Mediaboss Marketing

NEW YORK US President Donald Trumps first major legislative goal to repeal and replace the 2010 Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) has already imploded, owing to Trump and congressional Republicans naivet about the complexities of health-care reform. Their attempt to replace an imperfect but popular law with a pseudo-reform that would deprive more than 24 million Americans of basic health care was bound to fail or sink Republican members of Congress in the 2018 mid-term elections if it had passed.

Now, Trump and congressional Republicans are pursuing tax reform starting with corporate taxes and then moving on to personal income taxes as if this will be any easier. It wont be, not least because the Republicans initial proposals would add trillions of dollars to budget deficits, and funnel over 99% of the benefits to the top 1% of the income distribution.

A plan offered by Republicans in the US House of Representatives to reduce the corporate-tax rate from 35% to 15%, and to make up for the lost revenues with a border adjustment tax, is dead on arrival. The BAT does not have enough support even among Republicans, and it would violate World Trade Organization rules. The Republicans proposed tax cuts would create a $2 trillion revenue shortfall over the next decade, and they cannot plug that hole with revenue savings from their health-care reform plan or with the $1.2 trillion that could have been expected from a BAT.

The Republicans must now choose between passing their tax cuts (and adding $2 trillion to the public debt) and pursuing a much more modest reform. The first scenario is unlikely for three reasons. First, fiscally conservative congressional Republicans will object to a reckless increase in the public debt. Second, congressional budget rules require any tax cut that is not fully financed by other revenues or spending cuts to expire within ten years, so the Republicans plan would have only a limited positive impact on the economy.

And, third, if tax cuts and increased military and infrastructure spending push up deficits and the public debt, interest rates will have to rise. This would hinder interest-sensitive spending, such as on housing, and lead to a surge in the US dollar, which could destroy millions of jobs, hitting Trumps key constituency white working-class voters the hardest.

Moreover, if Republicans blow up the debt, markets response could crash the US economy. Owing to this risk, Republicans will have to finance any tax cuts with new revenues, rather than with debt. As a result, their roaring tax-reform lion will most likely be reduced to a squeaking mouse.

Even cutting the corporate tax rate from 35% to 30% would be difficult. Republicans would have to broaden the tax base by forcing entire sectors such as pharmaceuticals and technology that currently pay little in taxes to start paying more. And to get the corporate-tax rate below 30%, Republicans would have to impose a large minimum tax on these firms foreign profits. This would mark a departure from the current system, in which trillions of dollars in foreign profits remain untaxed unless they are repatriated.

During the presidential campaign, Trump proposed a one-time 10% repatriation-tax holiday to encourage American companies to bring their foreign profits back to the United States. But this would deliver only $150-200 billion in new revenues less than 10% of the $2 trillion fiscal shortfall implied by the Republicans plan. In any case, revenues from a repatriation tax should be used to finance infrastructure spending or the creation of an infrastructure bank.

Some congressional Republicans who already know that the BAT is a non-starter are now proposing that the corporate income tax be replaced with a value-added tax that is legal under WTO rules. But this option isnt likely to go anywhere, either. Republicans themselves have always strongly opposed a VAT, and there is even an anti-VAT Republican caucus in Congress.

The traditional Republican view holds that such an efficient tax would be too easy to increase over time, making it harder to starve the beast of wasteful government spending. Republicans point to Europe and other parts of the world where a VAT rate started low and gradually increased to double-digit levels, exceeding 20% in many countries.

Democrats, too, have historically opposed a VAT, because it is a highly regressive form of taxation. And while it could be made less regressive by excluding or discounting food and other basic goods, that would only make it less appealing to Republicans. Given this bipartisan opposition, the VAT like the BAT is already dead in the water.

It will be even harder to reform personal income taxes. Initial proposals by Trump and the Republican leadership would have cost $5-9 trillion over the next decade, and 75% of the benefits would have gone to the top 1% a politically suicidal idea. Now, after abandoning their initial plan, Republicans claim they want a revenue-neutral tax cut that includes no reductions for the top 1% of earners.

But that, too, looks like mission impossible. Implementing revenue-neutral tax cuts for almost all income brackets means that Republicans would have to phase out many exemptions and broaden the tax base in ways that are politically untenable. For example, if Republicans eliminated the mortgage-interest deduction for homeowners, the US housing market would crash.

Ultimately, the only sensible way to provide tax relief to middle- and lower-income workers is to raise taxes on the rich. This is a socially progressive populist idea that a pseudo-populist plutocrat like Trump will never accept. So, it looks like Republicans will continue to delude themselves that supply-side, trickle-down tax policies work, in spite of the overwhelming weight of evidence to the contrary.

Get to grips with President Trump; Project Syndicate has published more than 100 articles exploring the implications of his presidency for politics, the economy, and world peace and security. They are all here:

Continue reading here:
A Fiscal Reality Test for US Republicans - Project Syndicate

Congress limped into its spring break with little to demonstrate that much has changed from its previous dysfunctional gridlock despite Republicans control of both Capitol Hill and the White House.

There were vows at the start of the year of a rapid-fire offense, but Republican leaders ended the first three months of 2017 with only one major accomplishment: the confirmation of Neil M. Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. Even that came with a high price changing the Senate rules in such a way as to permanently decrease the influence of the minority.

Every big GOP initiative has hit a dead end or remains stuck at the starting line: Plans to rapidly repeal the 2010 Affordable Care Act have stalled amid House Republican infighting. Senate Republicans have largely rejected the centerpiece of an emerging overhaul of the tax code that is backed by House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.). And an infrastructure package, often touted by President Trump, has been relegated to the back of the line. Some Republicans are wondering whether they should move that up to try for a much-needed bipartisan win.

But grand ambitions for big changes with Trump in the White House and a GOP majority on Capitol Hill have quickly slammed into political reality: Republicans just cant seem to get along, especially in the House. And Trump is a political neophyte who is unfamiliar with the legislative wrangling and compromises needed to score a big win in Washington.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) was being realistic when he said this week that the bulk of the legislative agenda for the rest of this year would require Democratic support, given the tight margins in the Senate and GOP infighting in the House. Now out of session until late April, McConnell says he hopes cooler heads will soon prevail.

Im hoping that, after this two-week break, people are going to be in a more friendly mood, he said in an interview Friday, noting that Democrats used fewer delay tactics on Gorsuch than some Cabinet selections early this year. Most of the things that well be doing the rest of the year, theyll have to play a major role.

Some Democrats are willing to cross the aisle, particularly several up for reelection that hail from states where Trump won by wide margins.

Wed like to find a pathway forward, Sen. Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) said after Fridays Gorsuch confirmation vote. Yet Manchin found McConnells move to end 60-vote filibusters on Supreme Court nominees to be un-American and said hes still waiting for real outreach on more legislation to bring together a bipartisan coalition.

Well, we had the opportunity this time, he said of the Supreme Court fight, and it didnt work too well.

[Immediate impact: Gorsuch could begin playing pivotal role on Supreme Court starting next week]

That effort didnt get any easier late Thursday when Trump ordered a Tomahawk missile strike on Syrian airfield in response to a chemical weapon attack against Syrian rebels a move that won bipartisan support but also renewed calls from both parties for Congress to debate and approve a new war resolution.

Earlier this decade, Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) and John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) made a basic calculation: A Congress that struggled to pay its debts and to keep the government lights on was never going to craft a bipartisan deal governing the prosecution of Americas wars.

So the Democratic Senate majority leader and the Republican House speaker, both of whom are now retired, stymied attempts at drawing up a new measure to guide the military in carrying out its expanding operations fighting terrorists.

McConnell adopted that same attitude after the strike in Syria, suggesting Trump had the constitutional latitude to act and that Republicans and Democrats were too far apart to agree on a new authorization for the use of military force.

I cant envision us agreeing on what an AUMF ought to be, he said.

[Congress greets Syria strike with mix of applause and anger]

And lawmakers face more immediate problems. Within 72 hours of lawmakers return later this month is the April 28 deadline for funding the federal agencies to avert a government shutdown. McConnell and Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) had a long meeting this week about that funding plan and not once did they discuss the bitter taste of the Gorsuch confirmation fight.

Left to their own devices, the two leaders appear ready to craft a deal. Thats because McConnell knows that, the more things change in the era of Trump, the more some things stay very much the same on Capitol Hill.

In the House, that means that theres a bloc of several dozen conservatives who hate spending deals and will almost certainly vote against whatever Ryan puts before them, while in the Senate they will need at least eight Democrats to clear the 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster.

[Republicans try to revive health-care effort as leaders seek to temper expectations]

While Trump advisers and some House Republicans spent the past week haggling over an effort to revive the health-care overhaul, McConnell never once mentioned that legislation as a focus for the remainder of this year.

He noted that the only achievements in the first quarter of 2017 Gorsuch, confirming Trumps Cabinet and overturning more than a dozen agency regulations happened because they faced 51-vote thresholds in the Senate. The only simple-majority arrow left in their quiver is the tax overhaul if Republicans can agree on a new, massive budget resolution.

But that decision is up in the air amid House-Senate battles over a proposed tax on goods coming across the U.S. border.

Now we pivot into a period where, with the exception of whatever were going to do on tax reform, Democrats will be full partners, McConnell said.

The window for finding Democratic collaborators is not permanently open. If Republicans keep pushing legislation with parliamentary rules allowing votes from just their side of the aisle, it requires them to resolve long-standing GOP feuds.

If Republicans keep running into dead ends, with no success, the impetus for Democrats to want to work with an unpopular Congress and unpopular president will fade.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) gave a one-word answer to what Trump should do next: Infrastructure.

Im disappointed they didnt go with that first, she added.

Back in January, at the Republican issues retreat in Philadelphia, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said an infrastructure package is something that might happen later, behind the health and tax packages. On Friday, Thune moved it higher on the priority list, given how the health legislation exposed lingering feuds within the GOP.

The key lesson on health care, he said, applies to the upcoming legislative battles as well. Republicans can no longer expect to barnstorm Washington with a speedy legislative assault.

Better to do it right, Thune said, than to do it fast.

Read more from Paul Kanes archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook.

Read the rest here:
Republicans on Capitol Hill leave town with most of their agenda stuck in limbo - Washington Post

Top Republicans on Friday said that President Trump's decision to punish Syria was a reassuring sign that he had abandoned isolationism and was through playing footsie with Russia.

Republicans have hoped that Trump's foreign policy might evolve from the "America first" approach that suggested he wasn't interested in being a global leader. And, they have strongly urged the president to stop coddling Russian strongman Vladimir Putin.

Trump's decision to hit Syria with missile strikes in retaliation for using chemical weapons, and his administration's stern warning to Damascus' key ally, Russia, that such behavior wouldn't be tolerated, left senior Republicans optimistic that the president is finally changing course.

"This action reminded me of [former President] George W. Bush," Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said in an interview with the Washington Examiner. "It was well-planned, well-executed sent multiple messages."

McConnell said the strike put Syrian dictator Bashar Assad on notice that murdering civilians is unacceptable. The majority leader said it also signaled to U.S. adversaries and allies alike that "America is back, and playing a leadership role."

Republicans chafed under the foreign policy of former President Barack Obama. They criticized the Democrat for diminishing U.S. influence, charging that he appeased adversaries and neglected allies.

Yet, that's the same approach to international relations Trump telegraphed he might take while campaigning for president. The president questioned the value of crucial western alliances, and stubbornly refused to criticize Putin, whom he praised as a strong leader.

Similar to Obama, Trump argued that the U.S. was over-extended abroad and needed to refocus inward. The Republican appeared to go further, however.

Trump indicated that he was prepared to discard decades of bipartisan foreign policy consensus, formulated in the aftermath of World War II, and in particular embraced by the GOP since Ronald Reagan's presidency, that America had a unique role to play.

Also from the Washington Examiner

President Obama's former deputy national security adviser indicated Saturday that he isn't very happy with President Trump's decision to hit a Syrian air base with missiles.

Trump's missile strike, which was retaliation for Syria's use of chemical weapons, drew instant comparisons to Obama, who warned the U.S. would act if Syria used chemical weapons.

Obama did nothing after Syria crossed that "red line" of Obama's, and many said Trump was the one to finally enforce Obama's ultimatum years later.

But in an early Saturday morning tweet, Rhodes suggested that Trump's strike was only aimed at boosting his press coverage, and seemed to warn reporters against helping him achieve this.

04/08/17 4:04 PM

That's why Trump's action against Syria was so reassuring to Republicans. It symbolized to them that Trump was rejecting his isolationist tendencies, and embracing the hawkish foreign policy that has dominated his party for nearly four decades.

"I was proud of him," said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a hawk who has been sharply critical of Trump's foreign policy. "He called me last night, and he said: 'Well, I bet you're happy.' I said: 'No, I'm proud. I'm proud that you did something that needed to be done.'"

Even a few Democrats praised Trump, however sparingly. While making clear that they wanted the president to communicate, more specifically, his military and diplomatic strategy for Syria, they were generally pleased to see him embrace a traditional foreign policy.

"I support this action by President Trump," said Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., who serves on the Foreign Relations Committee. "Assad's murderous campaign against his own people has gone on far too long."

Trump's flirtation with Putin has rankled Democrats and Republicans. But the matter has been particularly distressing for a GOP proud of its foreign policy heritage as the party that won the Cold War and presided over the demise of the Soviet Union.

Also from the Washington Examiner

Trump defended the strike as a way to defend the "vital national security and foreign policy."

04/08/17 2:55 PM

So despite their acceptance of the president's various political eccentricities, they have resisted him on Russia. Republicans have begged Trump to treat Moscow as an adversary and recognize its bad behavior, from repressing democracy at home to invading neighbors, not to mention undermining U.S. interests.

Syria is an example. Russia has propped up Assad and has a significant military presence in Syria, in an effort to challenge Washington's influence in the Middle East. The U.S. struck anyway, without coordinating or seeking Putin's advance of approval (Moscow was warned, but only to avoid an unintended military confrontation.)

The Trump administration additionally delivered a stern message to Russia that complicity with Assad's use of chemical weapons was unacceptable. All of that has deepened the Republicans' confidence that the president's infatuation with Putin might be over.

"For a lot of people, it will probably put to rest all this discussion about, oh, he and Putin are holding hands together," said Sen. James Risch, R-Idaho, a pointed Russia hawk who serves on the intelligence committee. "If that was the case on Wednesday, it wasn't the case by midnight on Thursday."

See the rest here:
With Syria strike, Trump reassures Republicans on Russia - Washington Examiner

One of the few gifts of Donald Trumps presidency is that it unmasks all the hypocrisy and inanity of right-wing ideology. It is almost as if Trump werea brilliant saboteur on an undercover operation to expose members of the increasingly powerful far-right fringe as incapable of governance and barely able to dress themselves in the mornings. Unfortunately, secret agent Trumps aim is a little wide. Along with the delusions of the radical right, he will also damage America.

Trumps election, as surreal as it seems, fits into a larger pattern thats observable in modern American politics. A Democrat assumes power and performs his administrative tasks with competence and diligence. His policies, while insufficiently progressive for many leftist voters, result in the general improvement of living conditions for millions of people. Throughout the Democrats tenure, the right wing grows hostile and enraged, while building media empires to lure Americans into the opposition. As enticement they use abstractions that appeal to the default setting of mainstream, white American culture: bromides about personal responsibility, big government and rugged individualism.

Then white Americans elect a Republican, thinking he is going to clean up Washington and help business but are soon horrified to find that Republicans do what Republicans always do. They eliminate social services, reduce public aid, manage public institutions as illiterate fools and threaten to take the country to war.

Playtime lasted only months with Trump, whose health care policy amounted to encouraging Americans to save money to pay for health care themselves and giving the poor more options, as if members of an impoverished family on Medicaid carefully review all available health insurance packages, and after consulting an accountant, decide that Medicaid was best for them. The entire reason they are on Medicaid is that they have no other options. Anyone in the real world would understand the consequences of poverty, but Republicans emigratedfrom reality in recent years and thenbuilt a wall behind them to keep themselves out.

For decades, conservatives have accused liberals of living in a fantasy world of utopian idealism. While liberals believe that big government can solve every problem with more money, conservatives insist that only theyhave the practical wisdom necessary to make tough choices. Now long after former President Barack Obama and his political allies spent months poringover the details of the Affordable Care Act, barely managing to get it passed, it is the hard-nosed conservatives who complain that health care is complicated or who struggle to explain how insurance works. It turns out it is easier to shout, socialism and to make racist innuendos than to reform American law and grant millions of people access to decent medical treatment.

Right-wingers arenow lost in a labyrinth of theory. With no historical precedent or comparative evidence, they claim that the free market will solve every problem. Entirely divorced from the reality of real human lives, conservatives resort to emotional appeals to individualism in the face of suffering even when institutional intervention could offer alleviation.

Fearful that Trump and House Speaker Paul Ryans health plan might allow some poor people to take medicine, the bonkers House Freedom Caucus opposed the bill, creating a political fiasco. After eight years of promising to repeal and replace Obamacare, Republicans collapsed and fumbled at the 1-yard line. Several Republicans in the Senate, who have to contend with a statewide electorate of liberal, moderate and conservative voters and who have some attachment to the real world, opposed the bill because they feared the anger of constituents who would lose their health care. Reasonable citizens should feel grateful to the Republicans for subverting their agenda, regardless of the intentions, but the reasons they have cited demonstrate the difference between the abstract and the concrete.

The problem of American politics, and right-wing governance, is not that Trump is a wrecking ball in human form or that congressional Republicans are oblivious to any truth excommunicated from the laissez faire free market cult, but that so many voters namely white ones remain susceptible to Republican abstraction of concrete, quality-of-life issues.

During the health care debate, many reports detailed how Trump voters were terrified and angry that they would lose their health care coverage if Trump and Ryan succeeded. One can only stand in awe of these people. Attempting to figure out what drove them to the polls, and how they could express surprise at Trumps doing exactly what he promised to do, is about as easyand as enjoyable asattempting to break down a brick wall with your forehead.

Those equipped with helmets might want to consider how white rural, and often suburban, culture is reflexively conservative in the sense that it believes only bad people which is code forpeople of color receive government assistance. If rural typesreceive government assistance, they believe they are exceptions and that certainly Donald Trump will make the appropriate distinctions.

I remember having a conversation with a man looking for an open ear in a bar. In the middle of a rant against Barack Obama, he remarked that he doesnt want government running health care. I asked him how he obtained health coverage. His answer: I get mine through the VA.

When I covered a Tea Party rally in Indiana, I politely withheld comment while listening to a man pontificate at length on the evils of big government. He was wearing a T-shirt from Yellowstone National Park.

Stories of dislocation between right-wing belief and behavior are common but not simply because small government conservatives are all shameless hypocrites. Many of them are sincere but unaware of the cognitive dissonance. Right-wingers blind spots are exactly why rational arguments in favor of social services and public programs so often fail to persuade them. It is not an intellectual but a psychological problem.

Luckily, Obamacare requires insurance plans to cover therapy.

Here is the original post:
Trumpcare fiasco proved it: Republicans are utterly divorced from reality - Salon

Republicans never knew how much they loved Barack Obama.

Three months into Donald Trumps presidency, congressional Republicans enter a two-week Easter recess without a major legislative victory to brag about to voters back home. While they used to blame the ex-president for all their problems pointing the finger at a Democratic White House for their inability to pass GOP priorities their beloved scapegoat is gone.

Story Continued Below

That means they now bear responsibility for the partys inability to land any of Trumps campaign promises in what should have been some of the most productive months of his presidency. Indeed, House GOP infighting has all but suffocated their longtime promise to repeal Obamacare and its threatening their chance to pass tax reform and fund Trumps border wall.

Clearly, President Obama gave us a common focus, said Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.). Now that hes gone, we have to govern. Thats always a bit of a challenge when youre not just the opposition, but youre now the governing majority. I hope when we go home for the next two weeks, our constituents will remind us of that so we can get on track when we come back.

It wasnt supposed to be like this. Speaker Paul Ryan had a plan, with a timeline that included sending Trump a GOP Obamacare alternative by the close of this week. Then, Congress would quickly fund the government, including the first piece of a new U.S.-Mexico wall, and move onto a sweeping tax reform package unlike anything the country had seen since 1986.

But the Wisconsin Republican and his top lieutenants miscalculated. They thought they could get the White House to pressure the House Freedom Caucus into backing a bill conservatives deemed Obamacare 2.0. The intra-party war that ensued effectively killed the House bill entirely, leaving little indication of a revival anytime soon.

Meanwhile, senior Republicans are already signaling they wont fight hard for Trumps wall, in order to avoid a government shutdown showdown at the end of the month. And tax reform looks like a truly heavy lift. Senate Republicans can at least boast that they muscled through Neil Gorsuchs confirmation to the Supreme Court, but thats about it.

Thats the burden of being in the majority: you cant blame anyone else. Youre in charge, said Rep. Mike Simpson, a senior Republican and leadership ally. The Idaho Republican said he thinks some GOP constituents will be angry and could try to boot them from office.

Its a much different dynamic than what theyd become accustomed to under Obama, when they deflected heat to the Democratic commander-in-chief. During an interview off the House floor, Rep. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.) said divided government also united the conference at least some of the time.

Not only is there someone else for whom to place the blame, theres a unifying, rallying point of, If only we didnt have that person, or that entity, or that party, or that whatever, we would be able to do X, Y and Z, he said.

Now, of course, Republicans control everything. And theyre still not able to get their priorities over the finish line.

House leaders feel the same frustration. When asked whether his GOP colleagues missed Obama, House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy laughed out loud while walking back to his office this week.

There was Hillary, there was Susan Rice, there was a lot of em, the California Republican said. Harry Reid was unifying!

McCarthy, though, pushed back against the criticism that House Republicans have accomplished nothing in almost three months of total Washington control: How long did it take Barack Obama to pass health care? Sixteen months. So give us a little break here. Were working.

House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) said Republicans are very glad Obama is gone. Theres still a lot of things were unified on. Weve passed a lot of [Congressional Review Act resolutions] to the president and that hes signed that have undone a lot of Obama regulations, and thats permanent, by the way. Thats some big wins that dont get reported a lot.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell also argued Friday that the 13 Obama-era regulations the GOP has killed amounted to a significant achievement. Theyre going to save the economy billions of dollars, the Kentucky Republican told reporters.

Of course, McConnells bigger victory was his year-long power play to deny Obama a chance to fill a Supreme Court vacancy and instead install Gorsuch even if it meant he had to kill the filibuster for high court nominees and erode an essential characteristic of the Senate.

Apart from that much-needed GOP win, McConnell acknowledged the partys slow start and called for a bit of patience. Look, were just in the first quarter of the year, he said. Theres much left to be done.

Since House Republicans cant blame the left, theyve turned on one another, obliterating the message of unity the party took up after Trump won last fall.

Ryan, for his part, has delicately suggested some of his own members dont know what it means to govern. His conference, hes said numerous times over the past few weeks, is experiencing growing pains.

Meanwhile, Freedom Caucus members and more than a few mainstream Republicans outside the group arent happy with the process Ryan employed to craft the health care bill. They argue there wasnt enough member buy-in, and theyre resentful that they didnt get their say.

Sign up for POLITICO Huddle. A daily play-by-play of congressional news in your inbox.

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

Even Rep. Rod Blum of Iowa, a conservative in a swing district who benefited from Ryans personal fundraising assistance during the 2016 election, told POLITICO he wished the speaker would shoulder more of the blame for what happened.

I come from the private sector, and in the private sector, the leader stands up if something doesnt work and says its 100 percent my fault, Blum said. Thats what a leader does. Id like to see that in Washington, D.C. He, as the House leader, should say its 100 percent my fault, and there shouldnt be any finger-pointing.

Conservatives and centrists are also at one anothers throats. Freedom Caucus members say moderate members of the House Republican Conference no longer want to repeal Obamacare. Rep. Mo Brooks singled out centrist Republicans in the Tuesday Group for the fact that Republicans will return to their districts with Obamacare fully intact.

Its very paradoxical today that our Republican Congress could, when Barack Obama was president, pass a repeal of Obamacare, the Alabama Republican said. Yet, now that Donald Trump is president, we lack the ability to pass the repeal of Obamacare. To me the primary difference is that the Tuesday Group does not want to repeal Obamacare. And as long as they dont its difficult to get the majority votes needed.

GOP leaders, moderates and dozens of mainstream Republicans across the conference, however, still think the Freedom Caucus set fire to the House. And as Sanford noted Wednesday, the bickering has created a GOP identity crisis.

External party struggles you can have an open food fight and say, I disagree with Nancy Pelosi and shes going to throw breadcrumbs my way and Im going to throw breadcrumbs her way, Sanford said. If its within the fraternity, then its a question of wait who represents the fraternity? Are we right? Are we left? Are we center? Who is us?

John Bresnahan contributed to this report.

See the article here:
How Republicans learned to love Obama - Politico