Dear Senator Sanders,

I know you get a lot of letters every day. Hopefully somebody reads them! But what I really hope is that you will read this one yourself, because the issue is so important to me.

The reason I am writing is that I want to encourage you to consider starting a new political party.

I was one of your many volunteers during the primary campaign.  It is amazing to think of all of us busily trying to get you elected—people deeply involved in your campaign even though you didn't know who we were, or what, exactly, we were doing. The energy was palpable and exciting. We were devoted to you and the promise your message held for real change in this country.

The reason we were so enthusiastic is that we trusted your integrity so deeply. You not only said the right words, but the way you acted and your long political career spoke so eloquently about what you are and represent.

What I know about you is that you are always working for the good of all. I respect your decisions because I know they come from a desire to do the best you can for the people of this country as well as the environment and the world in general. In that light, I understand your stated goal of transforming the Democratic party into a progressive force for change.

Still, I would question whether your goal is likely to succeed. A couple of months ago I heard a few interviews with Nick Brana about “drafting” you to start a new political party. I had never taken that idea too seriously until I listened to his arguments. His take on the party is that it would rather lose to the Republicans than be taken over by progressives. This was quite a startling idea until I thought about it a little. For progressives to be the dominant force in the party, corporate donations would have to be refused. And the bulk of establishment Democrats are totally unwilling to do that. This was recently brought home by the DNC's voting down of the reinstatement of President Obama's ban on accepting corporate PAC donations to the party. The election of Tom Perez as DNC chair is also indicative. As you know, Keith Ellison was the front runner until President Obama prevailed upon Perez to enter the race. It was not okay with the DNC to have a progressive leading the party. Similarly, it was not okay with them to have you be the Democratic nominee, and you know better than anyone the many ways they sought to suppress your campaign.

Not too long ago I was watching an interview you did with the L.A. Times. I actually started to cry, listening to you—and it was not the first time. I cried because you are the rarest of things: a politician who tells the truth. My tears were of gratitude, that within a wasteland of empty and vapid rhetoric, there is one who speaks with honesty and compassion about the real concerns of everyday people.

But when you talk about getting money out of politics, about the minimum wage, about free college tuition, about universal health care, I also have a very uncomfortable feeling. And that is because you are trying to make that fit into a Democratic party that is almost completely bought off by the corporations. It is a party that does not want your ideas and your compassion and your tireless energy to help others. They shunned you during the primary season. Now they are cynically using you because of your popularity. They hope that you can bring people into the party because people are attracted to you. What they don't realize is that people love you because you are so radically different from the Democratic party.

When I listen to you speak I always love what you say. But in the next moment I think, “But Bernie is telling these people what he would do, not what is possible in the Democratic party.” You seem to be inviting people to a party that doesn't exist—except in your mind. When I hear you speak about transforming the party from the ground up, I think: “This will never happen; Bernie is not in his element; he is fighting a losing battle.” Democrats often say you are not a real Democrat. And it's true! Thank God, you are not!

I have the sense that your greatest work may still not be accomplished. Potentially, you have enormous power at this time. You didn't have it when you began your campaign. But now you are the most popular politician in the country. People trust you. In my life (I'm 69) I've never seen anything like it. But when you speak, it seems like the next line should be, “And that is why I am declaring that I wish to start a new political party in this country: a party of and for the people!” The energy of your campaign days would be reignited and you wouldn't be held back by a vindictive Democratic establishment. If you split the Democratic party, you would also gain the support of millions of independents. Had the latter been able to vote in the Democratic primaries you surely would have won the nomination. In addition, with you as the nominee, many people who decided not to vote at all would have come out to support you.

I have the sense that you are being held back; you are not at home; you are trying to support the unsupportable. I also sense that all progressives feel held back, fighting as we are, not only against Trump and the Republicans, but against the Democratic establishment as well. A few weeks ago I saw an online piece about how Tulsi Gabbard had been harshly condemned by many in the Democratic establishment for expressing the belief that we should avoid war in Syria and that we should not assume without proof that the recent gas attack was perpetrated by Assad. She was attacked for believing in diplomacy and accurate intelligence! This kind of drum beating for war is very familiar and very dangerous. And Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean are leading the way, supporting, as they did, the subsequent bombing strikes in Syria.

When you were first deciding to run for president, you considered running as an independent. You decided against it because there were too many obstacles involved. But you did consider it seriously! Now those obstacles would be largely mitigated. You were relatively unknown back then, and now you are by far the most popular politician in America.

New parties, including the Republican party, were formed at times exactly like this one. Given strong public sentiment and an extremely popular leader, it can happen, and quickly! I believe the appetite for such a thing is huge. What you accomplished during your campaign was nearly unimaginable. What you are doing now is also hugely important and effective. But I think starting a new party would open the floodgates of passion for political reform, for fairness and for all the things that you have had the courage to campaign for, and the genius to effectively communicate to all Americans. What you stand for is beyond the partisan. You stand for the people themselves. And you are educating them to know that you are merely articulating what they already believe and feel themselves. This is God's work. Why should you be held back by the Democratic party, which doesn't even appreciate you because you threaten their connections with Wall Street? That is where their loyalties lie. Why fight against this when you can leave the jailhouse and walk free in the fresh air of new hope and invigoration? The Democrats would bind you. Yet you could liberate this country.

At the present time, progressives have no leverage in the political debate. The establishment knows progressives have no place else to go within the mainstream political structure. Therefore they have to simply accept the crumbs they are offered by the leadership and get used to it. But neither progressives nor the working class are taking this anymore. Many of the former voted for Jill Stein or stayed home. Many of the latter voted for Donald Trump. People are leaving the Democratic party in droves because they realize it is a party that is deeply wedded to the corporatocracy; a party that does not look out first and foremost for the good of the people. This is the truth, their rhetoric notwithstanding.

You have said that revolutions begin from the ground up. But I will tell you that my active involvement in politics came only because of your leadership. My work at the grassroots needs inspiration and that requires a tangible goal—like seeing you elected president. The American people are understandably cynical. The government does not represent them. And the forces which maintain this travesty are very powerful. It is easy to feel powerless in such a situation. Yet you gave us hope and also showed us that what seemed impossible is possible. It is true the people have the power to change things, but without direct leadership, the grassroots are disorganized and fragmented. There is not enough consolidation to add up to the revolution you espouse—the revolution that would finally put the good of the people above all else.

I know you are in a difficult position. You have committed to a leadership role within the Democratic party. But if you could survey the will of the people, in the way you did when you were deciding whether to run for president; if you could check out the popularity of the idea of a new People's Party, you could predict whether it would be viable or not.

If you do not do this, you will still have accomplished more than any politician in recent memory. Yet this may be your crowning achievement, one that you are uniquely positioned to effect. And when you are no longer with us—may it be a very long time from now!—will you be a mere memory of what might have been, or will you be living still, in a viable party you yourself helped create?

Do think hard about this, dear Senator!

With deep respect and affection,

Tom Herman