Archive for the ‘Republicans’ Category

Republicans have ‘tough hill to climb’ on tax reform, GOP strategist says – CNBC

There's only about a 50-50 shot of getting tax reform done this year, Republican strategist Ron Christie predicted to CNBC on Friday.

"It's a very, very tough hill for Republicans to climb right now. We've seen the inability of House Republicans and their colleagues in the Senate to find consensus, to find a package to move forward to get to the president's desk," the former special assistant to President George W. Bush said in an interview with "Power Lunch."

"If you thought health care was complicated, I think tax reform is going to be an even more difficult burden for these guys to get over the finish line."

And the political infighting between President Donald Trump and Republicans certainly isn't helping matters, Republican Tony Fratto added.

Trump slammed Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell multiple times this week for what Trump calls his failure to follow through on the GOP agenda.

"Mitch, get back to work and put Repeal & Replace, Tax Reform & Cuts and a great Infrastructure Bill on my desk for signing," Trump wrote Thursday on Twitter.

The taunts led Republican senators to rally around McConnell on Friday.

Fratto, who was White House deputy press secretary under President George W. Bush, told "Power Lunch" he believes the only way to get tax reform done is to have the party unified.

"I have yet to meet a Republican in Washington who does not want to have significant tax reform done," he said. "They are unified on this. So trying to divide them is really, really destructive."

Jared Bernstein, former economic policy advisor to Vice President Joe Biden, thinks Trump's goal is to elevate Trump, not unify Republicans.

"He's far more interested in casting blame them in passing tax reform," Bernstein said.

Christie thinks Trump needs to work with McConnell on tax reform, not insult him over social media

"If we can't get anything done in the Congress, and we have the largest governing majority since 1929, it tells you perhaps that Republicans don't deserve the trust to govern."

CNBC's Jacob Pramuk contributed to this report.

See the original post here:
Republicans have 'tough hill to climb' on tax reform, GOP strategist says - CNBC

The Bernie Bros and sisters are coming to Republicans’ rescue – Washington Post

Things could go well for the Democrats in next years midterm elections if they dont Bern out.

President Trump is woefully unpopular, feuding with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and other Republicans. The GOP cant manage to repeal Obamacare or do much of anything. Voters say theyd like Democrats to run Congress.

But here come the Bernie Bros and sisters to the Republicans rescue: Theyre sowing division in the Democratic Party and attempting to enact a purge of the ideologically impure just the sort of thing that made the Republican Party the ungovernable mess it is today.

Bernie Sanderss advisers are promoting a litmus test under which Democrats who dont swear to implement single-payer health care would be booted from the party in primaries. Sanders pollster Ben Tulchin penned an op-ed with a colleague under the headline Universal health care is the new litmus test for Democrats. Nina Turner, head of the Sanders group Our Revolution, told Politico this week that theres something wrong with Democrats who wont unequivocally embrace Medicare-for-all.

That notion not just taking a stand but excommunicating all who disagree is what Republicans have done to themselves with guns and taxes, and it would seriously diminish Democrats hopes of retaking the House next year.

At the same time, Our Revolution has stepped up its attack on the Democratic Party. Turner this week sent an email to supporters complaining that she and others attempted to deliver a petition to Democratic National Committee headquarters but were shut out. In a follow-up interview with BuzzFeed, Turner expressed particular outrage that the DNC offered her ... donuts. They tried to seduce us with donuts, she said, calling the gesture pompous and arrogant and insulting.

Its not just about breakfast confections. The Bernie crowd has begun accusing freshman Sen. Kamala D. Harris (Calif.), a rising Democratic star, of being beholden to corporate money. Also in California, Kimberly Ellis, who ran for state Democratic chairman with the support of Sanders and lost in a close race to a former Hillary Clinton delegate, is refusing to concede and threatening to sue. Ellis told Adam Nagourney of the New York Times that the Democratic Party is in many ways right now where the Republican Party was when the tea party took over.

And thats a good thing? Republican fratricide, instigated by tea- party purity police, made Trump possible and left the GOP unable to govern. This is what Sanderss people would emulate.

Fortunately, Sanders seems to have lost clout. Candidates backed by Our Revolution have lost 31 races in 2017 and won 16 and the victories include Portland Community College Director, Zone 5 and South Fulton (Ga.) City Council 6.

Candidates endorsed by Sanders have struggled in high-profile races. Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) lost the DNC chairman race (he was appointed deputy chairman). Sanders-backed Tom Perriello lost the Democratic gubernatorial primary in Virginia, and a Sanders campaign official was blown out in a California congressional primary . Neither did the Sanders magic get the job done for Democrats in special congressional elections in Kansas, Georgia or Montana, and his candidate lost the Omaha mayoral race.

Yet the attempt by the Sanders movement to impose a health-care litmus test on Democratic candidates shows its destructive potential within the party. Support for single-payer health coverage has been growing, and it would become a real possibility if Republicans sabotage Obamacare but dont help the tens of millions who would lose insurance.

But to force Democrats to take some kind of single-payer purity oath would set back the cause. Democrats need to pick up 24 seats to take control of the House, yet there are only 23 Republicans in districts won by Clinton and only eight of those were won by President Barack Obama in 2012. There are a dozen Democrats in districts Trump won. In such swing districts, it would be suicidal to pledge support for something Republicans will brand as socialism.

A Pew Research Center poll in June found that while a majority of Democrats (52 percent) favor single-payer health care, only 33 percent of the public does overall. A Kaiser Health Tracking poll in June had better results: 53 percent of the public favored single-payer coverage. But Kaiser found that opinions were malleable, and that if, for example, respondents heard single-payer coverage would increase taxes, a majority opposed it. Also, midterm voters are older, and that group is hostile to Medicare for All.

If recent trends continue, and particularly if Republicans undermine Obamacare without an adequate replacement, the time for single-payer will come, and soon. But the litmus test distracts Democrats from protecting Obamacare, diminishes their chances of retaking the House and chops up the party over something that has zero chance of becoming law under Trump.

That Berns.

Twitter: @Milbank

Read more from Dana Milbanks archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.

Here is the original post:
The Bernie Bros and sisters are coming to Republicans' rescue - Washington Post

Republicans are increasingly antagonistic toward experts. Here’s why that matters. – Washington Post

By Matt Motta By Matt Motta August 11 at 7:00 AM

Since 2015, according to a new Pew Research Center poll, Republicans attitudes toward colleges and universities have become much more negative. The poll found that the number of Republicans who believe colleges have a positive impact on the way things are going in the country dropped from 54 percent in 2015 to 36 percent in 2017. Meanwhile, Democrats approval held constant at 72 percent.

Has that affected our politics? Several commentators have been asking that question: Has the rights declining trust in academics, scientists and other experts call it anti-intellectualism influenced opinions about politics?

Thats what my new research looks into. Drawing on more than 40 years of survey data, I found that the answer is yes. You can find the new anti-intellectualism in the way candidates and political movements scoff at experts and their evidence something we can see in public attitudes like the refusal to acknowledge human-caused climate change and support for politicians like Donald Trump.

President Trump and many of his top aides have expressed skepticism about climate change, while others say human activity is to blame for global warming. So what's the administration's real position? (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

A certain kind of populism distrusts intellectuals and experts

The historian Richard Hofstadter famously referred to Americans distrust and dislike of experts as a form of anti-intellectualism. Anti-intellectualism has been increasing in the United States since the mid-1990s, primarily among ideological conservatives, according to recent research.

Throughout U.S.history, politicians have attempted to capitalize on voters anti-intellectual attitudes. George Wallace, for example, frequently referred tocollege professors and judges as pointy-headed intellectuals during his third-party campaign for president in 1968.

More recently, Trump was regularly skeptical of and sometimes openly derisive toward experts a during his 2016 presidential campaign. Brexit campaigners were similarly skeptical about European Union bureaucrats, even throwingTrumps famous Youre fired! catchphrase at European economists.

How I did this research

Does such antagonism toward the experts win over the citizens who hold anti-intellectual attitudes? To answer this question, I analyzed four decades of survey data from two sources.

One is the General Social Survey (GSS), a representative sample of Americans that has been conducted roughly once every two years since 1972. I measured anti-intellectualism in this survey using a question that asked respondents whether they place a great deal, only some, or hardly any trust in the scientific community.

During the 1990s, conservatives started to distrust experts

From the early 1970s through early 1990s, I found little ideological divide on this question. In 1991, for example, 47 percent of liberals and 46 percent of conservatives expressed high levels of trust in the scientific community. By the mid-1990s, however, views began to diverge. In 2014, 53 percent of liberals and only 36 percent of conservatives held high levels of trust in the scientific community.

The second source is a four-wave national panel study collected during the 2016 general election by the University of MinnesotasCenter for the Study of Political Psychology (CSPP), via Survey Sampling International. I measured anti-intellectualism in this survey using a question developed by Eric Oliver and Wendy Rahn. They asked more than3,500 respondents how much they agreed or disagreed with this statement: I would rather place my trust in the opinions of ordinary people than the opinions of experts and intellectuals.

Here, too, I found significant differences between liberals and conservatives. In 2016, liberals earned an average score of 2.14 on the 0 to 4 point scale in which zero meant strongly disagreeing that the opinions of ordinary people should be trusted over experts, and four meant strongly agreeing with that statement while conservatives averaged about 2.42. The difference between the groups is a statistically significant 9 percent.

In each dataset, I assess the relationship between anti-intellectualism and the publics political opinions using regression modeling. These models control for several other factors that might influence respondents political attitudes, such as partisanship, education and other basic demographics.

Anti-intellectual Americans were more likely to prefer anti-expert politicians like Wallace or Trump

Respondents who were more anti-intellectual were more likely to support candidates who spoke skeptically about experts. In the 1972 GSS, approximately 22 percent of those who hardly trusted the scientific community were likely to vote for George Wallace in 1968, compared withonly 12 percent of those who placed a great deal of trust in experts.

I found a similar pattern among those who supported or opposed Donald Trump. In the CSPP study, respondents rated Trump and Hillary Clinton on scales ranging from 0 (very negative feelings toward acandidate) to 100 (very positive feelings). The difference between these two scales is known as a comparative candidate evaluation, or CCE, which I scaled to range from 0 (favoring Clinton over Trump) to 1 (favoring Trump over Clinton).

In July, those who strongly felt that expert opinions were less trustworthy than ordinary peoples were more likely to prefer Trump, with an average 0.49 CCE rating; those who strongly disagreed that experts were less trustworthy than ordinary people were more likely to prefer Clinton, with a 0.44 CCE rating. Thats about a 5 percentage-point difference between groups and it grew to about 8 points among those questioned in in October, with 0.51 and 0.43 CCE, respectively.

Does being wary of experts lead people to support Trump, or does supporting Trump lead people to be wary of experts? Because the CSPP data interviewed the same respondents a number of times over the course of the election, I was able to use more complex statistical procedures to investigate whether anti-intellectual attitudes increased support for Trump, or vice versa. I found that that anti-intellectual attitudes led voters to support Trump, and not the other way around.

Attacking science, experts and professors can help get politicians elected

Anti-intellectualism may influence how politicians campaign in upcoming election cycles. My research shows that politicians can successfully earn support by calling into question not only scientific consensus, but those who produce it. Attacking scientists, college professors and other experts can be a politically useful strategy for those hoping to win over the support of people who hold anti-intellectual attitudes.

And elections, of course, have consequences. If politicians who deride experts win political office, they may take action consistent with those views once elected. For example, Trump did dismiss EPA science advisers and pull out of the Paris climate agreement which may increase global carbon emissions, and also help win support on the 2020 campaign trail.

Matt Motta is a PhD candidate at the University of Minnesota. Find him on Twitter @matt_motta.

Read the original post:
Republicans are increasingly antagonistic toward experts. Here's why that matters. - Washington Post

At raucous town halls, Republicans have faced another round of … – Washington Post

(Bastien Inzaurralde/The Washington Post)

BRUNSWICK, Ga. The long August congressional recess, which Republicans had hoped would begin a conversation about tax reform and must-pass budget measures, has so far seen another round of angry town halls focused on President Trump and the stalled effort to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

Over just one day, in three small towns along Georgias Atlantic coastline, Rep. Earl L. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) spent more than four hours answering 74 questions, many of them heated. Just three focused on tax reform; nearly half were about health care.

We did our job in the House, Carter said at the top of a town hall at the College of Coastal Georgia in Brunswick. It got over to the Senate, and it hit a stumbling block there. Now its in their court, and they need to get something done. Folks, were not giving up.

Carters town halls he is hosting nine, more than any other House Republican mirror what is happening in swing and safe Republican districts across the country. The failure of the health-care repeal bill kick-started a tax reform campaign backed by GOP leaders and pro-business groups, who have booked millions of dollars in TV ads to promote whatever might lead to an uncomplicated tax code.

In the first spots, paid for by the American Action Network, a laid-off steelworker worries that without lower taxes for working families, more jobs will be lost to China. At rallies and forums in several states, Americans for Prosperity has pitched tax reform as a way to unrig the economy. And in a polling memo made public this week, the AAN found that 65 to 73 percent of voters responded favorably to reform if it was pitched as a way to restore the earning power of the middle class and save billions of dollars each year on tax preparation services.

But at town hall meetings since the start of the recess, tax reform has hardly come up; health care has dominated. At a Monday event in Flat Rock, N.C., Rep. Mark Meadows (R) pitched a plan to devolve ACA programs to the states, then found himself fending off constituents who backed universal Medicare.

[Bipartisan health policy coalition urges Congress to strengthen the ACA]

You can take the top 1 percent and tax them fully, and it still wont pay for Medicare, Meadows said.

At a town hall in Chico, Calif., in the most Democratic portion of a deep-red district, Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R) faced furious complaints about the repeal vote, with constituents accusing him of acting to bring about their deaths.

I hope you suffer the same painful fate as those millions that you have voted to remove health care from, one constituent told LaMalfa. May you die in pain.

Carters town halls did not reach such a boiling point, but they showed what the tone of congressional listening sessions has become: angry, wistful and loaded with progressive activists.

Georgias 1st Congressional District, stretching from Savannah to the Florida border, has been held by the GOP since 1993. In 2016, the Trump-Pence ticket carried the district by 15.5 points, while Democrats could not find a candidate to run against Carter.

(Nolan Ford/North State Public Radio)

But this week, the constituents who signed up for the meetings on Eventbrite and walked past local police officers to take their seats seemed to skew left. Two groups founded after the 2016 election, Speak Up Now and Savannah Taking Action for Resistance, had members at town halls in Darien and Brunswick.

Carter, who peppered his answers with self-deprecating jokes, sometimes called on activists whod dogged him before. In Brunswick, he quickly pivoted from a question about Zionist influence in our foreign policy by promising to put America first. After three different constituents asked him whether he supported the presidents decision to ban transgender men and women from military service, he went from deferring to our commander in chief to saying what he believed.

I dont want em serving in the military, Carter said, as dozens of constituents booed and more than a dozen walked out. Im sorry.

At each town hall, Carter provided fact sheets to advance two messages: how much work Congress had done in 2017, and how his party would not give up on repealing the ACA. A one-pager titled Health Care Reform: Myth vs. Fact, with citations from the Department of Health and Human Services, revealed just how much the party had suffered from Democratic attacks. Instead of rebutting the line that the GOP plan would cut Medicaid, it framed the ACAs Medicaid expansion as a departure from the programs mission, and one that denied choice to the working poor.

Medicaid was designed to provide a vital health care safety net for elderly, children, pregnant women, and individuals with disabilities, it read. Low and middle-income adults capable of holding down a job should have health care choices.

Behind the microphone, Carter found himself making that point repeatedly, about a slew of ideas for expanded government programs, as Democrats cheered and Republicans simmered. In Brunswick, after Carter told a college student that free tuition was a pipe dream weve got a $20trillion debt an older man took the mic and advised the student to get a job.

It wasnt the only time Carter stood back and watched as his constituents argued among themselves. Mary Nelson, 73, used her question time at the Darien town hall to insist that Republicans were all wrong about single-payer health care. She talked about an experience that her Australian relatives had gone through and described a cheap system with no hoops to jump through that could be copied in America.

They are taxed out the wazoo in Australia, interjected Adrienne Stidhams, 48, a Trump supporter.

How much do we pay for premiums? Nelson asked rhetorically.

Like Meadows, Carter suggested that Democrats and Republicans could work together on health-care bills with the repeal effort stalled.

When multiple constituents asked Carter if he would let the probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 election play out, he defended the president and suggested that special counsel Robert S. Mueller III, a good man, would probably find out the facts before long.

Im worried about some of the people he has around him, Carter said, apparently referring to lawyers hired for the probe who have been attacked in conservative media for donating to Democrats.

There were no questions about the debt limit, which must be raised when Congress returns to avoid default. The three questions about tax reform focused on the possibility of a fair tax, a national sales tax to replace taxes on income; whether companies keeping profits overseas could be taxed; and tax fairness in general.

Carter jumped at the opportunity to talk about it. Whats being proposed right now is to bring our corporate tax down from 35percent one of the highest in the world down to 15 percent, he said, citing a tax reform blueprint released this spring and a positive analysis from the conservative Tax Foundation. That will create jobs.

No constituents followed up with questions. Instead, there was more skepticism about the president and his plans, countered by constituents who asked Carter to defend the president from media attacks.

I tell ya, I dont think Ive ever seen a president thats been disrespected by the media like this, Carter said. He had more to say, but drowned out by booing, he moved on.

Read more at PowerPost

Excerpt from:
At raucous town halls, Republicans have faced another round of ... - Washington Post

EDITORIAL: Why won’t Republicans call out Trump on North Korea? – Chicago Sun-Times

President Donald Trump doesnt do diplomacy. He hurls broadsides.

Calling out unstable North Korean leader Kim Jong Un is a recipe for disaster. Thats how you tumble into a war. Nothing good can come from Trump lashing out at Kim on a whim, three times in the last week alone.

But our question is this: Where are voices of prudence within the presidents own party? Where are the Republicans, especially in Congress, who are prepared to call out Trump for his irresponsibility, putting our country first?

EDITORIAL

On Friday morning, Trump put Kim on notice via Twitter. Military solutions are now fully in place, locked and loaded, should North Korea act unwisely, he tweeted. Hopefully Kim Jong Un will find another path!

Earlier in the week, with the same schoolyard bluster, Trump told reporters, North Korea best not make any more threats to the United States. They will be met with fire and fury like the world has never seen.

And a few days later, Trump doubled down rather than calmed down. If anything, he said, maybe that statement wasnt tough enough.

And what did the United States get for all that? Kim, another man-child, promised to launch test missiles near the American island of Guam.

Any hope that Trumps new chief of staff, the respected Marine Gen. John Kelly, could restrain the president evaporated quickly. And Secretary of State Rex Tillerson doesnt have the presidents ear.

The job falls to the Republicans in Congress, who have the power of the bully pulpit, to put at least a rhetorical check on Trump.

Sen. John McCain came closest, warning Trump on Tuesday of the dangers of his fire and fury tweet. I take exception to the presidents words because you got to be sure you can do what you say youre going to do, McCain, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told a Phoenix radio station.

Congress should dust off legislation proposed in January by Sen. Edward J. Markey of Massachusetts and Rep. Ted Lieu of California, both Democrats, to prevent Trump from preemptively launching a nuclear strike. The president would not be limited, however, in using nuclear weapons to respond to a strike against the United States.

The United Nations Security Council voted this month to hit Pyongyang with new sanctions, yet Trump still has wasted no time launching his own verbal assault. This is a time for restraint, and for standing up to the president.

Send letters to: letters@suntimes.com

View original post here:
EDITORIAL: Why won't Republicans call out Trump on North Korea? - Chicago Sun-Times