Democrats – Mediaboss Marketing

Archive for the ‘Democrats’ Category

Here’s one way Rep. Linda Sanchez thinks Democrats should fight Obamacare repeal – Los Angeles Times

Rep. Linda Sanchez has a plan for how to approach Democrats' upcoming fight with Republicans over healthcare: Keep talking about it.

As Republicans race to repeal the Affordable Care Act, Democrats and supporters of President Obama's signature health care law need to emphasize to Republicans how many people rely on the act and have benefited from it, said Sanchez (D-Whittier).

They need to hear from their constituents what a lifeline it really is, Sanchez said. There seems to be this lack of understanding or appreciation of what real families are living with in terms of their health care needs.

Ahead of Friday's inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump, Sanchez sat down with Times' reporters and editors Tuesday afternoon to talk about Trump, and her plans as the newest member of House leadership.

Republicans are hustling to repeal the Affordable Care Act, also called the ACA or Obamacare, soon after Trump takes office, but it isn't clear yet what will be proposed in its place, or when that replacement will presented.

Were gearing up for that fight. California stands to lose a lot if ACA is repealed, she said. We are going to be getting the message out, not just about the individuals who are impacted negatively if it goes away, but the job losses that could occur and the fact that the state of California itself is at risk for losing billions of dollars in funding.

Last month, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) asked top political figures across the countryfor input on how to replace the Affordable Care Act. The response from California Gov. Jerry Brown and state leaders was abundant and grim.

A report released in December from theUC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education shows if the Affordable Care Act is repealed, 5 million Californians could lose health insurance, 200,000 healthcare related jobs could disappear,andMedicaid funding and individual subsidies losses could equal $20.5 billion.

She said as the public learns more about what was in the Affordable Care Act like access tocancer screenings and no copays for checkups or birth control the more frustrated they'll become with the prospect of repeal without a replacement plan.

Republicans are so good as messaging theyve managed to convince everybody that Obamacare is bad, even if they are beneficiaries of it. But, you take it away from folks and suddenly they are going to understand exactly what Obamacare was and meant, she said.

Sanchez also said that while she respects the dozens of members who have decided not to attend the inauguration Friday, including 16 Californians ,she's going to make a point.

My goal is to be front and center, she said. Im going to be the biggest pain in the neck that I can be.

Sanchez said she wants to be the member Trump hates to see because she is constantly hounding him on immigration, healthcare and other priorities for her mostly southeast L.A. County district.

My role in the next four years is to be as vocal an advocate as I can for what my constituents want and need and I will put myself in Donald Trumps path at every turn to confront him about these issues, Sanchez said.

See the original post here:
Here's one way Rep. Linda Sanchez thinks Democrats should fight Obamacare repeal - Los Angeles Times

January 19th, 2017

Comments off

Here’s Why Democrats Say They’re Skipping Trump’s Inauguration – NBCNews.com

More than 50 lawmakers all Democrats have said they won't be attending the 2017 inauguration of President-elect Donald Trump. Here is why lawmakers say they're boycotting, skipping, or simply out of town.

As an act "of defiance." Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva.

To oppose bigotry and/or demagoguery. Arizona's Rep. Ruben Gallego, Florida's Rep. Alcee Hastings, California's Rep. Lucille Royball-Allard

Because a Twitter poll told them not to. California's Rep. Karen Bass.

Unspecified personal conviction. California's Rep. Mark DeSaulnier. California's Rep. Tony Cardenas

To keep a clear conscience. Texas Rep. G.K. Butterfield, Texas Rep. Al Green

To look his family in the eye. Illinois Rep. Luis Guitierrez.

Because "Respect, like Pennsylvania Avenue, is a two-way street." New York Rep. Lloyd Doggett.

Because "a real president doesn't insult and bully celebrities or everyday Americans because they disagree with him," Rep. Raul Ruiz

To not normalize Trump's presidency. Maine Rep. Chellie Pingree, Kentucky's Rep. John Yarmuth

To not "risk my presencebeing interpreted as any kind of endorsement" Maryland Rep. Jamie Raskin

Because he shows "contempt for millions of Americans and then expect those very people to celebrate him." Texas Rep. Joaquin Castro

To spend time in their district. Rep. Jared Huffman. Missouri's Rep. William Lacy Clay, Washington Rep. Adam Smith

Because it would be hypocritical. Virginia Rep. Don Beyer

Because her constituents fear Trump. Washington Rep. Pramila Jayapal, Massachusetts Rep. Katherine Clark

Because Russia, conflicts of interest, and John Lewis. Washington Rep. Mark Pocan

"I respectfully decline to freeze my ass out there in the cold for this particular ceremony." Oregon's Rep. Kurt Schrader.

"Trump is a unique threat to the Constitution and our country." Pennsylvania's Rep. Brendan Boyle

#IStandWithJohnLewis California's Rep. Ted Lieu, California's Rep. Judy Chu, Florida's Rep. Darren Sotto Rep. Bennie Thompson, Ohio's Rep. Marcia Fudge, Pennsylvania's Rep. Dwight Evans, Pennsylvania's Rep. Mike Doyle, Pennsylvania's Rep. Bob Brady, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, Jr., Rep. Darren Soto, California's Rep. Mark Takano, Maryland Rep. Anthony Brown, New York Rep. Yvette Clark

Because they don't consider Trump's election legitimate. Georgia's Rep. John Lewis, Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen.

"THIS is not Dr. King's Dream." New York Rep. Adriano Espaillat

To "prepare for the coming assault." Oregon Rep. Earl Blumenauer.

To prepare "for resistance" California Rep. Barbara Lee

"I wouldn't waste my time." California Rep. Maxine Waters

Cannot celebrate Trump. New York Rep. Jose Serrano, New York Rep. Alma Adams, New Jersey Rep. Donald Payne Jr., New York's Rep. Jerry Nadler, Minnesota's Rep. Keith Ellison, California's Rep. Zoe Lofgren

To pray. New Hampshire's Rep. Carol Shea-Porter, New Jersey's Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman, California's Rep. Juan Vargas

Because he doesn't like DC "pomp and circumstance." Oregon's Rep. Peter DeFazio

To go to the Women's March, amongst other opposition to Trump. New York's Rep. Nydia Velazquez

Because she has a wedding to attend. Rep. Frederica Wilson.

Unspecified. Rep. Jerry McNerney, Rep. Grace Napolitano, Rep. John Conyers Jr., Illinois Rep. Dan Lipinski, Illinois Rep. Mike Quigley.

Go here to see the original:
Here's Why Democrats Say They're Skipping Trump's Inauguration - NBCNews.com

January 19th, 2017

Comments off

The Democrats’ ‘dossier’ – Washington Times

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The recent intelligence report on Russian interference in the election concluded that the Russian government was behind the hacking and release of Democratic emails. The assumed purpose of these activities was an effort to support the candidacy of Donald Trump, even though the report acknowledged that the Russian government believed Hillary Clinton was likely to win the election anyway. That seems to be a bit of a stretch, one that invites skepticism. Which brings us to the other controversy that is consuming Washington, the belated release of the so-called dossier on the Russian governments supposed contacts with Mr. Trump.

The only thing that seems certain about the dossier is that it was an effort to spy on the Russian government. After Mr. Trump clinched the Republican nomination, a private firm in Britain began preparing the intelligence reports in the dossier. They contained sensational allegations of ties between Russian government officials and Mr. Trump. Its asserted sources were Russian, including none other than an officer of the Russian FSB, the successor to the KGB. Reportedly, the private British investigators were conducting this intelligence gathering, or spying, under contract to an American private investigations company, which by that time reportedly was working for the Democrats.

It should come as no surprise that the Democratically commissioned dossier is virtually incredible. It makes sloppy, gossipy, unverifiable and occasionally bizarre claims on the basis of what it asserts are extensive contacts with senior Russian officials, including Russian intelligence officers. Reading the dossier leads inexorably to one of two conclusions: Either it was a fabrication by its authors, or Russian intelligence knew all about their activities. Russia is not the kind of country where that kind of stuff happens in any other way, and no other potential explanation for the document seems plausible. If Russian intelligence knew about the investigation, of course, then it could be disinformation or just plain nonsense. Either way, chances are the Russian government knew about the investigation, knew supporters of Mrs. Clinton were behind it, and knew they were trying to dig up information about possible ties between Russian officials and the Republican nominee.

The dossier has been circulating in Washington for months. Major press outlets have been busy patting themselves on the back for not publishing it before the election, on the asserted grounds that its sensational assertions could not be verified. That is a bit unconvincing. Perhaps the real explanation lies in the fact that if they published it, they would invariably have to reveal the identity of its creators, including those who contracted for and disseminated the dossier. Then the nation might have been confronted with a story before the election that Democrats had hired people to spy on Russia to get dirt on Mr. Trump. That could have been an embarrassing, if not worse, tale of dirty tricks. And portraying Democrats as victims of the Russians is a much better headline than the other way around. After all, the politics of victimization at times can appear to be a central platform of the Democratic Party.

The strangest part of this story is that the so-called intelligence community in the United States reportedly got bamboozled into briefing President Obama and President-elect Trump on the dossier, and possibly presenting a summary of it to them. At that point, it became free game for a gullible press, and it was leaked immediately. However, that it most likely was paid for by Democratic interests and was manifestly an effort to spy on the activities of Russian officials seem to have been lost in the debate about its lurid assertions. Some of Washingtons most serious and self-absorbed correspondents have been so busy falling all over themselves with concern about the implications of the dossiers sensational allegations that they have lost the main story about it. That is the fact that the dossier is an exercise in amateur international espionage directed at Russia and apparently commissioned by Democratic political operatives during the campaign.

The real story here is that the perfidious Russians were themselves being spied on. That seems like a pretty dumb thing to do, particularly since the Russians are masters of the art of espionage. The British, on the other hand, are not. Whatever people may think of the fictional George Smiley, the real MI6 has not been known for its success in dealing with its Russian adversaries. History reminds us that the Russian government had MI6 in its pocket for years after the war. And we are not even dealing with MI6 here, but rather a former officer of that agency. Hopefully, the CIA is in a better position to get to the bottom of this. It once was. But it is somewhat surprising that the agency did not know about the spying at the time.

One thing is clear. If Washington really wants to find out what happened, it should examine who commissioned the private effort to collect Russian intelligence on that governments contacts, activities and objectives with Donald Trump, who actually paid for it and with whose money. Espionage is supposed to be a serious business best left to governments. That someone in the Democratic Party apparently did not have the intelligence to understand that lesson may be the only verifiable story in this sorry and sordid episode. And it tends to put Russias own activities in a somewhat different light.

Finally, a note about the Russians. They may well have real dossiers on political figures. That should not be a surprise to anyone. However, it seems doubtful that they would be dumb enough to miss what was really going on here. That, apparently, is the job of the press.

Warren L. Dean Jr. is a lawyer and adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University Law Center.

January 19th, 2017

Comments off

Why I am still a Democrat (even though I can’t stand my party right now) – Fox News

As Donald Trump prepares to assume the Presidency, Republican friends have asked moderate Democrats like me why we dont join the GOP. After all, the party of Lincoln dominates state legislatures, Governorships, and all levers of power in Washington D.C.

So why dont I leave the Democratic Party?

Growing up in rural Oregon, being a Democrat was a good thing. My grandparents celebrated President Roosevelt and his efforts to pull the nation from the brink of the Great Depression. There were good government jobs for those with strong backs and willing hands. The elderly and disabled could count on Social Security to comfort them in their hardest years.

Most especially, my family was grateful for FDRs efforts to bring electricity and phone lines to our farm.

As my parents grew up, they took inspiration from President Kennedy and his call for shared sacrifice and service. They agreed that their fellow citizens ought to first ask what they might do for their country, not the other way around. Everyone was expected to work and contribute, especially as we battled the Soviet Union and the evils of communism.

Most of all, my parents stood firm with President Johnson as he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, ensuring that black Americans had and will always have an unshakable place at the American table.

In the 1980s, my siblings and I grew up witnessing the power and importance of compromise. Speaker of the House Tip ONeill (D-Mass.) worked closely with President Reagan to find common cause on tax reform and immigration despite profound ideological differences. Later, we watched a rural leader and neighbor Speaker Tom Foley (D-Wash.) work with President Bush as the Soviet Union collapsed and the U.S. emerged as the leader of the free world.

In short, my family felt pride to be part of the Democratic Party and America.

But throughout the 1990s, things started to change. For the parties. And for the country.

In 1999, the timber mill in my hometown closed, with nothing to replace it. Friends and family moved away. Businesses went bankrupt. My county became older and poorer.

But rural Oregon wasnt alone. Throughout the late 1980s and 1990s, this same scene played out across the nation. Steel mills, canneries, furniture plants, and mines. Gone. Their loss impacted not just white working families but black and brown too.

The cause of this decline? My family saw a mix of corporate greed, free trade agreements, unfair environmental regulations, and technology like automation and robotics.

But there was also another guilty party: urban elites. These rich-getting-richer Americans viewed our land as "Fly Over States," filled with poor-getting-poorer hillbillies. We may have grown the food on their plates, but we werent good enough to enjoy it with them.

Not surprisingly, these former neighbors eventually became The Others.

Both political parties understood this sad development and took advantage.

In 1992, Republican leaders cast gay men like me as child predators in order to scare (fellow) Christians and rural folks to the polls and their party.

Democrats took their own turn, using identity politics to cobble together their coalition of women, minorities, and urbanites that cast the rest of America aside.

The battle between the extremes was on. Tea Partiers tossed out moderate Republicans while liberal Democrats made no room for their rural brethren.

The result? Our democracy lost the people and temperament for compromise and empathy.

Meanwhile, the countrys problems went largely unresolved for nearly 20 years. Incomes have remained flat. Costs of living specifically housing have skyrocketed. And young people have saddled themselves with student debt. Our nations future is now stuck at home living with their parents.

Is it any wonder that nobodys happy with this political arrangement? Approval ratings for members of Congress are about the same as those for communist North Korea.

President-elect Trump has the chance to bring about a much-needed rebirth of the American political system. And though Im skeptical he recently called Democrats clowns Im still hopeful; so too are nearly 60 percent of my fellow Democrats who want him to succeed.

But if Trump fails, how do we break this fever of division? And how do Democrats help encourage that process? After all, we need multiple voices in Americas democracy. We are not North Korea or China or Russia with their single political party.

In short, I believe the Democrats can make a compelling case if we rediscover and embrace the legacies of Roosevelt, Kennedy, Johnson, ONeill, and Foley. We have a proven path forward.

First, weve got to find, train, and promote candidates who put America first, not our party. No more ideologues who are unwilling to compromise. That means things have to change at the Democratic National Committee a topic Ill cover in another column.

In the meantime, heres one simple idea: abandon divisive groups like Gays for Obama or Latinos for Obama. How refreshing it would be for committees to instead be based on our cities, like Denver for Obama. Wed all show up as neighbors black and white, gay and straight.

Democrats and Republicans.

Second, we have to adopt policies that are centrist and accommodating. Ive drafted a list of 10 principles to guide us from term limits to new trade agreements all of which were formed from conversations Ive had with Republicans and Democrats who share my passion for compromise and progress.

I have no illusions that collaboration will be easy or without conflict. In fact, I embrace civilized debate. Most of us do. But were tired of the endless fighting. And we have no shortage of problems to tackle. Theres little time to waste.

If President Trump cannot make America great again, then Democrats like me are ready to offer an alternative. My hunch is that, if we are earnest in our appeals, families across this country including mine might give us another chance to govern.

And thats why Im sticking with and will help reshape a new Democratic Party.

Bryan Dean Wright is a former CIA ops officer and member of the Democratic Party. He contributes on issues of politics, national security, and the economy. Follow him on Twitter @BryanDeanWright.

January 19th, 2017

Comments off