Mediaboss Marketing

Democrats in Congress have a new and surprising tool at their disposal in the era of one-party Republican rule in President Trumps Washington: power.

It turns out that Republicans need the minority party to help them avoid a government shutdown at the end of April, when the current spending deal to fund the government expires. And Democrats have decided, for now at least, that they will use their leverage to reassert themselves and ensure the continued funding of their top priorities by negotiating with Republicans.

I think we have a lot of leverage here, said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). Republicans are going to need our help putting together the budget, and that help means we can avoid some of the outrageous Trump proposals and advance some of our own proposals.

The fact that Republicans need Democrats to vote for a temporary spending measure to avoid a shutdown gives Democrats leverage to force the GOP to abandon plans to attack funding for environmental programs and Planned Parenthood. And it also allows Democrats to block Trumps top priority the wall along the U.S.-Mexico border which the president seeks to factor in to this latest round of budget negotiations.

[Hill Republicans trying to avert a shutdown need Democrats and Trump]

It comes at a time when Republicans on Capitol Hill are badly divided and President Trumps ambitious agenda a health-care overhaul, his 2018 budget blueprint, a tax proposal and an infrastructure program has yet to get off the ground.

Since the failure of the House GOPs health-care plan, Trump has signaled he may work with Democrats to achieve major goals. Coupled with the negotiations over the spending measure, such a statement could foreshadow a major and unexpected power shift in Washington in which the minority party has far more influence in upcoming legislative fights than was initially expected.

I think most of our caucus wants to work with them, said Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) in a recent interview, referring to the GOP. But it requires working in a compromise way.

But cooperation with their GOP counterparts and possibly even with Trump is a risky move for congressional Democrats, who are being pressured by the more liberal wing of their party to obstruct the GOP and Trump at all costs. Part of that energy is playing out in the Senate over the nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, as Democrats have vowed to block his confirmation, potentially leading to an explosive fight next week to change Senate rules.

Hill Democrats are betting voters will view any attempt to compromise on spending as further evidence that the fractured GOP is unable to govern. If the talks fail and a shutdown approaches, voters might then blame Republicans for failing to keep the government open despite their control of the House, Senate and White House, several Democratic aides reasoned.

There is a sense among many Democrats that bipartisanship isnt necessarily toxic, even in an environment in which ardent liberals continue to protest at town hall meetings. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other Democrats think voters see Democrats taking steps to defend existing policies such as battling the American Health Care Act or blocking funding for a border wall and understand the big picture.

Its an interesting time, Pelosi said Lets understand and let the public understand what the debate is.

Without Democratic help, Republicans are unlikely to unite behind a temporary spending plan to keep the government open past April 28. That does not even address the larger battle expected to take place over the fiscal 2018 budget in which Trump has proposed a $54billion increase in defense spending to be compensated for by cuts to 18 domestic agencies and programs.

Democrats have already flexed their muscle by refusing to support the funding of Trumps border wall as part of the temporary measure. They also rejected a proposal by the Trump administration to include in that measure a $30billion spike in defense spending and $18billion in cuts to domestic programs.

I think its clear that putting border money into this without a plan for how its spent is unacceptable, said Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.).

[Trump wants to add wall spending to stopgap budget bill, potentially forcing shutdown showdown]

But that doesnt mean Democrats wont support some minor compromise on defense spending and border security. Some Democrats have privately floated the idea that they might be willing to tap an off-budget war fund to help pay for some increases in defense and border spending, an idea neither Pelosi nor Schumer would rule out.

We would not be opposed to any border security measures that are not the wall increasing technology, Pelosi said at a Thursday news conference. There are better things that we can be doing.

Schumer was similarly supportive.

If they asked for $200million for more electronic surveillance and drones on the border, I dont think that would cause many hackles in our caucus, he said.

Republican leaders appeared in recent days to be open to that kind of compromise. Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) said leaving defense spending increases and money for the border wall out of the short-term spending negotiations wouldnt be a dealbreaking problem.

It doesnt mean that you cant come back to that smaller package and see if theres not some future way to do it, Blunt said.

But any appetite for compromise could end next week, when the two sides are expected to clash over Gorsuchs nomination.

Democrats are planning to exploit Republicans narrow 52-48 advantage in the Senate to slow a vote on Gorsuch. Schumer said he will force Republicans to get 60 votes on a procedural motion before the Senate can vote on the nomination.

Fallout from the very public battle over Gorsuch could play a critical role in whether spending talks stay on track. Democrats privately fear Trump will grow angry over the spectacle and demand funding for the wall, aides said.

There is also a chance GOP members and Trump will cool off during a two-week Easter recess just before a final spending deal is expected. Members of the Appropriations Committee hope to spend that time negotiating roughly 200 remaining issues, including Republican attempts to roll back some Obama-era financial regulations.

Clashes over similarly tacked-on provisions, typically known as riders, have for years prevented Congress from completing the regular appropriations process. Democrats have uniformly rejected Republican attempts to attach to spending bills riders that attack Planned Parenthood, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street regulation legislation.

We want legislation that meets the needs of the American people and does not have the poisonous riders in it, Pelosi said Thursday. We have to see the substance of what is in the bill.

Those fights have been somewhat muted this year as Republicans have used other means to begin chipping away at regulations implemented under President Obama. Congress has already taken steps to roll back Obamas Clean Power Plan and regulation of streams, two issues Republicans previously tried to address through riders.

A good handful of the measures ... have been addressed, said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska). It doesnt mean that there are not still issues that present themselves in the subcommittee budget, but I think its going to be a little bit easier.

Republicans have also hinted that they will not attempt a fight on Planned Parenthood. House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) told reporters last week he did not think a spending bill was the right place for the abortion fight and suggested conservatives take up the fight under special budget rules known as reconciliation.

We think reconciliation is the tool, because that gets it into law, Ryan said. Reconciliation is the way to go.

It is unclear whether Republicans who oppose abortion rights will be satisfied with that path. A group of 77 antiabortion organizations wrote to lawmakers Friday demanding that they continue to try to end federal support for Planned Parenthood. But they, too, focused on using reconciliation.

Democrats bet Republicans will be willing to ignore demands from their most conservative members, many of whom routinely vote against spending bills over objections to all government spending. They also are convinced Republicans are quickly growing tired of being bullied by Trump.

Schumer said Trumps idea of compromise is to propose something and give Congress no chance for input. That approach may work for now, but Democrats hope Republicans will eventually grow tired of Trumps dictating their path and instead turn to Democrats to begin legislating.

Our Republican colleagues are going along with that right now, Schumer said. But thats not how many of them feel. I think many of them want to work in a bipartisan way.

Ed OKeefe contributed to this report.

Ed OKeefe contributed to this report.

Read more at PowerPost

See original here:
Democrats have a new and surprising weapon on Capitol Hill ...

"After meeting with Judge Gorsuch, conducting a thorough review of his record, and closely following his hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, I believe that he is a qualified jurist who will base his decisions on his understanding of the law and is well-respected among his peers," the Indiana Democrat said in a statement.

Donnelly is the third Senate Democrat to support Gorsuch, joining Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota and Joe Manchin of West Virginia.

CNN's whip list has 36 Democrats saying or suggesting they will filibuster Gorsuch's nomination. Another two Democrats say they'll oppose Gorsuch in the final confirmation vote, but it's unclear where they will stand on a potential filibuster.

In his statement, Donnelly added the Senate "should keep the current 60-vote threshold for Supreme Court nominees."

"It's highly, highly unlikely that he'll get 60," Schumer said.

"Neil Gorsuch will be confirmed this week," McConnell said. "How that happens really depends on our Democratic friends. How many of them are willing to oppose cloture on a partisan basis to kill a Supreme Court nominee."

If Schumer is able to halt the vote, McConnell could move to change the rules of the Senate by invoking what is referred to as the "nuclear option," which would allow the leadership to overcome a filibuster of Supreme Court nominations with a simple majority, or at least 51 votes. Republicans hold a slim, 52-48 majority in the chamber.

View post:
Third Senate Democrat announces support for Gorsuch - CNN

Tom Prigg has climbed Half Dome in Yosemite National Park. Hes scaled Mt. Blanc du Tacul in France. He even scaled a building in Pittsburgh as a stunt for a 2013 film. But the McCandless resident may be facing his steepest climb yet: challenging 12th district Republican Congressman Keith Rothfus in 2018.

People I talk to are like, This is really daunting. And it is, said Mr. Prigg, a brain researcher at Carnegie Mellon University. But Mr. Prigg said that pundits who write off Democrats in the district arent listening to the people. People want to earn a livable wage, better prospects for their children, equal opportunity for higher education and careers later on.

Mr. Prigg already has a volunteer campaign team, a website, and a record as an Army veteran. Hes also counting on a base of Democratic voters outraged by the 2016 election of Donald Trump and Republican majorities in Congress. After people protest, they want to take direct political action.

Since January, those protests have included nationwide marches, raucous town hall meetings, and protests of Mr. Rothfus, Sen. Pat Toomey and 18th district Congressman Tim Murphy.

A weekly protest outside Mr. Murphys Mt. Lebanon office was to get our congressman to meet with us and address our concerns, said Mykie Reidy, an organizer of the event. But considering there has been no movement in that area, and his voting record, were looking down the road to 2018.

Lack of challengers in recent years has been a problem, she said. And when there has been, the candidates didnt have the resources, in part because party leaders wrote the districts off. But this year, she said, Democrats are now looking to groups like ours as an asset.

Most carbon-based life forms arent thinking of 2018s elections yet, and much of Western Pennsylvania is unforgiving terrain for Democrats. But the next several months may determine the landscape of the 2018 election. And if this years political ferment translates into credible challengers next year, it may be a victory in itself.

You never know what the mid-term environment is going to be, said Kyle Kondik, of the University of Virginias Center for Politics. I think the folks stepping up are doing their party a favor.

Some potential

Democratic insiders say several potential candidates -- most of whom have not run for office before -- are already mulling runs locally. Most are keeping quiet, but University of Pittsburgh professor David Miller of Mt. Lebanon is talking a bit. An aide to former Pittsburgh Mayor Tom Murphy and founder of CONNECT, an initiative to encourage regional cooperation among local governments, he said, We need to make sure we have a lot of competitive races in 2018.

Given Mr. Trumps travails in office, Mr.Miller said, One could anticipate the environment in 2018 would be very good. But its speculation at this point. I have made no decision so far.

Also weighing a run is retired Bethel Park civil engineer Peter Kohnke.

I was disgusted to see nobody running against our congressman, said Mr. Kohnke, a longtime leader on the Montour Trail Council. I talked to a lot of people about running and got a lot of no thank yous, so maybe its one of those things you have to do yourself.

Other Democrats are eyeing down-ballot races. Emily Skopov, a television writer, hopes to challenge state House Speaker Mike Turzai for his North Hills seat.

I get hugs from strangers, and the most common response is Oh, bless you, said Ms. Skopov, who runs a nonprofit that has restaurants donate kids-menu crayons to needy children rather than throwing them away.

Shes already drawn some national fundraising support because of an essay she wrote for Pantsuit Nation, a website popular with aggrieved backers of Hillary Clinton.

People support me because they understand the importance of swing states, she said. Due to the prominence of Mr. Turzai, who is pondering a gubernatorial run, this race is local but it has statewide consequence.

State and national Democrats have been calling for such efforts since last fall.

In February, the since-elected chair of the Democratic National Committee, Tom Perez, told the Post-Gazette he wanted the party to implement the every zip code strategy to compete in every district. Earlier that month, state party chair Marcel Groen urged local party leaders to find people to run for every single office, instead of conceding more rural areas to the GOP.

We can already see people stepping up to run at unprecedented rates, said Craig Auster, director of the political committee for the League of Conservation Voters. While left-leaning organizations like his want to back sophisticated campaigns, We need to be open to a lot of different kinds of candidates, including people who are becoming active for the first time.

One of the lessons of 2016, he added, is that voters are definitely hungry for not the status quo.

Tough terrain

No one thinks it will be easy.

Political prognosticators regard Western Pennsylvanias non-Pittsburgh congressional districts as solidly Republican, in part because Mr. Trump won Western Pennsylvanias Congressional Districts by 20 percentage points or more. A handful of more competitive Philadelphia-area districts almost certainly will command more attention and resources. The Democratic Congressional Campaign committee, which seeks to elect House members, is already targeting the east, while showing little interest in the Pittsburgh area so far.

A lot of [the outlook] has to do with recent election results, said the University of Virginia's Mr. Kondik, who handicaps House races for the highly regarded Larry Sabatos Crystal Ball. Democrats used to be be a lot more competitive in Western Pennsylvania.

Mr. Murphy hasnt faced a challenger the past two cycles: Since 2002, he has beaten Democratic challengers by margins ranging from 16 to 34 points. Mr. Rothfus has held off two challenges from Democrat Erin McClelland with relative ease.

The 12th and 18th districts were drawn by Republicans after the 2010 Census, and the maps make it tough to be too aggressive in the west, said consultant Marty Marks, who works with candidates backed by organized labor. Unions, a key Democratic bloc, also are focusing on the east, he said.

Because the 12th and 18th bridge both Allegheny County and its rural cousins, a candidate who appeals in one area may not resonate in another.

Henry Boldyzar, a Westmoreland County labor leader who pondered challenging Mr. Murphy in 2016, said Democrats are really struggling out here. They push social issues, which are killing them in counties like this.

An even larger hurdle may be money.

As much energy as were seeing, you still have to have the resources to get out your message, said Jason Henry, a campaign consultant who worked on Ms. McClellands 2014 bid, and Democratic Senate candidate Katie McGintys 2016 campaign.

A Congressional race likely would cost upwards of $2 million, he said, and while party leaders and donors would love to expand the battleground in Western Pennsylvania, they arent going to waste money. You have to show youre serious.

That could mean raising six-digit sums each quarter, And youll be competing for attention with [Senator] Bob Caseys and Gov. Tom Wolfs re-elections.

Re-electing Mr. Wolf and Mr. Casey are without a doubt a priority for organizations like Planned Parenthood, said Sari Stevens, who heads the health providers state political arm.

Recent polling suggests just over one-third of voters approve of Mr. Trump so far, but in Western Pennsylvania areas where he won by great margins, people still believe hes doing a good job, Ms. Stevens said. For Democrats to prevail, They need those people to change their minds.

Some Western Pennsylvanians, meanwhile, hope to raise money themselves.

A Squirrel Hill group is launching its own political action committee, Pittsburghers for America, to support Democratic challengers. PAC chair Jake McBride said organizers decided to start a new committee, rather than contribute nationally, because keeping the money at home was part of our goal. And we can advance our [agenda] here. On the national stage, its not realistic.

In the 18th district, meanwhile, Andrew Zahalsky has launched a political committee, BACPAC PAC, to raise money for the candidate who will challenge Mr. Murphy.

An oncologist who spent over $50,000 of his own money in a losing race against state Representative John Maher last year, Dr. Zahalsky said he knows Mr. Murphy will be hard to beat.

But a credible fundraising effort could push Mr. Murphy to the center, he said, by showing his constituents are serious enough to put their money where their mouths are.

Democratic enthusiasm means the ground is shifting under peoples feet, said Matt Blizek, the elections director for progressive advocacy group MoveOn.Org. He pointed to an imminent special election in Georgias 6th District, where Democrat Jon Ossoff is running strong in a staunchly Republican district.

Thats an even more conservative district than the ones in Western Pennsylvania, Mr. Blizek said. You have to compete everywhere, because you never know which race is going to go your way.

Chris Potter: cpotter@post-gazette.com

See original here:
Democrats looking to challenge solidly GOP seats - Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Gay rights groups that fiercely supported Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's winning campaign last fall because of his pledge to repeal North Carolina's "bathroom bill" now say he betrayed them by accepting the recent compromise, calling it a "dirty deal" with Republicans.

Many fellow Democrats also were upset with the compromise, which got rid of the provision requiring transgender people to use public restrooms corresponding to their birth certificate but kept state lawmakers in charge of future bathroom policies. That provision in particular angered businesses, the NCAA, the NBA and others who withdrew events and expansions from North Carolina at a steep cost.

"I am torn apart because I want to support my governor, and I want to support the efforts that we are trying to make, to make things at least a little bit better," Democratic Rep. Yvonne Holley of Raleigh said during debate on the legislation, adding that it reminded her of past disputes in North Carolina history over racial equity. Although she voted for the compromise, she said: "there is more to this than about using the bathroom."

Indeed there is: The law known as House Bill 2 also had prevented local and state governments from passing nondiscrimination ordinances protecting on the basis of categories such as sexual orientation and gender identity. It was replaced by a moratorium on local governments passing them in most cases for nearly another four years.

For months, opponents of the law insisted they would accept only a full repeal. Some joined hard-line conservatives in opposing the bill, though their reasons differed: Many Republicans saw no need for any repeal.

"It kicks HB2 down the road until 2020, keeping most of the awful law on the books for someone else to deal with," said Chris Sgro, executive director of Equality North Carolina. "That's not leadership, Gov. Cooper."

Cooper said the compromise was the best he could get with Republican leaders holding veto-proof majorities in the House and Senate. But he said it got HB2 repealed and restored some local LGBT protections for workers and contracts.

"This is not a perfect deal, and it is not my preferred solution," he said during a news conference.

HB2 caused the NCAA to cancel championships in the state this year and has discouraged some companies from relocating to or expanding in the state. An Associated Press analysis last week found that HB2 would cost the state more than $3.76 billion in lost business over a dozen years.

The NCAA set a deadline of last week for action on HB2 or North Carolina likely would miss out on holding championship events through 2022. Officials now say they'll decide this week whether the new law goes far enough.

"The jobs are leaving now. The money's going out of pockets from people now. ... We had to repeal this law now," Cooper said. As for gay rights groups opposing the bill, "I hope that they will see and that they will know my heart and they will see that I will continue to fight for LGBT rights."

To be sure, Human Rights Campaign, Equality NC and other groups also leveled plenty of blame on GOP legislative leaders. But many of the same people who spent last year protesting Republican Gov. Pat McCrory, who signed HB2, protested Cooper.

"Roy Cooper forfeited the chance to make a principled stand against a new bill that essentially is window-dressing," said Grayson Haver Currin of Raleigh, a registered Democrat who last year led weekly blastings of air horns and noisemakers near the Executive Mansion in protest of HB2. He and about 50 others performed again Thursday evening across the street to oppose Cooper's signing of the new bill.

Twenty-one Democrats in the legislature voted against the compromise Cooper asked them to support. Some House Democrats said on the floor they couldn't support a measure that still keeps discrimination on the books.

The next gubernatorial election isn't until 2020. While some Democrats who voted for the bill could face primary challenges in 2018 because of their "yes" votes, the party also has a vested interest in eliminating the Republicans' veto-proof majorities to give the governor more leverage.

Mac McCorkle, a political consultant to the two previous North Carolina Democratic governors, said he doesn't think complaints from outside groups will hurt Cooper unless he disappoints them repeatedly. The electorate won't turn on Cooper if businesses consider the state again, he said.

"The barometer for most people is going to be the national economic developments," McCorkle said.

And despite the complaints, nearly 40 Democrats voted for the agreement. Democratic Rep. Mickey Michaux of Durham, a veteran of the civil rights movement, said it was the best deal the governor could assemble given the circumstances.

"I'm not going to throw my governor under the bus," Michaux said before voting for the bill. "I'm going to support my governor so that he has an opportunity for a second term."

Continue reading here:
'Bathroom bill' compromise angers Democratic gov's allies - ABC News

My friend Cheryl Pelicano is a blue sparkler in the circus of red that is South Carolina. And like all Democrats, she is aghast at everything related to President Trump. But all this Russia stuff, especially the latest involving Michael Flynn and his request for immunity, compelled Pelicano to ask me a series of how can we get rid of this guy? questions. So, I asked Laurence Tribe, legendary constitutional law professor at Harvard University, for the answers.

Democrats crossing their fingers in hopes of a miracle removal of Trump from the Oval Office should let the blood back in their digits. The prospects are slim to none. And if said miracle were to happen, Hillary Clinton would not be swooping in to save the day. This is one of those careful what you wish for situations.

[PODCAST: Why Larry Tribe thinks Democrats should battle the Gorsuch nomination in a blaze of fire.]

Were in totally uncharted waters here, Tribe told me via email. To say that he thinks Trump is illegitimately in the White House would be an understatement. The more we learn about the apparent existence of evidence pointing to collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia to install Trump in the Oval Office, he said, the harder it becomes to view Donald Trump as a legitimate occupant of the office he has claimed.

That said, I believe deeply in Americas Constitution and in the rule of law, he continued. But the same commitment to the Constitution as our highest law requires me to abide by the Constitutions sole procedures for removing someone who has been sworn in as the president, however wrongfully.

Tribe said there are only two paths for presidential removal before completion of a four-year term. Removal upon impeachment and conviction is one, he told me. The other is the elaborate mechanisms of the 25th Amendment for displacing a president deemed by two-thirds of both Houses to be unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.

Now that Ive laid that groundwork, here are the questions from Pelicano and the answers provided by Tribe.

Pelicano: If it turns out that the election was heavily impacted, and Trump colluded with Russia, is the presidency illegitimate? If so, what happens?

Tribe: There is no mechanism in the Constitution and laws as they stand today for redoing a presidential election, however many people believe it was rendered illegitimate by treasonous or otherwise unlawful manipulation; and no institutional mechanism exists even for reaching an authoritative determination that a presidential election was illegitimate. Those who have imagined the Supreme Court might entertain a claim of that sort and order a new election are deluding themselves.

In contrast, the question whether Congress might conceivably have authority, under the Constitution as written, to enact a special law for making such a determination and holding a new national election is one that some people have been contemplating, but the odds that any such law could be passed over Trumps inevitable veto seem much too remote to warrant taking that option seriously.

Pelicano: Would that apply to Pences ability to ascend to office in the case that Trump were removed?

Tribe: Setting aside the virtually impossible scenarios Ive described, what lies ahead of us, if Trump fails to serve out his term, is clear: Vice President Pence, however tainted, will become the nations chief executive unless Pence, too, resigns or is removed from office after ascending to the presidency upon Trumps resignation, removal or displacement in which case the Presidential Succession Act of 1947 specifies that the Speaker of the House (Paul Ryan) would succeed to the presidency. Following Ryan in that line of succession would be the Senates president pro tempore (Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah), then the secretary of state (Rex Tillerson), and so on down the line of Cabinet members.

Pelicano concluded her email queries by asking, Am I just dreaming? Given what Tribe said, the short answer is yes. Sadly.

Follow Jonathan on Twitter: @Capehartj Subscribe to Cape Up, Jonathan Capeharts weekly podcast

Original post:
Sorry, Democrats. Trump's not going anywhere. You wouldn't like who would follow anyway. - Washington Post (blog)