Mediaboss Marketing

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 falls 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 partys candidates, he said. Im 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-Bakersfield) is concerned about next years 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 McCarthys 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. Hes a fiscal conservative and social moderate who is not viewed as an ideologue. He has distanced himself from Trump. Hes also the only GOP mayor leading one of the nations 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. Faulconers 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 partys 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 partys leadership put no resources behind its standard-bearer who ran against Gov. Jerry Brown. And in 2016, the GOPs 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.

Its 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 governors race is a flagship race and the party needs to have a [credible] candidate, but whether that happens is an open question.

Follow California politics by signing up for our email newsletter

Allen, an assemblyman from Huntington Beach, is a traditional GOP conservative and a staunch Trump supporter. A favorite of the partys grass roots, Allen opposes the adoption of a government-run healthcare 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 partys recent moves. Earlier this year, Allen filed a ballot measure to rescind the gas tax passed by the Legislature. Its 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 Faulconers, 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 states 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, its 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]ts entirely possible Republicans avoid the embarrassment of losing in November by simply losing in June.

Times staff writers Melanie Mason and Liam Dillon in Sacramento contributed to this report.

seema.mehta@latimes.com

For the latest on national and California politics, follow @LATSeema on Twitter.

California's 2018 governor's race is going to be big. Find out who's in and what's next

Billionaire Tom Steyer is spending millions for Democrats. What will he get out of it?

Live coverage of California politics

Excerpt from:
California Republicans don't want to be caught again without a statewide candidate but the party is fractured - Los Angeles Times

In Virginia, Republican gubernatorial nominee Ed Gillespie is getting peppered with questions on the campaign trail about President Trumps efforts on health care, and he has declined to take a clear position.

In Maryland, Gov. Larry Hogan (R), who is up for reelection next year, says health-care plans being advanced by the Republican Congress do not work for his state, but he is still getting badgered by Democrats to speak out more forcefully against Trump.

And in Illinois, Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) is taking flak for saying he still needs time to study the GOP bills. A mailer sent this week by one Democrat hoping to challenge him in 2018 showed a pair of boxing gloves and called Rauner and Trump a one-two punch that could knock out your health care.

As Congress continues to debate unpopular Trump-backed legislation projected to drive up the number of uninsured, some Republican gubernatorial candidates are growing queasy as they are asked to defend it and Democrats are eager to pounce.

Thirty-eight states are holding gubernatorial contests this year and in 2018. The challenge for Republicans is particularly pronounced in swing states and in those that have expanded Medicaid coverage under former president Barack Obamas signature health-care law, the Affordable Care Act. Both the House and Senate health-care bills would phase out federal funding for those efforts, leaving the 31 states that took advantage of the provision to pick up the tab if they want to continue it.

That is one of several ways in which implementation of the GOP health-care legislation would fall to the states, raising the stakes for gubernatorial candidates to lay out their positions.

Governors are the ones whod be left holding the bag, said Jared Leopold, communications director for the Democratic Governors Association, which on Wednesday unveiled digital ads targeting GOP candidates in six states whom the DGA accuses of staying silent on Trumps health-care efforts.

The spots target Gillespie, who is on the ballot this year in Virginia, and candidates seeking the GOP nomination next year in Michigan, Ohio, Nevada, Florida and Rhode Island.

Jon Thompson, a spokesman for the Republican Governors Association, said the ads are a sign of Democratic weakness, citing in particular the decision to air them in Rhode Island, a state that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton carried easily last year.

I read polls every day, and theres no evidence yet that President Trump or any of his policies are going to be a drag on any of our candidates, Thompson said.

Only 17percent of adults nationwide approve of the Senate health-care bill, while 55percent disapprove, according to an NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll released on Wednesday.

Even among Republicans, support is tepid, with 35percent voicing approval and 21percent saying they disapprove.

John Weaver, a veteran Republican strategist, said federal action on health care will probably factor in significantly in gubernatorial races this year and next regardless of what actually happens in Washington.

If Congress does nothing and the health-care exchanges established under the ACA continue to have problems, that will be an issue, he said. And if a bill similar to what was unveiled last week by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) becomes law, there will be plenty of talk about its impact on states.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has projected that the Senate bill could lead to 22million fewer people with insurance by 2026.

It wont be forgotten by any means, clearly, said Weaver, who worked on the presidential campaign of Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R).

Kasich is among a handful of sitting Republican governors who have spoken out against the GOP bills in Congress. Hours before Senate Republicans delayed a vote this week, Kasich said their bill was unacceptable because it would victimize the poor and mentally ill and redirect tax money to people who are already very wealthy.

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval (R) has also spoken out against the GOP legislation, citing the impact of phasing out federal funding for Medicaid expansion in his state.

Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R), who presides over a Democratic-leaning state, has been critical as well. On Monday, he joined Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) in writing a letter to McConnell asking on behalf of the bipartisan National Governors Association that the Senate slow down its march toward a vote.

Thompson, the RGA spokesman, said such dissent was a byproduct of holding 33 governorships, compared with 16 for Democrats. What works for some states might not work for another state, he said.

For Gillespie, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, the GOP health-care efforts are an ongoing headache as he campaigns in the only Southern state that Clinton won last year.

Gillespie has been trying to stay laser-focused on jobs and the economy. But he could not escape health-care questions during a routine campaign stop Tuesday at Pork Barrel BBQ in Alexandria, Va.

So what do you think about the Senate health-care bill? asked one woman who introduced herself as Gail and said that she had never met Gillespie.

Without skipping a beat, Gillespie repeated his common refrain. Well, Ill take a look at it, and I got concerns on both sides, he said. I dont think the Affordable Care Act has been good for us in Virginia. Our premiums and out-of-pocket expenses have skyrocketed.

So, will you support a public option? the woman interjected, referring to an idea embraced by liberals to include a government-backed coverage option on insurance exchanges.

I dont know that Id support a public option, Gillespie responded. That makes me nervous.

Mary Lagnaoui, an Alexandria resident, said she realized Gillespie was at Pork Barrel after spotting protesters with signs outside. She has been so consumed by health-care-related news that she felt compelled to go inside and get his thoughts, she said.

Do you have a stand on Obamacare? she asked Gillespie.

Well, we were just talking about it, he said. I believe that the Affordable Care Act, Obamacare, has not been good for us here in Virginia.

As their conversation continued, Gillespie said he hopes that Congress does not treat Virginia punitively for not having taken part in Medicaid expansion under the ACA.

Im hoping they get that right in Washington, D.C., but Im focused on what we can do here in Virginia, Gillespie said, before excusing himself to take a photo with restaurant employees and leave the building.

A recent Quinnipiac University poll pegged the presidents approval rating in Virginia at 40percent and found that nearly 6 in 10 Virginians disapproved of the House Republicans health-care bill.

Gillespies detractors, including the Democratic nominee, Lt.Gov. Ralph Northam, have pilloried him for not taking a firm stance on the legislation, which Northam has characterized as immoral and unacceptable.

At some point, Gillespie will have to say what he thinks is good for Virginia, said Bob Holsworth, a longtime political analyst. This issue is likely to come more to the forefront if something actually passes.

Jennifer Duffy, an analyst who tracks gubernatorial contests for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, agreed that Gillespie is going to have a hard time fudging this issue and not taking a position.

But she said it might not be as pressing for other GOP candidates around the country.

He is too close to the Beltway, she said. People expect him to have a position, and Democrats are clearly not going to let this go.

The Republican nominee in New Jersey, the only other gubernatorial contest this November, has voiced concerns about the ACA and the loss of Medicaid funding that would result from the Republican legislation.

Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno (R) is waiting to see a final bill, but believes Washington should pass a replacement plan that covers preexisting conditions and allows people to keep their health insurance at an affordable cost, said spokesman Ricky Diaz.

In Maryland, Democratic Party chair Kathleen Matthews knocked Hogan on Wednesday for what she described as a lack of leadership in preventing Republicans in Congress from scaling back the ACA and called his position wishy-washy.

Hogan is acting more like a politician than a true governor who cares about the health care of hundreds of thousands of constituents, Matthews said on a conference call with reporters.

Hogan has criticized Congresss latest plan for replacing the ACA, with a spokeswoman for his office saying last week that Congress should go back to the drawing board in an open, transparent and bipartisan fashion to craft a bill that works for all Americans.

The Maryland governor has also said he wants Congress to find a middle path between Democrats who want to preserve the ACA and Republicans who would like to drastically overhaul it.

Josh Hicks contributed to this report.

Read the rest here:
Republicans running for governor put in a tough position by Trump health cuts - Washington Post

A medical malpractice bill that limits attorney fees and some patient damage fees in civil lawsuits was passed by the House on Wednesday by a narrow margin of 218 to 210, with numerous Republicans voting against the measure.

The biggest point of contention was over a provision that places a cap of $250,000 on noneconomic damages awards to victims, which includes for pain and suffering. Nineteen Republicans voted against the bill, many of them citing this as a key reason, saying it would trample on states rights because it would take away their ability to establish their own laws on the matter.

At least two dozen states do not cap noneconomic damages, and several state supreme courts including Washington and Florida have determined they are unconstitutional.

This represents a massive expansion of federal authority, said Rep. John J. Duncan Jr. (R-Tenn.), who voted against the bill.

Its a power grab by Washington, said Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.), who also voted against the measure.

The opposition from Republican members is a break from the past, when conservative lawmakers have consistently united in their support of similar measures. Several conservative groups, such as Frontiers of Freedom and the Institute for Liberty, also opposed the bill. And former U.S. attorney general Edwin Ed Meese, a Republican, announced his opposition Tuesday, calling the bill constitutional malpractice.

In a letter sent to House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.), Meese said the bill was a sweeping effort to federalize tort law with our system of federalism, which reserves that province solely to the states.

The $250,000 cap for noneconomic damages is separate from damages plaintiffs receive based on future economic losses. Noneconomic damages are meant to compensate victims for pain and suffering, as well as permanent disfigurement or other serious disabilities that may not interfere with their ability to work.

The caps would apply broadly to all manner of medical malpractice, including errors in surgery, side effects from unsafe drugs, abuse and neglect in nursing homes, and sexual assault by doctors.

The issue will probably decrease the odds of the Senate taking up the measure, opponents and proponents of the measure said. The Senate has routinely declined to vote on previous tort measures passed by the House, but with Republicans in control of both chambers, some are more optimistic about this bills chances.

Democrats did not break from tradition. They have consistently opposed tort legislation. Republicans have accused them of being swayed by large campaign donations they get from trial lawyers. Democrats have said, and continued to say Wednesday, that they are against such measures because people who have been harmed would be unable to seek justice.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) called the bill cruel and heartless as he made this argument against the measure.

A Washington Post article earlier this month examined the case of a Pennsylvania man, Steven Hanes, who underwent surgery in 2013 to have a testicle removed that was causing him pain. After a doctor removed the wrong testicle, he filed a medical malpractice suit and was awarded $630,000 in noneconomic damages more than twice the amount that the new bill would allow.

The limits on lawyer fees was not debated Wednesday. That provision would limit fees based on a sliding scale, in some cases cutting by half the amount a lawyer would receive from malpractice awards. On average, lawyers receive between 30 and 40percent of the award, according to several medical and legal groups who follow tort policy.

In a statement released just after the vote, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons a major proponent of the bill said it applauded the bills passage, calling it common sense, proven, comprehensive medical liability reform that will help contain health care costs.

The Center for Justice & Democracy a major opponent of the bill said it strongly condemned its passage.

Joanne Doroshow, the centers executive director, called it a harsh and mean-spirited bill that will harm the most vulnerable and severely injured Americans. This includes brain-damaged children, quadriplegic workers, and seniors in nursing homes.

Read more at PowerPost

Originally posted here:
House Republicans pass tort bill by slim margin - Washington Post

By Evan McMullin By Evan McMullin June 28 at 6:33 PM

Evan McMullin is a former CIA operations officer who ran as an independent candidate in the 2016 presidential election. He is co-founder of the nonprofit Stand Up Republic.

Whether its leaders and members realize it, the Republican Party is at risk of becoming the Vladimir Putin-aligned party in the United States. It can be convincingly argued that its already similar to Putin-supported parties in Europe, given Donald Trumps presidency, the Republican bases increasingly favorable views of Moscow and the House GOP leaderships disinterest in investigating and preventing Russian interference.

Increasingly sophisticated Russian influence and cyberoperations threaten Americans ability to choose their own leaders. This isnt hyperbole; in fact, its hard to overstate just how serious this issue is. Yet President Trump continues to sow doubt about whether Moscow even interfered in the 2016 presidential elections and to suggest the questions insignificance by ignoring it all together.

Our commander in chief seems more interested in protecting Moscow than he does in deterring its future attacks. The Post reported that the administration is actually considering allowing the Russian government to reopen the two spy compounds that President Barack Obama closed in late December in response to Russias election attack. There are also reports that the White House plans to step up lobbying efforts against a new Russia sanctions bill that the Senate passed with overwhelming bipartisan support this month. The measure would add new financial sanctions and require congressional review before Trump could lift these or other retaliatory measures currently levied against Moscow, including the closing of the two compounds.

Worse, Trump appears to have some support in this from Republican leaders in the House. Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) have delayed the bill, citing the constitutional requirement that such bills originate in the House.

This is little more than a red herring. Nothing prevents them from inserting the text of the Senate bill into a House measure, passing it and sending it back to the Senate for final approval, which it would likely grant under expedited procedures. Instead, Ryan and McCarthy appear to be more interested in delaying and weakening the bill.

Behind their neglect are changing Republican voter opinions, which are becoming alarmingly more pro-Russian. According to a Morning Consult-Politico poll conducted in May, 49 percent of Republican voters consider Russia to be either an ally or friendly. Only 12 percent consider it an enemy. In 2015, only 12 percent of Republicans held a favorable view of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to Gallup. As of February, that figure had jumped to 32 percent.

These dangerous trends impair the nations will to protect itself, and they are entirely the result of Republican leaderships failure to oppose Trump from the beginning. Republican voters had long held a healthy distrust of Putin, but Trumps persistent affinity for Moscow and other Republican leaders silence are changing Republican voters minds, now making it politically costly for GOP leaders to defend the nation from this foreign adversary.

Because they control both the executive and legislative branches, it is ultimately up to Republican leaders to prevent future Russian attacks on American democracy, even if such attacks may benefit the party electorally. Deterrence is an indispensable part of this equation. It cannot be accomplished without punishing Moscow for its violations of our sovereignty and threatening harsher responses for future trespasses.

In passing the Russia sanctions bill, Senate Republicans have shown they understand this. GOP leaders in the House must work with their Senate colleagues to pass a strong sanctions package that requires a congressional review of changes to Russia sanctions implementation desired by the president. He simply cannot be trusted to protect the integrity of Americas democracy on his own.

Republican leaders and the party are at a crossroads. They will either choose liberty in an independent America or to serve a distant, foreign master who seeks no more than to enrich and empower himself at the expense of free society everywhere. If Republican leaders choose the latter, the majority of Americans will have no choice but to hold them accountable as opponents to the cause of freedom.

Here is the original post:
Republicans are risking becoming the party of Putin - Washington Post

Senate Republicans reconvened behind closed doors Wednesday trying to break the impasse on their healthcare overhaul but emerged with no apparent strategy for resolving differences by an end-of-week deadline.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky vowed to try again for a vote after the Fourth of July recess, despite having abruptly delayed action this week.

Senators were aiming for a revised bill by Friday, the Republican whip, Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, told reporters, so it could be assessed by the Congressional Budget Office during the break.

But senators remained skeptical after the lengthy lunchtime huddle that appeared to run long on ideas but short on consensus.

I think its going to be very difficult, said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).

McConnell surprised senators by delaying this weeks expected votes once it became clear he did not have a majority for passage or possibly to even open the debate.

As many as 10 Republican senators now publicly oppose the bill, the Better Care Reconciliation Act, and leaders are scrambling to win them over with an estimated $200 billion in savings from the bill that can be applied to their particular states needs.

But even with that fund of resources, it is not clear McConnell will be able to satisfactorily improve the legislation, which now threatens to cut 22 million Americans off health insurance. He can only afford to lose two Republican votes in the face of Democratic opposition.

"It's going to be very difficult to get me to a yes... have to make us an offer we can't refuse, Sen. Dean Heller (R-Nev.) said on a telephone town hall late Tuesday, according tojournalist Jon Ralston, who monitored the call.

Fresh polling Wednesday showed paltry support for the Republican approach to overhauling the Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare, which has enjoyed a surge in popularity now that Republicans are closer than ever to repealing it. A USA Today poll put approval of the Senate GOP bill at 12%.

Republicans, though, are under enormous pressure from their most conservative supporters and big dollar donors, including the powerful Koch network to deliver on their promised to end Obamacare.

Senate Democrats, meanwhile, suggested that President Trump convene all 100 senators much the way then-President Obama did during his first days in office for a session at Blair House to see how they might be able to work together to improve, rather than repeal, the Affordable Care Act.

Id make my friends on the Republican side and President Trump an offer: Lets turn over a new leaf. Lets start over, said Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.).

President Trump, I challenge you to invite us all 100 of us, Republican and Democrat to Blair House to discuss a new bipartisan way forward on healthcare in front of all the American people.

No such invitation, however, seemed forthcoming. Trump dismissed Schumer's proposal "he just doesn't seem like a serious person," the president said and instead promised his own"big surprise" on healthcare.

"Healthcare is working along very well," Trump told reporters at the White House. "We could have a big surprise, with a great healthcare package."

Asked what he meant by a big surprise, Trump simply repeated: "A great, great surprise."

The Republican bill, like its counterpart passed by House Republicans, does not fully gut Obamacare, but rescinds the new taxes imposed on high-incomeindividuals and healthcare companies to pay for expanding coverage through Medicaid and subsidies for private insurance on the ACA marketplace.

Senators said the private talks Wednesday focused mainly on changes to the Obamacare marketplace that could bring down the cost of insurance premiums.

One idea from Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) to allow insurers to offer policies that do not meet the Obamacare benchmarks for what insurance needs to cover met with mixed reaction, senators said.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.),a physician, warned that such changes would alter the risk pool, keeping insurance costs high.

You end up with policies that, for example, dont cover maternity, Cassidy said. Do you want a policy that doesnt have maternity, which would be principally appealing to young men, when obviously typically men have had a role in that pregnancy?

Other senators were floating new ideas, but McConnell gave no indication whether those proposals would be included in the final revised product.

Michael A. Memolicontributed to this report.

Read more here:
Senate Republicans aim for new healthcare bill by Friday, but skeptics remain - Los Angeles Times