Mediaboss Marketing

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) unveiled the legislation that would reshape a big piece of the U.S. health-care system on Thursday, June 22. Here's what we know about the bill. (Monica Akhtar/The Washington Post)

As Republicans strive mightily and perversely for a health-care system that would increase the uninsured by 22 million people, they should ponder the impact on a particularly deserving group veterans.

Its not unexpected that heartless GOP plans would be hard on the vulnerable, but do they realize that includes many who continue to suffer from their service?

These are people largely supportive of Republicans, including President Trump, who had the insight to call the House plan mean.

Republicans honor veterans, but you cant tell it by their current health-care proposals.

The GOP plans do not directly affect the Veterans Affairs Departments extensive system of health services. About 7 million vets, however, get their care outside of VA services. After the Affordable Care Act, a.k.a. Obamacare, kicked in, the number of vets without insurance dropped by almost 40 percent, according to Sen. Jon Tester (Mont.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee, and other committee members.

Republicans would reverse that trend. Tester and his Democratic colleagues said the Senate bill could:

President Trump and his advisors claim spending for Medicaid will continue to increase under the Senate health-care proposal. CBO projections suggest otherwise. (Meg Kelly/The Washington Post)

The Republican committee chairman and the Trump administration had the chance to refute the data presented by the Democrats, but they did not.

As the Secretary (David Shulkin) has said, until the legislative process runs its course, we are not going to speculate on details of a possible bill, a VA statement said. Once a bill is agreed on, we will be in a position to review potential impacts on VA.

Committee Chairman JohnnyIsakson (R-Ga.) said: We have been working in a bipartisan manner to improve veterans access to quality and timely care. We will continue doing so and hope that Democrats recent attempts to politicize veterans health care wont hamper our efforts.

Exit polls indicate 60 percent of those who served in the military supported Trumps election, about the same portion of veterans who voted for Republican House candidates in 2014. Now this unpopularly elected president is working to drum up support for the very unpopular Republican proposals.

In five recent polls, the approval ratings for the Republican health-care plan ranged from a miserable 16 percent to a pitiful 30 percent, sometimes with a significant percentage undecided.

This plan, written in secret, will devastate thousands of elderly, disabled and rural veterans who go outside of the VA for all or some of their health care, Tester said. This plan guts Medicaid, which provides lifesaving treatment, mental-health care and access to a health-care provider for thousands of folks who have bravely served this nation. I will be working hard to make sure that any health- care law honors our promises to our veterans, but this plan doesnt even come close.

He was joined in outrage by Democratic Sens. Patty Murray (Wash.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Joe Manchin III (W. Va.), and Sherrod Brown (Ohio).

Our country makes a promise to take care of the men and women who serve, but Trumpcare would do just the opposite, Murray said.

Added Blumenthal: Every Member of Congress who plans to support this bill needs to imagine looking a veteran in the eye and telling them why their mental-health care for PTS (post-traumatic stress) has been halted, or why they can no longer afford treatment for traumatic brain injury sustained while serving their country.

Major veterans service organizations are taking a cautious approach to the GOP health-care proposals, if they have anything to say at all. Disabled American Veterans (DAV) is one organization staying vigilant on the debate and what it means for those who carry the pain of war.

DAV is carefully monitoring how changes to the Affordable Care Act could impact ill and injured veterans who served and sacrificed for our nation, said Executive Director Garry Augustine. VAs budget this year is already insufficient to meet all the requirements Congress has placed on the department to care for our nations ill and injured veterans. Any additional demand on the system may aggravate the current fiscal constraints and effect the delivery of care to millions of veterans who use and rely on VA.

He concluded with this forceful warning: We will not idly sit by while political posturing threatens to jeopardize the health of our nations heroes.

Read more:

[GOPhealth-caredebate turns to stark question: help vulnerable Americans, or help the rich?]

[Is the GOP trying to repeal and replace itself?]

[Will VA chief be voice of reason on climate change and medical marijuana in Trump administration?]

See the article here:
Many veterans would suffer under Republican health-care plan - Washington Post

LOS ANGELES

The GOP may be in dire straits in California, but a flurry of recent moves suggests the party of Ronald Reagan and Richard Nixon is not willing to abandon the 2018 gubernatorial race, as it did four years ago.

The big question is if the party will be able to marshal enough support behind a Republican candidate for governor and avoid a repeat of last fall's Senate campaign, which, thanks to the top-two primary, was fought between two Democratic candidates.

Several Republicans are in the mix. They include conservative Orange County Assemblyman Travis Allen and Rancho Santa Fe venture capitalist John Cox. Speculation is mounting that former state Assemblyman David Hadley plans to announce a run. There also are furious efforts to recruit San Diego Mayor Kevin Faulconer into the race, because he is viewed as the strongest possible contender.

"It is exciting," said Shawn Steel, a Republican National Committee member from Orange County. He said the GOP could exploit what he calls Democratic overreach in Sacramento, including the passage of an unpopular new gas tax. That plus growing alarm over quality of life issues in California could give Republicans an opening among voters who have typically not supported his party's candidates, he said. "I'm not counting on anything as being certain in politics, but I never expected (President) Trump to win, for goodness sakes, and was delighted when he upset all the pundits."

A viable Republican top-of-the-ticket candidate could be crucial to driving GOP voters to the polls in seven California House races that are expected to be battlegrounds in the 2018 midterms.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., is concerned about next year's turnout, and has been working hard trying to convince Faulconer to enter the race and show him he has a path to victory, according to multiple people familiar with McCarthy's efforts who were not authorized to discuss them.

Party Chairman Jim Brulte has made at least one personal appeal to the mayor during a face-to-face visit to San Diego.

On paper, the efforts make sense Faulconer is the type of Republican that political observers believe has the best shot of winning statewide office in California. He's a fiscal conservative and social moderate who is not viewed as an ideologue. He has distanced himself from Trump. He's also the only GOP mayor leading one of the nation's 10 largest cities, and was elected twice despite Democrats' six-point voter registration edge in San Diego, evidence of his crossover appeal.

GOP strategists familiar with his thinking say he is now weighing entering the race, even though he previously said he had no intention of running. Faulconer's spokespeople did not respond to a request for comment.

After the candidate conundrum, there is the question of a GOP path to victory in a state were Democrats dominate.

Democrats unsuccessfully tried to use an anti-Trump message in four recent special congressional elections across the country. But Republicans had stronger advantages in those districts. In California, Trump was trounced by Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton by more than 4.2 million votes, a reflection of the party's domination of state politics.

Republicans last elected a statewide candidate more than a decade ago, have seen voter registration plummet to a 19-point disadvantage to Democrats, and have repeatedly allowed the opposition party to win super majorities in both chambers of the state Legislature.

In 2014, the party's leadership put no resources behind its standard-bearer who ran against Gov. Jerry Brown. And in 2016, the GOP's dwindling number of voters in the state splintered in the primary for the first open U.S. Senate seat in more than two decades. The result was that two Democrats and no Republican advanced to the general election.

Both elections left palpable anger that GOP activists expressed at their annual convention earlier this year. The state party has pledged to compete in the 2018 gubernatorial contest, although it was unclear if the pledge includes a plan or if leaders were offering wishful thinking to soothe party loyalists.

"It's important for morale and turnout to have a Republican candidate on the November ballot," said Jack Pitney, a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College and a former state GOP leader. "It was bad enough to be shut out of the Senate race in 2016, but the governor's race is a flagship race and the party needs to have a (credible) candidate, but whether that happens is an open question."

Allen, an assemblyman from Huntington Beach, is a traditional GOP conservative and a staunch Trump supporter. A favorite of the party's grass roots, Allen opposes the adoption of a government-run health care system and has voted consistently against increasing protections for immigrants who entered the country illegally, stances that do not align with the majority of California voters. But he says even Democrats are "turned off" by the party's recent moves. Earlier this year, Allen filed a ballot measure to rescind the gas tax passed by the Legislature. It's an issue Republicans plan to campaign on in 2018, and already has triggered a recall campaign against a Democratic state senator from Orange County.

Hadley, who represented the South Bay in the state Assembly for two years, shares an ideological profile similar to Faulconer's, though he is not as well known. He has filed paperwork with the state to open a campaign fundraising account, but has not formally launched a bid. He did not respond to requests for comment.

Former Los Angeles Rams football player Rosey Grier has said he plans to run but has taken no formal steps to establish a campaign.

Successful gubernatorial races in California cost tens of millions of dollars, and the three top Democratic candidates already have raised more than $20 million collectively.

Pitney was skeptical the state's deep-pocketed GOP donors would invest in a race they know they are likely to lose, especially given that the battle for control of Congress would siphon money and attention to other competitive contests.

"Money would have to come from heaven," Pitney said. "Donors want to put the money where it can have some effect ... . Why throw it to a race where the outcome is very likely a big Republican defeat?"

Cox has the wealth to fund his own campaign, and already has put in a personal stake of $3 million. A source close to the candidate who was not authorized to speak publicly about the campaign said Cox is willing to invest a couple million more, but will not entirely self-fund his bid.

In 2014, such a dollar figure was enough for businessman Neel Kashkari to win the second spot in the primary and advance to the general, where Brown crushed him by 19 points. But Kashkari had only one serious Republican rival in the race, Tim Donnelly, a controversial then-assemblyman and former leader of the Minutemen border-patrol group.

This time around, it's more complicated. The more people jump in, the more they split up the shrinking number of Republican voters, increasing the likelihood of a Democrat-on-Democrat brawl next November.

Jon Fleischman, a conservative blogger based in Orange County and former state party official, summed up the problems with a crowded GOP field. "(I)t's entirely possible Republicans avoid the embarrassment of losing in November by simply losing in June."

Read the original post:
Republicans making moves in the 2018 California governor's race - MyAJC

Nine brave (and smart) Republican members of the House have decided to buck their leadership (not to mention the White House) over the issue of giving federal workers smaller pensions while requiring to pay more for those reduced annuities.

If all the proposals were enacted into law, the price tag to federal workers and retirees would be $149 billion in lost benefits over the next 10 years. Suffice to say, this potentially is a very big deal for federal workers and retirees.

Instead of looking at Washington as a swamp populated by wall-to-wall bureaucrats, the House members have looked within their own congressional districts, which have sizable numbers of federal and postal workers, all of whom are eligible to vote. They wrote a detailed letter to the House leadership, urging it to stop proposals that would force most current workers to pay as much as 6 percent more for their retirement benefits, reduce cost-of-living adjusts for retirees under the old CSRS plan and eliminate inflation-catchups, forever, for the vast majority of current workers who are under the less generous Federal Employees Retirement System.

There is also a proposal to eliminate a substantial gap payment that now goes to FERS retirees until they reach age 62 and qualify for Social Security. That can be worth thousands of dollars. Eliminating it would be especially tough, as in unfair, to law enforcement officers, federal firefighters, air traffic controllers and others who are generally required to retire no later than age 57.

Two of the pro-fed Republican House members are from Virginia, which is chock-full of federal and military personnel. And retirees. Reps. Barbara Comstock (R-Va.) and Rob Wittman (R-Va.) dont need a headcount on feds. They obviously realize how many are in their districts and how unhappy they are with the Trump administration austerity plan.

Other signers include Reps. Frank LoBiondo (R-N.J.) and Chris Smith (R-N.J.) from, as well as Reps. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), Tom Cole (R-Okla.), Walter Jones (R-N.C.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Austin Scott (R-Ga.).

All of them have huge numbers of federal employees. But that sometimes goes unnoticed. Nobody is surprised to hear that Maryland, Virginia and D.C. have lots of feds. But Utah? It has a disproportionate number of feds, especially in places like Ogden,where the Air Force, Interior Department and the IRS are THE major employers.

North Carolina, Georgia and New Jersey also have lots of feds. For many years, the largest union in the state of Oklahoma not what comes to mind as a fed-friendly state was the American Federation of Government Employees. It may still be.

The letter to the House leadership stresses what many federal workers and retirees often cite that changing the rules mid-career, or after retirement, is a moral breach of contract. That if all the changes were implemented as they have been scored, it would save the government more than $4 billion (with a B) in the first year, and a total of $149 billion over the next 10 years.

Looking at that in the mirror, it means that federal and postal workers and retirees from letter carriers, to park rangers, to astronauts and NSA code-breakers would lose $149 billion (again with a B) that are now due to them by law.

The breakout of the GOP nine could gather momentum. Forcing other House Republicans to consider the fairness-to-feds issue and also to check on how many of their constitutes are or were civil servants.

At best, it could revive the coalition of pro-fed Democrats and Republicans that came together during the Clinton and Bush administrations to fight the White House regardless of who was in it for bigger pay raises and better things for feds. Or at least to prevent big ticket takeaways.

That pretty much unraveled during the Obama years both sides share the blame for the pay freezes, furloughs and shutdowns but shows signs of coming back in the face of the proposed big-time cuts.

ByJory Heckman

Dr. Seuss wrote the book Green Eggs and Ham after his publisher bet him $50 that couldnt write a book using only 50 words.

Source: Wikipedia

See the original post:
House Republicans come out of political closet - FederalNewsRadio.com

Ron Brownstein, the editorial director of National Journal Group, has issued a challenge to Republicans who have criticized Trumps tweets against Mika Brzezinski. What, he asks, are they going to do about those tweets? Jennifer Rubin and John Weaver, two center-right opponents of Trump, have joined in deriding these Republican critics.

Criticism seems to me to be exactly the right response to this mornings presidential misbehavior. Im open to the argument that Republican officials should back up that criticism with action if only I saw a reasonable action they should take. What exactly do Brownsteinet al want the Republican critics of Trumps tweets to do about them?Speaker Ryancant take away Trumps Twitter account. Senator Graham cantgive Trump the self-restraint and decency neither nature nor upbringing seems to have supplied him. I asked the question on Twitter, and havent gotten a great answer yet. Is Senator Sasse supposed to impeach Trump over his tweets? Thats what some respondents suggested. I am sorry to say that it seems necessary to point out that this response is insane. If it were sane, it would mean that none of the criticisms of Trump made by Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumershould be taken seriously, either, since they havent declared for impeachment either.

Some liberal respondentssuggested that the problem is that the critics keep voting with Trump and supporting his agenda. The idea, I suppose, is that to register their opposition to obnoxious Trump behavior Republicans should delay the confirmation of conservative nominees they support, vote against legislation they favor, and so on. Even better, I suppose, congressional Republicans with misgivings about Trump could commit ritual suicide, or switch parties, whichever would bemore painful.

Read the original here:
Trump's Tweets and Republicans - National Review

REPUBLICAN SENATORS are regrouping after Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) put off a vote on his Obamacare repeal-and-replace bill. The stumble was for the better. The bill was drafted in secret. Not a single hearing was held. Democrats were not consulted. With only a single week afforded to absorb the legislations contents before a vote, the timetable was absurd. Mr.McConnells attempt to jam it through stank of legislative malpractice and hypocrisy.

Republicans should treat this as an opportunity to step away from the brink and reevaluate their foolhardy push to rush through an ill-wrought overhaul of the nations health-care system without any input from the other side. Despite President Trumps claims otherwise, GOP leaders have not engaged Democrats seriously on the health-care issue, as Democrats did for at least a time as they drafted Obamacare. Republicans have instead advanced coverage reductions and tax cuts that Democrats and, indeed, most of the public could never embrace.

The Congressional Budget Office has repeatedly exposed these ideas to be abjectly cruel, finding that they would result in north of 20 million more people uninsured in a decade, as government health-care assistance was rolled back to finance a large tax cut for the wealthy. Mr. McConnell has reportedly argued, however, that pressing forward would be better than negotiating with Democrats. What does it say about the Republican Party that even this bill is more appealing than reaching out to moderates on the other side of the aisle?

Not all feel this way. Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), one of the Senate bills skeptics, this week suggested fixing Obamacare markets in cooperation with Democrats. She and Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) released a compromise health-care proposal before Republicans began their mad repeal-and-replace rush. For his part, Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) urged Republicans Wednesday to start over and find a new, bipartisan way forward on health care. If Mr. Schumer wants to show that he is interested in doing more than trolling his GOP counterparts, he could appoint a group of moderate Democrats to serve as credible negotiators.

If both sides sat down in good faith, there would be a wide range of possible compromises. Senators could work off the Cassidy-Collins plan, which is not preoccupied with cutting taxes and allows states that want to keep the Obamacare system to do so, while letting others try a different course. In any compromise scenario, Democrats would seek commitments that health-care markets would be properly subsidized and administered, and Republicans would seek some loosening of Obamacare regulations, particularly if doing so allowed younger people to buy bare-bones coverage. That is grounds for an obvious trade.

Both sides have expressed interest in reinsurance programs, which would backstop insurance companies in cases of catastrophically large medical costs. Both may be interested in automatically enrolling everyone in a basic insurance plan unless they opt out. Both should seek a stronger and more durable mechanism to compel people to buy insurance, perhaps by withholding government tax benefits from people who refuse.

Reforming the health-care system with Democratic buy-in would also mean the Senate would not have to worry about complex parliamentary rules relating to the reconciliation process, which Republicans are currently using to avoid a Democratic filibuster. That greatly expands the reforms that bipartisan negotiators could consider.

What should be off the table, permanently, is the Senates bad bill. The unilateral effort to cram it through must end.

Excerpt from:
Republicans, step away from the brink - Washington Post