Mediaboss Marketing

Maxine Waters, the lead Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, invoked a rarely used congressional provision that allows lawmakers to directly request information from the Trump administration.

"Unfortunately, our requests to Chairman Jeb Hensarling that he utilize the investigative powers of the committee to look into matters pertaining to Donald Trump and his financial dealings have been completely ignored," Waters told CNNMoney. "Our Republican colleagues must wake up and hold the president accountable."

Between March 10 and June 21, committee Democrats have sent four letters -- two to Deutsche Bank, one to Hensarling, and another to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin -- requesting documents and answers about Russia's influence on the Trump administration.

A spokeswoman for the Democrats on the committee said no response has been received from Hensarling or Mnuchin. Deutsche Bank's counsel has also not answered questions, she said.

A Treasury spokesman told CNNMoney that the agency "takes responsiveness to congressional requests very seriously and is committed to providing useful and appropriate responses to requests from Congressional members."

A spokeswoman for Deutsche declined to comment. A spokesman for Hensarling did not respond to a request for comment.

In June, the German bank told House Democrats in a letter it wouldn't release details of its business relationship with Trump because doing so would violate federal policy laws.

Democrats have been demanding that Deutsche Bank release any internal reviews it may have conducted into loans to Trump and his family members and tied to allegations the German bank helped wealthy Russians launder billions of dollars.

In January, the bank settled charges with the government and was hit with $630 million in penalties over an alleged Russian money-laundering scheme.

Lawmakers have said the January settlement left open questions as to who may have been involved in the trading scheme, where the money was sent, and who may have benefited from the sums of money transferred out of Russia.

Friday's announcement is the latest effort by Democrats to get answers on Russia's influence on the Trump administration. It also comes days after learning the president's eldest son Donald Trump Jr. agreed to meet with someone he believed to be a "Russian government attorney" last summer after receiving an email offering him "very high level and sensitive information" that would "incriminate" Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, according to emails the younger Trump publicly released on Tuesday.

Democratic lawmakers are now trying to force GOP counterparts to say publicly whether they support investigating possible financial connections between Russian banks and Trump officials and associates.

"We will force Republicans to take votes on the record to continue from hiding facts from the American people," said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on Friday.

CNNMoney (Washington) First published July 14, 2017: 5:32 PM ET

The rest is here:
House Democrats press Treasury to divulge any Trump-Russia financial ties - CNNMoney

From time immemorial the government has tried to influence our behavior by rewarding or punishing us; big brother doesnt want us to smoke, so lawmakers tax the bejesus out of tobacco, they want us to drive electric cars, so we get showered with tax rebates and invitations into the cherished carpool lane if we go green at the car dealership, and they dont want us to linger too long at the curbside check-in at the airport, so the Dunkin Donuts is conveniently located beyond the TSA checkpoint inside the terminal.

Its the classic carrot and stick approach, that manipulates people into doing what the powers that be want.

The most famous plum from the tax man is probably the home mortgage deduction. The theory behind this perk is that people become stakeholders in society when they have skin in the game. Johnny lunch bucket is much more likely to care about the condition of the roads, schools and environment in his community if it directly affects the value of his property and the quality of life for him and his family.

Unfortunately, the tide has turned and mullets are now more en vogue than encouraging middle-class home ownership, at least in California.

On a 27-11 party-line vote the California Senate just approved Senate Bill 2, which would add a $75 fee to most real estate documents. This fee would apply to developers building new units, banks foreclosing, and people refinancing their homes, among others. Experts estimate that it would result in $1 billion in new revenue for Sacramento which they would use on, drum roll please ... low-income housing!

SB2s author, Democratic Sen. Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, told Capital Public Radio, This is a subsidy to help provide housing which then people will be able to remain in California our kids, our grandkids, the people who work in our fields, the people who work in grocery stores.

Uh, yea, its certainly a sweet deal for those who want the taxpayers of the state of California to be their sugar daddy, but if youre one of those suckers who pays their own bills, it makes you want to move to Nevada.

Advertisement

Sacramento is literally incentivizing poverty at the expense of middle-class homeowners.

After voting no on the bill, Republican Sen. Jeff Stone, R-Temecula, predicted that it would stifle real estate investment in the state of California and further place pressure on higher, not lower, real estate prices.

Weve gone from Herbert Hoover running on the platform of a chicken in every pot and a car in every garage to California Democrats promising a tenement above every 7-11.

Maybe Im just old-fashioned, but I refuse to live that close to bullet-proof glass.

Immediately after lecturing us about the need for more low-income housing, the state Senate also passed Senate Bill 106, which would allow Marin County to bypass Californias affordable housing laws.

Marin County, if youre wondering, is a deeply blue enclave north of San Francisco that sends Democrats to represent them in the state Legislature and voted for Hillary Clinton over Donald Trump by a 77-15 percent margin.

In other words, theyre fine with poor people living on the taxpayers dime, just as long as its nowhere near them.

Unfortunately, none of these hypocrisies were brought up before the vote because the legislative leadership tied the bill to the state budget, which means it never had to go through the traditional committee process.

This is what happens in a one-party state where ruling Democrats operate more like a cartel than participants in a representative democracy.

John Phillips is a CNN political commentator and can be heard weekdays at 3 p.m. on The Drive Home with Jillian Barberie and John Phillips on KABC/AM 790.

View post:
Democrats' hypocrisy on low-income housing - LA Daily News

HARRISBURG The $32 billion spending plan that became law on July 10 without Gov. Tom Wolfs signature still has no set arrangement for funding it, and Philadelphia-area Democrats said financing packages offered up by the GOP are irresponsible and they fear the states debt will increase.

Already, Standard & Poors alerted government officials that Pennsylvanias credit rating is in jeopardy of downgrading and a budget without means to fund it only hurts the states tenuous portfolio.

I am deeply troubled that the Senate and House Republicans who dominate both chambers waited so long after Governor Wolfs budget address back in February to begin discussing how to pay for the $32 billion spending bill supported by members of both parties on June 30, said State Rep. Christopher Rabb, a Philadelphia Democrat who serves the 200th Legislative District.

Nearly two weeks into the new fiscal year, Republican leadership from both chambers have refused to consider a shale tax, an adjustment to the states personal income tax which could provide savings to most families, a long-overdue minimum wage increase or an end to the Delaware loophole which allows for continued corporate welfare for the wealthiest Pennsylvania-based businesses paid for by hard-working families who are deprived of those revenues being allocated to valuable services and resources that benefit millions of residents across the state, Rabb said.

State Rep. Joanna McClinton, also a Philadelphia Democrat and who serves the 191st District, said when she began her term there was a budget impasse and GOP leadership couldnt coordinate and get on the same page and lead effectively.

Its very disheartening. The governor came to us, as he always does, gave us his priorities several months ahead of time and here we are in July, and we havent handled that business, McClinton said.

Without new revenue, the general fund will have a negative balance for eight months, and the state is basically operating on a credit card for eight months out of the year which is fiscally irresponsible, said State Rep. Leanne Krueger-Braneky, a Democrat from neighboring Delaware County.

Several lawmakers worked through a recent weekend trying to find ways to forge a plan to fund the spending bill and fill the more than $2 billion state budget gap.

However, they fell short of an agreement.

The governor and House Democrats said they want to ensure the revenue bill includes significant recurring revenue sources to avoid the credit downgrade threatened by Standard and Poors last week if Pennsylvania continues to try to borrow and mortgage its way out of its deficit.

I showed up to work this week with one goal in mind and that was to pass a fair and balanced budget, said State Rep. Maria Donatucci, the chair of the Philadelphia Delegation.

The House passed a budget that increased education funding for the City of Philadelphia by $34 million. Unfortunately, as the past week has come and gone, my colleagues across the aisle have only offered proposals that will hurt Philadelphia schools and Philadelphia school children, Donatucci said.

It is vital that we fund our early education initiatives and provide our children with the quality education they deserve. And we must now find a responsible way to pay for it, she said.

Among the ways Donatucci, Rabb and other Democrats have proposed is the implementation of a Marcellus shale severance tax and raising the minimum wage.

These are issues that I have been fighting for since I first took office, Donatucci said. I am willing to stay in Harrisburg as long as I have to and will continue to speak up for our most vulnerable residents. My constituents, and the entire city of Philadelphia, are counting on us to not only get this done, but to get it done right, she said.

Rabb accused Republicans of wanting to pay for the budget with a risky expansion of gambling and liquor sales, protecting wealthy corporations and slashing critical resources for the most vulnerable.

Democrats like me want to end poverty wages for hard-working women and men trying to support their families, end corporate welfare and make natural gas producers pay their fair share like regular taxpayers do so that we can better fund our schools, encourage job growth, care for our elders and others most in need and protect our environment, Rabb said.

Far bigger than our impending financial crisis is the crisis in leadership and vision in Harrisburg where Republicans have wreaked havoc for decades. Further, the budget process itself is a prime example of garbage in, garbage out because too much of the negotiations happen too late and with little transparency, accountability, creativity and inclusiveness, he said.

Meanwhile, as public attention continues to focus on ways to pay for the budget, Republicans in the state House have quietly been pushing a radical overhaul of the states Medical Assistance program that would impose work requirements on thousands of beneficiaries.

Two newspaper reports on Thursday said the bill, sponsored by Rep. Dan Moul, R-Adams County, cleared the state House on a party-line vote and is now awaiting action by the Senate, which could happen at any time.

The language is included in a piece of budget-enabling legislation known as the Human Services Code. The two chambers are now on six hours notice to return to Harrisburg in the event of a budget agreement.

That means a vote on the Medicaid revisions could happen as part of that.

Activists have accused the House of trying to push the bill through to avoid a public outcry, even as Washington works on a radical overhaul of Obamacare.

This is kind of done in the middle of the night, moving forward proposals that would impact hard-working Pennsylvanians that rely on Medicaid for coverage, Antoinette Kraus, of the Philadelphia-based consumer group Pennsylvania Health Access Network, said.

Donatucci said shell continue to urge her Republican colleagues to do what is right for all Pennsylvanians. Its time to put people before party, she said.

See more here:
State Democrats 'deeply troubled' over budget proposals - The Philadelphia Tribune

Some people have said our pathway to the majority is to do well in working-class districts where Trump was able to win last year and demonstrate to those voters that they have been sold a bill of goods, said Achim Bergmann, a Democratic campaign consultant working on several House races. But we also need to get to voters in districts that have not been traditionally competitive but voted against Trump, and are primed to support someone who will be a check on Trump.

For their part, Republicans are looking for opportunities in Rust Belt states where Mr. Trump prevailed but House Democrats held on.

Midterm congressional elections tend to pivot largely on swing districts where Republicans and Democrats have roughly equal chances of winning. But with so few of these left, both parties are now relying on their own interpretations of which seats they can force into play, with Republicans largely on defense, as the party in power tends to lose seats in midterm years even when the president is popular.

While Republicans cling to a 52-48 majority in the Senate, Democrats in that chamber face difficult re-election campaigns in many states where Mr. Trump won and scarce opportunities to win Republican seats.

The House landscape is different: Republicans there have been largely averse to confronting Mr. Trump, fearing the alienation of the presidents stalwart supporters more than the loss of disillusioned Republicans.

Democrats are betting that Republicans near lock-step allegiance with Mr. Trump, matched with an anemic list of legislative accomplishments in this Congress and traditionally low voter turnout in a midterm year when Democrats are energized, could make it happen for them. Democrats are also counting on Mr. Trumps sinking approval rating, among all but Republican voters, to continue to fall.

It is urgent that Democrats win the House in 2018 to restore financial stability and a path to the future for hard-working families, said Representative Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California and the House minority leader. A Democratic victory is critical for the sake of the good health of the American people, the strength of our democracy and the future of our planet. Nothing less is at stake than America as we know it.

In some places, like many districts in California, the Republican voter advantage has shrunk in recent years; in the district that includes Anaheim, where Representative Mimi Walters, a Republican, is seeking re-election, that edge has dropped from 43 percent in 2014 to just shy of 40 percent now.

If Republicans are telling you they are on offense this cycle, they are delusional, said Meredith Kelly, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. They had to spend $25 million to hold on to Kansas, Georgia, Montana and South Carolina. If they have to spend even a fraction of that money to defend their incumbents, they wont be able to go on offense.

Yet, after a bruising loss in the suburbs of Atlanta, Democrats have had to examine their playbook.

The Georgia race to fill the seat of Tom Price, the health and human services secretary, saw Republicans successfully cover the Democratic candidate, Jon Ossoff, with a bucket of Pelosi paint.

The memories of her speakership and disapproval of her is so potent, and not just for the base, said Matt Gorman, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee. She turns off independents as well. It was consistent in Georgia 6 and other suburban affluent districts.

Taking that lesson, Democrats are honing their messages to make them specific to districts, rather than sticking to the national partys talking points, and steering away as much as possible from the struggle between the progressive base and moderate Democrats.

There are a lot of people in this district who dont like Trump but dont like the national Democratic Party either, said Mr. Min, who is one of a handful of Democrats hoping to unseat Ms. Walters, who is in her second term here and is closely aligned with Mr. Trump on contentious issues like health care.

The alchemy of message and candidate is always the hardest to master. To that end, from southern Michigan to Staten Island to here in Orange County, Democrats are fielding candidates with military experience helpful in Republican-leaning districts and those with health care backgrounds, from doctors to a neuroscientist to a woman who is emphasizing her experience as a breast cancer survivor.

I am telling people I am not a Hillary person, said Mr. Min, who has his eyes fixed carefully on nonaffiliated and Republican voters Asians and parents in particular who voted for Mrs. Clinton last year.

Republicans and many election experts say that even though midterm elections have historically been tough on the party in power, last year clearly demonstrated that voters make a distinction between congressional Republicans and Mr. Trump, especially when it comes to some incumbents like Representative Ed Royce, who represents a district near here. Voters cooled themselves at the Independence Day parade Mr. Min attended with paper fans festooned with Mr. Royces name.

Unhappiness with Mr. Trumps policies does not mean that those mainstream Republicans are willing to throw out every elected official, said Nathan Gonzales, the editor of Inside Elections. It is unclear whether voters now consider Trump and congressional Republicans under the same banner and hold them responsible for him.

At the same time, trying to recapture independents and Trump-voting Democrats alone will not do the trick. The fight for the House includes different battles in lots of different types of districts, Mr. Gonzales said. Democrats know they cant compete in just the Clinton-Republican districts and take back the majority. Theres just not enough of one type of seat.

View post:
Democrats, Hoping to Retake House, Walk Tightrope in Unlikely Places - New York Times

By Daniel Jos Camacho By Daniel Jos Camacho July 14 at 1:06 PM

Daniel Jos Camacho is a Contributing Opinion Writer at The Guardian U.S. and writes about politics and religion.

U.S. President Trump and French President Emmanuel Macron discussed Russia, China, the Paris climate agreement and terrorism at a joint news conference on July 13. (Reuters)

As President Trump heads back from his meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron, a number of Americans are sighing wistfully for the president we dont have. Macrons American admirerssee in himeverything that welack in Trump: The new president is young, attractive, concerned about the climate and possesses commanding power in parliament. In short, Macron represents what Democrats here have lost. The French dodged their bullet; we didnt. Macron stemmed the nationalist tide sweeping across Europe and restored order to the free world reeling after Brexit and Trump. Or so the story goes.

With Marine Le Pens National Front as the only alternative in the French runoff earlier this year, Macron was the right and necessary choice. Yet Americans should beware of developing too much of a love affair with Frances latest president: After all, Macron does not provide a truly progressive blueprint that we should or even could emulate here.

American liberals have been quick to embrace Macron. During Frances election, former president Barack Obama called and formally endorsed him. Painting this simply as an effort to stop Le Pen would be a half-truth: Obama reached out before the first round, where a more progressive candidate by the name of Jean-Luc Mlenchon would go on to win the youngest segment of the voting population. Obama was not opting for a lesser evil but an unabashed embrace of centrist politics. As political commentator Joy Ann Reid put it, Macron found a way to thread the needle between far right and far left populism/socialism. Hes culturally liberal but economically pragmatic. Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress, was another visible leader in the Democratic establishment who argued that Macron provides a model for progressives here. Enthusiasm for him extended to the popular level. When Macron attended the G-7 Summit in late May, he ignited social media fan fiction over his impossibly romantic first date with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

[Frances Emmanuel Macron is about to expand his power in a most remarkable way]

At first, Macrons liberal boosters seemed to be getting what they bargained for. Macron stood up against Trump, publicly airing his disagreement with him for pulling the United States out of the Paris climate accord while saying, Make our planet great again. There was his pre-emptive white-knuckled handshake with Trump which demonstrated firmness.

But look closer, and a much more complicated picture of Macrons politics emerges. To start, he won the presidency with a weak mandate in an election in which over a third of French voters abstained or cast white ballots. His party En Marche! won an overwhelming majority in parliament only amid record-low turnout. This weak mandate, coupled with his effort to push through controversial labor reforms without debate in parliament, does not sound deeply democratic.

Macron, who took Trump to Napoleon Bonapartes tomb, has himself earned comparisons to the French emperor, something he doesnt entirely seem to mind: He has previously said that France needs a king and Jupiter-like president. Macron has also given other offensive and sometimes utterly bizarre commentary. When he was recently asked if Africa would implement a Marshall Plan for Africa, he described Africas economic problems as civilizational. After the president skipped the traditional Bastille Day news conference, an administration source explained that Macrons complex thought process didnt lend itself to interviews with journalists.

[Macron is set to be one of the loudest anti-Trump voices in Europe]

Macron has emphasized tax cuts for businesses and limits on public spending. When the new French Prime Minister douard Philippe spoke to FT and was told that these were right-wing measures, Phillippe allegedly burst into laughter and responded, Yes, what did you expect? Macron has made a concerted effort to lure capital to France, particularly bankers leery of Brexit. When Macron speaks of revolutionizing and transforming France, in sounds more like a Silicon Valley-style neoliberalization than pro-worker reform that might benefit the poor and working class. Americans, at the very least, should know that this has not been to solution to the plight of workers.

Depending on who you ask, Macrons politicsare either masterful compromise or the art of standing for everything and nothing at the same time. He spoke out against Frances colonial complicity in Algeria only to apologize after his comments caused an uproar. Regarding the Muslim burkini, Macron thinks the dress is not religious but ideological and opposed to gender equality. Still, he thinks it is wrong for police to forcibly remove burkinis. Yet again, he supports a partial ban. This is against a backdrop in which Macron has low regard for civil liberties mosques can be closed if Macrons Interior Ministry does not like what is said in them and in which he plans to make Frances state of emergency permanent.

It is unclear whether Macrons policies will bury the nationalist xenophobic current feeding on economic discontent or further it. Nevertheless, Democrats here should not look to him as the progressive model to emulate here. The Democratic establishments attraction to Macron is fueled by nostalgia for a bygone era. Lacking a successor to Obama, it is as if some now look to Macron to imagine an uninterrupted order in which the center is stable, and nothing has changed. But that world is gone now, and dreaming of France wont bring it back.

Read the original:
Democrats, get a grip: Emmanuel Macron is not your progressive savior - Washington Post