Mediaboss Marketing

Senate Republican leader Christine Radogno announced her resignation Thursday, another sign of the lack of progress at the Capitol as Illinois teeters toward a third year without a comprehensive spending plan.

The first woman to lead a legislative caucus left little doubt her departure was in part born of frustration over the partisan stalemate that has sent state government finances spiraling downward despite her efforts to reach a compromise that would satisfy a demanding Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner and a Democratic-led General Assembly.

"I will say that I feel strongly that the governor has the right agenda, but it's not that easy getting there. We need fundamental change in this building, but we need to compromise in order to get there," said Radogno, 64, of southwest suburban Lemont.

"We have to put aside personalities. We have to prioritize what we want. Nobody gets 100 percent, but what do you absolutely have to have? When you negotiate, you need to understand and get in the skin of the person you're talking to," she said, providing advice for the governor and other legislative leaders.

The 20-year veteran lawmaker had earned plaudits for working with Democrats. Radogno said for months she had been looking for a "natural break" in the legislative schedule to begin her retirement. In what could be viewed as an ominous acknowledgment, Radogno said she chose Saturday, the start of the state's new budget year, to retire because "I'm not sure there's another natural break coming anytime soon."

Radogno's announcement came as the state faced increased warnings of financial doom if it went past Friday's deadline without a spending plan.

Facing a downgrade to "junk" credit status, a federal court ruling that could require increased payments to Medicaid providers, uncertainty for some school openings in the fall, the future of what remains of a frayed social service safety net and the prospect of road construction project shutdowns, Democratic Comptroller Susana Mendoza said the consequences to the state of failing to reach a budget agreement by midnight Friday go from the current "horrific" to "catastrophic."

Democratic House Speaker Michael Madigan pledged to open Friday with a House vote on his members' version of a state $36.5 billion spending plan, despite no agreement on items Rauner has made a prerequisite toward signing a budget and tax increase including changes in workers' compensation and a freeze on property taxes.

Rep. Greg Harris, Madigan's top budget negotiator, said that depending on the fate of the spending plan, Democrats would then vote on their tax plan. Filed late Thursday, the proposal would raise the personal income tax rate from the current 3.75 percent to 4.95 percent.

Unlike tax legislation approved earlier by the Senate, it would not be retroactive to Jan. 1 but instead begin with the July 1 start of the budget year. That change is designed to avoid having people pay even more in income taxes the rest of the year to catch up for the past six months. Also out is an expansion of sales taxes to some services. The hike would be permanent, against Rauner's desire to make it temporary.

By calling the budget and tax plan in the House, Madigan will be taking the temperature of House Republicans with Rauner's must-have issues still undecided. Even if all House Democrats vote for measures in this special legislative session, at least four Republican votes are needed for passage.

"We are staring into the abyss," Harris said. "I think everyone who cares about the state of Illinois should support this. This is the chance."

If those measures fail to gain enough support, Harris said Democrats would consider a series of backup bills to spend money in key areas such as social services and education. But those efforts would not come with the needed dollars to actually pay for the programs, meaning they are likely designed to provide political cover to allow Democrats to say they voted in favor of projects important to their districts even if a broader deal isn't reached.

"Those are the contingencies, we don't want to vote on those," Harris said.

Madigan also maintained that he and Democratic Senate President John Cullerton insisted that Rauner sign a Democratic-passed bill to rewrite how the state divvies up money for public schools. Rauner had previously vowed to veto the measure, calling its level of funding for Chicago Public Schools a "bailout."

Madigan also said that any efforts to change the workers' compensation system for people injured on the job must include a rate review of premiums charged by insurers. Democrats contend 2011 changes should provide more savings to businesses, but insurers are increasing their profits instead. Republicans are pushing for further cuts to fees doctors, hospitals and pharmacies receive for treating workers with rates closer to those set under Medicaid.

On property taxes, Democrats have agreed to Rauner's call for a four-year statewide freeze, but are pushing for several exemptions that Republicans contend would result in little relief. They include exemptions for Chicago and troubled school districts such as CPS. The freeze also would not apply to levies that are used to pay debt or pension payments for employees, including police and firefighters.

Madigan declined to detail areas where Democrats may be open to further "adjustments" on their property tax proposal. He also refused to predict if a resolution would come ahead of the start of the new budget year, saying anything is possible if the sides remain "reasonable." That was a dig at Rauner, who he has repeatedly accused of pushing an "extreme" agenda.

"I think I have moved considerably to engage on all of these issues," Madigan said. "I don't see that I am being unreasonable. I am here. I am proposing to vote for things I don't believe in. I don't think the government should be about the business of reducing the benefit level of an injured worker. That's not the right thing to do. But in the spirit of compromise I am prepared to vote for that."

House lawmakers Thursday also approved a new version of an already passed measure that could raise monthly phone fees for 911 services money that Mayor Rahm Emanuel hopes to route toward paying down Chicago's pension debt. Rauner has threatened to veto the initial measure.

The version of the bill that's now on Rauner's desk would extend the Emergency Telephone System Act, which is set to expire Saturday, and would allow Chicago to raise its 911 fee to $5 per month from $3.90, while jurisdictions outside the city would see their monthly rate go from 87 cents to $1.50 per line.

A Rauner aide last week called on lawmakers to pass a new bill that does not include the surcharge hikes but ensures that the Emergency Telephone System Act is extended to provide for local 911 services.

Instead, Republicans and Democrats in the House came together to pass a backup version of the bill that continues the 911 funding stream if the law expires because of a Rauner veto or inaction of the original proposal. The Senate approved the legislation Wednesday.

The idea is that if Rauner vetoes the first bill while lawmakers are out of town, they can send him the second bill without having to make a special trip to Springfield to take a vote.

But the day's news was dominated by word of Radogno's retirement from a leadership post she has held since 2009 when she succeeded Frank Watson of Downstate Greenville, who had suffered a stroke.

Even before her announcement, behind-the-scenes efforts to replace Radogno were being made by state Sen. Bill Brady of Bloomington, who served as her top deputy in the Senate GOP caucus, and by state Sen. Karen McConnaughay, the former Kane County Board chairman from St. Charles.

In a statement, Rauner called Radogno "a consummate professional and public servant, who has championed fiscal responsibility and human services that help our most vulnerable residents."

Talk of Radogno's decision had begun spreading privately during the closing days of June in the aftermath of months of contentiousness with a Democratic legislative majority and a Republican governor who has extensively used his personal wealth to command loyalty among GOP lawmakers.

But Radogno found her members' loyalty to Rauner sometimes created conflict with loyalty to her leadership, some Republicans said privately. That surfaced in working with Cullerton to try to negotiate an end to the impasse known as the "grand bargain."

Rauner eventually contended the so-called bargain did not go far enough to satisfy him, and Democrats accused him of stripping away GOP votes from a version of the package.

Radogno said she was "disappointed" that a bipartisan package failed to materialize in May but told reporters, "If that was my motivation (to resign) I would have been gone then."

Though Radogno has been in the General Assembly for two decades, a decision to step down had been expected as the grind of legislative sessions, particularly serving in the minority, began to take its toll.

Besides the political battles, Radogno also had some personal tragedies during her tenure, including the June 2014 death of her 31-year-old daughter, Lisa, who worked for then-U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk's office in Washington.

"As you may know, my daughter was on the Hill, so politics was really important to her, so knowing (that, I) doubled down my interest in it," Radogno said, tearing up.

"But it did give me the perspective that nothing's forever and I don't want to be squandering my life with my husband and my grandkids and my other daughters," she said. "We only all have a certain amount of time and that experience told me that's for sure."

rap30@aol.com

Twitter @rap30

View original post here:
Illinois Senate Republican leader Radogno steps down - Chicago Tribune

The Fix's Callum Borchers explains the years-long feud between President Trump and the hosts of MSNBC's "Morning Joe." (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

People suffering from Alzheimers often experience something called sundowning, when in the early evening they become particularly disoriented and erratic in their behavior. The president of the United States experiences something we might call mornraging, when at the beginning of the day he tunes in to morning television shows, hears something that makes him mad and fires off tweets that highlight the darkest recesses of his id.

At the precise moment when President Trump is trying to persuade Republican senators not to abandon one of the partys most critical policy initiatives, its almost as though hes trying to give members of his party reasons to get as far from him as possible. That could have continuing consequences for the partys ability to achieve tricky and complex policy and political goals.

Heres what Trump sent this morning:

If Donald Trump were your friend, your uncle or your co-worker, youd feel compelled to say to him, Dude, cmon. Dont be such a jerk. But hes not any of those things. Hes the president of the United States, the most powerful person in the world.

And some Republican members of Congress are indeed telling him to stop being such a jerk. This has to stop we all have a job 3 branches of govt and media. We dont have to get along, but we must show respect and civility, tweeted Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine). Please just stop. This isnt normal and its beneath the dignity of your office., added Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.).

Mr. President, your tweet was beneath the office and represents what is wrong with American politics, not the greatness of America, said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.). The Presidents tweets today dont help our political or national discourse and it does not provide a positive role model for our national dialogue, said Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.).

This is not okay, said Rep. Lynn Jenkins (R-Kan.). As a female in politics, I am often criticized for my looks. We should be working to empower women.

But he wont stop. This is who he is. We all know that. Trump is not going to become presidential, hes not going to rein in his worst instincts, and hes not going to stop mornraging. Hes a petty, vindictive, insecure little man with no impulse control. Its who he is and who he will always be.

After President Trump tweeted insults at MSNBC host Mika Brzezinski on June 29, White House principal deputy press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders defended Trump and said Americans "knew what they were getting" when they elected him. (Reuters)

Republicans knew exactly who he was when they all lined up behind him in 2016, even if many harbored the naive hope that he would be changed by the office. But they also assumed that with total control of the government, they would pass a boatload of bills, hed sign them, and his personal weaknesses wouldnt much matter. It turns out, however, that it isnt so simple. As were seeing in the health-care debacle currently underway, when youre trying to accomplish something complex and politically perilous, you need the president. You need him to be a persuasive public advocate for your policy, and you need him to help resolve internal differences and forge consensus.

But Trump fails on both both counts. He cant be a persuasive advocate because he doesnt understand the policies he advocates for, and he has focused so relentlessly on telling his base what they want to hear that people outside that base just dont believe him. When he gives an interview or makes a speech about what Republicans are trying to do, hes likely to say something that contradicts or undermines their case. And internally, hes rapidly losing whatever respect he had from Republicans.

Consider this description from a recent article by some of The Posts political reporters about how Trump is viewed by members of his own party in Congress:

In private conversations on Capitol Hill, Trump is often not taken seriously. Some Republican lawmakers consider some of his promises such as making Mexico pay for a new border wall fantastical. They are exhausted and at times exasperated by his hopscotching from one subject to the next, chronicled in his pithy and provocative tweets. They are quick to point out how little command he demonstrates of policy. And they have come to regard some of his threats as empty, concluding that crossing the president poses little danger.

Republicans are facing some tricky challenges in the months ahead passing a budget, increasing the debt ceiling, tax reform and success can require subtle negotiations. At times, it may be necessary for the president to convince individual members to put aside their own ideas and interests in favor of something that is good for the party but might not be good for them. Who thinks Trump is capable of that?

Now lets be clear about something: Republicans are not a profile in courage on the question of Donald Trumps boorishness. They supported him in 2016 when he was accused by multiple women of harassment, when he made racist attacks on a judge, when he picked a fight with a Gold Star family, when he was caught on tape bragging about his ability to commit sexual assault with impunity and they still support him as long as hes doing what they want. There are precious few of them who stood up and said that they could not in good conscience stand behind such a despicable human being, and history will judge them harshly for their complicity in this disaster of a presidency.

But what Im talking about here are the moments when they arent all in agreement, and Trump would have to exercise leadership to pull them together. If youre a member of Congress, making the decision to overcome your doubts and do what the president asks isnt easy. A lot of factors play into it your fear that he might punish you, the personal relationship youve built with him, your constituents feelings about him, your worries about reelection, your belief in your own independence and so on. Trump has been president for barely five months, and were already seeing that members of Congress dont really fear him, theyre continually amazed by his ignorance about policy, and they think his White House is a bunch of amateurs.

Trump could change that state of affairs, but it would take time, work and an inclination he apparently lacks. Instead, hed rather just say that everything is going great. So he keeps making it worse. If youre in the midst of sensitive negotiations over health care and you desperately need to hold the votes of (among others) Sens. Collins, Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), maybe launching puerile sexist tweets at cable news personalities is not going to help.

There are always going to be times when a member of Congress says, Mr. President, I respect and admire you, but I have to say no this time. That happens to every president. But if you convince them that youre not worthy of their respect and admiration, saying No becomes a lot easier.

Read more:
How Trump's disgusting behavior will make Republican disunity more likely - Washington Post (blog)

President Trump unified Washington Thursday in opposition to a pair of tweets he wrote in which he criticized a female MSNBC anchor and said she had undergone plastic surgery.

"Obviously, I don't see this as an appropriate comment," House Speaker Paul Ryan said when asked about the tweets Thursday.

"I think it's a blatantly sexist [tweet]," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said of Trump's social media rant. "That really saddens me because it is so beneath the dignity of the president of the United States to engage in such behavior."

Criticism of Trump's comments poured in from both sides of the aisle and spilled into the White House briefing room on Thursday, where deputy press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders faced an onslaught of questions about whether the president crossed an ethical line with his tweets.

The host he attacked, MSNBC "Morning Joe" co-anchor Mika Brzezinski, has been an outspoken critic of Trump and has even questioned his mental stability.

Few rallied to Trump's defense in the wake of his attack on Brzezinski, and even the president's strongest supporters questioned the wisdom of his early-morning Twitter tirade.

Laura Ingraham, a conservative radio host who has been considered as a possible candidate for press secretary, chided Trump for diverting attention away from his administration's crackdown on illegal immigration.

And Mike Huckabee, a longtime Trump supporter and father to Sanders, stopped short Thursday of saying his daughter defended the president's words and cautioned Trump against using the same harsh tactics in future situations.

Trump's tweets about Brzezinski come as Republicans in the Senate struggle to sell their Obamacare repeal legislation to the public in one voice amid intra-party disputes about the direction of the healthcare plan.

The president, who had stayed mostly on the sidelines of the Obamacare repeal debate as senators put together a bill behind closed doors over the past month, emerged as a leading spokesman for the bill after the GOP released it last week. His latest tweets could provide a distraction from his efforts to build support for the policy.

But it wouldn't be the first time Trump's social media antics disrupted the work of his White House and united lawmakers against his Twitter feed.

Earlier this month, for example, Trump seemingly announced that he was under investigation for alleged obstruction of justice just as the frenzy surrounding former FBI Director James Comey's testimony before Congress had finally begun to die down.

The tweet revived scrutiny of Trump's efforts to downplay an investigation into his former associate, Gen. Mike Flynn, and gave Democrats room to hammer home the latest set of allegations against his administration.

In early June, Trump threw a wrench into his Justice Department's efforts to defend an executive order temporarily suspending immigration from the Middle East by embracing the "travel ban" nickname with which several courts had taken issue.

Trump's tweets soon surfaced in court documents as critics of the so-called "travel ban" fought to block it in the legal system.

The president touched off a firestorm of controversy in May when he hinted that the White House may have "tapes" of conversations between Trump and Comey.

Comey cited the tweet as the motivation behind his decision to share details from his Trump talks with the media, which in turn prompted the deputy attorney general to appoint a special counsel.

And in March Trump drew widespread condemnation with his claim that former President Barack Obama wiretapped Trump Tower.

In each case, Trump put Republicans in the awkward position of having to defend his rants and stole the focus from their attempts to build support for GOP legislative items.

The White House has relied on a familiar tactic to dismiss questions about the president's disruptive social media habits.

For nearly every day that's dominated by an off-message Trump tweet, White House officials have clung to the line so ubiquitous that it has become a running joke in some corners of the media: "The tweet speaks for itself."

Read the rest here:
Trump's tweets unnerve Republican allies - Washington Examiner

A Republican opposition researcher with a potential connection to President Trump's former national security adviser Mike Flynn tried to obtain emails he thought were stolen from Hillary Clinton's email server, according to a new report.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the GOP operative, Peter W. Smith implied to people he sought to recruit to participate in his mission to access the stolen emails that he was working with Flynn, who was then a national security adviser to then-candidate Trump.

The Journal said the stolen emails in question were likely hacked by Russians.

The newspaper reported that emails written by Smith and one of his associates show Flynn and his consulting company, Flynn Intel Group, were allies in their effort.

Flynn's actual role in the project is unknown, the Journal reports. Smith told the Journal he knew Flynn but didn't say if he was involved. Smith, 81, died about a week and a half after his interview with the Journal, the report notes.

A Trump campaign official told the Journal that Smith never worked for them, and if Flynn coordinated with Smith, it would have been in his private capacity.

The Journal reports that U.S. investigators, as part of the probe of Russia's election interference, have examined reports from intelligence agencies that describe Russian hackers discussing how to obtain emails from Clinton's server and then give them to Flynn through an intermediary.

Smith was targeting 33,000 emails that Clinton said were deleted and not provided to investigators because they were personal. Smith thought the emails might have been obtained by hackers and that they actually concerned official matters Clinton wanted to hide.

The Journal said Smith gave no evidence for his speculation.

Former FBI Director James Comey has said there is no evidence Clinton's private server has been hacked, but he left open the possibility it might have been.

Flynn is a central figure of investigations into Russia election interference and possible collusion with the Trump campaign. Flynn was fired from his role as national security adviser after admitting he had misled the vice president and other White House officials about the contents of a phone call he had with the Russian ambassador to the U.S. weeks before Trump's inauguration.

Read more here:
Republican operative tied to Mike Flynn tried to obtain Hillary Clinton's emails: Report - Washington Examiner

Six months after taking control of the White House and both houses of Congress, Republicans who campaigned for years on repealing Obamacare still cant agree on how to do it.

A chief reason that the struggle has been so hard is the growing importance in the party of populist blue-collar voters, whom Trump proved adept at courting, but Republicans risk alienating with their healthcare overhaul.

Its true, as Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said Tuesday after temporarily shelving a vote on the healthcare bill, that legislation of this complexity almost always takes longer than anybody else would hope.

Its also true, as Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said, that President Trump is new to government, and "it has been a challenge to him to learn how to interact with Congress." Trump, who touts himself as the closer in big deals, has proven ineffective in that role so far in the Senate, in part because of a failure to master not just the details of healthcare policy, but the broad outlines of how the bill would work.

But something more than the complexity of the subject and the dysfunction of the White House has stymied Republicans: The split over healthcare highlights a deep division that threatens to paralyze them as a governing party.

A side-by-side comparison of Obamacare and the GOPs replacement plans

Republicans were seemingly so disciplined in not lending any support to Democrats during the Obama years that we thought they were unified, said Sarah Binder, a political science professor at George Washington University and expert on Congress.

Weve overestimated cohesion in the Republican Party, she said, noting that Republicans have become more ideologically diverse over the last decade.

The splits within the party have McConnell and his allies scrambling to get the 50 votes they would need in the Senate to pass a bill, a goal he repeated on Wednesday. McConnell hopes to reach a deal by Friday, before senators leave for a weeklong July 4 recess, and then vote on it when they return. However, the longer the bill is exposed to public scrutiny and attack, not just from Democrats, but from doctors groups, hospital officials, insurers and some Republican governors, the harder the search for votes will become, he and his lieutenants fear.

Alex Brandon / Associated Press

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell listens to a question while speaking with the media after a meeting with President Trump at the White House.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell listens to a question while speaking with the media after a meeting with President Trump at the White House. (Alex Brandon / Associated Press)

If Republicans cant agree, McConnell said after senators met with Trump at the White House on Tuesday, well have to sit down with Sen. [Charles. E.] Schumer, the Democratic leader to negotiate a solution to at least tackle the most acute problems with the Obamacare markets.

But he made clear that bipartisan discussion was not his first choice. My suspicion is any negotiation with Democrats will include none of the reforms that we would like to make on the market side and the Medicaid side, he added.

Republicans determination to pass the healthcare bill might seem puzzling in light of its deep unpopularity with voters. A poll for National Public Radio and PBS, conducted by the polling institute at Marist College in Poughkeepsie, N.Y., and released Wednesday, found, for example, that only one in five people approved of how the Republicans are handling healthcare. Even among those who identified themselves as Trump supporters, opinion was evenly divided on how the party is dealing with the issue, while Trump opponents were almost unanimous in their distaste for it.

Asked specifically about the Senate bill, just 17% of Americans and only 35% of Republicans said they approved of it.

Two other nationwide surveys, done by polling institutes at Suffolk University in Massachusetts and Quinnipiac University in Connecticut, showed similar results.

One counterbalance to the bills unpopularity is pressure from the partys donors, who tend to be ideological conservatives.

At a recent donor conference organized by the network of groups affiliated with the billionaire Koch brothers, Doug Deason, a major Republican donor from Dallas, told reporters that he and other wealthy Texans had let Republicans know that they would stop sending money until Congress started fulfilling key campaign promises, including repealing the Affordable Care Act, as Obamacare is formally known.

You control the Senate, you control the House, we have the presidency, theres no reason we cant get this done, Deason said he told House Republicans, including Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield). Were closing the checkbook until you get some things done, he said.

But pressure from donors is not the only factor. The same survey that revealed widespread unpopularity for the Senate bill also showed that 53% of Republicans still said they wanted Congress to completely repeal Obamacare. Among the public as a whole, 25% took that view, while 46% said Congress should change the law so it does more, and another 17% said they should leave it as it is.

A close look at how people voted last fall helps explain the divided impulses among Republicans. The partys victory in 2016 depended on two very different groups traditional conservatives and conservative populists who have clashing interests in the healthcare debate.

Political analysts often look at how voters line up on two different sets of issues economic subjects, such as the proper size of the social safety net, the role of government in the economy and inequality between rich and poor; and social issues, including race, immigration and moral questions like abortion.

Analyzed that way, voters typically separate into four big clusters. A recent large-scale study of 2016 voters, conducted by a team of political scientists for the Democracy Fund, a nonpartisan foundation, found that the largest group, making up about 45% of voters, was consistently liberal on both economic and social questions. Thats the Democratic Partys core not a majority, but relatively cohesive on most policy issues.

The opposite end of the spectrum conservatives on both economic and social issues made up just under 25% of the vote. Thats the traditional activist core of the GOP.

What allowed Trump to win and also helped create the Republican majorities in the House and Senate, is the degree of support they got from the roughly 30% of voters who hold conservative views on social issues but relatively liberal ones on the role of government. Those voters, often labeled populists, are typically blue-collar, less affluent and often drawn to Republicans despite the partys views on economic issues, not because of them.

The fourth group liberal on social issues, but conservative on economics has appeal in some elite circles, but is extremely small among ordinary voters, less than 5% of the voters in 2016.

There are a lot of people who voted Republican because of cultural and identity issues, but who want government programs that help them, said Lee Drutman, a senior fellow at New America, a Washington-based think tank, who analyzed voting behavior for the study.

The conflicting pressures that those two groups of voters create for Republican elected officials has been a key factor in the legislative stalemate.

Republican senators such as ones from Ohio, West Virginia, Maine and Nevada who have balked at the Senate bill have constituents who like these programs, including Medicaid and parts of the Affordable Care Act, Drutman said. If theyre taken away, a lot of these voters will be upset.

Trump in his campaign seemed to understand that view, and unlike most of his Republicans rivals, he opposed cuts in entitlement programs.

I was the first & only potential GOP candidate to state there will be no cuts to Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid, Trump declared in a Twitter message early on in his quest. Since his election, he has seemed intermittently aware of the tension between the GOP effort to repeal Obamacare and the needs of many of his voters, backing the healthcare bill in public, but then calling it mean after it passed the House and saying that the Senate should add more money to produce a measure with heart.

Shrinking Medicaid, the governments 50-year-old program of medical assistance to the poor, however, forms the largest element of the bill, despite Trumps campaign stand. The Senate version would reduce spending on Medicaid by $772 billion over the next decade, a cut of about 25%, and would push some 15 million people off Medicaid coverage, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

The president has not put forward a policy proposal of his own to achieve the measure with heart that he says he would prefer. Thats part of a larger theme of the Trump presidency so far: The administration has produced almost no specific policy proposals to back up Trumps populist economic message. Trumps strategist, Stephen K. Bannon, and his domestic policy advisor, Stephen Miller, have tried to push forward more specifically populist policies, but have had little success outside of immigration policy.

By default, that has left the policy field largely to the traditional conservatives, who have used the quest to overturn the Affordable Care Act as a vehicle for their long-term goal of cutting taxes and reducing Medicaid.

For them, despite the efforts unpopularity, the opportunity to roll back Medicaid and pass a big tax cut was sort of a dream come true, said Binder. Now, it may have backfired.

A side-by-side comparison of Obamacare and the GOPs replacement plans

Staff writers Lisa Mascaro and Brian Bennett contributed to this report.

David.Lauter@latimes.com

For more on Politics and Policy, follow me @DavidLauter

Get the latest news from the nations capital on Essential Washington >>

See the original post here:
Healthcare debate highlights the split that threatens to paralyze Republicans - Los Angeles Times