Mediaboss Marketing

Sure, Donald Trump is a boob, but that doesnt explain why Republicans cant govern from Capitol Hill. At a time when the prospects for the middle class are in sharp decline, Republicans offer nothing but negativity.

There are many different flavors of freedom. For example, there is freedom as capacity and freedom as detachment.

Freedom as capacity means supporting people so they have the ability to take advantage of lifes opportunities. You encourage your friend to stick with piano practice so he will have the freedom to really play. You support your child during high school so she will have the liberty to pick her favorite college.

Freedom as detachment is giving people space to do their own thing. Its based on the belief that people flourish best when they are unimpeded as much as possible. Freedom as detachment is marked by absence the absence of coercion, interference and obstacles.

Back when the Republican Party functioned as a governing party it embraced both styles of freedom, but gave legislative priority to freedom of capacity. Look at the Republicans major legislative accomplishments of the past 30 years. They used government to give people more capacities.

In 1990, George H.W. Bush signed the Americans With Disabilities Act, which gave disabled people more freedom to move about society. In 1996, Republicans passed and Bill Clinton signed a welfare-reform law that tied benefits to work requirements so that recipients would develop the skills they need to succeed in the labor force. In 2003, Republicans passed a law giving Americans a new prescription-drug benefit, which used market mechanisms to give them more control over how to use it.

These legislative accomplishments were about using government in positive ways to widen peoples options. They aimed at many of the same goals as Democrats broader health coverage, lower poverty rates but relied on less top-down mechanisms to get there.

Over the past few decades Republicans cast off the freedom-as-capacity tendency. They became, exclusively, the party of freedom as detachment. They became the Get Government Off My Back Party, the Leave Us Alone Coalition, the Drain the Swamp Party, the Dont Tread on Me Party.

Philosophically you can embrace or detest this shift, but one thing is indisputable: It has been a legislative disaster. The Republican Party has not been able to pass a single important piece of domestic legislation under this philosophic rubric. Despite all the screaming and campaigns, all the government shutdown fiascos, the GOP hasnt been able to eliminate a single important program or reform a single important entitlement or agency.

Today, the GOP is flirting with its most humiliating failure, the failure to pass a health-reform bill, even though the party controls all the levers of power. Worse, Republicans have managed to destroy any semblance of a normal legislative process along the way.

There are many reasons Republicans have been failing as a governing party, but the primary one is intellectual. The freedom-as-detachment philosophy is a negative philosophy. It is about cutting back, not building.

A party operating under this philosophy is not going to spawn creative thinkers who come up with positive new ideas for how to help people. Its not going to nurture policy entrepreneurs. Its not going to respect ideas, period. This is not a party thats going to produce a lot of modern-day versions of Jack Kemp.

Second, Republican voters may respond to the freedom-as-detachment rhetoric during campaigns. It feels satisfying to say that everything would be fine if only those stuck-up elites in Washington got out of the way. But operationally, most Republicans support freedom-as-capacity legislation.

If youre a regular American, the main threat to your freedom is illness, family breakdown, social decay, technological disruption and globalization. If youre being buffeted by massive forces beyond your control, you dont want legislation that says: Guess what? Youre on your own!

The Republicans could have come up with a health bill that helps people cope with illness and nurtures their capacities, a bill that offers catastrophic care to the millions of American left out of Obamacare, or health savings accounts to encourage preventive care. Republicans could have been honest with the American people and said, Were proposing a bill that preserves Obamacare and tries to make it sustainable. They could have touted some of the small reforms that are in fact buried in the Senate bill.

But this is the Drain the Swamp Party. The Republican centerpiece is: Were going to cut your Medicaid.

So now we have a health-care bill that everybody hates. It has a 17 percent approval rating. It has no sponsors, no hearings, no champions and no advocates. As usual, Republican legislators have got themselves into a position where they have to vote for a bill they all despise. And if you think GOP dysfunction is bad now, wait until we get to the debt-ceiling wrangle, the budget fight and the tax-reform crackup.

Sure, Donald Trump is a boob, but that doesnt explain why Republicans cant govern from Capitol Hill. The answer is that were living at a time when the prospects for the middle class are in sharp decline. And Republicans offer nothing but negativity, detachment, absence and an ax.

See the original post:
Why Republicans can't govern - The Seattle Times

Republicans are trying to conjure up a Russian scandal they can get behind.

GOP House members and at least one Trump Cabinet member are pushing years-old allegations from conservative activists that Russia has funneled money to U.S. environmental groups to oppose fracking. The story has reappeared in conservative circles in recent weeks a respite, perhaps, from the steady drip-drip of news reports about dealings between Russians and President Donald Trumps inner circle.

Story Continued Below

Allegations have circulated for years that Moscow has sought to discourage European countries from developing their own natural gas supplies as an alternative to Russian fuel. And conservatives have sought to extend those concerns to the U.S. though theres little but innuendo to base them on.

But the rumors gained new life in late June, when House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith and fellow Texas Republican Rep. Randy Weber asked Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to investigate whether the Kremlin is bankrolling green campaigns against the fracking technology that helped the U.S. overtake Russia in gas production.

Among other material, Smith and Weber cited articles in conservative news publications and an alleged Hillary Clinton speech published by WikiLeaks part of a trove of stolen Clinton campaign documents that U.S. intelligence agencies have linked to Russias election-meddling efforts.

The reports, the Republican lawmakers wrote in the letter to Mnuchin, suggest that Russia is also behind the radical statements and vitriol directed at the U.S. fossil fuel sector.

Green groups dismissed Smiths allegations as an attempt to divert attention from all the news surrounding Trump and Russia.

The source for energy and environment news weekday mornings, in your inbox.

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If congressional Republicans are so concerned about Russian influence, they should start seriously investigating that countrys interference in our election, not attacking long-standing environmental organizations, said Melinda Pierce, legislative director for the Sierra Club, one of the groups Smith and conservatives have accused of potentially taking Russian money.

The League of Conservation Voters, another group named in Smiths letter, also blasted the Science Committees allegations.

This is false, LCV spokesman David Willett said. We have no connections to Russia and have been an effective advocate for environmental protection for over 45 years. This seems like nothing more than an attempt at distraction away from the Trump campaigns well-publicized interactions with Russian interests to influence the election.

Still, Fox News and The Wall Street Journal op-ed page have both run items about the committees letter, and Energy Secretary Rick Perry lent his voice to the effort when a Fox Business anchor asked whether he supported an investigation.

Absolutely, Perry said in the July 11 broadcast. Steve is a very capable and very focused business individual who knows that this type of activity has to be investigated, has to be halted.

Spokespeople for the Energy Department and Treasury Department did not respond to questions. A White House spokesperson did not reply to questions about whether the allegations had made their way to Trump.

Anti-fracking sentiment in the U.S. started bubbling up among U.S. environmental groups as soon as the oil and gas production method started surging in the late 2000s, with the documentary Gasland appearing in theaters in 2010 after a year and a half in production. Much of that opposition was driven by local activists in new gas hot spots like Pennsylvania who complained about threats to their drinking water, while major national environmental groups like the Sierra Club were slower to take up the cry.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, who oversees an economy almost totally dependent on oil and gas exports, has also slagged fracking technology. He once said that fracking makes black stuff come out of peoples water faucets, according to a New Yorker report.

Still, there is no evidence that Russian money has gone to U.S. green groups, at least on the national level, said Brenda Shaffer, an adjunct professor at Georgetown Universitys Center for Eurasian, Russian and Eastern European Studies. And there is even less evidence that any money would have been well spent, given how hard it would be to push widespread fracking bans through the myriad of local, state and federal governments involved in permitting, she added.

It would be almost impossible to prevent fracking in the United States, Shaffer told POLITICO.

The evidence the committee cites includes comments that former NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen made at a London-based think tank in 2014, when he said he believed Russia was working with environmental groups in Europe to oppose shale gas development.

Other officials have indicated the same scheme is unfolding in the U.S., Smiths letter goes on to say though from there the trail becomes murkier.

The letter also cites a speech that Clinton allegedly delivered in Canada in 2014, according to Clinton campaign emails published by WikiLeaks, in which the former secretary of state supposedly said she had encountered phony environmental groups that opposed pipelines and fracking. The emails were part of a cache of Democratic documents that U.S. intelligence officials believe were originally pilfered by Kremlin-linked hackers.

Im a big environmentalist, but these were funded by Russians, Clinton says in the alleged transcript.

But the text does not indicate whether Clinton who promoted shale gas drilling in Europe was referring to environmental groups in Europe or the United States. A Clinton campaign aide did not answer questions about the veracity and the context of the speech. The campaign has refused to confirm or deny the content of any of the leaked materials.

Still, the alleged Clinton quotes have taken off in conservative news outlets, with The Daily Caller and Washington Times including them in articles published in the past year. Smith, in turn, cited those articles in the footnotes of his letter to Treasury.

Its a theory, but the reasoning behind it makes sense, said a committee aide, who requested anonymity. The chairman is saying theres data points pointing to this theory, and hes saying the Treasury secretary can shine some light on this. This isnt out of left field and crazy.

Science Committee aides also argued that last years national intelligence report on Russian meddling in the 2016 election supports the concerns raised in Smiths letter. However, the intelligence report doesnt allege any Kremlin outreach to U.S. environmental groups.

The intelligence reports non-classified, 14-page version makes reference to anti-fracking programming broadcast by Kremlin-controlled news channel RT. This is likely reflective of the Russian Governments concern about the impact of fracking and U.S. natural gas production on the global energy market and the potential challenges to Gazproms profitability, the report says. Gazprom is a Russian natural gas giant.

Much of the rest of the case that Russia funneled money to U.S. green groups comes from a 2014 report created by the Environmental Policy Alliance, which describes itself as devoted to uncovering the funding and hidden agendas behind environmental activist groups.

The group shares a Washington, D.C., address and a phone number with a public relations firm run by Richard Berman, a lawyer and former lobbyist who has also created issue groups such as the Center for Union Facts and Center for Consumer Freedom prompting liberal critics to nickname him the astroturf kingpin. CBS News once called him Dr. Evil in a 2011 piece focusing on his lobbying efforts on unpopular issues, including a campaign against Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

A representative of the Environmental Policy Alliance confirmed that Bermans firm manages the group.

The groups report and Smiths letter focus on $23 million that a Bermuda-based philanthropic firm, Klein Ltd., donated in 2010 and 2011 to the San Francisco-based Sea Change Foundation, according to information disclosed in Sea Changes IRS tax forms. Sea Change then awarded around $55 million in each of those years to the Sierra Club Foundation, U.S. Climate Action Network, Natural Resources Defense Council and other environmental groups to promote energy efficiency and climate change-related operations, according to its IRS tax filings.

Although the source of Kleins capital has not been documented, the Science Committees letter says, the panel alleged that various corporate and personal connections strongly suggest that the money originated with the Russian government and energy sector.

But a lawyer representing Klein told POLITICO that none of the money came from sources connected to Russia. And a Sea Change spokesperson said none of its donations to environmental groups were earmarked for opposition to fracking.

The Klein Foundation grants were given as general support and no requirement was made that the funds be used for specific projects, programs, or activities of the Sea Change Foundation, the spokesperson said.

Bermans report draws on a court case filed in the British Virgin Islands in the mid-2000s that resulted in a money-laundering conviction against IPOC Group, an entity owned by Leonid Reiman, Russias former telecommunications minister and adviser to Putin, according to an outline of the case maintained by the World Bank. Roderick Forrest, a lawyer for Wakefield Quin, a law firm representing Klein Ltd., was one of IPOCs directors, according to case documents.

The House committee did not contact Klein as part of its fact-finding, a committee aide said. But Forrest railed against the accusations and said the company was considering legal action following the committees letter.

The allegations are completely false and irresponsible, Forrest told POLITICO. We can state categorically that at no point did this philanthropic organization receive or expend funds from Russian sources or Russian-connected sources, and Klein has no Russian connection whatsoever.

The Sierra Clubs Pierce also denied that any of the money it received from Sea Change ultimately came from Moscow.

We have confirmed that the origin of these funds is a private U.S. donor who cares about climate change and has invested in the work the Sierra Club does to tackle the climate crisis and advance the clean energy economy not from Russia, she said.

Missing out on the latest scoops? Sign up for POLITICO Playbook and get the latest news, every morning in your inbox.

View original post here:
Republicans brewing Russian scandal to target greens - Politico

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Republican Senate leaders aim to hold a procedural vote as early as Tuesday to take up legislation to repeal or replace Obamacare, but it remained unclear which version of the bill senators would vote on.

President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans campaigned on a pledge to roll back former President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law, the 2010 Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare.

Senator John Thune, a member of the Republican leadership, told "Fox News Sunday" the initial vote was simply a way to open debate on the bill so that senators from both parties could offer amendments.

"The first vote, which will occur sometime this week, will be to proceed to the consideration of that legislation and to at least have a debate where we can have an open amendment process," Thune said.

The Republican-controlled House in May passed its version of a healthcare bill. Senate Republicans have considered two versions of related legislation but have been unable to reach consensus after estimates showed as many as 22 million fewer Americans would be insured if the proposals became law. A plan to repeal Obamacare without replacing it also ran aground.

Republicans control a narrow majority in the Senate, holding 52 of 100 seats. With the Democrats united in opposition to the Republican effort, Senator Majority Leader Mitch McConnell can only afford to lose the votes of two Republican senators.

The fate of any legislation to rewrite Obamacare is uncertain as many Republicans have not yet made clear their positions.

"It appears we'll have a vote on Tuesday but we don't know whether we'll be voting on the House bill, the first version of the Senate bill, the second version of the Senate bill," Republican Senator Susan Collins told CBS' "Face the Nation" on Sunday.

Collins is a moderate Republican who has objected to prior versions of the Senate bill and also to repealing Obamacare without replacing it.

Trump suggested last week that he was fine with letting Obamacare fail, but he then switched course and invited Republican senators to the White House to try to hash out a healthcare deal.

The Republican effort has also been complicated by the absence of Republican Senator John McCain, who has been diagnosed with brain cancer and has been in his home state of Arizona weighing treatment options.

Reporting By Amanda Becker; Editing by Daniel Wallis

Continued here:
Republican strategy on healthcare bill in flux ahead of vote - Reuters

Getty

President Donald Trump speaks during the commissioning of the USS Gerald R. Ford CVN 78, on July 22, 2017 in Norfolk, Virginia.

President Donald Trump lashed out at his fellow Republicans on Sunday in a tweet, saying that they do very little to protect their president, calling that very sad.

Its very sad that Republicans, even some that were carried over the line on my back, do very little to protect their President, Trump said Sunday afternoon in his latest tweet.

Trump spent Sunday morning at the Trump National Golf Club in Virginia, returning to the White House about 3 p.m. He sent the tweet about an hour and a half later.

He also tweeted Sunday about the phony Russian Witch Hunt.

As the phony Russian Witch Hunt continues, two groups are laughing at this excuse for a lost election taking hold, Democrats and Russians! the president tweeted.

Trump also tweeted about fellow Republicans on Saturday, saying it is time for the GOP Senators to step up on health care.

The Republican Senators must step up to the plate and, after 7 years, vote to Repeal and Replace. Next, Tax Reform and Infrastructure. WIN! he wrote.

It is not clear which Republicans Trump was referring to in his Sunday tweet. It is also not known exactly what kind of protection he is looking for.

His comments came on the a day after former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, one of Trumps rivals during the GOP primary race last year, called out Republicans and Trump for their handling of the Russian election interference investigation. His comments were made during OZY Fest in New York City on Saturday, and were widely reported Sunday.

If your opponent does things that you, your head explodes on, if Barack Obama did something as its related to Russia, you say this is outrageous, all this stuff, then when your guy does the same thing, have the same passion to be critical, Bush said, according to The Hill.

About Trump, Bush said his presidency has been chaotic, focusing on recent reports that Trump is looking into his pardon powers and attacking independent counsel Robert Mueller.

You get disciplined when your team says, No, Mr. President, lets stay focused on these policy objectives,' Bush said, according to Business Insider. Dont disparage people,dont go after Mueller, dont say youre going to pardon yourself or whatever. Dont do all that. Govern.

He also criticized the way image the president displays to the world.

The president is the prime minister and the king. He or she, eventually, will be the symbol of the country, and also the prime minister responsible for making government work, Bush said, according to Business Insider. And right now, our president doesnt view that job as important. Look at history. History is important. When presidents inspire us, we do better. And thats what we need to get back to.

Read More From Heavy

James Mathew Bradley Jr.: 5 Fast Facts You Need toKnow

Visit link:
Trump Tweet: Republicans Aren't Doing Enough to 'Protect Their President' - Heavy.com

Common Dreams

For Republicans, Fear and Loathing is a Winning Message Common Dreams It would be too easy to dismiss Donald Trump's Commission on Electoral Integrity as superfluous evidence of the intellectual erosion of the Republican Party. As a Twitter observer who styles himself LOLGOP quipped last week when the commission held its ... and more »

View original post here:
For Republicans, Fear and Loathing is a Winning Message - Common Dreams