Mediaboss Marketing

A bit of the spirit of Dolley Madison may be quietly at work within the U.S. Congress.

The wife of James Madison, a Founding Father and later the fourth president of the United States, she is often remembered as a gracious hostess. But the presidentress, as she was known, accomplished much more.

Her popular social gatherings, called squeezes (for the crowds they drew), brought together the members of Congress in the early 19th century from both sides of the aisle. The deeper purpose: helping politicians get to know each other as individuals, not as anonymous enemies.

Today the House Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress has taken up that task. Its wide range of interests has included recommending money-saving measures like bulk buying of office supplies, mandatory cybersecurity training for members, and even an overhaul of the budgeting process itself.

But one of its most important functions may be as a low-key effort to reduce hostility between the parties.

Rather than having more members from the majority party, the committees membership is evenly split: six Democrats and six Republicans. And when it meets members dont sit as two opposing camps but interspersed, as individuals.

Tom Graves of Georgia, the groups top Republican, has called the committee a little place of refuge where members can offer ideas of how to make this place work better. Rather than operating as a typical committee, where Republicans put on their red jerseys and Democrats put on their blue jerseys to battle it out, we kind of made a decision not to do that, says committee Chairman Derek Kilmer, a Democrat from Washington state. Everybodys wearing fix Congress jerseys.

Other than at the House gym or on the floor of Congress itself, members of the two parties have few opportunities to actually meet each other, Mr. Graves notes. The committee recommends that at the start of each new term a bipartisan retreat be held for all members and their families. And it says a bipartisan, members-only space should be created on Capitol Hill as well.

As part of an effort to reach out, Mr. Kilmer has visited the Republican Study Committee, an influential caucus of conservative members. And Mr. Graves paid a similar call on the New Democrat Coalition, a group of center-leaning congressional Democrats.

The select committees proponents include some 40 House freshmen, who are eager to see a change in the highly partisan climate of the chamber, and the Association of Former Members of Congress, which includes members from both parties.

The committee is" a bright spot in all of this [partisan] noise right now,Mr. Graves has said.

Get the Monitor Stories you care about delivered to your inbox.

Last November, the House extended the panels tenure through the end of 2020, which promises to be a politically acrimonious year that will include presidential impeachment hearings in the Senate and the November elections.

At the same time the select committee will be trying to bring sensible reforms to the way the House operates. That could pay an even bigger dividend: the realization that Republicans and Democrats can work together for the common good.

The rest is here:
Where Republicans and Democrats work together to fix Congress - The Christian Science Monitor

With the 2020 census on the horizon, there's been a lot of chatter about which states stand to lose seats and which stand to gain. This doesn't just impact representation in Congress, but also the electoral power of each state in presidential electionswhich everyone should know by now is determined by the Electoral College.

CNN's Chris Cillizza looked at the projected changes and determined "the news is very good for the Southwest and South and not at all good for the industrial Midwest and Northeast." Cillizza notes that "Texas is projected to be the biggest gainer post-2020, adding three more congressional districts due to massive population growth over the past decade." Florida is also expected to gain two seats, while Arizona, Colorado, Montana, North Carolina and Oregon "are also projected to each gain another congressional seat."

Who are the losers? Ten states are expected to lose at least one congressional district: Alabama, California, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and West Virginia.

To figure out what this all means, Cillizza went back and tracked the biggest changes in congressional representation since the 2000 census, and here's what he calculated:

Texas (+9 seats)

Florida (+6)

Arizona (+4)

Georgia (+3)

Colorado (+2)

North Carolina (+2)

And thebiggest losers:

New York (-5 seats)

Ohio (-4)

Pennsylvania (-4)

Illinois (-3)

Michigan (-3)

"That 30-year trend is unmistakable," says Cillizza. "The South and Southwest are growing increasingly powerful. The Rust Belt is getting rapidly weaker."

While the 2020 census won't change anything for the upcoming election, it's worth noting here that five of the six biggest seat-gainers were Trump states in 2016, and of the losers, Trump won three while Hillary won two. Michigan and Pennsylvania, two of the losing states, may have been won by Trump, but have mostly voted Democrat in recent elections. But, overall, the advantage is clearly for Republicans based on these trends.

There is, however, a huge caveat. And I can't overstate just how huge. The Republican stronghold of Texas has become increasingly competitive, and could become a swing state in future elections. It's expected to vote Trump in 2020, but population changes over the years have increased liberal influence in the state, and down the road, Republicans may find themselves aggressively competing for Texas and it's electoral votes. Should Texas ever go blue, Cillizza notes, "all of the smaller, more incremental gains for Republicans from population movement over the last few decades disappear."

The bottom line here is that Republicans should not dismiss concerns about Texas trending purple, or even put it off. The time to address the problem is now.

_____

Matt Margolis is the author ofTrumping Obama: How President Trump Saved Us From Barack Obama's Legacyand the bestselling bookThe Worst President in History: The Legacy of Barack Obama. You can follow Matt on Twitter@MattMargolis

See the rest here:
The Electoral Map Is Shifting in Favor of Republicans, But There's a Catch | News and Politics - PJ Media

National Republicans are breaking with a U.S. House recruit, George Buck, who is running in Florida's competitive 13th Congressional District, after he sought donations from supporters by insinuating that several Democrats, including Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar, should be hanged.

In a fundraising email sent last week, the Republican candidate's campaign for the St. Petersburg-area seat, singled out Omar and falsely accused the Somali-born Democrat, elected in last year's midterms, of working for the country of Qatar and asserted she should be punished, the Tampa Bay Times reported.

The email also mentions Buck's Democratic rival, incumbent Rep. Charlie Crist, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.

"We should hang these traitors where they stand," the email reads, according to the Tampa Bay Times.

The campaign literature does not explicitly state who he is referring to as alleged traitors, the paper reported.

ABC News has not independently reviewed the campaign literature.

Buck initially told the Tampa Bay Times he did not write the email, even though it included his signature, adding, "I would never talk like that."

In a statement to ABC News Wednesday, when asked about the fundraising email and the NRCC's decision, Buck asserted that treason is a crime punishable by death.

"I am a decorated veteran of the 101st Airborne Division. As someone who has taken the oath to defend the Constitution, I take that oath very seriously," he said in the statement. "Anyone who commits treason against the United States should be tried to the full extent of the law."

"Treason is one of the few crimes the Constitution has as punishable by death," he added.

In a Facebook post Wednesday, he also said, "Any Republican who calls me out for my rhetoric but doesn't call out the Democrats for theirs are hypocrites."

Buck did not respond when asked by ABC News if he is suggesting Omar or the other Democrats mentioned in his campaign literature committed treason.

Omar's campaign did not immediately respond to ABC News' request for comment.

House Republican Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., disavowed Buck's email, saying in a statement Wednesday, "theres no place for inciting violence in politics."

"Instead of doubling down on these disgraceful comments, the candidate ought to apologize unequivocally and denounce these unacceptable statements," he continued.

The National Republican Congressional Committee, the House GOP's campaign arm, dropped Buck from its "Young Guns" program, the party's recruitment and mentoring program for rising House candidates running in competitive races -- a move that distances the GOP from the controversial candidate who is standing by the email.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy made the decision to remove Buck from the program, and NRCC Chairman Tom Emmer, a Minnesota congressman, agreed with the decision, according to a committee spokesperson. Buck was announced as a member of the program on Oct. 30, alongside 23 other Republicans.

Tlaib, one of Omar's key allies, quickly came to her defense, condemning Buck's email in a tweet: "The fact that those who make these violent threats very publicly without hesitation reaffirms just how much white supremacy has spread within the @NRCC. They are raising money on a call to hang a Black Muslim member of Congress and too many are silent. @IlhanMN."

On the campaign trail, President Donald Trump has frequently ridiculed Omar, Ocasio-Cortez, Tlaib and Pressley--four minority congresswomen who have dubbed themselves the "Squad" on the campaign trail, drawing criticism from both Democrats and some Republicans for his rhetoric.

Ocasio Cortez, Pressley and Tlaib were born in the U.S., and Omar, who came to the U.S. as a refugee when she was a child, has been living in the country since she was 12 years old and is a U.S. citizen. In the 2018 midterm elections, all four women won a popular vote to claim their seats in Congress.

Trump has particularly targeted Omar calling her "an America-hating socialist."

The president threaded a vicious string of verbal attacks against Omar at an October campaign rally in her home district, calling out her positions on Israel, which elicited scattered "send her back" chants from the crowd.

"She is a disgrace to our country, and she is one of the big reasons that I'm going to win and the Republican party is going to win Minnesota in 13 months," he continued.

Buck isn't the only congressional candidate to take aim at Omar.

Twitter suspended the account of Danielle Stella, Omar's Republican opponent in the 5th Congressional District race, after she falsely suggested the congresswoman may have passed intel to Iran and should be "tried for treason and hanged," according to the New York Times referencing a screenshot of a tweet sent from her account.

ABC News did not review the original tweet, which can no longer be accessed.

Omar previously denied the allegations made against her according to The Jerusalem Post. Her office told the New York Times that such stories are outlandishly absurd.

Originally posted here:
National GOP breaks with House candidate who says 'traitors' should be 'hanged' - ABC News

We are in that festive period between Thanksgiving and Christmas, but do you remember how you spent National Impeach Obama Week? That was the period in 2014 when the Coalition to Impeach Obama Now sought the removal of President Obama by staging national protests. The plan was to unfurl impeachment banners at road intersections and bridges across America. Among the impeachable offenses broadcast included bizarre and erratic behavior which implies psychological pathology and governing by dictatorial fiat with lawless executive order.

But where are they now? Why no protest of lawless executive orders when President TrumpDonald John TrumpTop Democrat: 'Obstruction of justice' is 'too clear not to include' in impeachment probe Former US intel official says Trump would often push back in briefings Schiff says investigators seeking to identify who Giuliani spoke to on unlisted '-1' number MORE has signed more than Obama? What about when Trump declares he has an Article Two with the right to do whatever he wants as president? Where are concerns of bizarre and erratic behavior when the president refers to himself as a very stable genius and the chosen one who has great and unmatched wisdom? Where is the outrage at governing by dictatorial fiat when Trump seeks to bribe a foreign leader to help himself win an election and stay in power?

The political hypocrisy over the years is not limited to a fringe group draping their spray painted Impeach Obama bedsheets from highway overpasses. Many Republican leaders at the state and national levels are demonstrating a kind of ziplock ability to unfasten themselves from past impeachment standards in order to seal their loyalty with Trump.

Take Republican Representative Michael Burgess of Texas. When he spoke at a Tea Party gathering in his district in 2011, he advocated impeaching Obama. But when he voted last month against the impeachment inquiry into Trump, Burgess called the process a sham and a shame and an exercise in futility. Speaking of futility, he has also devoted himself to defunding the Energy Department efficiency standards for incandescent light bulbs. Glaciers may be melting, Venice is flooding, and wildfires are burning, but he will make the world safe for conventional light bulbs.

Republican Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma alleged a coverup in the Obama investigation of the attack in Benghazi in 2013. People may be starting to use the i word before too long, he said during an interview, referring to impeachment. Today, the i word is inconsistent. Inhofe called the current investigation full of smear tactics used by Democratic lawmakers who are desperate and singularly focused on discrediting and delegitimizing President Trump, no matter what, in spite of his successes with the economy, military, and judges. Evidently, there is a constitutional exemption from impeachment based on stock market performance.

When Republican Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa was asked earlier this month whether it is acceptable for a sitting president to ask a foreign power to investigate a political rival, she refused to answer. Instead of addressing claims against Trump, her defense has been to argue that impeachment distracts from more pressing issues. Five years ago, Ernst was not worried that impeachment might divert policy discussion. In 2014, she said that Obama was absolutely overstepping his bounds and should face those repercussions whether it be removal from office or impeachment.

Let us also not forget the South Dakota Republican Party, which voted in 2014 to demand the impeachment of Obama when he exchanged five Taliban detainees at Guantanamo for former Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, who had been captured in Afghanistan. A few weeks ago, the executive board of the South Dakota Republican Party passed a resolution in full support of Trump and castigated Democrats for trying to do through this impeachment fiasco what they cannot achieve at the ballot box.

Finally, there is the eloquent hypocrisy of Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who frothingly defends Trump today. However, when President Clinton was being impeached back in 1999, Graham said, You do not even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job in this constitutional republic if this body determines that your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role. Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing of the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.

Are you listening, Lindsey? If so, which Lindsey are you listening to?

Steve IsraelSteven (Steve) J. IsraelElise Stefanik tests impeachment waters for moderates in Congress The Hill's Campaign Report: Impeachment looms large over Democratic debate Is Mayor Pete the man to beat? MORE represented New York in Congress for 16 years and served as the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee from 2011 to 2015. He is now the director of the Institute of Politics and Global Affairs at Cornell University. You can find him on Twitter @RepSteveIsrael.

Originally posted here:
Republicans need to face reality with hypocrisy on impeachment | TheHill - The Hill

Then-Republican candidate for Governor Ron DeSantis holds a rally in Orlando, Fla., November 5, 2018. (Carlo Allegri/Reuters)

A new St. Leos poll in Florida shows Governor Ron DeSantis sporting an approval rating of 68 percent (with a disapproval of 20 percent). Whats most impressive about these numbers is that in every demographic that matters, DeSantis is polling above 50 percent with both sexes, Hispanic (67 percent approval) and black voters (63), and among both parties.

When it comes to governorships, Florida isnt an outlier. The last time the Morning Consult poll tabulated a list of the most popular governors, the top 14 and 18 of the top 20 were Republicans. These Republicans govern in states that have highly diverse electorates, from Alabama to Vermont.

Which is weird, because this very week, progressives at the New York Times and the Atlantic were assuring us that the GOP was so reviled nationally and its agenda so toxic to the average American that the party has been compelled to hide from democratic accountability.

Naturally, Charlie Baker cant support the same policies in Massachusetts that Mark Gordon can in Wyoming. And some of these governors have their agendas tempered by Democratic legislatures, while others do not. But, like DeSantis, all of them tend to govern with a conservative disposition, and most of them openly advocate a conservative agenda.

How many progressive governors do you see near the top of the list? Kate Brown of Oregon, perhaps the most progressive governor in the country, is also one of its least popular. Gavin Newsom, whos pushed a slate of left-wing policies, owns an approval rating in heavily liberal California thats on par with Donald Trumps national numbers. Rational, pragmatic, progressive J. B. Pritzkers polls are horrible. Andrew Cuomos numbers are brutal. The only Democrats in the top 20 are Steve Bullock and John Carney, two of the most moderate liberal governors in the country.

Nothing is static in politics, and there are an array of factors that drive a politicians approval. (Heres a deeper dive by John McCormack on why Republicans are succeeding.) But its a bit difficult to ignore the striking skew of this list.

It seems to me that voters have a far more personal, less ideological stake in their governors than they do in the politicians they send to Washington as proxies in broader philosophical battles. Congress, thankfully, does little real policy work. Governors are far more likely to be judged on nuts-and-bolts governance, stability, and competence. In this regard, its pretty clear that Republicans are figuring out ways to stay relevant and popular in lots of areas of the country. Its also pretty clear that voters are able to compartmentalize their local and national votes. Pundits who treat Trumps approval rating as the ultimate indicator of the GOPs political fortunes are doing their readers a disservice.

See original here:
If the Republican Party Is Dying, Why Are Their Governors So Popular? - National Review