>A. latus</em> genome, we estimate that its parents are approximately 93% genetically similar, which is about as related as we humans are with lemurs. In other words, <em>A. latus</em>, an agent of infectious disease, is the fungal equivalent of a human-lemur hybrid.</p>
How A. Latus Differs From its Parents.<p>Elucidating the identity of closely related fungal pathogens and how they differ from each other in infection-relevant characteristics is a key step toward reducing the burden of fungal disease. For example, we found that <em>A. latus</em> was three times more resistant than <em>A. nidulans</em>, the species it was originally identified as using microscopy-based methods, to one of the most common antifungal drugs, <a href="https://www.drugbank.ca/drugs/DB00520" target="_blank">caspofungin</a>. This result provides a clear example of the potential importance of accurate identification of the <em>Aspergillus</em> pathogen causing an infection.</p><p>We also examined how <em>A. latus</em> and <em>A. nidulans</em> interact with cells from our immune system. We found that immune cells were less efficient at combating <em>A. latus</em> compared to <em>A. nidulans</em>, suggesting the hybrid fungus may be trickier for our immune systems to identify and destroy.</p><p>In the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, our quest to understand <em>Aspergillus</em> pathogens is becoming more urgent. Growing evidence suggests that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/myc.13096" target="_blank">a fraction of COVID-19 patients are also infected with <em>Aspergillus</em>.</a> More worrying is that these <a href="https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2607.201603" target="_blank">secondary <em>Aspergillus</em> infections</a> can worsen the clinical outcomes for those infected with the novel coronavirus. That being said, we stress that little is known about <em>Aspergillus</em> infections in COVID-19 patients due to a lack of systematic testing, and none of the infections identified so far appear to have been caused by hybrids.</p><p>So, when it comes to hybrids, some are fantastic (the minotaur), some are helpful (the mule) and some are dangerous (<em>Aspergillus latus</em>). Understanding more about the biology of <em>Aspergillus latus</em> may help in our understanding of how microbial pathogens arise and how to best prevent and combat their infections.</p>
This Saturday, June 6, marks National Trails Day, an annual celebration of the remarkable recreational, scenic and hiking trails that crisscross parks nationwide. The event, which started in 1993, honors the National Trail System and calls for volunteers to help with trail maintenance in parks across the country.
- As Protests Rage, Climate Activists Embrace Racial Justice ... ›
- First-Ever Black Birders Week Tackles Racism Outdoors - EcoWatch ›
- 15 EcoWatch Stories on Environmental and Racial Injustice ... ›
- Take a Hike Day Is Around the Bend. What's Your Dream Hike ... ›
By John Letzing
This past Wednesday, when some previously hard-hit countries were able to register daily COVID-19 infections in the single digits, the Navajo Nation – a 71,000 square-kilometer (27,000-square-mile) expanse of the western US – reported 54 new cases of what's referred to locally as "Dikos Ntsaaígíí-19."
The Navajo Nation covers the corners of three different states. Google Maps
Growing Contribution<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yMzM3NDY5Ny9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0NjM4MTgyM30.IuQTKQs1stvYYKD6vaVTrqAyoBsUG0BhDvlhxsyKwPA/img.png?width=980" id="02a05" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="2841f82b1785df5d5ed7bf64d3bb882b" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
World Economic Forum
- Black and Hispanic Americans Suffer Disproportionate Coronavirus ... ›
- Native American Tribes' Pandemic Response Is Hindered by ... ›
- Navajo Nation Has Highest Covid-19 Infection Rate in the U.S. ... ›
World Environment Day: A Time to Consider the Planet We’ll Return To, and Decide How to Care for It Going Forward
It's a different kind of World Environment Day this year. In prior years, it might have been enough to plant a tree, spend some extra time in the garden, or teach kids the importance of recycling. This year we have heavier tasks at hand. It's been months since we've been able to spend sufficient time outside, and as we lustfully watch the beauty of a new spring through our kitchen's glass windows, we have to decide how we'll interact with the natural world on our release, and how we can prevent, or be equipped to handle, future threats against our wellbeing.