Mediaboss Marketing

Major Republican initiatives are bogged down for reasons that have nothing to do with the personality flaws of the tweeter in chief, and everything to do with the broader, more fundamental fecklessness of his party.

According to Politico, a Trump confidante says that the man in the Oval Office or more often at Mar-a-Lago is tired of everyone thinking his presidency is screwed up. Pro tip: The best way to combat perceptions that youre screwing up is, you know, to stop screwing up.

But he cant, of course. And its not just a personal problem.

It goes without saying that Donald Trump is the least qualified individual, temperamentally or intellectually, ever installed in the White House. As he veers from wild accusations against President Barack Obama to snide remarks about Arnold Schwarzenegger, hes doing a very good imitation of someone experiencing a personal breakdown even though he has yet to confront a crisis not of his own making. Thanks, Comey.

But the broader Republican quagmire the partys failure so far to make significant progress toward any of its policy promises isnt just about Trumps inadequacies. The whole party, it turns out, has been faking it for years. Its leaders rhetoric was empty; they have no idea how to turn their slogans into actual legislation, because theyve never bothered to understand how anything important works.

Take the two lead items in the congressional GOPs agenda: undoing the Affordable Care Act and reforming corporate taxes. In each case Republicans seem utterly shocked to find themselves facing reality.

The story of Obamacare repeal would be funny if the health care and, in many cases, the lives of millions of Americans werent at stake.

First we had seven seven! years during which Republicans kept promising to offer an alternative to Obamacare any day now, but never did. Then came the months after the election, with more promises of details just around the corner.

Now theres apparently a plan hidden somewhere in the Capitol basement. Why the secrecy? Because the Republicans have belatedly discovered what some of us tried to tell them all along: The only way to maintain coverage for the 20 million people who gained insurance thanks to Obamacare is with a plan that, surprise, looks a lot like Obamacare.

Sure enough, the new plan reportedly does look like a sort of half-baked version of the Affordable Care Act. Politically, it seems to embody the worst of both worlds: Its enough like Obamacare to infuriate hard-line conservatives, but it weakens key aspects of the law enough to deprive millions of Americans many of them white working-class voters who backed Donald Trump of essential health care.

The idea, apparently, is to deal with these problems by passing the plan before anyone gets a chance to really see or think about whats in it. Good luck with that.

Then theres corporate tax reform an issue where the plan being advanced by Paul Ryan, the House speaker, is actually not too bad, at least in principle. Even some Democratic-leaning economists support a shift to a destination-based cash flow tax, which is best thought of as a sales tax plus a payroll subsidy. (Trust me.)

But Ryan has failed spectacularly to make his case either to colleagues or to powerful interest groups. Why? As best I can tell, its because he himself doesnt understand the point of the reform.

The case for the cash flow tax is quite technical; among other things, it would remove the incentives the current tax system creates for corporations to load up on debt and to engage in certain kinds of tax avoidance. But thats not the kind of thing Republicans talk about if anything, theyre in favor of tax avoidance, hence the Trump proposal to slash funding for the IRS.

No, in GOP world, tax ideas always have to be presented as ways to remove the shackles from oppressed job creators. So Ryan has framed his proposal, basically falsely, as a measure to make American industry more competitive, focusing on the border tax adjustment which is part of the sales-tax component of the reform.

This misrepresentation seems, however, to be backfiring: It sounds like a Trumpist tariff, and has both conservatives and retailers like Wal-Mart up in arms.

At this point, then, major Republican initiatives are bogged down for reasons that have nothing to do with the personality flaws of the tweeter in chief, and everything to do with the broader, more fundamental fecklessness of his party.

Does this mean that nothing substantive will happen on the policy front? Not necessarily. Republicans may decide to ram through a health plan that causes mass suffering, and hope to blame it on Obama. They may give up on anything resembling a principled tax reform, and just throw a few trillion dollars at rich people instead.

But whatever the eventual outcome, what were witnessing is what happens when a party that gave up hard thinking in favor of empty sloganeering ends up in charge of actual policy. And its not a pretty sight.

Continue reading here:
Republicans, a party not ready to govern - The Seattle Times

Roll Call

Furor Over Russia's Hacking Puts Congressional Republicans on Hot Seat Wall Street Journal (subscription) In the controversy over Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, here's where the key players stand: Russian President Vladimir Putin must be pleased, President Donald Trump is furious, and congressional Republicans are in the hot seat. House Republicans Shouldn't Get Too Comfortable in MajorityRoll Call all 7 news articles »

View original post here:
Furor Over Russia's Hacking Puts Congressional Republicans on Hot Seat - Wall Street Journal (subscription)

Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker offered some limited praise of the new plan. | AP Photo

President Donald Trump's scaled-back order restricting travel from six majority-Muslim nations won over one of his biggest GOP critics Monday, even as few other Republicans rushed to endorse the plan.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, who has hounded Trump on his ties to Russia and called the presidents first attempt at a travel ban a potential self-inflicted wound in the fight against terrorism," embraced the White House's changes.

Story Continued Below

This executive order will achieve the goal of protecting our homeland and will, in my view, pass legal muster, the South Carolina Republican said in a statement, adding that "the new order will withstand legal challenges as its drafted in a fashion as to not be a religious ban, but a ban on individuals coming from compromised governments and failed states."

But Graham, so far, appears to be the only convert. Other Republicans who had criticized the first travel order issued in January and quickly halted in federal court offered few words of support. Graham and Sen. John McCain had criticized Trumps first travel order in a joint statement, but Grahams support, notably, came in a solo press release.

McCain later tweeted that Iraq was not included in the new executive order and that Iraqis are our allies in the fight against #ISIL. Removing Iraqi citizens from the travel ban came after entreaties from Graham, McCain and other prominent Republicans including Trump's secretary of state and defense secretary in light of Iraqis contributions to the fight against terrorism.

Other top Republicans were noticeably reticent to offer full-throated support for the new order. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker, who criticized Trumps January travel ban, offered some limited praise, at least for the roll-out of the new plan.

I am very encouraged by the interagency approach the administration has taken to develop and implement the revised executive order, said Corker, adding that he was pleased that Iraq was removed from the countries subject to visa restrictions. The Tennessee Republican also said reviewing the nations screening and vetting procedures is an appropriate step and that he is hopeful these programs will then be reinstated.

White House press secretary Sean Spicer emphasized Monday that the new travel order is based on the same principles that guided the first but this time, he said, all stakeholders, including lawmakers, were extensively briefed on the contents.

"We made sure that everybody knew what we were doing," he said, adding, "I think we did a phenomenal job of rolling it out."

But the White Houses engagement didnt immediately draw an outpouring of support from the presidents allies on Capitol Hill.

House Republicans, in particular, appeared to be reserving judgment, offering sparse cover to a president who sprung his first travel ban on them with little warning, stoking turmoil and energizing grassroots Trump opponents. The relative silence was notable given the Trump administration's apparent confidence that the communication problems plaguing the execution of its initial immigration order had been fixed this time around.

"There should be no surprises whether it's in the media or on Capitol Hill," Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly told reporters at a press briefing on the order, after which no questions were taken.

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) was a notable exception to the GOPs reticence, offering a quick endorsement of Trumps new plan.

This revised executive order advances our shared goal of protecting the homeland, said Ryan, who criticized the rollout of Trumps initial travel ban. I commend the administration and Secretary Kelly in particular for their hard work on this measure to improve our vetting standards.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) also signaled support.

Backing for Trump among Republicans was slightly more robust in the Senate.

The new immigration order also excised language from Trump's first version, which signaled a preference for refugee applications from Christians residing in majority-Muslim countries and would not affect existing visa holders, a tweak welcomed by Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

That change "should ensure the unintended consequences from the last order do not reoccur," Grassley said in a statement.

Other elements of Trump's initial immigration order, including a 120-day pause in the admission of refugees from around the world and a deep cut in the number of refugees admitted during the current year, remain intact.

Inquiries with a slew of moderate Republican lawmakers who had expressed concerns about Trumps first travel order were not immediately returned.

Meanwhile top Democrats quickly condemned the new immigration limits as little more than a warmed-over regurgitation of Trump's original travel ban, a hastily rolled-out plan that faltered in federal court and provoked mass protests at international airports across the country. They continued to refer to the effort as a Muslim ban, and they were emboldened further when Spicer told reporters Monday that the principles of the executive order remain the same."

A watered-down ban is still a ban," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. "Despite the administrations changes, this dangerous executive order makes us less safe, not more, it is mean-spirited, and un-American."

Newly elected Sens. Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.) and Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), who called for stricter evaluation of the refugee screening process on the campaign trail in 2015, on Monday slammed Trump's order as "a backdoor Muslim ban" and "immoral," respectively.

A few conservatives who backed Trump's earlier order offered early praise for the revised edition. Arizona GOP Rep. Paul Gosar called it refreshing to see a President that isnt ashamed to uphold the most important job of the government ... protecting the American people.

See the original post:
Republicans in no rush to back Trump's new travel ban - Politico

Speaker Paul Ryan, right, and his House Republicans are reportedly planning to introduce its Obamacare replacement bill this week.

Congressional Republicans will introduce their much-anticipated bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act this week, NBC News reports, citing a senior House aide.

Draft legislation would provide expanded tax credits and health savings accounts for individuals, while cutting spending on tax subsidies and Medicaid, NBC writes. It would also practically eliminate the employer and individuals mandates to provide and carry health insurance. That legislation may have changed but a House Republican aide earlier called it the bones of what would happen.

Also read: Trump embraces HSAs as a pillar of repeal and replace, but they will need work.

SEC nominee targeted: A coalition of progressive groups is planning to announce a campaign to derail President Trumps nomination of Jay Clayton to head the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Washington Post reports. Organizers say the campaign will include a six-figure digital advertising buy. As the Post says, it comes amid broader efforts by Democrats to highlight Trumps choice of finance-industry insiders for key administration positions despite his antiWall Street rhetoric when he was a candidate.

Knives out for Priebus: Politico writes that administration officials are increasingly putting blame on Trumps chief of staff, Reince Priebus, as the White House struggles to gain its footing nearly two months into the new presidency. More than a dozen Trump aides, allies and others close to the White House said Priebus was becoming a singular target of criticism within the White House.

One senior administration official said theres a real frustration among many, including Trump himself, that things arent going as smoothly as hoped for. The White House, meanwhile, pushed back on the story, with Trump chief strategist Stephen Bannon saying the presidents agenda is being implemented in record time, which shows you what a great job Reince is doing.

Also see: Opinion: With wiretapping tweets, Trump undermines the presidency.

Regulation tally: Federal agencies and the GOP-led Congress have delayed, suspended or reversed more than 90 regulations in the month and a half since Trump took office, according to a tally by the New York Times. The Times called the effort one of the most significant shifts in regulatory policy in recent decades, with dozens more rules possibly being eliminated in the coming weeks.

Read more from the original source:
Republicans to introduce health bill this week | Knives out for Reince Priebus, Trump's chief of staff - MarketWatch

President Trump and congressional Republicans are poised to roll back a series of Obama-era worker safety regulations targeted by business groups, starting with a rule that would require federal contractors to disclose and correct serious safety violations.

The Senate is set to vote Monday evening to eliminate the regulation, dubbed the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule. Finalized in August and blocked by a court order in October, the rule would limit the ability of companies with recent safety problems to complete for government contracts unless they agreed to remedies.

The measure to abolish it has already cleared the House. The next step after the Senate vote would be the White House, where Trump is expected to sign it.

A half-dozen other worker safety regulations are also in Republican crosshairs, with one headed to the Senate floor as soon as this week. Many are directed at companies with federal contracts. Such companies employ 1 in 5 American workers meaning the effort could have wide-ranging effects.

This is the opening salvo of the Republicans war on workers, said Deborah Berkowitz, who was a senior policy adviser at the Occupational Safety and Health Administration when many of the regulations were crafted. It sends a signal that Congress and the administration is listening to big business and their lobbyists and they are not standing up for the interests of the American workers.

[Federal Insider: Fair-pay order for contractors under attack in Congress]

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and other leading business groups have urged Congress and the Trump administration to eliminate the regulations, arguing that they discourage businesses from competing for government contracts, thereby reducing jobs.

This is the same old playbook from the left that never changes, said Randy Johnson, the Chambers senior vice president for labor, immigration and employee benefits. Any changes in employment laws proposed by the employer community is disingenuously described as an attack on workers. The left has never seen a regulation they dont like, no matter how many jobs it kills.

Hours before the Senate vote on the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) released a staff report that says that 66 of the federal governments 100 largest contractors have at some point violated federal wage and hour laws. Since 2015, the report says, more than a third of the 100 largest OSHA penalties have been imposed on federal contractors.

Too often, federal contractors break labor laws while continuing to suck down millions in taxpayer dollars, Warren said in a statement.

[Hill Republicans move to scrap Obama-era regulations]

That concern prompted the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces regulation. Among the strongest data points: Rodney Bridgett, 37, a worker at a Tysons Foods beef processing plant in Nebraska, was crushed by a piece of heavy equipment when a chain snapped on the plants kill floor in 2012.

Tyson spokesman Worth Sparkman called Bridgetts death a tragic accident and said the company aspires to have zero work-related injuries and illnesses, and continue to improve our culture related to safety every day.

OSHA investigators found that Tysons supervisors had repeatedly failed to inspect the faulty chain. While OSHA sought to fine the company, the Obama administration moved separately to target a major source of Tysonss revenue: nearly $300million a year in federal contracts.

The Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces regulation was finalized in August. Days later, the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC) sued, securing a temporary injunction that prohibited the federal government from implementing it.

ABC and other business groups objected to the rules requirement that companies disclose citations for alleged safety violations that they are still challenging.

They define violations to include mere allegations and citations where the contractors havent had a chance to defend them, said Marc Freedman, executive director of labor law policy with the Chamber. We consider this a violation of their constitutional due-process rights.

David Madland of the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, said the rule applies only to companies with contracts worth $500,000 or more. If the rule is eliminated, he said, taxpayers will lose alongside affected workers. One purpose of the rule was to make it easier for federal agencies to identify contractors who were not honest brokers when it came to employee pay.

People who rip off workers rip off the government, Madland said.

After Trumps election, the Chamber and other business groups added the rule to wish lists for regulations they wanted to see eliminated. Republican lawmakers quickly identified a tool to assist in those efforts the rarely used Congressional Review Act (CRA). Approved in 1996, the law had been used only once to kill a worker safety rule that would have forced companies to alter their workstations or change tools and equipment if their employees suffered work-related repetitive-stress injuries.

The CRA allows Congress to roll back recently enacted regulations by a simple majority vote. Once a rule is killed, it is killed forever. No future administration can pass a similar measure unless Congress is persuaded to pass a law instead a far more difficult task.

Reps. Bradley Byrne (R-Ala.) and Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) are leading the charge to kill Labor Department regulations using the CRA. In addition to the effort to eliminate the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces regulation called the blacklisting rule by the Chamber and many Republican lawmakers Byrne introduced a measure to quash a regulation called the Volks rule.

Adopted in January, the rule responds to a 2012 D.C. Court of Appeals decision Volks Constructors v. Secretary of Labor that limited OSHAs power to issue citations for record-keeping violations older than six months. The new rule gives OSHA authority to issue citations and levy fines against companies for failure to record illnesses, injuries and deaths that date back as far as five years.

Last week, the House voted to kill the Volks rule. If the measure clears the Senate, Trump is expected to sign it.

Byrne said he does not think OSHA needs the Volks rule. If you are determined to be a bad actor, youll be a bad actor, he said. I dont think this is going to encourage noncompliance. I think that OSHA is being lazy on getting its investigations done.

Byrne also called the rule an overreach, saying the changes should have been made in law, not through regulation.

Rep. Robert C. Bobby Scott (D-Va.) is leading efforts to block the rule-killing measures. He argues that Byrnes measure to kill the Volks rule will block OSHAs enforcement efforts and create a safe harbor for those employers who deliberately underreport.

OSHA says staffing levels permit investigators to visit an American business roughly once every 140 years, unless a serious violation is reported.

Scott also defended the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule, saying that nothing in the regulation would ban a company from securing a federal contract. He noted that only companies with serious, pervasive, intentional and repeated safety violations would have to report them.

Who qualifies for that who we need to help? Scott said. If you can save money by underpaying your workers and violating OSHA, why should you have a competitive advantage over those who are complying with the law?

Leaders on both sides of the battle hold key committee assignments and have close financial ties with the constituencies they are championing. Foxx and Byrne received hundreds of thousands in donations for their 2016 reelection campaigns from employees of federal contractors and their trade groups, including ones that have been at the forefront of efforts to kill the two worker safety rules. Foxx received $7,500 from employees of ABC, while Byrne received $10,000 from ABC employees.

Scott, meanwhile, is a long-standing champion of unions and civil rights groups who are in favor of the keeping the Obama-era rules. During Scotts 2016 reelection campaign, more than half of his donations came from union employees, including $10,000 from the United Steelworkers and $30,000 from the United Food and Commercial Workers union, according to records maintained by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Alice Crites contributed to this report.

More here:
Republicans poised to roll back worker safety regulations - Washington Post