Mediaboss Marketing

One by one, the six Democrats running for mayor of Philadelphia gave their best pitches Wednesday night to about 300 members of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, in an effort to secure the union's coveted endorsement in the May primary.

The meeting, in the sheet-metal workers' hall on Columbus Boulevard, was closed to reporters, but afterward the candidates talked about their prospects of having one of the city's largest unions on their side, and about their views on education funding, which has emerged as one of the top issues in the campaign.

"They know all of the funding does not come from the city," said PFT president Jerry Jordan, "but that there is a need for a mayor to work with the legislature and the governor in Harrisburg in order to make sure that the resources are there for our children."

His members, he said, want "someone who is honest and who will work to make sure the resources are in the classroom for them."

Most of the candidates said they told the union members they would work with Harrisburg for an equitable school-funding formula that would send more money for the district, which is facing an $80 million budget deficit for the next school year.

Some, however, said they would also try to get more money from local sources.

Former Common Pleas Court Judge Nelson Diaz said he would try to shift the tax base to increase the burden on real estate. If the wage tax is lowered, he said, more people will work here and more real estate taxes will come in.

Former District Attorney Lynne M. Abraham also discussed tax reform and how the city's fiscal decisions play a role in the school funding debate. "How we spend our money, and can we be more efficient with how we spend our money, so we can use some of the savings to give to the schools," she said.

Former city spokesman Doug Oliver said he would consider selling city assets that are not "a primary function of government." He listed the Philadelphia Gas Works, the Water Department, and Philadelphia International Airport as examples.

See the original post:
Democrats running for mayor seek teachers' union backing

Relying on Republicans and going against the grain of his own party for his legislative successes has not been much of a go-to play in President Barack Obama's game plan.

Then there's international trade.

On Thursday, Obama stepped up his campaign for expanding exports and negotiating new trade deals in Asia and Europe, a rare spot of common ground with Republicans and a raw point of friction with Democrats. Obama pushed his trade themes in interviews with television stations from states represented by some of the handful of Democratic senators who may be willing to side with the president on his plans for new commerce agreements.

"There have been times in the past where some of the trade deals didn't work out for particular sectors in particular communities," Obama told KMBC in Kansas City, Missouri. "Which is why we're organizing trade in the Asia Pacific region, the fastest growing region in the world, to make sure you have strong enforceable labor provisions, make sure you have strong enforceable environmental provisions, make sure you have a level playing field."

Before cutting those deals, however, Obama wants authority to negotiate trade agreements that Congress can only approve or reject, but not amend. Presidents have had an increasingly tough time getting that authority from Congress; Bill Clinton had to buck his party to win it and George W. Bush got it by a single vote.

But Obama's task may be even tougher.

"He has a harder challenge because the last Democratic president (Clinton) who did this did it in the context of a historic economic boom, a period in which globalization still looked like it had enormous upsides with relatively little downside," said Rob Shapiro, a former senior Commerce Department official and economic adviser to President Clinton.

"The upsides are still there, but the downsides have become more apparent."

Critics, including labor unions, complain past trade deals have sent U.S. manufacturing jobs to countries with lower wages, have flooded the U.S. with cheaper imports and not helped U.S. exporters.

The Obama administration on Thursday released data promoting the role of exports in the economic recovery. According to the White House, exports supported about 11.3 million jobs in 2013, an increase of 1.6 million over 2009. While the U.S. posted a record $2.35 trillion in exports in 2014, it also posted a $500 billion trade deficit, higher than 2013 but lower than the $760 billion high recorded in 2006.

Read more from the original source:
Obama Steps up Pitch for Trade, Exports, Targets Democrats

WASHINGTON -- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday turned down an invitation to meet privately with Senate Democrats next week during his visit to Washington, saying the session "could compound the misperception of partisanship" surrounding his trip.

Netanyahu had previously accepted an invitation from Republican leaders to address a joint meeting of Congress on March 3 and speak about Iran. The GOP leaders did not consult with the Obama administration, which the White House and even former Secretary of State James Baker, a Republican, called a breach of protocol.

Play Video

Former Secretary of State James Baker says he can't remember the last time a foreign leader was invited to address Congress without the president...

Sens. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., on Monday invited Netanyahu to meet in a closed-door session with Democrats during his visit, saying a private meeting would be a "wholly appropriate opportunity" for him to discuss issues facing the U.S. and Israel. The GOP invitation, the Democrats said, "sacrifices deep and well-established cooperation on Israel for short-term partisan points - something that should never be done with Israeli security and which we fear could have lasting repercussions."

But Netanyahu declined the invitation on Tuesday and expressed regret about the politically fraught tone of his trip.

"I regret that the invitation to address the special joint session of Congress has been perceived by some to be political or partisan," Netanyahu wrote. "I can assure you that my sole intention in accepting it was to voice Israel's grave concerns about a potential nuclear agreement with Iran that could threaten the survival of my country."

Netanyahu said to meet with Democrats "at this time could compound the misperception of partisanship regarding my upcoming visit."

More than a half dozen House and Senate Democrats have said they will skip the speech, calling it an affront to President Obama and the administration as they engage in high-level negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program. Vice President Joe Biden will be traveling and has no plans to attend the speech.

Play Video

Read the rest here:
Netanyahu won't meet privately with Democrats

For Harry Reid and his Senate Democrats, revenge is a dish best served bold.

For years, they complained that the Republican minority had tied the chamber in knots. But now, just weeks into their stint in the minority, Democrats are brazenly using the same knot-tying procedures.

Four times, they used filibusters to block the majority from bringing up a Department of Homeland Security funding bill that would undo President Obamas executive orders on immigration. And even after Majority Leader Mitch McConnell essentially surrendered on Monday splitting the immigration proposal from the funding bill Democrats continued grandstanding gleefully on Tuesday, confident that if parts of the Homeland Security department shut down in the coming days Republicans will be to blame.

And so Reid (Nev.) led about 30 Senate Democrats and a couple of uniformed firefighter chiefs into a basement room in the Capitol complex Tuesday afternoon for a pep rally daring Republicans to let funding run out for DHS and essentially declaring the GOP majority soft on terrorism. With terrorists threatening to attack America, we must fund Homeland Security and fund it now, said Reid, who, wearing Wayfarer sunglasses and sporting ghastly facial bruises because of a recent accident, seemed downright scary as he invoked terrorist beheadings.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) asked of the Republicans: Are they going to prioritize politics? Or are they going to prioritize national security?

Top Senate Democrats insisted on Tuesday that legislation to fund the Department of Homeland Security be passed before members would consider debate on immigration. (AP)

And Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, where the Mall of America is the target of a new terrorist threat by the Somali group al-Shabab, told Republicans to get these firefighters funded, to fund our security and not to send a message to al-Shabab that were just going to shut down Homeland Security.

All of this must make McConnell wonder why he wanted so much to become majority leader. The Kentucky Republican is making a good-faith effort to keep his promise not to have a shutdown. But he is finding out that the Senate is just as ungovernable under his Republican control as it was under the previous management.

For his troubles, McConnell is the target of carping by conservatives and is so far receiving no assistance from House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio). Hes also an easy mark for mischief-making Democrats, who are now enjoying the advantage Republicans did for years: Its easier to stop things from happening than to make them happen.

On the Senate floor Tuesday morning, McConnell described his proposed surrender. My preference remains with the legislation thats already passed the House, he said, referring to the plan to make homeland-security funding conditional on the demise of Obamas immigration orders. But Im ready to try another way. I hope our friends across the aisle will demonstrate similar flexibility.

See original here:
Milbank: Harry Reid takes the stage in the DHS fiasco

The movie star created a stir during her Best Supporting Actress Academy Award acceptance speech at Sunday night's Oscars, when she said: "To every woman who gave birth to every taxpayer and citizen of this nation, we have fought for everybody else's equal rights. It's our time to have wage equality once and for all, and equal rights for women in the United States of America."

The comment was a hit in the moment, with Meryl Streep and Jennifer Lopez effusing their support.

Now, likely 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, Labor Secretary Tom Perez and other Democrats are using those comments as a way to raise an issue that's been central to their party's economic message in recent years.

"I think we all cheered at Patricia Arquette's speech at the Oscars -- because she's right," Clinton told an audience of women working in Silicon Valley's technology industry in California on Tuesday.

Other Democrats praised Arquette's comments, too. Among them were House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, Perez, the Labor secretary, and Valerie Jarrett, one of President Barack Obama's top White House aides.

Democrats have pushed a bill intended to close the pay gap between men and women by offering new legal protections to women who complain that they're being underpaid relative to their male peers, and by having the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission collect gender and racial pay data.

The bill failed to clear the 60-vote procedural threshold in the Senate last year -- and it's all but certain not to advance now that Republicans control both the House and the Senate, leaving Democrats to raise the issue on the presidential campaign trail instead.

Republicans argue there are already enough protections on the books to ensure women have the right to equal wages.

Clinton's comments come as The New York Times reports she plans to make her gender -- and potential to break the "glass ceiling" and become America's first female president -- a central theme in her widely expected 2016 campaign.

During her speech Tuesday, Clinton recalled being pregnant while working in an Arkansas law firm that had no maternity leave policy. She also called the tech industry the "wild west," and said it needs to be more welcoming to women.

See the original post here:
Clinton, Dems embrace Arquette's equal pay pitch