What Bernie Sanders won in return for endorsing Clinton

The independent senator from Vermont has managed to pull the Democratic platform – and Hillary Clinton's policy proposals – further to the left.

Mike Groll/AP
Sen.Bernie Sanders speaks in Albany, N.Y. in June. The independent senator from Vermont has managed to pull the Democratic platform – and Hillary Clinton's policy proposals – further to the left.

Bernie Sanders didn't get the Democratic nomination. The Democratic platform is another story. 

The Vermont senator endorsed former secretary of state Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee on Tuesday, appearing alongside her at a campaign event in Portsmouth, N.H. The event marks a formal close to his own presidential bid and sets up a general election race between Clinton and presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump. And with Sanders's camp hailing a series of revisions to the Democratic policy platform draft, it could redefine the terms of future battles in Congress.

Sanders had refrained from endorsing Clinton for more than a month after an Associated Press count indicated that he was mathematically out of contention for the nomination. Not so, the Sanders campaign countered, insisting that "super-delegates" who had pledged their vote to Clinton could change their mind at the Democratic convention in late July. But in recent weeks, it became increasingly clear that the campaign had turned its attention to reshaping the scripture of until-recent party orthodoxy, using Sanders's endorsement as leverage.

On Sunday, Sanders lauded “enormous strides” after the platform’s authors met to hash out a final, though non-binding, agenda. Alterations to the platform included a “reasoned pathway for future legalization” of marijuana; increased regulations on fracking and a toughened carbon tax (although not the fracking ban Sanders has urged); a $15-an-hour minimum wage, which would rise over time in tune with inflation; and a commitment to "crack down on the revolving door" between the private and public sectors, particularly Wall Street. 

“Thanks to the millions of people across the country who got involved in the political process – many for the first time – we now have the most progressive platform in the history of the Democratic Party,” said Sanders. 

Those victories followed an agreement by Clinton to adopt three significant proposals associated with Sanders. One plan would make public universities tuition-free for students whose families earned less than $125,000 per year. Another would expand access to Medicare and community health centers. And Clinton also put her weight behind a $15-an-hour minimum wage. 

One key loss for Sanders during platform negotiations came in his failure to secure Democrats' opposition to the Trans-Pacific Trade Pact, a massive trade accord pushed by President Barack Obama that would further intertwine the economies of the US and 11 other nations in the Americas and the Pacific. Sanders also lost a push to “end the occupation” of Palestine, as well as his proposed fracking ban. 

But on Monday, Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver championed the changes to the platform, telling The Washington Post that the campaign had gotten “way over 90 percent of what we wanted” in negotiations.

Sanders's endorsement of Clinton may help ease Democratic operatives' fears that the party would be sundered during what has become one of the most polarized election seasons in recent memory.  

"We have to keep moving the ball forward, and the ball will continue to move forward," Weaver said. "Electing Donald Trump would set that back tremendously." 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.