JerryReichler

Dear Senator Sanders, I received your recent correspondence outlining eight priorities you intend to pursue when Congress returns. I appreciate the opportunity to review your positions. However, as a longtime Vermont constituent, I believe your statements deserve a more substantive examination than another expression of agreement or disagreement. You have served in Congress for decades, during which you have consistently advocated many of these same priorities. I recognize that you have contributed to meaningful legislation, including the bipartisan veterans' healthcare reforms of 2014, and that Congress requires compromise and cooperation. Nevertheless, introducing legislation, delivering speeches, and expressing opposition are not equivalent to achieving legislative results. Constituents are entitled to distinguish among them. I would appreciate specific, documented answers to the following questions. 1. Healthcare You correctly identify serious problems involving healthcare costs, prescription drug prices, and access to treatment. Your Medicare for All Act of 2025, S. 1506, was introduced on April 29, 2025, and referred to the Senate Finance Committee. What measurable legislative progress has occurred since its introduction, and what specific steps have you taken to secure the votes required for passage? Given the longstanding political obstacles to Medicare for All, what practical, incremental reforms have you helped enact that directly reduced medical expenses or expanded access for Vermont residents? What is your specific legislative plan for improving healthcare accessibility in rural Vermont, where residents frequently contend with provider shortages and considerable travel distances? After decades of advocating universal healthcare, what concrete results should Vermonters use to evaluate your effectiveness in achieving it? 2. Workers and the minimum wage On April 8, 2025, you introduced the Raise the Wage Act, S. 1332, proposing a $17 federal minimum wage by 2030. Your latest correspondence now calls for $20. What changed between these proposals, and what specific economic analysis supports the new figure? Will you introduce or amend legislation establishing a $20 minimum wage, and what timetable and congressional support do you anticipate? How would your proposal account for Vermont's small businesses, particularly those operating on narrow margins, while protecting workers from reduced hours or job losses? I would also appreciate an accounting of how your previous minimum-wage legislative efforts have translated into enacted federal law. 3. Unions and workers' rights You describe union formation as a constitutional right. While freedom of association has constitutional protection, the specific collective-bargaining rights of most private-sector employees are primarily established by the National Labor Relations Act. You introduced the PRO Act, S. 852, in March 2025. What legislative progress has that proposal achieved, and what additional steps have you taken beyond its introduction? What specific enforcement changes would you prioritize to ensure employers comply with existing labor protections? How would your proposed reforms protect employees' freedom to organize while also respecting their lawful right not to join a union? What measurable improvement in workers' protections can you identify as a direct result of legislation you helped enact? 4. Campaign finance and political influence You advocate overturning Citizens United, eliminating super PACs, and reducing wealthy individuals' influence over federal elections. In May 2026, you introduced S. 4602, the Abolish Super PACs Act, proposing a $5,000 limit on individual contributions to super PACs. What is the specific constitutional and legislative pathway for implementing this proposal under existing Supreme Court precedent? Does your plan depend upon a constitutional amendment, changes in Supreme Court interpretation, or another legal mechanism? What binding campaign-finance reforms have you successfully helped enact during your congressional service? I would also welcome clarification regarding the transparency standards you believe should apply equally to candidates, their political organizations, and individuals or organizations supporting their campaigns. 5. Income and wealth inequality Your letter states that the wealthiest 1% own more than the bottom 93% of Americans and that Elon Musk possesses more wealth than the bottom 53% of households. What specific datasets, valuation dates, and calculation methods support those comparisons? When arguing that billionaires pay lower effective tax rates than ordinary workers, are you referring to federal income taxes, all taxes combined, or calculations treating unrealized investment gains as income? What specific tax legislation have you helped enact that demonstrably reduced wealth inequality, rather than simply proposing that such inequality should be reduced? I recognize that wealth concentration presents serious economic and political questions. However, identifying an economic problem does not, by itself, demonstrate that your legislative efforts have meaningfully corrected it. 6. Artificial intelligence You have introduced the Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act, S. 4214, and the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act, S. 5493. Both proposals raise substantial questions about implementation and unintended consequences. What independently verifiable evidence supports a national moratorium rather than targeted regulation of demonstrable risks? How would you define the advanced AI systems subject to restrictions, and what measurable conditions would permit development to resume? Have you evaluated the potential economic consequences for American employment, medical research, cybersecurity, universities, and small businesses? How would your proposals prevent the United States from surrendering technological capabilities to countries that would not observe comparable restrictions? I would also like to understand how you intend to protect Americans from AI-related harm without unnecessarily preventing responsible innovations that may benefit them. 7. Foreign policy, Iran, and Israel Your opposition to American military involvement in Iran and continued military assistance to the Israeli government raises important constitutional, humanitarian, and national-security questions. Your letter states that the war with Iran is costing Americans hundreds of billions of dollars. Yet the Congressional Budget Office's September 2026 estimate placed direct military costs at approximately $38 billion through August 1, with further monthly expenditures projected. What is the source of your larger estimate? Please distinguish direct military spending, supplemental appropriations, replacement costs, and broader economic losses. What specific congressional measures have you sponsored or supported to address the authorization, continuation, or termination of hostilities with Iran? Your April 2026 resolutions seeking to block particular military sales to Israel failed in the Senate. What additional enforceable legislative measures do you propose, beyond resolutions that have not secured sufficient votes? How would your proposed foreign-policy approach address civilian protection, regional security, the threat posed by Iran-backed armed groups, and the prevention of further military escalation? I am asking what Congress can actually accomplish, through which legal authorities, and with what identifiable consequences—not merely what policies you oppose. 8. Climate change and Vermont The scientific evidence for rising global temperatures is substantial. Vermont has experienced severe flooding and related infrastructure damage that make this issue especially relevant to our state. Your congressional delegation has helped secure federal funding for disaster recovery, and those efforts deserve acknowledgment. However, funding announcements and long-term results are not necessarily the same thing. What specific climate or energy legislation have you helped enact that has produced measurable benefits for Vermont households and communities? What demonstrable reductions in flood exposure, energy costs, or infrastructure vulnerability can be attributed to federally supported projects in Vermont? How will you ensure that the costs of transitioning to new energy technologies do not disproportionately burden rural residents, farmers, low-income households, and small businesses? What oversight measures have you supported to establish whether federal disaster and infrastructure funds are producing their intended results? 9. Personal financial transparency and public accountability Finally, I would like to address an issue that is directly relevant to your longstanding criticism of concentrated wealth and political privilege. Your public financial disclosures document income from book publishing, including royalties reported during your congressional service. I do not suggest that earning royalties or accumulating assets is inherently improper. Nor do I believe a public official should be criticized simply for achieving financial success. However, a public official who consistently demands greater financial accountability from wealthy Americans should reasonably welcome a comparable level of scrutiny regarding his own finances. Would you provide a clear explanation of the principal sources of your personal wealth and how they have changed during your congressional career? What standards do you apply to identifying and addressing potential financial conflicts of interest? How do you distinguish legitimate personal wealth accumulation from the forms of economic and political influence you repeatedly criticize? These are questions of transparency and consistency, not allegations of misconduct. My central concern: results versus promises Senator, I understand that no individual senator can single-handedly pass legislation or control the actions of Congress. Political opposition and procedural obstacles are genuine limitations. Nevertheless, you have served in Congress long enough for constituents to reasonably request a comprehensive accounting of your legislative effectiveness. I would specifically appreciate a written summary identifying: Major legislation for which you were the principal sponsor that became law. Significant provisions you negotiated into enacted legislation. Federal funding delivered to Vermont, including your individual contribution and the outcomes achieved. Major legislative priorities that remain unfulfilled, the principal obstacles to their passage, and the specific actions you intend to take next. I am not looking for another explanation of why our country faces difficult challenges. I already understand that. I am asking what you have accomplished, what remains unfinished, and what evidence Vermonters should use to judge the effectiveness of your continued service. Political conviction deserves respect. Legislative accountability is equally important. I would appreciate a substantive, point-by-point response from your office, supported where possible by bill numbers, recorded votes, enacted legislation, and measurable outcomes. Thank you.