Here are two connected arguments regarding the Democratic platform and presidential nomination, for both this state and the nation.
Locally, I suspect most people attending March 26 caucuses believe that 1) funding for pre K-12 public education in Washington should be more like Massachusetts’ than Mississippi’s, 2) only tax reform will reduce the shortfall, and satisfy McCleary, and 3) politics’ third rail, a state income tax, no matter the outcries, must be part of the reform mix.
Nationally, and stating that I favor Sanders but will work and vote for either nominee, Sanders has made Clinton more progressive on issues like trade, environment and higher education tuition costs and loans, but less so on money in politics and on a tax policy targeting high incomes, financial transactions, and overseas holdings and profits, which remain third rails. I hope both presidential campaigns challenge them.
This election year requires boldness. Whatever Trump’s fascism, I note his populist “trade and jobs” message’s inroads where Democrats must win, in the Rust Belt. But I believe a progressive tax platform keyed to infrastructure and education spending will outflank whatever any Republican concocts, and could help flip the Senate. It would also be a way for the nation to reverse Mississippi-ization.
Milt Krieger, Bellingham