Mediaboss Marketing

The paradox of secrecy in American politics is how much attention it gets. Over the last couple of weeks, the penchant of the White House and the Republican Senate for blocking the release of information has become a central issue in Washington. Its a case of making lemonade from lemons: If you cant cover the story, cover why you cant cover it.

Perhaps most immediately important is the Senate GOPs refusal to reveal anything about the bill the health-care bill currently under consideration. Meanwhile, the administration has been quietly clamping down on various forms of access, from public schedules to visitor logs to the daily briefings at the White House. The executive branch has taken to refusing requests for information from congressional Democrats too.

The White House Press Briefing Is Slowly Dying

The result is a weird reversal of the normal course of business: Gossipy nuggets leak out of the White House on a daily basisTrump is yelling at TVs! Trump is angry at Jared! Sean Spicer/Reince Priebus/Steve Bannon is on the chopping block!and the president tweets as fact things his lawyers claim are not true, yet next to nothing is known about a huge bill that could change health coverage for millions of Americans.

This kind of secrecy is bad for policymaking and bad for democracy, but since abstract arguments like that are difficult to plead effectively, its customary to argue that secrecy is also politically unwise. For example, it is clearly hypocritical. When Obama was president, Republicans complained that the White House was too secretive, and that Democrats were trying to railroad through health-care reform without public inputeven though the process behind the Affordable Care Act was far more public and lengthy than the present process. But hypocrisy is seldom lethal for any politician, let alone a party, especially in todays partisan climate.

Another argument is that clamming up will actually hurt the clams. As Politicos Playbook puts it today, This could be bad for the White House, as it will be far more difficult for them to drive a message and respond to questions. This might be true, but take it with a healthy dose of skepticism. For one, its obviously self-serving for journalists to say that giving journalists more access is good for them, and the press corps, smelling blood, is out for damaging stories about Trump. Sometimes openness is not a zero-sum game, but in this case, it probably is.

Second, wheres the proof? The George W. Bush administration was more secretive than the Clinton administration; the press howled; and Bush got reelected. The Obama administration was more secretive than the Bush administration; the press howled; and Obama got reelected. Part of Obamas success was that he found other ways to get his message out: Social media, for example, and interviews with non-traditional interlocutors, from Zach Galifianakis to YouTube stars. Trump may be different in degree and extremity from his predecessors, but his administrations secrecy is part of a disturbing, bipartisan progression.

The secrecy will continue as long as it works. It certainly worked in the House, where GOP leaders watched a first attempt at a health bill go down as its flaws became public. For the second try, they acted fast and quietly, not even waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to score the bill.

And so far, the strategy is working for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell as well. Its not just Democrats and the press who are upset; some Republicans are speaking out too:

But until enough members of the GOP caucus actually demand that McConnell open up the process, their complaints will make little difference. In fact, that might be by design. McConnell and his lieutenants would much rather have an argument about process and take the lumps they get from that fight: They can write complaints off as either the whingeing of a biased press or hypocrisy from Democrats who did the same thing. Thats far better than trying to defend an unpopular bill that will likely push millions off insurance, redistribute money to the wealthy, and slash popular entitlements. The secrecy gives disgruntled Republican members of the caucus something else to complain about instead.

(The general public may not really be the audience from whom the Senate leadership is hiding its bill; public disapproval of the House health bill is already very high, and Democrats will vote en masse against it. The bigger danger for McConnell is that Republican constituenciesfrom the business lobby to GOP governorswill react fiercely to the bill and convince Republican senators to defect.)

Meanwhile, Senator Chuck Grassley, the Iowa Republican, has taken a bold stand on behalf of Democratic colleagues, writing a letter to President Trump complaining about the executive branch ignoring document requests. But as long as Grassley stands alone, and has only angry letters to write, the White House can blithely ignore him, too.

In the long run, shutting out public attention can have some ill effects. Just ask Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, who has gone to historically drastic extents to avoid dealing with reporters. The result has been that the State Department cant seem to ever present a clear message about what its policies are, and keeps getting undercut by the president. Perhaps cutting down on briefings will make the administrations message control even worse, though its hard to imagine what that would look like. (The White House did belatedly add an on-camera briefing to Tuesdays schedule.) Perhaps enough Republican senators will get upset about the closed-door health-care process to force it out into public hearings. But for as along as it continues to succeed, secrecy is likely here to stay.

Read the original post:
Republicans Will Continue to Stick With Secrecy as Long as It Works - The Atlantic

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on June 20 that Americans will have "plenty of time" to look at the health-care bill before it goes to the Senate floor for debate. (The Washington Post)

In Washington, the need to spin is strong. Which is why it's so amazing that Senate Republicans aren't even trying to spin their secret health-care negotiations as anything but: Yeah, this isn't good.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was asked Tuesday by MSNBC's Willie Geist if getting a first look at the bill this week and then votingon it next week allows for enough time.

Corker's answer: Well, that's it looks like the time that's going to be allotted. He went on: I would have liked, as you already know, for this to be a more open process and have committee hearings. But that's not what we're doing.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was more blunt:

And Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) just straight up acknowledged the fact that in 2010, Republicans might as well have been criticizing their future, 2017 selves:

This is not how Republicans wanted this to go.

They control Washington. They can finally make good on their near-universal promise to repeal Obamacare. And instead of publicly celebrating that, they're negotiating a bill in secret and more or less criticizing themselves for it. The Senate could vote on a version of the House's health-care bill as soon as next week, and key senators as well as the health and human services secretaryand possibly even the president haven't seen it.

[Are Republicans leading the most secretive health-care bill process ever?]

(Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reportersTuesday that the bill could become public by Thursday.)

Republicans might not be able to defend keeping their health-care bill secret until the last minute, but they have a reason for doing it: They're calculating that the blowback for keeping it secret is a lesser evil than the blowback for negotiating it in public.

Last month, they watched House Republicans negotiate their bill in the open, and they saw a torturous process. Every iteration was extensively reported by the media. Lawmakers went home and got yelled at by their constituents for supporting a bill that could cut their benefits or that wouldn't fully repeal Obamacare. Republicans had to pull the bill from the floor at the last minute because they couldn't get enough support from their own party; an embarrassing and humbling moment.

Senate Republicans have been crafting their version of the bill for more than a month now. But because most of them don't know what's in it, we haven't written any stories about it, and opposition hasn't had time to harden.

Actually,opposition probably won't have time to coalesceif McConnell gets his way: There will be about a week between the bill's introduction and a vote, and lawmakers won't have more than a long weekend back home.

By contrast, the 2009-2010 Obamacare negotiations included months of public hearings before they were ultimately finished behind closed doors. In 2010 and now, both sides say they were forced into secrecy by a minority party that wanted only to stall.

But Republicans have taken the secrecy to a new level, refusing to even hold committee hearings.

The result is that, yes, McConnell gets awarded flip-flops from The Washington Post's Fact Checker for overseeing the most secretive health-care bill process ever. Yes, Democrats get to thrust hypocrisy in the faces of their colleagues. And yes, Republicans are doing something that, by their own definition, is indefensible.

But from Republicans' perspective, they don't have a choice.Their party is too ideologically fractured, and the margin of victory in the Senate too slim (Republicans can afford to lose just two GOP votes), to craft a health-care bill in the open, despite the fact that most Republican senators wish this process were more transparent.

More:
Republicans aren't even trying to defend their secret health-care negotiations - Washington Post

Jun. 20, 2017 at 4:23 PM

While the Senate Republicans bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act has been shrouded in secrecy, at least one thing is all but certain: the final bill will include hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts, mostly for the richest Americans. It might seem unsurprising that Republicans are proposing tax cuts, except for one fact: The cuts would go disproportionately to Democratic-leaning states.

To fund the insurance expansion, the Affordable Care Act created a variety of new taxes. Some, like those on medical devices, pharmaceuticals and health insurers (and lets not forget tanning salons), were levied on consumers via the health care industry. But a hefty portion were charged directly to the wealthiest taxpayers. One such tax is a 0.9 percent payroll tax on individuals earning more than $200,000 a year, often referred to as the Medicare surcharge. The other is a 3.8 percent tax on net investment income, also for people who earn more than $200,000. These taxes largely affect the top 5 percent of earners, with the majority of the money collected coming from the top 1 percent of earners.

A look at who is paying these taxes, based on Statistics of Income data from the Internal Revenue Service, reveals that of the eight states that paid the most in 2014, six voted for Hillary Clinton in last years presidential election. Those six states collectively accounted for 47 percent of all the money raised by the taxes in 2014.

That pattern holds when we look at all states and the District of Columbia, too: These taxes as a whole both in terms of dollar amounts paid and the share of people paying them are largely coming from states that leaned Democratic in the 2016 election. That doesnt necessarily mean the specific people paying the taxes voted for Clinton, of course, but it is revealing in terms of the decisions legislators are making in supporting or rejecting the current health care reform efforts. People in states that backed Clinton in 2016 filed just 44.6 percent of all 2014 tax returns. But residents of those states accounted for 56.3 percent of all taxpayers who paid the investment tax and 59.0 percent of those who paid the Medicare surcharge. In all, states that voted for Clinton paid 17.3 billion dollars, which is 59.9 percent of the combined ACA-related taxes. In short, in repealing these taxes, Republican senators would be giving tax breaks predominantly to states that favor their Democratic opponents.

Net investment tax is a 3.8 percent tax on net investment income for individuals earning more than $200,000 a year. Medicare surcharge is a 0.9 percent payroll tax on individuals earning more than $200,000 a year.

Sources: IRS, Cook Political Report

Of course, these taxes fund specific benefits, including the expansion of Medicaid and the tax credit that helps lower-income Americans buy insurance via the private health insurance marketplace. In the table below, we show the difference between the share of people in each state who receive the tax credits to buy insurance and the margin of voters the Democratic party won in the 2016 presidential election. Almost all the states where more residents pay the tax than receive the credit are blue, while most of the states where more people receive the credit than pay the tax are red.

The Obamacare credit is formally known as the Advance Premium Tax Credit.

Sources: IRS, Cook Political Report

The story is a bit different when it comes to the ACAs other major mechanism for increasing insurance coverage: the Medicaid expansion. The ACA intended to open Medicaid eligibility up to essentially all low-income Americans, not just children, the disabled, and other groups historically covered by the program. In 2012, however, the Supreme Court ruled that states didnt have to accept the expansion, and 19 states have chosen not to do so. Those states, unsurprisingly, lean red and tend to have Republican Senators; 17 have Republican governors and 17 voted for President Trump in 2016. Nonetheless, several red states, including Kentucky and Arkansas, did accept the expansion, and a large share of their populations are receiving coverage as a result.

One way to think about the tradeoffs of the ACA is to look at how many of a states residents directly benefited from the law (via tax credits or the Medicaid expansion) relative to how many paid the investment tax. That ratio shows that in certain red states, many more people are receiving financial support from the law than paying for it. In 2014, the three states with the highest ratio of beneficiaries to investment-tax payers were all won by Trump: West Virginia, Kentucky and Arkansas. In those three states, for every person who paid the investment tax, more than sixteen people benefited directly from either the Medicaid expansion or the tax credit that subsidizes premiums on private plans. To be clear, while the ratio of ACA taxpayers to beneficiaries may favor red states, that doesnt mean that residents of blue states havent received benefits under the law, and in far greater numbers than in those that paid additional taxes. In California, for example, 2.5 million people were newly enrolled in Medicaid in 2014 as a result of the expansion, whereas fewer than 600,000 households paid the investment tax.

Not all the ACAs taxes fall disproportionately on the wealthy. For example, the law also imposes a tax on people who dont have insurance, which affects far more people than the investment tax. (In fact, in 2014, more than twice as many people paid that tax as received tax credits for coverage.) In dollar terms, however, that tax is relatively small: It generates less than 6 percent of the amount raised by the investment tax and Medicare surcharge. Overall, 40 percent of the total cuts proposed by the Houses health care bill would go to people with the highest 1 percent of incomes, according to an analysis by the left-leaning Tax Policy Center. Again, these are people who are disproportionately likely to live in states that voted for Clinton.

The text of the Senate bill hasnt yet been released, so it is impossible to calculate the exact impact it would have on each state. It is possible that Republican leaders could sweeten the deal for specific states in order to pass the bill, a tactic Democrats also used to get Nebraskas then-Senator Ben Nelson to cast the 60th Obamacare vote in the Senate. (This cornhusker kickback was removed from the final version of the law.) But focus on state-level interests is certainly not the reason that Republicans are within striking distance of repealing the ACA.

Since our analysis suggests that Obamacare taxes are disproportionately paid by blue states and disproportionately benefit red states, in an important sense, Republican senators are lining up to vote against their states interests. Of course, the ACA taxes were originally enacted by Democrats, so prioritizing ideological and partisan commitments over the state-level costs and benefits is by no means unique to the GOP. But this trend does highlight a key fact about contemporary policymaking: Senators evaluating big-ticket bills like the ACA and the Houses American Health Care Act are looking at them through the lenses of partisanship and ideology much more than through the lens of how the bills will affect their states.

Tiger Brown, Saleel Huprikar, and Louis Lin provided research assistance. A Russell Sage Foundation Presidential Authority Award supports Dan Hopkins ACA-related research.

Read more here:
Republicans' Obamacare Repeal Would Cut Taxes But Mostly In Blue States - FiveThirtyEight

It looks as though the special election in Georgias 6th Congressional District the most expensive House race in history will be a toss-up.

At any other time, Republican Karen Handel would likely be expected to win election by a decent margin, but the race has turned into the first domino in an elaborate resulting pattern.

If Handel beats Democrat Jon Ossoff, Republicans in close House districts will be able to breathe a little easier, knowing that a winnable race taking place under the cloud of a historically unpopular president could still be won. If Ossoff wins, though, Republicans worried about keeping their jobs next year have new cause for concern. And that dark cloud, President Trump, will have new reason to worry, since his fate lies in their hands should the investigation into his possible attempts to obstruct justice head south.

Fairly or not, that number, the results of the special election, will loom large in the thinking of Republicans in swing districts. But on Tuesday morning, another new number emerged that will make every Republican along Pennsylvania Avenue wary. A new poll from CBS News found that Trumps job approval had fallen to 36 percent from 41 percent in late April. Of more concern, though, was the figure for Republicans: Only 72 percent of Trumps own party thinks hes doing a good job. That mirrors a recent poll from the Associated Press, which found that only three-quarters of Republicans held positive views of Trumps job performance.

The last time CBS polled on Trumps job approval, in late April, 83 percent of Republicans viewed him positively. Thats a decline of 11 points. Other recent polls have also shown a downward trend.

One point of concern unearthed by CBS is that Republicans are far less likely to approve of Trumps handling of the Russia investigation than they are of his handling of the economy or terrorism. While two-thirds of Americans think that the Russia investigation is serious, most Republicans think that the investigation is little more than a distraction though a majority think that the investigation should continue without Trump firing the special counsel.

Back to the original question, though: How serious a problem is this for congressional Republicans who may have to decide whether to defend Trump to their constituents?

Trump was inaugurated five months ago Tuesday. His approval rating among members of his own party tracked with President Barack Obamas early approval ratings early in his tenure, but as time has passed, Trumps approval ratings among Republicans have slipped lower while Obamas approval ratings with Democrats held fairly steady.

Of even more concern to congressional Republicans in swing districts is that Trump is much less popular with independents than Obama was over his first five months.

Holding Republicans doesnt mean much in a close race if you lose Democrats by a wide margin and if independents drift away.

We can look at that data another way. Trumps numbers among members of his own party have been a bit lower than Obamas; among independents, much lower.

The broader context here is important, though. Obamas first few months in office included the traditional honeymoon period that new presidents get. Over the course of his two terms, though, a wide partisan gulf emerged, with Democrats viewing him positively and Republicans negatively. Most of the movement in his poll numbers stemmed from movement among independents.

If we compare all of Obamas poll numbers to Trumps over his first 150 days, theres more overlap including among independents. Among members of each presidents own party, Trumps distribution is actually slightly better.

The implication is that Trump inherited a partisan pattern from Obama. But then, Trump should still be in his honeymoon period among Republicans. The CBS poll suggests that may be coming to a quick end.

One last note. Over the weekend, the blog Lawfare looked at President Richard Nixons approval ratings among Republicans as the Watergate investigation unfolded. Nixons approval was under 60 percent among Republicans for months before he actually resigned. Thats good news for Trump, suggesting that even in that less-partisan era, pressure on Capitol Hill Republicans to act against the Republican president wasnt significant enough to force a vote on impeachment, even when that president was much less popular with the party than Trump is.

If Handel loses Tuesday and if Trumps approval ratings among Republicans continue to erode or if theres a shift against the president in the investigation the position of congressional Republicans will shift quickly. But if Handel wins, and if Trump can generally hold steady among Republicans, the 2018 calculus looks a bit different. Like Handel, most Republicans wouldnt embrace Trumps presidency on the campaign trail next year, but luckily for Trump, they wont be pushing to campaign with President Pence, either.

Visit link:
The other number that might inspire some panic among congressional Republicans - Washington Post

With Breanne Deppisch and Joanie Greve

THE BIG IDEA:

CHAMBLEE, Ga. Obamacare has been front and center in Republican campaign commercials for the past four election cycles, but its been absent from the airwaves ahead of todays special election in Georgias 6th District.

Most of the GOP spots have focused on national security. A relentless barrage of attacks ads sought to define Democratic candidate Jon Ossoff, 30, as an inexperienced and liberal carpetbagger who wouldbe a puppet of Nancy Pelosi.

This is ironic because the neck-and-neck race to replace Tom Price, who resigned to become secretary of health and human services, has played out against the backdrop of Congress finally considering a repeal of the 2010 law. Senate Republicans are forging ahead with plans to hold a vote next week, and Democrats are now using every procedural trick available to slow the chamber to a crawl so they can draw attention to the secretive process being used to advance the legislation.

Politically, it is sensible for GOP outside groups to steer clear of this issue in their paid media. An Atlanta Journal-Constitution poll found that just one-quarter of likely voters in the costliest House race in U.S. history approve of the Republicans' American Health Care Act.

But the polling does not capture the full story. In dozens of interviews on the ground over three days, most Republicans and many independents who have concerns about the House bill stressed that they still detest Obamacare. Their expectations might seem unreasonable to anyone who is closely following the debate or is steeped in the complexities of public policy, but they believe Donald Trump can and should enact a replacement plan that will both reduce their costs and improve their quality of care.

No matter where people fall in the debate, virtually everyone cares deeply about the outcome. The Journal-Constitution survey, conducted the week before last, found that 81 percent of likely voters describe health care as an extremely or very important priority to them, larger than any other issue by far.

-- One reason a lot of Republicans in the suburbs north of Atlanta are willing to give Trump leeway is Price. After representing the district for 12 years, he is still highly respected by the grass roots. He won reelection by 23 points last November, even as Trump edged out Hillary Clinton by just one point.

Lynda Chapman, a trained pharmacist who has a masters degree in health-care policy, expressed confidence that any repeal bill will be good so long as Price signs off on it. Ive known Tom Price for over 20 years, she said. Hes a good man and has a good heart. You have to trust him because he knows what hes doing.

She said this after watching Price speak at a rally for Republican candidate Karen Handel. The HHS secretary began his speech in an airplane hangar here on Saturday by noting that he had come in his personal capacity. He made just one passing reference to the health debate in his remarks. Even then, it was part of a laundry list. Between calls for lower taxes and stronger national security, he said: And you all want patient-centered health care. That was it.

In a six-minute speech peppered with yalls, Handel also never mentioned Trump or health care. Were going to show up on Tuesday, and were going to rock Nancy Pelosis world, she said.

-- When asked, Handel says she would have voted for the House bill because its better than the status quo. It is by no means a perfect bill, but it was important to get the process started, she told me before she held a meet-and-greet at a restaurant. And the process couldnt begin until we had a bill that was passed, right? So theres some good things in it: Being able to keep people on their parents plan until theyre 26, I think most people are A-okaywith that. A lot of people ask me: Why cant we fix it? Well, we cant fix something that had the largest tax increase embedded in it in my lifetime [a reference to the individual mandate]. The only way to fix a tax increase is to repeal it.

One thing I trust the Senate will deal with is making sure that states that didnt expand Medicaid shouldnt be at a disadvantage versus other states, Handel added. So fix that. Make sure that the language on preexisting conditions is exactly right. As I read it, there are richer protections for people with preexisting conditions in the House bill than there were previously. From a practical standpoint, there are things they can do to give it a good solid foundation to keep moving forward.

-- The bill was a flashpoint in the debates, as Ossoff argued that the legislation guts protections for preexisting conditions. He told the story of a 7-year-old boy who has a heart condition and might struggle to get insurance if the bill became law. We need to fix Obamacare, not repeal it, the former House staffer says in one of his ads.

-- The legislation has certainly helped galvanize Democratic energy. Melissa Holloway, 32, is a registered nurse who works with Medicaid recipients. The Democrat wore a Not My President T-shirt as she joined two dozen friends for an impromptu protest outside Prices rally for Handel. I believe health care is a human right, she said. Most of the people who are going to be hurt by Trumpcare are already disadvantaged. Thats what real terrorism looks like.

-- Republican activist Angie Caswell, 42, wandered outside to engage with these protesters. She earnestly wanted to understand how they could possibly think Obamacare was working. Her deductibles have skyrocketed in recent years, she said, and shes heard horror stories about doctors going out of business. I only know one person who has benefited from Obamacare, she said.

The mental health counselor, a native of Sweden who became a U.S. citizen in 2004, calls herself ultra-conservative and strongly supports the president. Trump wants to put something together thats actually going to last and work for everybody, Caswell explained. To do that, you have to start over. Thats what theyre doing.

She said the protesters concerns about people with preexisting conditions losing coverage are unfounded because, surely, Trump would never allow such a terrible thing to happen to people who need help. Thats definitely one of the things hes going to make sure they fix, she said, referring to the Senate bill. Im sure Trump has scratched his head on that one a lot.

-- The Congressional Leadership Fund has spent $7 million to keep this seat in GOP hands, including a field program that has 135 paid door-knockers. For the past two months, the super PAC aligned with Paul Ryan has focused its efforts on mobilizing a universe of about 38,000 Republicans who voted in the 2016 presidential primary but not in the crowded April primary for this election. If these lower-propensity voters show up, the district is red enough that Handel will win.

I joined Chase McGrath, 18, on one of his door-knocking shifts. He just graduated from high school and will attend Georgetown this fall. Walking down streets lined with pine cones and red dirt in Roswell, he urged these targeted voters to take the time to turn out for Handel. Canvassers for CLF had previously knocked on many of these doors twice. This was the final push to drive them to the polls. Theres a lot of people who are just ready for the election to happen, McGrath said.

One of the Republicans he connected with was Karen Shandor, a registered nurse, who decided to vote for Handel after watching her promise to cut taxes during one of the televised debates. She thinks having another Republican in Congress will help Trump advance his agenda. Im having a really hard time. My money doesnt go as far as it used to, she said. We may not see changes right away with what Trump is doing, but I feel like in the long run it will benefit us.

Shandor used to work in an emergency room and complained that undocumented immigrants from Mexico would always get medical care with no questions asked. She said she resents freeloaders and explained that she supports the House bill because her understanding is that it will make Mexicans pay more for their health care. I didnt have a child because I didnt know if I could afford it, the 58-year-old said as she took a break from tending to her vegetable garden. But Mexican kids in the country illegally are automatically covered. Hopefully that changes.

-- L.B. Jamieson, 49, sells cement trucks and hates Obamacare. She considers herself an independent, backs Handel and suggests she will be deeply disillusioned if congressional Republicans do nothing to get rid of the law. I have to pay a $40 co-pay just to see a doctor, the Republican said. Its not affordable. Id rather pay the fine.

Donald Trump was not my first choice, but I went with him because he knows what hes doing, and hes a successful businessman, Jamieson explained as she dipped a pita chip into hummus at Marlows Tavern in Johns Creek during a date with her boyfriend. I dont think hes always making the best choices, but at the same time hes done more in his first 100 days than any president ever before.

I asked what specifically Jamieson was thinking of when she said that. Just research it, she said. Im not going to get into it, but its the truth. Its factual. Just look it up.

-- Trump tweeted support for the GOP nominee last night, but he spelled her name wrong: Karen Handle's opponent in #GA06 can't even vote in the district he wants to represent.... He deleted that and reposted it with the right spelling. He also acknowledged the wider implications of the race: The Dems want to stop tax cuts, good healthcare and Border Security. Their ObamaCare is dead with 100% increases in Ps. Vote now for Karen H. He posted again this morning:

-- The bottom line: If Handel loses tonight, it will be almost entirely because of moderate unease with Trump and his agenda. The Journal-Constitution poll found that only about one-third of voters in the district approve of the president. Even one in four Republicans give him an unfavorable review.

Demographics are key: While Trump pulled just 48 percent in the district last November, Mitt Romney got 61 percent in 2012. That swing, one of the biggest in the country, is why Democrats aggressively targeted the race early on.

Republicans only represent two of the 15 House districts with the highest percentage of adults who have a college degree. Georgias 6th is one of them. (The other is Virginias 10th, which includes tony D.C. suburbs like McLean and is held by Barbara Comstock.)

Obviously, Trump would never acknowledge that his unpopularity is why his party lost an election. So it shouldnt be surprising that the White House is already telegraphing plans to blame others if Handel goes down. Inside the West Wing, Trump and his advisers have paid increasing attention to the race and have been briefed regularly on Handels standing in private polls, GOP ground efforts and early-vote totals, Bob Costa reports. Associates of Trump who have said he is already furious over the focus on his handling of investigations into Russian meddling in the 2016 election warned that an Ossoff win could spark new rage toward Handels campaign and the way the GOP handled the race.

WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE NATIONAL HEALTH-CARE DEBATE:

-- Senate Republican leaders are moving forward with plans to hold a vote next week, even though they still arent sure theyll have the 50 votes to pass anything. The Wall Street Journal reports: Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is intent on keeping pressure on Senate Republicans to move quickly on the bill rolling back and replacing much of the 2010 health law, lawmakers and GOP aides said. The push for a quick vote before the weeklong July 4 recess could backfire, however, as some conservative and centrist Republicans have expressed concern about the emerging shape of the legislation. Still, Mr. McConnell has reasons to try for a quick health-care vote. The pressure could force lawmakers to reach a consensus on sticking points that have divided them. And GOP leaders in both chambers want to move on to other legislative items.

-- Senate Democrats ramped up opposition Monday to the emerging bill with a series of mostly symbolic moves, including speeches that went late into last night. At one point early Monday evening, more than a dozen Democratic senators sat at their desks on the Senate floor and took turns standing and asking for committee hearings on the bill and for the text to be released for greater scrutiny, Sean Sullivan reports.

-- Democrats hope that, if they can block a Senate vote before July 4, the August recess will stifle GOP momentum and make it much harder to get final passage. The New York Times reports: Lawmakers would have just three weeks to pass a Senate bill and work out differences with the House before the planned August recess (assuming a bill passes the Senate). The Trump administration also wants Congress to raise the governments statutory borrowing limit before August, another fight that could collide with the Affordable Care Act repeal.

-- One problem: Senate Dems arent unified about the approach. Politico reports: (Leadership) wants to use every procedural tool at their disposal to slow the GOPs progress, but one of their more arcane options the power to block committee meetings two hours after the Senate goes into session risks inviting Republicans to paint them as heedlessly obstructionist.

-- Liberal activist groups are planning a big national day of action around health care on July 29, the first day of the congressional summer recess. But if Senate Republicans have their way, Obamacare will already be gone by then, Mike DeBonis notes.

-- Some Republicans are beginning to talk publicly about canceling the August congressional recess so that they can get a bill done. The Hill: A Senate GOP aide expressed doubt, however, that David Perdue, Dan Sullivan and Steve Daines will get very far in convincing McConnell to cancel the recess.

-- The contents of the Senate bill remain tightly under wraps, which defies tradition but could establish a new norm if it works. Amber Phillips reports: There are always some kinds of closed-door negotiations on big pieces of legislation. But at this point in the 2009-2010 debate for the Affordable Care Act, there had been months of public committee hearings that you and I could attend or watch online or read about in the news. Senators had been briefed on what was happening and could answer reporters' questions instead of saying they have no idea what's in the bill. Amendments were offered by both sides. But if the bill makes it through despite the secrecy, that would be a remarkable change in the way legislation is debated and passed. And it would be a very tantalizing path for both sides to take in the future.

-- As the bills contents remain unclear, some reports suggest that the Senate may vote to cut Medicaid by even more than the $800 billion that the House approved last month. The Hill reports: The proposal would start out the growth rate for a new cap on Medicaid spending at the same levels as the House bill, but then drop to a lower growth rate that would cut spending more, known as CPI-U, starting in 2025. That proposal has been sent to the Congressional Budget Office for analysis, a Senate GOP aide said. The aide said that plan has been described as a consensus option that has been sent to CBO, though no final decision has been made yet. Another aide said there are still other options in the mix. Democrats and some more moderate Republicans were already warning about Medicaid cuts in the House-passed bill.

-- New polling released by the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling shows that the House bill is deeply unpopular in three states with GOP senators who could torpedo the legislation: Alaska, Nevada and West Virginia.

WHILE YOU WERE SLEEPING:

-- Otto Warmbier, the University of Virginiastudent who was imprisoned by North Korea for nearly a year and a half before beingmedically evacuated and returned home in a coma last week, has died. He was 22. Susan Svrluga and Anna Fifield report: "Warmbier had gone to North Korea on his way to Hong Kong for a study-abroad program, but was stopped when he tried to leave the country. He was a much-loved student a former homecoming king and high-school soccer captain who went on to become a top student at U-Va., where he was awarded a scholarship designed for the most 'intellectually curious' students."

Warmbier'sdeath could push lawmakers or the Trump administration to restrict or ban Americans from traveling to North Korea. [Reps. Adam Schiff and Joe Wilson] have introduced the North Korea Travel Control Act in the House, which would require Americans who want to travel to North Korea to obtain a license. There would be no licenses for tourists. The Senate has been more reluctant to introduce restrictions on Americans but Warmbiers death might be the trigger that they need, analysts say. Separately, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has raised the prospect of the administration using an executive order to ban travel to North Korea.

The group that brought Warmbier to North Korea announced that itwill no longer allow Americans to travel on its tours,USA Today's Melanie Eversley reports.

The U-Va. newspaper, the Cavalier Daily, had some more details about Warmbier's life:"At the University, Warmbier was a member of the Theta Chi Fraternity and an Echols Scholar. A Commerce student at the time of his imprisonment, Warmbier would have graduated this past spring. Graduates noted his absence with#FreeOtto stickersat Final Exercises in May."

GET SMART FAST:

SCOTUSWADES INTO PARTISAN TERRITORY:

-- The Supreme Court said it will consider whether partisan gerrymandering violates the Constitution,agreeing to hear a Wisconsin case thatcould portend major changes for future U.S. elections. Robert Barnes has the details:

WHY IT'S BIG: The justices regularly are called to invalidate state electoral maps that have been illegally drawn to reduce the influence of racial minorities But the Supreme Court has never found a plan unconstitutional because of partisan gerrymandering. If it does, it would have a revolutionary impact on the reapportionment that comes after the 2020 election and could come at the expense of Republicans, who control the process in the majority of states.

MORE ON THE CASE: The court accepted a case from Wisconsin, where a divided panel of three federal judges last year ruled that the states Republican leadership in 2011 pushed through a plan so partisan that it violated the Constitutions First Amendment and equal rights protections. And they gave an indication of how divisive the issue might be: after granting the case, the court voted 5 to 4 to stay the lower courts decision, which had required new districts be drawn this fall. (The liberal justices each went on record saying they would have denied the stay, meaning the courts five conservatives granted it.)

WHO STANDS TO GAIN: [While] both parties draw [district] lines to their own advantage Republicans have more to lose because they control so many more state legislatures, Barnes writes. The RNC and a dozen large Republican states have asked the court to reverse the Wisconsin decision.

[Since] the court has never struck down a map for partisan gerrymandering, that ruling could move the needle in a way we have never seen before, The Fixs Aaron Blake writes. Basically any movement in that needle would be in Democrats' favor. In recent years, Republicans have enjoyed a very large edge when it comes to control of the redistricting process ... The GOP won a huge wave election in the 2010 contests, which happened to come just before the once-per-decade census and before state legislatures in most states across the country redrew their congressional and state legislative maps. Republicans used this edge to draw very GOP-friendly maps in big swing states and even some blue-leaning states And in large part because of those state legislative maps, they retain historic control through today, including complete control of state government in 25 out of 50 states, compared to just seven for Democrats. And that, in turn, would mean they get to draw many of these maps again So Democrats, he concludes, should be cautiously very happy with this.

MORE FROM THE HIGH COURT:

-- SCOTUSruled that a federal law prohibiting the registration of trademarks that officials consider disparaging violates the First Amendment. Bob reports: Justices unanimously sided with the Asian American rock group the Slants, which in 2011 was prohibited from registering the bands name with the U.S. Patent and Trademark office. The decision is likely to affect the ongoing legal battle of the Washington Redskins, whose trademark registration was revoked in 2014 under the same clause.

-- The court also threw out a case from post-Sept. 11 detainees against officials in the George W. Bush administration.The detainees, many of them Muslim,claimedthey were abused while being held by New York Citys federal immigration authorities.Bob has more: Six plaintiffs brought a representative suit They alleged they were held because of their race, religion, ethnicity, and national heritage and immigration status, and were subjected to verbal and physical abuse, daily strip searches and months in solitary confinement. None of those held at the detention center in Brooklyn were found to have any connection to terrorism. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy said that the treatment alleged by the men was tragic, but that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit in New York was wrong to let the suit proceed. In general, government officials are shielded from civil lawsuits when they have acted in good faith in carrying out their duties.

WHERE ARE YOUR VOTER FILES?:

-- Detailed information on nearly every registered American voter including information on ethnicity religion, and views on political issues were left exposed on the Internet for 12 days by a Republican contractor that works for the RNC and other GOP clients. Brian Fung, Craig Timberg and Matea Gold report: The data offered a strikingly complete picture of the voting histories and political leanings of the American electorate laid out on an easily downloadable format, said cyber-security researcher Chris Vickery. He discovered the unprotected files of 198 million voters in a routine scan of the Internet last week and alerted law enforcement officials. The precision and volume of the information highlights the rising sophistication of the data-mining efforts that have become central to modern political campaigns. In some cases, that included which voters are suspicious of Wall Street and pharmaceutical firms, or who reluctantly voted for [Clinton] or supports the Affordable Care Act Vickery said. The company also kept information on Americans voting histories and their reported enthusiasm for Trump. Theyre using this information to create political dossiers on individuals that are now available for anyone, said Jeffrey Chester, of the Center for Digital Democracy. These political data firms might as well be working for the Russians.

PERSONNEL IS POLICY:

-- It's finally happening: Sean Spicer is expected to transition from his role as White House press secretary to a more behind-the-scenes role overseeing communications strategy a move that comes as part of a broader press-shop overhaul and after months of rumors.Ashley Parker and Philip Rucker report: Spicers anticipated move away from the briefing-room podium comes amid weeks of Trumps frustration with his communications team, and after the White House had made overtures to a range of Republicans about taking jobs within the West Wing press operation. We have sought input from many people as we look to expand our communications operation, Sarah Huckabee Sanders [said] in a statement. As he did in the beginning, Sean Spicer is managing both the communications and press office. No official announcement has been made about Spicers move, and discussions concerning his role are ongoing, including whether he would still occasionally appear from the podium."

-- Meanwhile, the White House and congressional Republicans are taking hits for a lack of transparency in Trump's Washington, with important business increasingly being handled behind closed doors.Philip Rucker and Ed OKeefe report: The federal governments leaders are hiding from public scrutiny and their penchant for secrecy represents a stark departure from the campaign promises of Trump and his fellow Republicans to usher in newfound transparency. I was very frustrated the Obama administration held things so close to the vest but I quite frankly havent seen any change with the Trump administration. In some ways I find it worse, said Jason Chaffetz, [who until recently led the House Oversight Committee] I see a bureaucracy that doesnt want documents and the truth out the door and just flipping the middle finger at Congress, Chaffetz said.

Rep. Chaffetz(R-Utah) is leaving Congress at the end of this month so it's no surprise perhaps that the House Oversight chairman whose job it is to hold the administration accountable is letting loose. But there's also significant criticism of House Republicans, who are being attacked for writing a major overhaul of the health-care system behind closed doors.

-- Energy Secretary Rick Perry denied in an interview Monday that humans are the primary cause of climate change.Steven Mufson reports: Asked in an interview on CNBCs Squawk Box whether he believed that carbon dioxide was the primary control knob for the temperature of the Earth and for climate, Perry said that No, most likely the primary control knob is the ocean waters and this environment that we live in. Perry added that the fact is this shouldnt be a debate about, Is the climate changing, is man having an effect on it? Yeah, we are. The question should be just how much, and what are the policy changes that we need to make to effect that? Perrys comments fall in line with what [EPA] administrator Scott Pruitt said in a March interview Both mens views contradict the conclusions of scientists at Pruitts own EPA as well as NASA, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

-- Mark Corallo, the spokesman for Trumps personal legal team, was highly critical of the president on Twitter before his hiring disparaging some of his policy initiatives and, on one occasion, circulating an opinion piece saying Trump had eroded the credibility of the office he holds. TheNew York Times Julie Hirschfeld Davis and Maggie Haberman report: In April [Corallo] used Twitter to suggest twice that [Pence], not Mr. Trump, should be the Republican nominee for president in 2020. In May, he posted several remarks disparaging the influence of [Ivanka Trump] and Jared Kushner [and] later last month, Mr. Corallo lavishly praised Robert Mueller His posts are a rare instance of a Trump ally publicly venting criticism of a president who prizes loyalty and is known to be averse to dissent. Hey Mr. President, wheres all the winning? Mr. Corallo wrote last month, appearing to compare Mr. Trump to Bill Clinton, who hailed from Arkansas, and his famous parsing of words. Or, like the guy from AR, are you going to tell me it depends on the definition of winning? ...It would be simple to dismiss his comments on Twitter as the personal social media musings of a private citizen. But Mr. Trump, who makes little distinction between his own personal and official utterances, often bristles at mild slights, even in an informal setting."

-- A fuller picture is emerging of Jay Sekulow, Trumps new lawyer and Sunday-show defender who is not well known among Washington's criminal attorneys. Sari Horwitz, Devlin Barrett and Tom Hamburger report: [Sekulow] is, however, a fixture on conservative talk radio and a celebrity among conservative organizations for his high-profile First Amendment court battles over religious rights. He has argued a dozen cases before the Supreme Court. Along with his own widely syndicated daily radio talk show, Jay Sekulow Live! broadcast on more than 850 radio stations, satellite radio and on his website Sekulow is also a regular guest on the Fox News Channel, The 700 Club and Sean Hannitys radio show, as well as provides commentary on the Christian Broadcasting Network. In May, Sekulow dismissed the Russia scandal as a fraud on the American people.

THE AGENDA:

-- Paul Ryan is expected in a speech today to talk up the possibility of overhauling the tax code this year, despite many obstacles. The Wall Street Journals Richard Rubin reports: Mr. Ryan, in a speech to manufacturers in Washington, isnt expected to delve into the details that divide Republicans or the negotiations between the Trump administration and members of Congress Mr. Ryans speech to the National Association of Manufacturers, sandwiched between cable news appearances, is meant to build momentum and public support for the partys aims. Republicans face significant obstacles, but many see a tax overhaul as a political necessity that would deliver on one of their core campaign promises. For now, taxes are secondary to health care and other policy issues. But the GOP is planning a busy fall.

-- A Hawaii judge has narrowed the injunction he placed three months ago on the administrations revised travel ban. Politicos Josh Gerstein reports: U.S. District Court Judge Derrick Watson scaled back the injunction Monday, nullifying its impact on studies and policy reviews ordered under the directive Trump issued in March and billed as an anti-terrorism initiative. In a ruling last week, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the bulk of Watson's injunction, but said portions of it that blocked the Trump administration from studying vetting procedures were too broad and should be lifted.

-- The administration has dubbed this to be Tech Week, which kicked off with a meeting between Trump and several of the industrys top CEOs. APs Catherine Lucey and Josh Boak report: Apple CEO Tim Cook and Eric Schmidt, executive chairman of Google parent company Alphabet, were among those attending an afternoon of working groups on issues like technology infrastructure, cybersecurity and visas for foreign workers. Trump has spoken out against illegal immigration and signed an executive order banning travelers from six Muslim-majority countries, a source of tension with technology firms. Were working very diligently with everybody, including Congress, on immigration so that you can get the people you want in your companies, the president said. The administration drew a mix of flattery and policy requests from the assembled technology leaders and university officials.

-- Trump is taking almost no steps to expand his support and broaden his leadership of the Republican Party, Annie Linskey reports on the front page of The Boston Globe: Two-thirds of the presidents domestic travel for public events has been to states that he won, including all of his travel this month ... His few trips to blue states seem mostly happenstance, because they are home to government facilities Trump visited, such as Dover Air Force Base in Delaware.There are times you think: 'Does he even want to run for reelection?'"said Peter Barca, a member of the Wisconsin State Assembly and a Democrat.

THERE'S A BEAR IN THE WOODS:

-- The endless stream of Russia-related hearings continue today on Capitol Hill. NPRs Philip Ewing reports: The marathon of high-profile congressional hearings continues Tuesday with a session scheduled by the Senate Judiciary Committee's panel on crime and terrorism. It appears aimed squarely at the ongoing imbroglio over Trump associates' possible connections to last year's Russian election meddling. Subcommittee Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., titled the session Concurrent congressional and criminal investigations: lessons from history. In other words: How can House and Senate committees keep clear of an executive branch process like that being led by Justice Department special counsel Robert Mueller?

Former Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson will also testify tomorrow before the House Intelligence Committee on Russias 2016 election interference.

-- This doesnt look good: While serving as a top campaign aide to [Trump], Michael Flynn made tens of thousands of dollars on the side advising a company that sold surveillance technology that repressive governments used to monitor activists and journalists, HuffPosts Paul Blumenthal and Jessica Schulberg report: [Flynn] earned nearly $1.5 million last year as a consultant, adviser, board member, or speaker for more than three dozen companies and individuals Two of those entities are directly linked to NSO Group, a secretive Israeli cyberweapons dealer founded by Omri Lavie and Shalev Hulio, who are rumored to have served in Unit 8200, the Israeli equivalent of the National Security Agency. [And] during the time Flynn was working for NSOs Luxembourg affiliate, one of the companys main products a spy software sold exclusively to governments and marketed as a tool for law enforcement officials to monitor suspected criminals and terrorists was being used to surveil political dissidents, reporters, activists, and government officials.

-- Michael Flynns former business partner, Bijan Kian, has come under increased scrutiny as the Russia investigations continue to probe his lobbying work. Reuters Nathan Layne and Julia Edwards Ainsley report: Investigators are also looking at whether payments from foreign clients to Flynn and his company, the now-inactive Flynn Intel Group, were lawful, according to two separate sources with knowledge of the broad inquiry into Flynn's business activities. That includes payments by three Russian companies and a Netherlands-based company, Inovo, controlled by Turkish businessman Ekim Alptekin Kian played a central role in securing and overseeing the Inovo contract, two people with knowledge of that project said. It is not clear whether Kian is a target of the criminal investigation or whether investigators are trying to build a fuller understanding of how Flynn's company operated.

-- Another of Flynns former associates, Kamil Ekim Alptekin, is trying to clear his name in the Russia probes. Buzzfeed News Borzou Daragahi reports: Alptekin said the work Flynn did for him for which he was paid $530,000, and included research into Erdoans nemesis, the US-based cleric Fethullah Glen had nothing to do with the Turkish government, and challenged anyone to prove it did. I do have ties to those in power, but Im not a member of the inner circle, he said. But Alptekins story has raised eyebrows in Washington, where many have been left wondering where he got the money to pay Flynn and why a relatively obscure businessman in Turkey had hired the former general to dig up dirt on one of Erdoans enemies.

-- Democratic leaders in the House are also pressing for more information on two previously undisclosed trips Flynn made to the Middle East in 2015. Karoun Demirjian reports: According to the ranking Democrats on the House Oversight and House Foreign Affairs committees Elijah E. Cummings (Md.) and Eliot L. Engel (N.Y.), respectively Flynns security forms and interviews revealed a previously unreported, six-day trip he made to Saudi Arabia in October 2015, in which he claimed to have stayed at a hotel that does not appear to exist, have traveled with a friend who was never named, and have spoken at a conference that none of his handling bureaus were aware of. According to congressional testimony Flynn gave in June 2015, Flynn also made an earlier trip that involved talks about developing nuclear power in the region. But Flynn never documented the trip on his security clearance forms at all.

-- The Trump administration has outlined a new plan for dealing with Russia but will the president support it? BuzzFeeds John Hudson reports: [Rex Tillerson] has crafted a three-point framework for future US-Russia relations that takes a narrow view of what can be achieved between the former Cold War adversaries, but seeks a constructive working relationship with Putin on a limited set of issues. The first pillar of the [still-classified] framework, a US official said, is to convey to Moscow that aggressive actions against the United States are a losing proposition that will be counterproductive for both sides. When Russia takes bold actions against American interests Washington will push back. [The second pillar is to] engage on issues that are of strategic interest to the United States, including the [war] in Syria, North Korea's rapidly developing nuclear weapons program, and cybersecurity and cyberespionage The third pillar of the framework emphasizes the importance of strategic stability with Russia, an umbrella term that encompasses a range of long-term mutual geopolitical goals.

-- On the financial front, a bipartisan group of senators signed a letter asking the State and Treasury Departments to review a possible Russian takeover of the petroleum company Citgo. The Hills Sylvan Lane reports: Citgo, owned by the government of Venezuela, risks defaulting on a loan from Rosneft, a Russian state-owned energy company. Rosneft could take control of Citgo upon default, giving a company with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin command of United States infrastructure Citgo operates across 19 states, with 48 terminals, interstate oil and gas pipelines, and refineries, the senators wrote. Serious questions have been raised regarding the national security risk of Rosneft a company with close ties to President Putin assuming control of U.S. energy infrastructure.

DANGEROUS DEVELOPMENT:

-- After the U.S. shot down a Syrian government jet Sunday, Russia warned that further action would result in itsmilitary treating U.S. forces as targets. Louisa Loveluck and David Filipov report: Russia condemned that strike as a flagrant violation of international law and said its forces will treat U.S.-led coalition aircraft and drones as targets if they are operating in Syrian airspace west of the Euphrates River while Russian aviation is on combat missions. Pavel Baev, who studies the Russian military at the Peace Research Institute Oslo, called the threat mostly a bluff but said that calling it is risky because there are some nervous fingers on many buttons. In a statement Monday, the [U.S.-backed fighters in Syria] warned that it would retaliate in the face of further aggression from pro-Assad forces, raising the possibility that the United States could be forced to deviate further from its stated policy in Syria, which involves targeting Islamic State militants only.

-- In response to Russias threat, the Pentagon rapidly moved to re-establish deconfliction practices with Russia. The Hills Ellen Mitchell reports: Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joe Dunford on Monday said the United States will try in the next few hours to re-establish deconfliction arrangements between Russia and the United States following the U.S. downing of a Syrian military jet over the weekend. An incident occurred, we have to work through the incident, we have a channel to be able to do that and I think its going to require some diplomatic and military engagement in the next few hours to restore the deconfliction that weve had in place, Dunford said at a forum at the National Press Club in Washington.

-- Russias threat led Australia to announce that it will temporarily suspend military air operations over Syria, the BBC reports.

THE NEW WORLD ORDER:

-- A car struck a police vehicle on the Champs-Elysees in Paris yesterday and exploded upon impact. James McCauley reports: Police were treating the incident as a deliberate act, and the Paris prosecutor opened a terrorism investigation. The driver, whose identity was not immediately released, was killed in the crash, Gerard Collomb, Frances interior minister, told reporters at the scene. No one else was injured, Paris police sources said. Police said the attacker who was 31 and from the northwestern Paris suburb of Argenteuil was known to French authorities, the Associated Press reported. He was reportedly listed on the governments Fiche S, a dossier of people suspected of posing a threat to national security.

-- France also continues to address the outcome of Sundays parliamentary elections, which left Marine Le Pens far-right party almost completely shut out of power. James McAuley reports: The populist fervor that swept Britain and the United States never reached the same pitch in France While Le Pen had hoped that her party might serve as the principal opposition to Macrons majority, the National Front earned only eight of the 577 parliamentary seats, according to totals from Sundays second round of voting. The result was particularly stunning given that the party had gotten more than one-third of the votes cast in the final round of the presidential election. There was, however, a silver lining: a seat for Le Pen herself, a small but symbolic victory that some said would enshrine the far-right leader in Frances political establishment.

-- British authoritieslearned more about theattack near a London mosque that killed one and injured nine, including identifyingthe assailant. CNN'sAngela Dewan, Carol Jordan, Stephanie Halasz and Steve George report: The driver of the van that plowed into pedestrians near a mosque in north London has been identified as Darren Osborne, 47, a resident of Cardiff in Wales, according to multiple UK media outlets He was being held on suspicion of terrorism offenses, police said British Prime Minister Theresa May said the attack was directed at Muslims and condemned it as every bit as sickening as deadly Islamist attacks that hit the country in recent months.

-- The incident seemed to confirm British Muslims worst fears following recent attacks by radical Islamists. Griff Witte and Karla Adam report: Witnesses said the driver was heard shouting after he was wrestled to the ground that he wanted to kill Muslims. It was chilling but not, in the Finsbury Park neighborhood, entirely unexpected. Fears have been growing among Muslims here that they could be singled out by extremists in tit-for-tat attacks because of other attacks carried out in the name of Islam, even though they are widely denounced by the mainstream Muslim community We dont feel safe anywhere, said a young man who gave his name as Adil Rana. We dont feel safe walking the streets or going to the mosque.

-- The neighborhood where the attack occurred, Finsbury Park, wasconsidered a hotbed of Islamist extremism. Adam Taylor reports: A relatively deprived immigrant neighborhood in North London, it was the home of the Finsbury Park Mosque infamous for housing the radical Egyptian cleric known as Abu Hamza al-Masri, who was later extradited to the United States and found guilty of terrorism charges. But like many of its surrounding neighborhoods, the area has rapidly gentrified in recent years, arguably becoming both more diverse and tolerant at the same time. Kebab shops sit comfortably next to cafes serving flat white espressos. Finsbury Park Mosque has undergone its own dramatic reforms over the previous decade, too, with its extremist edges stripped away.

-- Trump has yet to address the mosque attack on his personal Twitter account, despite his rapid response to the radical Islamist attack earlier this month. Philip Bump writes: That Trump hasnt mentioned the attacks on Muslims in London isnt surprising, mind you. It took days for him to praise the two men who were stabbed to death in Portland, Ore., while defending Muslim women on a train. It took almost a week for him to speak out about the shooting of two Indian men in Kansas by someone who thought that they were Muslim. In one sense, its odd that Trump hasnt tweeted condolences to the victims in London, given the criticism hes received for his slow response to the above attacks but, again, its not surprising that he hasnt, given his history. The broader question is why Trump remains uninterested in acknowledging such attacks.

-- In the shadow of the recent attack, Brexit negotiations got underway between the United Kingdomand the European Union. Michael Birnbaum reports: Discussions began with an immediate concession from the British over how the talks will be structured, a display of the weakness of the British position in the face of an unusual degree of unity among the E.U.s 27 remaining members Despite sharp splits in London over what to seek in the divorce, the lead British negotiator vowed that his nation would plunge onward with a full declaration of independence, dampening expectations after the election that Britain would move to preserve some ties with Brussels European leaders have repeatedly said that Britain need not go through with its plans for divorce although they have been tough about what a split will mean if it happens.

-- In related news, another top E.U. official called for a European army yesterday. The Telegraphs Justin Huggler reports: Hans-Peter Bartels, Germanys national defence commissioner, on Monday called for Natos EU members to organise their militaries into a single force. In the end, there will be a European army, he said. His comments, on the same day Brexit talks formally began, are a sign the rest of the EU is preparing to press ahead with further defence integration. Britain has repeatedly blocked plans for an integrated European defence policy, but other member states have warned it cannot expect to have a say in the issue post-Brexit. There have been growing calls for a single European defence policy in the wake of Donald Trumps comments that Nato is obsolete.

WAPO HIGHLIGHTS:

-- 7 sailors died aboard the USS Fitzgerald. Here are their stories, by Avi Selk: The grief swelled after divers found seven bodies in the wreckage of the USS Fitzgerald off the coast of Japan this weekend. It washed across the United States, through dire phone calls, texts and solemn visits. It reached the family of a 19-year-old firefighter who had enlisted in the Navy the year before, and the wife of a 19-year veteran who had been planning his retirement, and fell upon households from Connecticut to the southern end of Texas people with little more in common than a sudden, immense loss on the other side of the world.

-- Opium use booms in Afghanistan, creating a silent tsunami of addicted women, by Pamela Constable: Drug addiction in Afghanistan, once mostly limited to men who spent years as laborers or war refugees in Iran, has exploded into a nationwide scourge that affects millions of people, including a growing number of women and children. Over the past five years, programs of crop eradication and substitution have been largely abandoned as foreign funding has ended and insurgent attacks have increased. As a result, tens of thousands of farmers have returned to the lucrative business of growing opium poppies. Last year, 420,000 acres in Afghanistan were devoted to poppies, and opium production rose 43 percent over 2015, to 4,800 tons, according to the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime.

-- Inside Melania Trumps home town, by Nick Kirkpatrick and Matic Zorman: Last week, Melania Trump began calling Washington, D.C., home, giving the nations capital something in common with the small, hilly Slovenian town of Sevnica.

SOCIAL MEDIA SPEED READ:

The president offered his condolences to the families of Otto Warmbier and the sailors who died on USS Fitzgerald:

Trump had a meeting with the president of Panama and mentioned that canal they have:

Trump kicked off Tech Week at the White House by meeting with some top CEOs, including Amazon CEO and Washington Post owner Jeff Bezos:

Here is the original post:
The Daily 202: Most Republicans in the Georgia special election are willing to give Trumpcare a chance - Washington Post