Mediaboss Marketing

New York Times

GOP, Once Unified Against Obama, Struggles for Consensus Under Trump New York Times For eight years, those divisions were often masked by Republicans' shared antipathy toward President Barack Obama. Now, as the party struggles to adjust to the post-Obama political order, it is facing a nagging question: How do you hold together when ... GOP in charge after 8 years of Obama, struggles to govern early in Trump eraMLive.com National (US) Poll - March 23, 2017 - U.S. Voters Oppose GOP Health | Quinnipiac University ConnecticutQuinnipiac University Poll all 5,248 news articles »

Read the original here:
GOP, Once Unified Against Obama, Struggles for Consensus Under Trump - New York Times

After retiring, someformer presidents dedicate their time to apolitical, benevolent causes, such asGeorge W. Bush's returnto Texas totake up painting.Then there is former President Barack Obama, who is focusing his retirement on redrawing the battle lines of American democracy.

The 44th Commander in Chiefis honing in on redistricting reform: redrawing political districtlines so that they are more representative of the people who live there.

"Democrats have to be clear on the given population distribution across the country," Obama said in his first post-election news conference, "We have to show up everywhere. We have to work at a grass-roots level, something that's been a running thread in my career."

To help do this, before leaving office Obama created the National Democratic Redistricting Committeeand namedformer U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder as its chairman.Earlier Saturday Kelly Ward, former executive director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee,was picked to lead the group as an interim Executive Director.

According to the NDRC website, Republican gerrymanderingafter the 2010 census put Democrats at a disadvantage.Holdersays on the site that "The biggest rigged system in America is gerrymandering."

To redraw the maps, the NDRC will focus on winning elections that impact redistricting, winning legal battles in state and federal courtand sponsoring ballot initiatives.

"American voters deserve fair maps that represent their diverse communitiesand we need a coordinated stragey to make that happen." Holder told Politico, adding"This unprecedented new effort will ensure Democrats have a seat at the table to create fairer maps after 2020."

As ATTN: reported last month, districts drawn by Republicans in Texas have already been found guilty of gerrymandering, and four of the nine House seats that Democrats picked up in 2016 were from distracts that were redistricted, according to Politico.

Up first: Thegovernor's race in Virginia, where Holder rallied support this week to hold on to the governor's seaton the 2017 ballot.

See the original post here:
Obama's Retirement Is Totally Different From Every Other President - ATTN (blog)

With the stroke of his pen, Trump will stop government contractors from having to report labor law violations, scale back federal control on lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management and void rules that looked to set federal standards for teacher training.

Trump campaigned on ending government regulations and signed an executive order in January that looked to scale back government rules by requiring agencies to slash two regulations for every one new rule.

"This isn't a knock on President Obama," Trump said in January when he signed the executive order. "This is a knock on many presidents preceding me. It's a knock on everybody."

This legislation, HJ Resolution 37, voids an executive order Obama signed in August that looked to protect government contractors by requiring employers to disclose labor law violations, including wage theft, unsafe working conditions and hiring discrimination.

The rollback was sponsored by Rep. Virginia Foxx, a North Carolina Republican who argued the rule had the potential to blacklist some government contractors.

Foxx said that the rule allowed the Labor Department to deny business to contractors based on "alleged" violations.

"Under this rule, bureaucrats can determine employers are guilty until proven innocent and then deny them the ability to do business with the federal government," Foxx said.

The White House said in a February statement that Trump intended to sign the bill.

"The administration strongly supports the actions taken by the House to begin to nullify unnecessary regulations imposed on America's businesses," read the statement of administration policy.

This bill, HJ Resolution 44, sponsored by Wyoming Republican Rep. Liz Cheney, looks to halt an Obama administration plan for the millions of aces managed by the Bureau of Land Management, especially those concentrated in the Western United States.

The plan was drawn up, the bureau said in December, in an attempt to use more data when deciding whether to allow logging, mining and other commercial uses on federal land. It also looked to reduce the amount of time required to decide what to do with federal lands.

"Under the current system, it takes an average of eight years for the BLM to finish a land use plan," Bureau of Land Management Director Neil Kornze said in December. "This update to our planning rule allows for a more streamlined process that also increases collaboration and transparency."

Critics of the rule -- known at "Planning 2.0" -- said the rules would minimize local input in land management and stymie public comment, while giving the federal government more authority on what to do with the space.

"Planning 2.0 dilutes local and state voices and centralizes power here in Washington, DC," Rep. Rob Bishop, a Utah Republican, said in a speech about the plan.

The White House signaled in February that it intended to approve the bill to void the Obama-era rule.

"Given its regional approach to planning, the administration believes the rule does not adequately serve the State and local communities' interests and could potentially dilute their input in planning decisions," the statement said.

These bills, HJ Resolutions 57 and 58, nullify education rules outlined by the Obama administration near the end of 2016 that Republicans argued took control out of the hands of states and localities while also burdening states with requirements on data collection and teacher training.

"While school accountability is important, the administration is committed to local control of education and this rule places additional burden on states and constrains them in areas where the ESSA intended broad flexibility," the White House said in their statement.

The Obama administration said at the time that both the rules would push the United States education system past former President George W. Bush's "No Child Left Behind" education reform bill.

Trump signaled during the 2016 campaign that he wanted states to have more control in how they structure their education system and the two laws look to do just that.

"The purpose of the resolution under consideration is simple: Reining in the federal role in education and protecting the state and local control promised to students, parents, and education leaders," Rep. Brett Guthrie, a Texas Republican, said about the bill he sponsored to roll back the rule.

CNN's Allie Malloy contributed to this report.

Read the original here:
Trump tries to make good on promises to roll back Obama-era regulations - CNN

President Donald Trump is set to sign a sweeping executive order on Tuesday aimed at promoting domestic oil, coal and natural gas by reversing much of his predecessors efforts to address climate change-- prompting warnings the action will undermine U.S. leadership on the issue.

The document lays out a broad blueprint for the Trump administration to dismantle the architecture that former President Barack Obama built to combat the phenomenon, according to details shared with Bloomberg News. Some of the changes would happen immediately, while others would take years to complete.

"Hes trying to undo more than a decade of progress in fighting climate change and protecting public health, David Doniger, director of the climate and clean air program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in an email. But nobody voted to abandon Americas leadership in climate action and the clean-energy revolution. This radical retreat will meet a great wall of opposition.

The order will compel federal agencies to quickly identify any actions that could burden the production or use of domestic energy resources, including nuclear power, and then work to suspend, revise or rescind the policies unless they are legally mandated, are necessary for the public interest or promote development.

It also will toss out two Obama-era directives that gave consideration of climate change a prominent role in federal rule making. One advised government agencies to factor climate change into environmental reviews, such as those governing where oil drilling should take place. The other, called the social cost of carbon, is a metric reflecting the potential economic damage from climate change that was used by the Obama administration to justify a suite of regulations.

This is about making sure that we have a pro-growth and pro-environment approach to how we do regulation in this country, Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, said on ABCs "This Week program on Sunday.

Trump, who has called climate change a hoax, has vowed to reorient the government so that U.S. oil and coal producers thrive and steel and auto manufacturers dont face job-killing restrictions. The coming order underscores Trumps commitment to make good on his campaign promises, which helped propel him to victory in industrial strongholds such as West Virginia and Pennsylvania.

The details shared with Bloomberg News reflected the latest draft of the White House order and could change before the announcement, which Pruitt said would happen Tuesday.

Some analysts question whether reversing the rules can save coal miner jobs. Killing the Clean Power Plan is not enough to spark a coal revival and avert a wave of planned retirements of power plants using the fossil fuel, said Kevin Book, an analyst with Washington-based research firm ClearView Energy.

"Even without the Clean Power Plan, there are still 14 gigawatts of coal retirements related to" a mercury pollution rule "and market dynamics waiting in the wings," Book said.

While the White House order will make clear that the target of the planned regulatory rollback should be on policies curbing the production of oil, natural gas, coal and nuclear energy, it also will say the U.S. is well served when affordable, reliable and clean electricity is produced from an array of sources, including solar, wind and hydropower.

The order also is set to include a targeted assault on a handful of specific Obama-era regulations. It will require the Interior Department to lift a moratorium on the sale of new coal leases on federal land and compel the EPA to review, and, if appropriate, begin proceedings to suspend, revise or rescind regulations designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.

Obamas Clean Power Plan was designed to cut carbon dioxide emissions from electricity by 32 percent by 2030 compared to 2005 levels. The initiative has been in legal limbo since the Supreme Court stayed it while it was reviewed by a federal appeals court. The Trump administration now is expected ask that court to put the matter on hold to allow it time to revise or undo the measure -- an action environmentalists have vowed to challenge.

Other policies in the cross hairs: an EPA rule setting requirements for greenhouse gas emissions for construction of new power plants and an Interior Department regulation setting mandates on hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells on federal lands. The Interior Departments Bureau of Land Management said earlier this month it would begin the process to rescind the regulation, which requires companies to disclose the chemicals they pump underground and to seal off waste water in storage tanks.

Trumps executive order also is set to revoke six specific directives from his predecessor, including Obamas broad strategy for paring emissions of methane released from oil and gas operations. Other Obama directives targeted for repeal include one on climate change and national security, as well as a pair of directives from June 2013 that laid out his climate plans.

The Obama administration wove climate considerations into decisions across the federal bureaucracy, from efficiency standards for microwave ovens to the refurbishing of government buildings.

The changes may have little immediate impact on the market for coal, which is facing stiff competition from cheaper natural gas and renewable energy, analysts say.

Even before the Obama administration imposed the coal-leasing moratorium in January 2016, producers had little interest in adding new federal reserves to their portfolios amid slumping domestic demand. The U.S. government has sold just one coal leases since October 2012, though earlier this month it approved a transaction originally sought in 2005. Existing federal leases contain at least 20 years worth of coal, according to Interior Department estimates.

Even without the EPAs Clean Power Plan in force because of the Supreme Court stay, using coal to generate electricity has been in decline as a result of previous pollution regulations and competition from low-cost natural gas, solar and wind.

The removal of the Clean Power Plan could halt coals decline as a source of electricity during the next two decades, according to projections from the Energy Information Administration. More coal use would mean less natural gas use, EIA said.

Trumps action sets in motion at least a year of bureaucratic work at the EPA to formally dismantle the Clean Power Plan. And whatever happens will inevitably be challenged in court by those same environmental groups.

By contrast, the Interior Department can undo the coal leasing moratorium with the stroke of a pen, the same way it was imposed a year ago, under an administrative order issued by former Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.

Keep up with the best of Bloomberg Politics.

Get our newsletter daily.

Trumps targets would also reduce the role of climate change in government decision-making. For instance, the social cost of carbon metric served as the linchpin for many Obama administration environmental rules. Critics say the number -- now nearly $40 for every metric ton of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere -- gives artificial precision to uncertain conditions nearly 300 years in the future.

According to shared details of the executive order, the Trump administration will disband the working group that created the social cost of carbon and return to an earlier 2003 approach for calculating the costs and benefits of proposed regulations.

Read this article:
Trump to Issue Far-Reaching Reversal of Obama Climate Push - Bloomberg

Republicans' years-long quest to repeal and replace President Obama'sfailing healthcare scheme suffered adevastating blow on Friday, as President Trump and Speaker Ryan withdrew legislation from consideration after it became clear that they didn't have the votes for passage. Following this dramatic setback, Trump said he was ready to move on to other issues,assuring voters that as Obamacare continues to implode, a second bite at this apple will become necessary. Ryan, for his part, uttered what must have been avery painful sentence: "We're going to be living with Obamacare for the foreseeable future." The inevitable 'blame game' sniping is well underway, but before we get to that, here is our analysis on Special Report, hours after the bill got yanked. Amid multiple interesting and worthwhile observations is Charles Krauthammer's central point: By establishing a new baseline for public expectations regarding the government's role in healthcare, Obama has won a major ideological victory for statism. His law isfatally flawed andwon't work. But he appears to have shifted the paradigm toward more government intervention, not less (via Right Sightings):

Krauthammer hadbegged the GOP to unify behind a single "damnplan," then march together to turn back the Obamacare tied. That didn't happen, and now here we are. As I added in my comments, while much of DC is fixated on the politics of Friday's outcome, the hard reality beyond the Beltway is that millions of Americans are still being actively harmed by Obamacare's lack of access and affordability. They helped elect Republicans to rescue them, and Republicans have failed. Plus, withpoor enrollment figures andother projections coming in, the law is getting worse, not better. Democrats are going to continue to whine that by allowing the current law to play out as written, Republicans are "undermining" it. But the fact remains that Democrats are 100 percent responsible for the status quo; it'stheir mess that they passed with zero GOP votes. And their so-called "solutions" -- as outlined briefly in the clip of Sen. Chuck Schumer in our segment -- are destructive and politically unviable: More spending, more government, more price controls. So the squabbling between the parties shows few signs of abating, and the same applies to intra-GOP wrangling, as well. The moderates and rank-and-file conservatives are blaming the right-wingers. The right-wingers are blaming the moderates and the leadership. Trumpists are blaming Paul Ryan ("this was his bill and his failure"), and Trump's detractors are pointing fingers at him ("the buck stops with the president, who was supposed to be a world-class negotiator"). Over the weekend,Trumpmade it clear that heisn't happy either:

Then another apparent feud blew up over the weekend over another presidential tweet, with Trumpblastingout a message urging followers to watch a Fox News weekend program, which proceeded to open with an impassioned (and misguided, in my view) demand that Ryan step down as Speaker. Given the current context, Trump's penchant for hiding behind "many people are saying" hedges, andrumbles from within the White House attacking Ryan, this sequence of events looked a lot like Trump promoting an opinion that he wanted to inject into the bloodstream, even if he didn't want to publicly shiv Ryan himself. (In fact, Trump had explicitly called on Ryan to remain in place on Friday afternoon). But aseparate, very plausible theory alsoemerged:

Either the president, frustrated by the collapse of his first major legislative push, was knifing a scapegoat by proxy, or he was promoting a television program based on an on-screen graphic promoting content related to an entirely separate issue. Big difference.Reportedlyembattled White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus says the timing of the tweet and the Ryan diatribe wascoincidental. Speaker Ryan's office was more specific and emphatic about what didn't go down:

So if Trump and Ryan's relationship remains copacetic in spite of last week's debacle, what's next? Tax reform, we're told -- which is extremely complex and politically-challenging unto itself, and which became even more so now that the post-Obamacare budgetary baseline Republicans were expecting hasn't panned out. But what about healthcare? Is the GOP really going to just table the issue on which they've campaigned for eight years? It's not like the existing law is improving. A number of Republicansare insisting that the party go back to the drawing board to urgently address this problem, but how might that shape up? Step one is starting over. Step three is repealing and replacing Obamacare. But step two is the real challenge, as has become abundantly clear. Both Krauthammer andRamesh Ponnuru have suggested fashioning a bill that includes everything that Republicans would ideally feature in a start-from-scratch legislative process, "reconciliation" concerns be damned. Pass it out of the House, and force Senate Democrats to filibuster it. That sounds fine, but Democrats absolutely would filibuster it. Then what? Is there an acceptablemiddle way nobody has introduced yet? Or would this all amount to yet another messaging bill from Republicans on Obamacare? If so, whyspend even more time on something that will inevitably butt up against another brick wall?

Gorsuch Vote Delayed By One Week

View original post here:
Krauthammer: Let's Face It, Friday's Big Winner Was Barack Obama - Townhall