Mediaboss Marketing

Ron Brownstein, the editorial director of National Journal Group, has issued a challenge to Republicans who have criticized Trumps tweets against Mika Brzezinski. What, he asks, are they going to do about those tweets? Jennifer Rubin and John Weaver, two center-right opponents of Trump, have joined in deriding these Republican critics.

Criticism seems to me to be exactly the right response to this mornings presidential misbehavior. Im open to the argument that Republican officials should back up that criticism with action if only I saw a reasonable action they should take. What exactly do Brownsteinet al want the Republican critics of Trumps tweets to do about them?Speaker Ryancant take away Trumps Twitter account. Senator Graham cantgive Trump the self-restraint and decency neither nature nor upbringing seems to have supplied him. I asked the question on Twitter, and havent gotten a great answer yet. Is Senator Sasse supposed to impeach Trump over his tweets? Thats what some respondents suggested. I am sorry to say that it seems necessary to point out that this response is insane. If it were sane, it would mean that none of the criticisms of Trump made by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumershould be taken seriously, either, since they havent declared for impeachment either.

Some liberal respondentssuggested that the problem is that the critics keep voting with Trump and supporting his agenda. The idea, I suppose, is that to register their opposition to obnoxious Trump behavior Republicans should delay the confirmation of conservative nominees they support, vote against legislation they favor, and so on. Even better, I suppose, congressional Republicans with misgivings about Trump could commit ritual suicide, or switch parties, whichever would bemore painful.

Read the original here:
Trump's Tweets and Republicans - National Review

REPUBLICAN SENATORS are regrouping after Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) put off a vote on his Obamacare repeal-and-replace bill. The stumble was for the better. The bill was drafted in secret. Not a single hearing was held. Democrats were not consulted. With only a single week afforded to absorb the legislations contents before a vote, the timetable was absurd. Mr.McConnells attempt to jam it through stank of legislative malpractice and hypocrisy.

Republicans should treat this as an opportunity to step away from the brink and reevaluate their foolhardy push to rush through an ill-wrought overhaul of the nations health-care system without any input from the other side. Despite President Trumps claims otherwise, GOP leaders have not engaged Democrats seriously on the health-care issue, as Democrats did for at least a time as they drafted Obamacare. Republicans have instead advanced coverage reductions and tax cuts that Democrats and, indeed, most of the public could never embrace.

The Congressional Budget Office has repeatedly exposed these ideas to be abjectly cruel, finding that they would result in north of 20 million more people uninsured in a decade, as government health-care assistance was rolled back to finance a large tax cut for the wealthy. Mr. McConnell has reportedly argued, however, that pressing forward would be better than negotiating with Democrats. What does it say about the Republican Party that even this bill is more appealing than reaching out to moderates on the other side of the aisle?

Not all feel this way. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), one of the Senate bills skeptics, this week suggested fixing Obamacare markets in cooperation with Democrats. She and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) released a compromise health-care proposal before Republicans began their mad repeal-and-replace rush. For his part, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged Republicans Wednesday to start over and find a new, bipartisan way forward on health care. If Mr. Schumer wants to show that he is interested in doing more than trolling his GOP counterparts, he could appoint a group of moderate Democrats to serve as credible negotiators.

If both sides sat down in good faith, there would be a wide range of possible compromises. Senators could work off the Cassidy-Collins plan, which is not preoccupied with cutting taxes and allows states that want to keep the Obamacare system to do so, while letting others try a different course. In any compromise scenario, Democrats would seek commitments that health-care markets would be properly subsidized and administered, and Republicans would seek some loosening of Obamacare regulations, particularly if doing so allowed younger people to buy bare-bones coverage. That is grounds for an obvious trade.

Both sides have expressed interest in reinsurance programs, which would backstop insurance companies in cases of catastrophically large medical costs. Both may be interested in automatically enrolling everyone in a basic insurance plan unless they opt out. Both should seek a stronger and more durable mechanism to compel people to buy insurance, perhaps by withholding government tax benefits from people who refuse.

Reforming the health-care system with Democratic buy-in would also mean the Senate would not have to worry about complex parliamentary rules relating to the reconciliation process, which Republicans are currently using to avoid a Democratic filibuster. That greatly expands the reforms that bipartisan negotiators could consider.

What should be off the table, permanently, is the Senates bad bill. The unilateral effort to cram it through must end.

Excerpt from:
Republicans, step away from the brink - Washington Post

The GOP may be in dire straits in California, but a flurry of recent moves suggests the party of Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon is not willing to abandon the 2018 gubernatorial race, as it did four years ago.

The big question is if the party will be able to marshal enough support behind a Republican candidate for governor and avoid a repeat of last falls Senate campaign, which, thanks to the top-two primary, was fought between two Democratic candidates.

Several Republicans are in the mix. They include conservative Orange County Assemblyman Travis Allen and Rancho Santa Fe venture capitalist John Cox. Speculation is mounting that former state Assemblyman David Hadley plans to announce a run. There also are furious efforts to recruit San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer into the race, because he is viewed as the strongest possible contender.

It is exciting, said Shawn Steel, a Republican National Committee member from Orange County. He said the GOP could exploit what he calls Democratic overreach in Sacramento, including the passage of an unpopular new gas tax. That plus growing alarm over quality of life issues in California could give Republicans an opening among voters who have typically not supported his partys candidates, he said. Im not counting on anything as being certain in politics, but I never expected [President] Trump to win, for goodness sakes, and was delighted when he upset all the pundits.

A viable Republican top-of-the-ticket candidate could be crucial to driving GOP voters to the polls in seven California House races that are expected to be battlegrounds in the 2018 midterms.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield) is concerned about next years turnout, and has been working hard trying to convince Faulconer to enter the race and show him he has a path to victory, according to multiple people familiar with McCarthys efforts who were not authorized to discuss them.

Party Chairman Jim Brulte has made at least one personal appeal to the mayor during a face-to-face visit to San Diego.

On paper, the efforts make sense Faulconer is the type of Republican that political observers believe has the best shot of winning statewide office in California. Hes a fiscal conservative and social moderate who is not viewed as an ideologue. He has distanced himself from Trump. Hes also the only GOP mayor leading one of the nations 10 largest cities, and was elected twice despite Democrats six-point voter registration edge in San Diego, evidence of his crossover appeal.

GOP strategists familiar with his thinking say he is now weighing entering the race, even though he previously said he had no intention of running. Faulconers spokespeople did not respond to a request for comment.

After the candidate conundrum, there is the question of a GOP path to victory in a state were Democrats dominate.

Democrats unsuccessfully tried to use an anti-Trump message in four recent special congressional elections across the country. But Republicans had stronger advantages in those districts. In California, Trump was trounced by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton by more than 4.2 million votes, a reflection of the partys domination of state politics.

Republicans last elected a statewide candidate more than a decade ago, have seen voter registration plummet to a 19-point disadvantage to Democrats, and have repeatedly allowed the opposition party to win super majorities in both chambers of the state Legislature.

In 2014, the partys leadership put no resources behind its standard-bearer who ran against Gov. Jerry Brown. And in 2016, the GOPs dwindling number of voters in the state splintered in the primary for the first open U.S. Senate seat in more than two decades. The result was that two Democrats and no Republican advanced to the general election.

Both elections left palpable anger that GOP activists expressed at their annual convention earlier this year. The state party has pledged to compete in the 2018 gubernatorial contest, although it was unclear if the pledge includes a plan or if leaders were offering wishful thinking to soothe party loyalists.

Its important for morale and turnout to have a Republican candidate on the November ballot, said Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College and a former state GOP leader. It was bad enough to be shut out of the Senate race in 2016, but the governors race is a flagship race and the party needs to have a [credible] candidate, but whether that happens is an open question.

Follow California politics by signing up for our email newsletter

Allen, an assemblyman from Huntington Beach, is a traditional GOP conservative and a staunch Trump supporter. A favorite of the partys grass roots, Allen opposes the adoption of a government-run healthcare system and has voted consistently against increasing protections for immigrants who entered the country illegally, stances that do not align with the majority of California voters. But he says even Democrats are turned off by the partys recent moves. Earlier this year, Allen filed a ballot measure to rescind the gas tax passed by the Legislature. Its an issue Republicans plan to campaign on in 2018, and already has triggered a recall campaign against a Democratic state senator from Orange County.

Hadley, who represented the South Bay in the state Assembly for two years, shares an ideological profile similar to Faulconers, though he is not as well known. He has filed paperwork with the state to open a campaign fundraising account, but has not formally launched a bid. He did not respond to requests for comment.

Former Los Angeles Rams football player Rosey Grier has said he plans to run but has taken no formal steps to establish a campaign.

Successful gubernatorial races in California cost tens of millions of dollars, and the three top Democratic candidates already have raised more than $20 million collectively.

Pitney was skeptical the states deep-pocketed GOP donors would invest in a race they know they are likely to lose, especially given that the battle for control of Congress would siphon money and attention to other competitive contests.

Money would have to come from heaven, Pitney said. Donors want to put the money where it can have some effect.... Why throw it to a race where the outcome is very likely a big Republican defeat?

Cox has the wealth to fund his own campaign, and already has put in a personal stake of $3 million. A source close to the candidate who was not authorized to speak publicly about the campaign said Cox is willing to invest a couple million more, but will not entirely self-fund his bid.

In 2014, such a dollar figure was enough for businessman Neel Kashkari to win the second spot in the primary and advance to the general, where Brown crushed him by 19 points. But Kashkari had only one serious Republican rival in the race, Tim Donnelly, a controversial then-assemblyman and former leader of the Minutemen border-patrol group.

This time around, its more complicated. The more people jump in, the more they split up the shrinking number of Republican voters, increasing the likelihood of a Democrat-on-Democrat brawl next November.

Jon Fleischman, a conservative blogger based in Orange County and former state party official, summed up the problems with a crowded GOP field. [I]ts entirely possible Republicans avoid the embarrassment of losing in November by simply losing in June.

Times staff writers Melanie Mason and Liam Dillon in Sacramento contributed to this report.

seema.mehta@latimes.com

For the latest on national and California politics, follow @LATSeema on Twitter.

California's 2018 governor's race is going to be big. Find out who's in and what's next

Billionaire Tom Steyer is spending millions for Democrats. What will he get out of it?

Live coverage of California politics

Excerpt from:
California Republicans don't want to be caught again without a statewide candidate but the party is fractured - Los Angeles Times

In Virginia, Republican gubernatorial nominee Ed Gillespie is getting peppered with questions on the campaign trail about President Trumps efforts on health care, and he has declined to take a clear position.

In Maryland, Gov. Larry Hogan (R), who is up for reelection next year, says health-care plans being advanced by the Republican Congress do not work for his state, but he is still getting badgered by Democrats to speak out more forcefully against Trump.

And in Illinois, Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) is taking flak for saying he still needs time to study the GOP bills. A mailer sent this week by one Democrat hoping to challenge him in 2018 showed a pair of boxing gloves and called Rauner and Trump a one-two punch that could knock out your health care.

As Congress continues to debate unpopular Trump-backed legislation projected to drive up the number of uninsured, some Republican gubernatorial candidates are growing queasy as they are asked to defend it and Democrats are eager to pounce.

Thirty-eight states are holding gubernatorial contests this year and in 2018. The challenge for Republicans is particularly pronounced in swing states and in those that have expanded Medicaid coverage under former president Barack Obamas signature health-care law, the Affordable Care Act. Both the House and Senate health-care bills would phase out federal funding for those efforts, leaving the 31 states that took advantage of the provision to pick up the tab if they want to continue it.

That is one of several ways in which implementation of the GOP health-care legislation would fall to the states, raising the stakes for gubernatorial candidates to lay out their positions.

Governors are the ones whod be left holding the bag, said Jared Leopold, communications director for the Democratic Governors Association, which on Wednesday unveiled digital ads targeting GOP candidates in six states whom the DGA accuses of staying silent on Trumps health-care efforts.

The spots target Gillespie, who is on the ballot this year in Virginia, and candidates seeking the GOP nomination next year in Michigan, Ohio, Nevada, Florida and Rhode Island.

Jon Thompson, a spokesman for the Republican Governors Association, said the ads are a sign of Democratic weakness, citing in particular the decision to air them in Rhode Island, a state that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton carried easily last year.

I read polls every day, and theres no evidence yet that President Trump or any of his policies are going to be a drag on any of our candidates, Thompson said.

Only 17percent of adults nationwide approve of the Senate health-care bill, while 55percent disapprove, according to an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll released on Wednesday.

Even among Republicans, support is tepid, with 35percent voicing approval and 21percent saying they disapprove.

John Weaver, a veteran Republican strategist, said federal action on health care will probably factor in significantly in gubernatorial races this year and next regardless of what actually happens in Washington.

If Congress does nothing and the health-care exchanges established under the ACA continue to have problems, that will be an issue, he said. And if a bill similar to what was unveiled last week by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) becomes law, there will be plenty of talk about its impact on states.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has projected that the Senate bill could lead to 22million fewer people with insurance by 2026.

It wont be forgotten by any means, clearly, said Weaver, who worked on the presidential campaign of Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R).

Kasich is among a handful of sitting Republican governors who have spoken out against the GOP bills in Congress. Hours before Senate Republicans delayed a vote this week, Kasich said their bill was unacceptable because it would victimize the poor and mentally ill and redirect tax money to people who are already very wealthy.

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) has also spoken out against the GOP legislation, citing the impact of phasing out federal funding for Medicaid expansion in his state.

Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R), who presides over a Democratic-leaning state, has been critical as well. On Monday, he joined Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) in writing a letter to McConnell asking on behalf of the bipartisan National Governors Association that the Senate slow down its march toward a vote.

Thompson, the RGA spokesman, said such dissent was a byproduct of holding 33 governorships, compared with 16 for Democrats. What works for some states might not work for another state, he said.

For Gillespie, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, the GOP health-care efforts are an ongoing headache as he campaigns in the only Southern state that Clinton won last year.

Gillespie has been trying to stay laser-focused on jobs and the economy. But he could not escape health-care questions during a routine campaign stop Tuesday at Pork Barrel BBQ in Alexandria, Va.

So what do you think about the Senate health-care bill? asked one woman who introduced herself as Gail and said that she had never met Gillespie.

Without skipping a beat, Gillespie repeated his common refrain. Well, Ill take a look at it, and I got concerns on both sides, he said. I dont think the Affordable Care Act has been good for us in Virginia. Our premiums and out-of-pocket expenses have skyrocketed.

So, will you support a public option? the woman interjected, referring to an idea embraced by liberals to include a government-backed coverage option on insurance exchanges.

I dont know that Id support a public option, Gillespie responded. That makes me nervous.

Mary Lagnaoui, an Alexandria resident, said she realized Gillespie was at Pork Barrel after spotting protesters with signs outside. She has been so consumed by health-care-related news that she felt compelled to go inside and get his thoughts, she said.

Do you have a stand on Obamacare? she asked Gillespie.

Well, we were just talking about it, he said. I believe that the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, has not been good for us here in Virginia.

As their conversation continued, Gillespie said he hopes that Congress does not treat Virginia punitively for not having taken part in Medicaid expansion under the ACA.

Im hoping they get that right in Washington, D.C., but Im focused on what we can do here in Virginia, Gillespie said, before excusing himself to take a photo with restaurant employees and leave the building.

A recent Quinnipiac University poll pegged the presidents approval rating in Virginia at 40percent and found that nearly 6 in 10 Virginians disapproved of the House Republicans health-care bill.

Gillespies detractors, including the Democratic nominee, Lt.Gov. Ralph Northam, have pilloried him for not taking a firm stance on the legislation, which Northam has characterized as immoral and unacceptable.

At some point, Gillespie will have to say what he thinks is good for Virginia, said Bob Holsworth, a longtime political analyst. This issue is likely to come more to the forefront if something actually passes.

Jennifer Duffy, an analyst who tracks gubernatorial contests for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, agreed that Gillespie is going to have a hard time fudging this issue and not taking a position.

But she said it might not be as pressing for other GOP candidates around the country.

He is too close to the Beltway, she said. People expect him to have a position, and Democrats are clearly not going to let this go.

The Republican nominee in New Jersey, the only other gubernatorial contest this November, has voiced concerns about the ACA and the loss of Medicaid funding that would result from the Republican legislation.

Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno (R) is waiting to see a final bill, but believes Washington should pass a replacement plan that covers preexisting conditions and allows people to keep their health insurance at an affordable cost, said spokesman Ricky Diaz.

In Maryland, Democratic Party chair Kathleen Matthews knocked Hogan on Wednesday for what she described as a lack of leadership in preventing Republicans in Congress from scaling back the ACA and called his position wishy-washy.

Hogan is acting more like a politician than a true governor who cares about the health care of hundreds of thousands of constituents, Matthews said on a conference call with reporters.

Hogan has criticized Congresss latest plan for replacing the ACA, with a spokeswoman for his office saying last week that Congress should go back to the drawing board in an open, transparent and bipartisan fashion to craft a bill that works for all Americans.

The Maryland governor has also said he wants Congress to find a middle path between Democrats who want to preserve the ACA and Republicans who would like to drastically overhaul it.

Josh Hicks contributed to this report.

Read the rest here:
Republicans running for governor put in a tough position by Trump health cuts - Washington Post

A medical malpractice bill that limits attorney fees and some patient damage fees in civil lawsuits was passed by the House on Wednesday by a narrow margin of 218 to 210, with numerous Republicans voting against the measure.

The biggest point of contention was over a provision that places a cap of $250,000 on noneconomic damages awards to victims, which includes for pain and suffering. Nineteen Republicans voted against the bill, many of them citing this as a key reason, saying it would trample on states rights because it would take away their ability to establish their own laws on the matter.

At least two dozen states do not cap noneconomic damages, and several state supreme courts including Washington and Florida have determined they are unconstitutional.

This represents a massive expansion of federal authority, said Rep. John J. Duncan Jr. (R-Tenn.), who voted against the bill.

Its a power grab by Washington, said Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who also voted against the measure.

The opposition from Republican members is a break from the past, when conservative lawmakers have consistently united in their support of similar measures. Several conservative groups, such as Frontiers of Freedom and the Institute for Liberty, also opposed the bill. And former U.S. attorney general Edwin Ed Meese, a Republican, announced his opposition Tuesday, calling the bill constitutional malpractice.

In a letter sent to House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), Meese said the bill was a sweeping effort to federalize tort law with our system of federalism, which reserves that province solely to the states.

The $250,000 cap for noneconomic damages is separate from damages plaintiffs receive based on future economic losses. Noneconomic damages are meant to compensate victims for pain and suffering, as well as permanent disfigurement or other serious disabilities that may not interfere with their ability to work.

The caps would apply broadly to all manner of medical malpractice, including errors in surgery, side effects from unsafe drugs, abuse and neglect in nursing homes, and sexual assault by doctors.

The issue will probably decrease the odds of the Senate taking up the measure, opponents and proponents of the measure said. The Senate has routinely declined to vote on previous tort measures passed by the House, but with Republicans in control of both chambers, some are more optimistic about this bills chances.

Democrats did not break from tradition. They have consistently opposed tort legislation. Republicans have accused them of being swayed by large campaign donations they get from trial lawyers. Democrats have said, and continued to say Wednesday, that they are against such measures because people who have been harmed would be unable to seek justice.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called the bill cruel and heartless as he made this argument against the measure.

A Washington Post article earlier this month examined the case of a Pennsylvania man, Steven Hanes, who underwent surgery in 2013 to have a testicle removed that was causing him pain. After a doctor removed the wrong testicle, he filed a medical malpractice suit and was awarded $630,000 in noneconomic damages more than twice the amount that the new bill would allow.

The limits on lawyer fees was not debated Wednesday. That provision would limit fees based on a sliding scale, in some cases cutting by half the amount a lawyer would receive from malpractice awards. On average, lawyers receive between 30 and 40percent of the award, according to several medical and legal groups who follow tort policy.

In a statement released just after the vote, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons a major proponent of the bill said it applauded the bills passage, calling it common sense, proven, comprehensive medical liability reform that will help contain health care costs.

The Center for Justice & Democracy a major opponent of the bill said it strongly condemned its passage.

Joanne Doroshow, the centers executive director, called it a harsh and mean-spirited bill that will harm the most vulnerable and severely injured Americans. This includes brain-damaged children, quadriplegic workers, and seniors in nursing homes.

Read more at PowerPost

Originally posted here:
House Republicans pass tort bill by slim margin - Washington Post