Mediaboss Marketing

Since House Republicans first won their narrow majority in the midterm elections, Ive been stressing that their far-right members will be the biggest hindrance to Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and his ability to govern as speaker. I can now say that I was myopic. While McCarthys inability or unwillingness to rebuff the far right is an ongoing problem, it wont be the sole reason his speakership eventually collapses.

As it turns out, McCarthy is also just as bad at managing everyone else in his caucus, including the members of his own leadership team. And if he cant get everyone on the same page, and fast, the global economy stands to be the biggest loser of the GOP power struggle.

The current drama is that Republicans have yet to agree on a budget. President Joe Biden, well aware of the divisions among the GOP on this matter, has said he wont negotiate with Republicans over raising the debt ceiling until he can see their full budget plan. And, according to The New York Times, McCarthy has no confidence in Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, the chair of the Budget Committee.

But apparently, thats not the extent of McCarthys beef with Arrington. During the drawn-out struggle for the speakers gavel in January, Arrington reportedly floated the name of Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La. That trial balloon went nowhere, not least because Scalise the House majority leader, who has long been McCarthys No. 2 reportedly discouraged members from floating his name as an alternative.

As for budget negotiations, Arrington told reporters last month that the GOP was readying a term sheet with its conditions for raising the debt ceiling. McCarthy told reporters, I dont know what hes talking about. Convinced Arrington cant pull together a budget, McCarthy regards him as incompetent, the Times reported.

Ouch.

Scalise, meanwhile, isnt exactly one of McCarthys favorite people right now. According to the Times, late last month he reportedly gave the rest of leadership assurances that the Parents Bill of Rights was on course for easy passage. But in the end, five Republicans voted against it which would have been enough to tank it if some Democrats hadnt been absent. And Republicans meant that bill to be one of the major parts of their agenda.

Beneath the obvious Mean Girls atmosphere in the Capitol, several bits of intrigue are playing out. Theres a certain irony in Arringtons disenfranchisement. Since the Republican Revolution in 1994, the House GOP has often chafed at the centralization of power in the hands of the speaker. One of the proposed solutions has been to devolve power back to the committees, whose chairs used to rule over them as their personal fiefdoms.

McCarthys response hasnt been empowering chairs like Arrington, though, even as he has made himself more vulnerable to being ousted as the price for his gavel. Instead, McCarthy has tapped Rep. Garret Graves, R-La., to be the point person on the debt ceiling negotiations. Its also a weird choice, one most likely based more on McCarthys personal loyalty than on any particular skill Graves brings to the table. Its unlikely to win him any points among the rest of the rank and file, nor is the perception that he's trying to find someone else to catch the blame for the failure to produce a budget.

Meanwhile, theres a rich tradition in Congress of rivalry between the top-ranked members in a caucus (see: Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., vs. Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md.). One senior House GOP aide told NBC News that they were surprised to see the tensions spilling out into the open. But its no secret Scalise and McCarthys teams have always kinda been at odds, the aide said.

Its less surprising that Scalise hasnt made obvious plays for the gavel. Everything Ive ever heard or read about him portrays him as affable and well-liked by his colleagues, including those across the aisle. Thats the kind of reputation one doesnt toss aside casually with ill-timed schemes. And whatever the reason for his false confidence ahead of the vote on the Parents Bill of Rights, his previous role as minority whip must mean he knows he doesnt have the support to take out his boss yet. No, it makes much more sense for Scalise to simply bide his time as the pressure on McCarthy most likely increases over the coming weeks. Theres a dwindling window for McCarthy to right the ship and Im not sure he should count on First Mate Scalise to back him in event of mutiny.

House Democrats probably have a good bit of schadenfreude about this ongoing mess. The internal strife at the top has left the Republican agenda moving in slow motion over these first almost 100 days. On some of the things youd think would be priorities, such as immigration, the GOPs disarray has kept off the floor bills that would force Democrats to take votes that could be used in political attacks.

McCarthys lack of skill at moving his caucus forward could otherwise be seen as the feel-good event of the spring except theres the looming debt ceiling crisis. Because while his ineffectiveness in most policy areas is a benefit for the Americans who would be most affected by the draconian cuts the GOP is pushing, a failure to lift the debt ceiling would have repercussions for us all.

Hayes Brown is a writer and editor for MSNBC Daily.

Follow this link:
How Speaker Kevin McCarthy is alienating House Republicans - MSNBC

House Republicans are in a fix. They had a simple, devious plan: take the debt limit hostage, and institute massive changes to the federal budget. But they cannot agree on either the list of demands for the former, or the specific budget changes they want for the latter. The New York Times reports that, with deadlines approaching, the party caucus cant even decide on whether or not to balance the budget, much less the specific ways to get there. The newest demand is that the country be put on a path towards a balanced budget, an approximately meaningless phrase. Axios reports that this has strengthened Democrats decision to play hardball: demanding a clean debt limit increase and no negotiations on the budget until Republicans can present their own offer.

Thats Republicans for youequal parts wildly extreme and so chaotically stupid that they cant even decide what extreme thing to do. We should expect nothing less from this party.

One aspect of this story is the utter intellectual debasement of the conservative movement. Its policy apparatus used to be dominated by Ayn Rand acolytes like former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, who advanced a nakedly plutocratic agenda of welfare and social insurance cuts, deregulation, and tax cuts for the rich. His plans as written relied on ludicrous magic asterisk assumptions to get acceptable budget numbers. But at least there was a discernible program there: hand money to the rich by cutting social programs and blowing up the deficit.

More from Ryan Cooper

Donald Trump proved there was basically no organic appetite for this agenda in the conservative base, when he won the 2016 Republican primary promising to protect Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid. Ryan eventually snuck out of town.

While in office, Trump allowed his staffers to propose massive welfare cuts, and actually did pass giant tax cuts for the rich, because he paid almost no attention to policy details. And one does still hear Randian notions from some GOP members of Congress. But much of the rest of the party is clearly not that keen on the old program anymore, particularly regarding Medicare and Social Security. Cutting those programs is nightmarishly unpopular, particularly with the base of seniors at whom the GOP targets their nostalgic MAGA messages. More importantly, Trump has returned to his old stance in his primary campaign against Ron DeSantis, who was a die-hard welfare cutter when he served in the House. Trump still rules the GOP, and the rest of the party is loath to cross him.

More importantly still, a large and growing swath of Republicans simply do not know or care about budget details. National conservative attention revolves around people like Reps. Andy Biggs (R-AZ), Lauren Boebert (R-CO), and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA)loud, incurious idiots who say paint-blisteringly extreme things to get attention, typically accusing Democrats of imagined heinous crimes. Greene in particularwho was previously best known for filming herself chasing after a school shooting survivor shouting delirious conspiracy nonsense and threats at himis virtually a shadow Speaker of the House now.

A large and growing swath of Republicans simply do not know or care about budget details.

Many up-and-coming Republicans plainly now view national office as a springboard to stardom in right-wing mediathe Congress-to-podcast circuit, as it were. Former Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC), who spent most of his staff money on comms rather than policy, was only a few steps ahead of the trend. (It seems he was also ahead of the curve with his alarming fixation on Nazi memorabilia, given the reporting about Republican megadonor Harlan Crows collection of Hitler possessions.)

So for the extreme right that dictated terms to McCarthy so he could become Speaker, the budget and the debt limit are almost entirely performative identity signifiers. They do want enormous spending cuts, because thats the most conservative thing to do (read: its the opposite of what Democrats want). But they are basically indifferent to the detailed implications. So if cutting Social Security and Medicare is off-limits, as well as the military and the Trump tax cuts, the Republican far right naturally assumes theyll balance the budget by cuts elsewhere.

The problem is that, as the Congressional Budget Office pointed out in March with an air of palpable exhaustion, it would be impossible to achieve that even if the GOP zeroed out every single other program in the entire federal government.

All this stuff is just so boring on the right. Fussy details about the actual size of government programs and agencies or the duties of holding federal office or elementary arithmetic are for blue-haired social justice warrior communists. Passing a responsible budget or not defaulting on the national debt doesnt get you on Fox News or boost your podcast subscriptions. Indeed, it might hurt those things if an opportunistic pundit or politician decides to denounce you as a RINO for doing whats right for the country. The conservative movement is on to harder stuff now, chasing the dragon of boycotting Bud Light, book and abortion bans, vicious transphobia, kicking Black people out of the state legislature for speaking out of turn, and pardoning a convicted murderer if his victim was liberal. Annoying technical responsibilities just dont make for compelling television that can produce conservatives favorite emotional state, namely fits of apoplexy.

So instead of ironing out some compromise deal, thus far conservatives have reacted to the impossibility of their set of priorities by bitter infighting and mutual recriminations. McCarthy reportedly is deeply distrustful of both his lieutenant House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), because the extreme right tried to get him instead of McCarthy into the Speakers chair, and Budget Committee chair Jodey C. Arrington (R-TX), because he is incompetent and kept going to reporters with plans that didnt have McCarthys backing.

It turns out to be quite difficult to operate a political party made up of 75 percent crack-brained yahoo attention hounds, whose voters are egged on by a media apparatus that has trained its audience to demand the impossible and punish the sell-outs who cant deliver, in the words of Alex Pareene.

As a closing comment, readers might be surprised to learn that these kinds of high-stakes battles over the debt limit and the budget werent a thing for most of American history. The debt limit only dates back to 1917, and nobody even thought to take it hostage for decades. When the possibility did arise, the Gephardt rule ensured for many years that when the House passed a budget, it also automatically raised the debt ceiling as necessarylike how a functioning country would do it.

On the budget side, before 1980 there was no such thing as a government shutdown. If Congress failed to pass a budget, then all the agencies and programs kept on operating on their status quo track, with the assumption that sooner or later the legislature would get around to it and authorize the required funding. But in 1980, Jimmy Carters attorney general Benjamin Civiletti, with the cramped, hyper-literalist, and politically idiotic style of reasoning that is so characteristic of the elite liberal legal establishment, issued an opinion declaring it illegal to continue operating the government without a budget.

Both of these things can and should be resurrected. The debt ceiling ought to be abolished, either through Congress or Joe Biden declaring it unconstitutional. Attorney General Merrick Garland ought to return to the previous interpretation of budget laws, and Democrats in Congress should reinforce it as soon as possible. The fewer policy grenades Republicans have in their arsenal, the better.

Visit link:
Republicans' Self-Inflicted Budget Impasse - The American Prospect

Last Tuesdays Wisconsin election might have been overshadowed by the news of Donald Trumps arraignment, but Trump and his party were likely paying close attention to the raceand the dangers it portends for the GOP in 2024.

First, here are three new stories from The Atlantic:

An Iron Grip

Last Tuesday, the liberal Milwaukee County judge Janet Protasiewicz won an election that gave Wisconsin liberals a 43 majority on the states supreme court after 15 years of conservative control. The results of the states judicial race are a likely barometerand a possible determinantof the GOPs prospects in 2024.

As my colleague Ronald Brownstein noted in the days leading up to the Wisconsin election, the contest would prove a revealing test of the electoral strength of the most powerful wedge issues that each party is likely to stress in next years presidential race. A Protasiewicz win, he wrote, would also affirm that support for legal abortion has hastened college-educated suburban voters collective recoil from the Trump GOP. Such a shift could restore a narrow but decisive advantage for Democrats in a state at the absolute tipping point of presidential elections, Ron explained.

In an Atlantic article last week, the former Milwaukee talk-radio host and The Bulwark editor at large Charlie Sykes doubled down on Brownsteins assertion. As long as abortion is an issue, one Republican legislator told me, we wont ever win another statewide election, Sykes wrote.

With Protasiewiczs victory, Wisconsin Republicans may have even more to worry about than voters attachment to reproductive rights. Thats because, as my colleague Adam Serwer noted last weekend, Wisconsin is a notoriously fickle swing state that Republicans have gerrymandered with scientific precision since 2010driven, in no small part, by its conservative-majority supreme court.

Adam writes:

Thanks to their precise drawing of legislative districts, Republicans have maintained something close to a two-thirds majority whether they won more votes or not And year after year, the right-wing majority on the state supreme court would ensure that gerrymandered maps kept their political allies in power and safely protected from voter backlash. Some mismatch between the popular vote and legislative districts is not inherently nefariousit just happens to be both deliberate and extreme in Wisconsins case.

Extreme is no overstatement. Robert Yablon, a law professor at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and a faculty co-director of the State Democracy Research Initiative, told me by email that although Democrats have won more of Wisconsins statewide elections in recent years than their Republican opponents have, under the maps that the Republican-controlled legislature drew in 2011, Republicans maintained an iron grip on the legislature throughout the last decadeeven in years when Democratic candidates won more votes statewide.

Following the 2020 census, the Wisconsin Supreme Court went on to uphold revised electoral maps that further solidified Republicans advantage in the state. Although Wisconsin Democrats saw the reelection of Governor Tony Evers last November, Republicans claimed a two-thirds supermajority in the State Senate following a special election to fill a suburban Milwaukee seat last Tuesday. Republicans are just short of a supermajority in the state assembly and hold six of the states eight U.S. House seats.

But Democrats still hope to turn the Badger State around. Last week, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee released its House Democrats Districts in Play plan for the 2024 election cycle, outlining which congressional districts the party will target in its efforts to retake control of the House. The DCCCs plan listed Wisconsins first and third districts among the 31 Republican-held House seats Democrats deem particularly flippable next fallan outlook that appears to hinge (at least in part) on the prospect of electoral redistricting. If Protasiewicz were to make good on a remark from earlier this year, in which she hinted at plans to review challenges to the states current electoral maps, the court could approve new maps that would improve Democrats odds of clawing back power in those districts.

Having more balanced electoral maps could certainly make a difference in 2024, Yablon told me. Theres no guarantee that such maps would enable Democrats to win a legislative majority, but they could create meaningful competition for legislative control for the first time in more than a decade. At a minimum, Republicans would likely see their current legislative majorities shrink.

Whether or not new electoral maps could make a difference in 2024 will, of course, depend on their being redrawn and approved in the first placeand fast.

Related:

Todays News

Evening Read

The Moms Who Breastfeed Without Being Pregnant

By Sarah Zhang

While her wife was pregnant with their son, Aimee MacDonald took an unusual step of preparing her own body for the babys arrival. First she began taking hormones, and then for six weeks straight, she pumped her breasts day and night every two to three hours. This process tricked her body into a pregnant and then postpartum state so she could make breast milk. By the time the couples son arrived, she was pumping 27 ounces a dayenough to feed a babyall without actually getting pregnant or giving birth.

And so, after a 38-hour labor and emergency C-section, MacDonalds wife could do what many mothers who just gave birth might desperately want to but cannot: rest, sleep, and recover from surgery. Meanwhile, MacDonald tried nursing their baby. She held him to her breast, and he latched right away. Over the next 15 months, the two mothers co-nursed their son, switching back and forth, trading feedings in the middle of the night. MacDonald had breastfed her older daughter the usual wayas in, by herselfa decade earlier, and she remembered the bone-deep exhaustion. She did not want that for her wife. Inducing lactation meant they could share in the ups and the downs of breastfeeding together.

Read the full article.

More From The Atlantic

Culture Break

Read. Birnam Wood, Eleanor Cattons new novel, a biting satire about the idealistic left.

Watch. Abbott Elementary (and pay special attention to Mr. Johnson, the janitor on the ABC comedy).

Play our daily crossword.

P.S.

I suppose this is where I out myself as a native Wisconsinitea cheesehead, if you willwho has followed the electoral goings-on of my home state with varying degrees of attentiveness (and mounting bafflement) in the years since my departure. But if theres any single resource thats helped fill in the blanks of my political literacy, its The Fall of Wisconsin. The 2018 book by the journalist Dan Kaufman, also from Wisconsin, traces the conservative conquest of a state that was, until relatively recently, taken for granted as a progressive stronghold. In case the books title doesnt make it incredibly obvious, Kaufman is not exactly an ideologically impartial observer. But his deep research provides useful background for understanding the past 15 years of Badger State politics and, by extension, broader rifts in the American electorate.

Kelli

Isabel Fattal contributed to this newsletter.

View original post here:
Why Wisconsin Has Republicans Worried - The Atlantic

We thought that we were in a good place because he was in Florida and, you know, he didn't tie up our city, Mayor Eric Adams said at an unrelated press conference Wednesday, when asked about preparing for another Trump visit. | Mary Altaffer/AP Photo

NEW YORK Mayor Eric Adams on Wednesday voiced irritation with former President Donald Trumps renewed presence in the city for various legal proceedings and national Republicans depiction of Manhattan as dangerous place that disregards victims rights.

We thought that we were in a good place because he was in Florida and, you know, he didnt tie up our city, Adams said at an unrelated press conference Wednesday, when asked about preparing for another Trump visit. Now, hes going to be back here often.

Trump is scheduled to return to New York later this week to give a deposition in state Attorney General Tish James business fraud lawsuit against him and his real estate firm.

The historic indictment of the former president by the Manhattan district attorney brought hundreds of protesters last week to the Manhattan criminal courthouse.

Meanwhile Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg, a darling of progressive Democrats for his criminal justice reform policies, has drawn the ire of House Republicans, who say the top prosecutor should focus on violent offenders instead of Trumps alleged involvement in a hush money scheme. They plan to hold a so-called field hearing in New York City next week on violent crime.

Adams criticized House Judiciary Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) for his hearings singular focus on New York City when crime in congressional Republican areas per capita is through the roof. He faulted southern states for the proliferation of guns flowing to major cities.

The hearing is the latest move by House Republicans to pressure Bragg, who is pursuing 34 felony charges accusing Trump of falsifying business records to bury damaging allegations of an extramarital affair during the height of the 2016 presidential campaign. Trump has pleaded not guilty.

The House GOP recently subpoenaed a former Manhattan prosecutor who criticized aspects of Braggs investigation. Bragg sued to block it, calling the move a campaign of harassment.

The House Judiciary Committees scheduled hearing on violent crime pledges to examine how Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Braggs pro-crime, anti-victim policies have led to an increase in violent crime and a dangerous community for New York City residents.

Adams said the committee hasnt communicated with city officials to prepare for the hearing that will be held in a lower Manhattan federal building.

This is just an extension of Donald Trump campaigning and it really makes no sense, Adams said.

View original post here:
Adams lashes out at national Republicans for casting city as crime ... - POLITICO

I have some advice for the Iowa Democratic Party: Tell Bobby Kaufmann to buzz off.

Or, if youd like, substitute a different four-letter word. Either way, he deserves it.

Kaufmann, a Republican state representative from Wilton, has proposed using the power of the state to dictate the inner workings of the opposing political party. Specifically, hes proposed a billin the Iowa House that would force Democrats to hold their presidential caucuses in person. The plan would forbid mail-in ballots, which Democrats have been planning to use next year.

Kaufmanns meddling is not only offensive, but its arguably unconstitutional. Ill get to that in a minute. First, though, lets debunk the BS that Kaufmann uses to explain why hes introduced this scheme.

He says hes trying to protect the caucuses and behelpfulto Democrats by distinguishing Iowa from the first-in-the-nation New Hampshire primary. Mail-in ballots, his says, would make the Democratic caucuses look more like a primary and prompt New Hampshire to jump ahead of Iowa.

This is nonsense. How Democrats run their caucuses has no impact on the Republican calendar. As for being helpful, no politician ever does anything to help the opposing political party when it comes to elections. So cross that off your list; its baloney.

Even if Kaufmann was trying to be helpful to the Democrats (he isnt), this isnt the 2000s. Bill Gardner, New Hampshires former secretary of state, doesnt control the presidential calendar. Besides, Democrats booted New Hampshire from its privileged spot in 2024, just like it did Iowa, so the Live Free or Die state is having a hard enough time defending itself; its in no position to dictate what other states do.

There may be some merit to the worry Republicans have that if Democrats dont have to caucus in person, some of them could meddle in the GOP caucuses. But even if thats a legitimate and substantive concern and Im not sure that it is this bill is clearly overkill. The bill also requires that caucus participants register with a party 70 days ahead of time.

If Iowa Democrats are to regain a spot in the partys early window in 2028 (which is a long shot, anyway), theyll have to make it so more people can participate in the caucuses. This is why Iowa Democrats initiated mail-in balloting to begin with, to try to keep its leadoff spot in 2024.

Unfortunately for them, it didnt work.

President Joe Biden, who has never been treated well by Iowa, upended the traditional calendar to prioritize South Carolina, Georgia and Michigan. He did well in those states and he needs them next year so hes rewarding them accordingly.

Thats politics. When Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were president, it was in their interests to keep the calendar the way it was. Why do you think Donald Trump didnt change things? Because he loves Iowa? Please. He got elected under the current system, so he kept it in place.

Notably, Kaufmann is also a senior Trump adviser for 2024. What do you figure the odds are that theres an angle to this bill that helps Trump next year?

Heres my second piece of advice for the Iowa Democratic Party: If the Legislature passes this bill and Kim Reynolds signs it into law, toss it in the trash. Thats where it belongs. Do the caucuses the way you want. If that means using mail-in ballots, then so be it.

Fortunately, IDP Chair Rita Hart seems to beleaning in that directionalready. Thats good. Instead of fighting the DNC, fight Iowa Republicans. Theyre the real threat. And if you want to tell Bobby Kaufmann to **** off again, feel free. It will probably be cathartic.

Normally, I dont like the idea of disregarding the law, but in this instance, Democrats shouldnt hesitate.

This scheme offends the conscience and probably the Constitution. Since when does a state government get to tell national political parties how they run their internal affairs like this?

Iowa does have a law that says the states presidential caucuses must go before the nations first primary, but its constitutionality has long been in doubt.

As former Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller wrote in a 1996 opinion: The US Supreme Court has long recognized the rights of political parties to control their own internal nomination and delegate selection processes and has struck down state statutes that abridged those rights.

This new proposal probably falls into the same category.

In other words, the Iowa Legislature has no business, and probably no right, to regulate in this area. (The party of small government, my sweet aunt.)

If Republicans do pass this nonsense, Democrats should eagerly challenge it in court. Or better yet, dare Republicans to try to enforce it. This would be good policy and good politics. If Democrats can kill the existing law, too, it would eliminate any doubt and give the party more flexibility for the future. A win over the Republicans also would help lift the spirits of Democrats who have mostly been on the losing end lately.

Heres the truth: Kaufmanns plan is just another effort by Republicans to tilt Iowas electoral playing field in their direction. The GOP has spent years making it harder for Iowans to vote by mail. Theyve shortened the voting window and added more complications in the hopes of tripping people up so they can exclude their ballots. And since Democrats rely on mail-in balloting more than Republicans, they know this helps Republican candidates.

Republicans also know that if Iowa Democrats were ever to regain a spot in the early voting window, it would help them in future general elections. We saw this in 2004 and 2008 when robust Iowa caucus cycles kept the Democrats stoked for the fall. In 2016, it helped Republicans in the same way. Eliminating any chance Democrats have of regaining an early spot in the calendar will only help the GOP.

Republicans may not need this advantage now. They are pretty much running Iowa from head to toe. Still, party leaders know that in politics, nothing is forever. It wasnt that long ago that Republicans had total control in Wisconsin, but conditions have changed and just this month, liberals won a key Supreme Court race, a sign that even in the industrial Midwest, Democrats are still alive.

That pulse hasnt yet made its way down the river to Iowa yet, but who knows what will happen in the future? Remember, it was only 15 years ago that Democrats controlled all the levers of state government in Iowa.

It probably never occurred to Democrats back then to mess around with the Republicans internal rules. But thats no surprise. Thats been the tradition.

Unfortunately, those days are gone. For todays Republicans, nothing is off limits, especially if it gives them an unfair electoral advantage. Such arrogance. (Theyre even doing an end run around regular legislative rules to consider this bill.)

So, by all means Democrats, use your favorite invective phrase to tell Bobby Kaufmann and his crowd what they can do with this bill. Then, ignore it.

Read more:
Republican caucus bill is offensive. Democrats should ignore it. - Iowa Capital Dispatch