Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Trump to Democrats: Pay for My Wall, or Obamacare Gets It! – Slate Magazine (blog)

Mick Mulvaney has an offer Democrats can almost certainly refuse.

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

President Trump is apparently trying to add another item to his resume of bumbled hostage-taking efforts this week, by threatening to sabotage the Affordable Care Act unless Democrats vote to fund a border wall with Mexico.

Sound familiar? It was just about two weeks ago that our president was busy threatening to sabotage Obamacare unless Democrats agreed to negotiate a plan to repeal and replace it. Having gotten nowhere with that bit of bluster, it seems Trump has moved on to the wall, which he's trying to secure funding for in the appropriations bill Congress must pass next week to avoid a government shutdown. Democrats have previously threatened to filibuster any legislation that included money for Trump's metastasized stump-speech applause line, so the White House is attempting to play hardball. As budget chief Mick Mulvaney explained in an interview with Bloomberg Friday, the administration is offering $1 of funding for Obamacare's crucial cost-sharing reduction subsidies for every $1 of money Democrats pony up for the wall. Here's the full quote:

The implicit threat here is that, if Democrats reject this deal, the White House will cease making the subsidy payments, and likely bring Obamacare crashing down. It is not especially credible. Democratic leaders are already responding with snark: Before, Mexico was supposed to pay for the border wall. Now, Trump's threatening the health care of millions to get taxpayers to cover it.

For a full rundown of the CSR drama, see my piece on it from last month. But briefly: Trump is currently deciding whether to continue appealing a federal court decision in which a judge ruled that the Obama administration did not have the right to continue making subsidy payments to insurers that were required under Obamacare, because Republicans in the House never appropriated money for them. If the White House decided to drop the case and cut off the flow of subsidies, insurance carriers would likely flee the Affordable Care Act's exchanges, leaving the individual market in rubble.

While this would no doubt be satisfying to some Republicans, it would almost certainly be a disaster for Trump's approval rating. Voters tend to blame the party in power for their personal miseryand in this case, they'd have every right to do so, since the administration would be taking active steps to burn down the health insurance market. Trump has tried to deny this, insisting that Obamacare is failing already and that Democrats own its impending collapse. But if he really believed that, he'd probably still be using the subsidies as a bargaining chip to get his own health care bill passed, instead of repurposing them to enact one of his other gold-plated pipe dreams.

Democrats, for their part, have very little incentive to negotiate here, since they'd be trading a temporary reprieve for Obamacare for a permanent border wall. The Trump administration says its precious barrier should cost up to $21 billion. That would pay for less than three years of the cost-sharing reduction subsidies, according to the Congressional Budget Office's projections, and giving Trump his wall now would almost certainly encourage him to make more extreme demands the next time the subsidies need more funding.

Trump has made the Democratic party an offer it will most certainly refuse. Maybe one day he'll figure out this whole negotiation thing.

Follow this link:
Trump to Democrats: Pay for My Wall, or Obamacare Gets It! - Slate Magazine (blog)

What went wrong at Oroville? Congressional Democrats demand answers – Sacramento Bee


Sacramento Bee
What went wrong at Oroville? Congressional Democrats demand answers
Sacramento Bee
Citing the near disaster at Oroville Dam, a group of congressional Democrats is pushing the government's watchdog agency to investigate federal oversight of dam safety regulations. The group, including Rep. Doris Matsui of Sacramento and five other ...

and more »

See the rest here:
What went wrong at Oroville? Congressional Democrats demand answers - Sacramento Bee

Cummings: Democrats need to be ‘big tent’ party – The Hill

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.) on Friday said Democrats need to be a "big tent" party amid clashes over whether candidates are sufficiently progressive enough to be backed by the national party.

"I think we have to have a big tent," Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the Oversight panel and a frequent television presence for the party, said in an appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe."

"Because it's one thing to say, 'OK, I don't want to be bothered with these folks.' It's another thing to say, 'Let's pull them under the tent, so we can be effective and efficient in getting something done.' Period."

Cummings also talked about how conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats helped the party win legislative victories in the Obama years.

Separately, Sen. Bernie SandersBernie SandersEx-aide: Obama still the leader of the Democratic Party Sanders endorses Ossoff, but won't call him a progressive The Hill's 12:30 Report MORE (I-Vt.)saidhe did not know whether Georgia House candidate Jon Ossoff, a Democrat seeking to win a conservative-leaning district, was a true progressive.

Some Democrats have called recently to open the party up to opposing viewpoints in an effort to expand its reach and appeal to voters who may not align with certain planks of the Democratic platform.

That approach has won the support of DNC Chairman Tom Perez, who said that, while the Democratic platform supports abortion rights, the party needs to be open to working with people with opposing points of view in order to reach voters in Republican-leaning parts of the country.

If youre going to be a big tent party as we are, and you're going to help elect Democrats who have generated support in their communities ... the will of those voters is the will that we must respect," Perez told ABC News' Jonathan Karl.

Read the rest here:
Cummings: Democrats need to be 'big tent' party - The Hill

‘Pivotal Moment’ for Democrats? Gerrymandering Heads to Supreme … – New York Times


New York Times
'Pivotal Moment' for Democrats? Gerrymandering Heads to Supreme ...
New York Times
The Wisconsin State Capitol in Madison. A panel of judges agreed that the State Assembly's electoral districts had been gerrymandered before the 2012 election ...

and more »

More:
'Pivotal Moment' for Democrats? Gerrymandering Heads to Supreme ... - New York Times

Democrats may finally break through in Texas, thanks to Trump – Washington Post (blog)

For a few election cycles now, Democrats have been vowing to put the largest, most important red state, Texas, in play. President Trump won the state by a not-very-close 9 points. Then again, Mitt Romney won it by about 16 points in 2012. Democrats still insist that as the state becomes more affluent, more diverse and more urban, it will tip Democratic. In 2016, Harris County the most populous county in the state went Democratic: Ending a streak of thin electoral margins, Harris County the biggest battleground in ruby red Texas with a population larger than 25 other states turned solidly blue with the largest presidential margin of victory in more than a decade.The blue wave was apparent up and down the ballot on a banner night for the countys Democrats.(If this sounds familiar, remember we just came through the Georgia 6th Districts special election, in which an atypical, wealthy and educated red district gave Democrat Jon Ossoff a stunning plurality of 48 percent.)

Last year, the Pew ResearchCenter reported: The Hispanic population in Texas is the second largest in the nation. About 10.4 million Hispanics reside in Texas, 18.8% of all Hispanics in the United States. . . . Some 28% of Texas eligible voters are Hispanic, the second largest Hispanic statewide eligible voter share nationally. One reason Hispanics do not turn out in as high numbers as white voters has to do with age. Latino eligible voters are younger than white, black and Asian eligible voters in Texas. Some 32% of Latinos are ages 18 to 29, compared with 19% of white eligible voters, 26% of black eligible voters and 21% of Asian eligible voters. As voters age, they tend to become more regular voters, which suggests that just as the Hispanic population is growing, the turnout among Hispanic voters will rise as they age.

While the Texas congressmen in deep-red districts have little to worry about, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex.) and congressmen such as Rep. Will Hurd (R-Tex.), who barely won in a district that went for Hillary Clinton, may face unusually stiff competition in 2018. A few political tremors rumbled through the state recently.

First, last month a federal appeals court found that Texas intentionally discriminated against black and Latino voters in drawing its 2011 congressional map, the majority found in a 2-1 ruling More specifically: Three of the states 36 districts violate either the U.S. Constitution or the Voting Rights Act. Hurds district was one of those found to have been unconstitutionally gerrymandered.

Separate court decisions struck down the state House and Senate map and invalidated the state voter-ID law. The Associated Press explained:

For Texas, the stockpiling losses carry the risk of a court punishing the state by demanding approval before changing voting laws. The process, known as preclearance, was formerly required of Texas and other states with a history of racial discrimination before the U.S. Supreme Court in 2013 struck down the heart of the Voting Rights Act. But the court kept in place the chance that states could again fall under federal oversight if intentional discrimination is found.

Minority rights groups and Democrats could press a three-judge panel in San Antonio over that possibility at a court hearing later this month in San Antonio, when theyre also expected to demand new state and congressional maps for the 2018 elections.

These are huge victories for civil rights groups and in turn could boost Democratic participation in 2018.

In addition to the legal battles, polling released this week presented some head-turning results. The TexasLyceum Poll found: Texans believe that immigration is the number one issue facing the state and the nation, but a plurality of Texas adults (62 percent) also say that immigration helps the U.S. more than it hurts. The younger the respondent, the more positively they view immigration. Moreover, Most Texas adults continue to oppose (61 percent) President Donald Trumps proposal to build a wall on the U.S.- Mexico border, and most dont want him to deport millions of undocumented immigrants. Many support traditional immigration reform proposals, even a pathway to citizenship if significant restrictions are put in place. Remarkably, 63 percent support allowing illegal immigrants living in the U.S. the opportunity to become citizens after a long waiting period if they pay taxes and a penalty, pass a criminal background check, and learn English. Even on the hot-button issues of sanctuary cities, voters are split (45 percent approve, 49 percent do not) on whether local officials must automatically turn [someone here illegally] over to federal immigration enforcement officers.

Thats not the response one might expect from deep-red Texas or from a state that elected anti-immigration hawks such as Trump and Cruz. Well, Texans dont much like either of those pols:

Senator Cruz is tied with Congressman [Beto] ORourke, who entered the contest last month, at 30 percent each. However, 37 percent of registered Texas voters say they havent thought about the race yet. Congressman [Joaquin]Castro fairs slightly better against the incumbent Senator, with 35 percent of Texas adults saying they support him over Ted Cruz at 31 percent.

By a margin of 54 percent to 42 percent, Texans disapprove of the job Trump is doing. As is true elsewhere, subgroups of voters view him in starkly different terms. (85 percent of Republicans give the President positive marks compared to 86 percent of Democrats who disapprove of his job performance. Same goes for young Texans. . . . 73 percent of 18-29 year olds are not enthused with the Presidents job performance along with 61 percent of Hispanics. Meantime, he is viewed positively by 60 percent of Whites.)

And finally, Texans are generally pro-NAFTA. Overall, 43 percent of Texas adults say that NAFTA has been good for the Texas economy, 24 percent say that it has been bad, and 33 percent offered no opinion. The topline results tracked closely to when we previously asked this question in 2009, when an equal share, 43 percent said that NAFTA had been good for the Texas economy, 28 percent said that it had been bad, and 29 percent had no opinion.

In sum, if Democrats can keep up their level of enthusiasm, turn out their base and run against Trump and his anti-immigrant and anti-trade policies (which hurt Texas residents), Cruz and a few incumbent GOP congressmen may have their hands full. Cruz, in particular, who has opportunistically been all over the map on support for Trump and on immigration and failed to deliver much in the way of concrete results for his constituents might actually be an inviting target for Democrats. We should underscore the pollsters warning that polling conducted this far in advance of an actual election are, at best, useful in gauging the potential weaknesses of incumbents seeking re-election [And] the substantial percentage of undecided respondents coupled with the conservative, pro-Republican proclivities of the Texas electorate in recent years suggest a cautious interpretation. (Cruz will also have a boatload of cash.)

Nevertheless, the notion that Republicans would have to work hard to hold seats in Texas tells you that something is changing. If right-wing immigrant-bashing and protectionism dont work in the Lone Star State, Republicans might need to reconsider their philosophy.

Read more:
Democrats may finally break through in Texas, thanks to Trump - Washington Post (blog)