Mediaboss Marketing

NEW YORK Rank-and-file Republicans are more concerned about leaks to the media of conversations between Trump advisers and the Russian government than they are about the conversations themselves, according to a Reuters/Ipsos opinion poll released Wednesday.

The poll, conducted between Feb. 16 and Feb. 20, shows how President Donald Trump has shifted opinions within the party of Ronald Reagan, where national security has been a top issue since the Cold War, said Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia.

"Republicans have now put a higher priority on their partisan identification and support for their current leader than principles they have had for many decades," Sabato said. "We live in such a polarized era."

Trump asked his national security adviser Michael Flynn to resign this month after news organizations reported he had discussed U.S. sanctions with a Russian diplomat while Barack Obama was still president.

Yet, while the media focused on the contacts with Russia, Trump blamed Flynn's departure on "criminal" leaks. He said Flynn was treated unfairly and that news reports of the conversations were "fake news."

"The real story here is why are there so many illegal leaks coming out of Washington?" Trump said in a tweet.

[Click here to see fullgraphic on the poll: tmsnrt.rs/2lLW2OE]

The Reuters/Ipsos poll attempted to measure which narrative was more credible for Americans. It asked people to pick one of two statements that was "the most concerning to you."

The first statement cited "reports that Trump advisors were in repeated contact with the Russian government during the 2016 presidential election." The second cited "U.S. intelligence agents leaking details of conversations between Trump advisors and the Russian government to reporters."

Overall, 43 percent of Americans said they were most concerned about reports of the contacts with Russia. Another 39 percent said they were concerned about the leaks and 19 percent said they didn't know.

However, people who identified with the Republican Party appeared to be much more troubled by the leaks. Some 57 percent said the leaks were the bigger concern, while 23 percent said it was the Russian contacts, and another 20 percent didn't know.

[Click on this link for an interactive view of the data in the Reuters Polling Explorer: polling.reuters.com/#poll/TM1163Y17/dates/20170216-20170220/type/overall]

Gary Crosen, 65, a retiree from Millersville, Md., who took the poll, said he did not think it was a big deal that Flynn spoke with Russia.

"I consider Russia one of our friends," Crosen said. "And we don't need to publicize it the way the news media has.

"A lot goes on behind the scenes that we dont see, and I don't think you need to bring it all out in the open."

The Reuters/Ipsos poll was conducted online in English in all 50 states. It surveyed 1,562 American adults, including 578 who identified as Republicans. It has a credibility interval, a measure of accuracy, of 3 percentage points for the entire sample and 5 percentage points for Republicans only.

(Reporting by Chris Kahn; Editing by James Dalgleish)

Originally posted here:
Republicans more concerned by leaks than Trump team Russian ...

President Trump isnt much interested in legislative details, and these days House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) isnt much interested in candor. That explains how they can both claim to be perfectly in sync and yet be heading for huge clashes on fundamental policy ideas. In fact, on defense spending, the budget more generally, entitlements and reforming health care and taxes, the differences between the GOP-controlled Crngress and the White House threaten to overwhelm progress on major initiatives.

On defense spending, for example, Trump announced a $54 billion increase in defense spending. That would require 60 votes to override the existing caps on the Budget Control Act (BCA). Democrats surely wont agree to proposed, massive offsetting cuts in domestic problems, but even Republicans are unenthusiastic about Trumps proposal.

Defense News reports thatHouse Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry (R-Tex.) and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) have each proposeda $640 billion base budget and argue this is a meager $18 billion more than President Obama had planned:

McCain, in a statement, said the figure was, a mere 3 percentabove President Obamas defense budget, which has left our military underfunded, undersized, and unready to confront threats to our national security With a world on fire, America cannot secure peace through strength with just 3 percent more than President Obamas budget. We can and must do better. . . . .

While we cannot repair all of the damage done by those cuts in a single year, we can and should do more than this level of funding will allow, Thornberry said in a statement. The administration will have to make clear which problems facing our military they are choosing not to fix.We cannot make repairing and rebuilding our military conditional on fixing our budget problems or on cutting other spending.

Overall, the presidents budget doubles down on the Obama administrations fiscal irresponsibility and the flaw in the BCA: refusing to address entitlement programs while squeezing popular domestic programs. Trumps own defense secretary has spoken out previously about cuts slashing foreign aid and diplomatic functions that complement the militarys mission. Republicans in Congress will find it difficult to swallow huge new cuts in popular programs such as the National Institutes of Health, national parks, NASA, job training, etc. Likewise, if Trumps budget increases the debt, which it almost inevitably will, you can expect budget hawks, including Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah), to balk.

The decision to seek major tax cuts while taking entitlement reform out of the equation means that a fiscally sound budget is virtually impossible. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget reminds us:

Domestic discretionary spending what the administration proposed to cut today to pay for defense increases only accounts for about 15 percent of spending and less than 5 percent of spending growth over the next decade. Social Security and health spending, on the other hand, account for half of total spending and almost two-thirds of spending growth over the next decade.

President Trump and administration officials have said in the past they will not propose any changes in Social Security and Medicare, even though both are on a path to insolvency. Entitlement reforms are necessary not only to protect those who depend on them but also to slow rising debt levels and create fiscal space for other programs, which are currently being crowded out.

Move over to Obamacare, and you see the Freedom Caucus in rebellion over the one element in the GOP plans that would aim to replace Obamacares health-care subsidies refundable tax credits. No way, the right-wingers say. The Hill reports:

The chairman of the influential Republican Study Committee said Monday he would vote against a draft ObamaCare replacement bill that leaked last week.Rep. Mark Walker (R-N.C.), head of the 172-member committee, said Monday his opposition stems from the draft bills use of refundable tax credits. There are serious problems with what appears to be our current path to repeal and replace Obamacare. The draft legislation, which was leaked last week, risks continuing major Obamacare entitlement expansions and delays any reforms, Walker said in a statementMonday.

It kicks the can down the road in the hope that a future Congress will have the political will and fiscal discipline to reduce spending that this Congress apparently lacks. Worse still, Walker continued, the bill contains what increasingly appears to be a new health insurance entitlement with a Republican stamp on it.

Finally, on tax reform, any plan that slashes rates on individuals and businesses without offsetting revenue will be a nonstarter for many conservatives, while Democrats are not going to support any plan that delivers big tax cuts for the rich. Ryans effort to make the numbers work through use of a border adjustment tax has run into a brick wall of opposition among Republican senators as well as business and consumer groups.

In sum, the White House seems oblivious to the unworkability of its plans and the fundamental differences within the GOP ranks. Ryan evidences no awareness as to how unpopular the specifics of his health-care and tax plans will be. How this all gets resolved even before Republicans try rounding up Democrats to pass measures that gut domestic spending, cut back on Medicaid and other health-care measures and give more tax cuts to the rich is anyones guess. In setting unattainable goals, overestimating Obamacare criticism and failing to appreciate the publics resistance to hard-right positions, the GOP may wind up with nothing to show for its 2016 wins. If so, it will face the real possibility of losing at least one of its majorities in 2018.

More:
Republicans are headed for huge clashes with Trump - Washington Post (blog)

New York Times

Why the Trump Agenda Is Moving Slowly: The Republicans' Wonk Gap New York Times When Republicans won in November, it looked as if 2017 would reflect a major legislative shift to the right. But two months into the 115th Congress and six weeks into the Trump administration, progress on fulfilling Republicans' major domestic policy ... Trump prepares to address a divided audience: The Republican CongressWashington Post With Republicans In Charge, Democrats Plan To Redefine Their MissionNPR House Republicans Are Helping Donald Trump Keep His Tax Returns SecretHuffington Post Politico -Fox News -ThinkProgress all 1,175 news articles »

Read the original:
Why the Trump Agenda Is Moving Slowly: The Republicans' Wonk Gap - New York Times

Republicans on Tuesday stifled a Democratic attempt to force the Justice Department to produce records related to its investigation of whether DonaldTrump and his campaign had secret ties to Russia. Apowerful GOP committee chairman said, however, that he would urge federal authoritiesto continue their probe.

The party-line House Judiciary Committee vote concerned a resolution of inquiry, an obscure legislative maneuver that allows Congress to demand documents from the executive branch. Under House rules, such a resolution must be debated in committee or be sent directly to the House floor.

[Democrat moves to force House debate on Trumps alleged business conflicts and Russia ties]

The resolution was among the steps that members of the Democratic minority in the House have taken topressure the GOP to toughen its oversight of President Trump and his administration. Itasked Attorney General Jeff Sessions to provide records that pertain to any criminal or counterintelligence investigation into Trump, his White House team or certain campaign associates; any investment made by a foreign power or agent thereof in Trumps businesses; Trumps plans to distance himself from his business empire; and any Trump-related examination of federal conflict of interest laws or the emoluments clause of the Constitution.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), who filed the resolution, toldhis colleagues that the panels lawmakers should notbury our heads in the sand.

The security and integrity of our nation are at stake, he said. It is unfortunate that we must resort to a resolution of inquiry to learn the truth about these serious issues. However, the House has so far abdicated its constitutional responsibility to provide meaningful oversight into the Trump administration, and it is time that we do our duty. . . . The public deserves to know the truth about the president, and we must not stop until we get these answers.

Rep. BobGoodlatte (R-Va.), the Judiciary Committee chairman,called the resolution unnecessary, premature and not the best way for this committee or the House to conduct oversight. Instead, he said,he plans to send a letter requesting that Sessions proceed with investigations into any criminal conduct regarding these matters acknowledging, at the same time, that his own requests for a Justice Department briefing on the Russia allegations had gone unanswered.

This resolution is about politics, not information, Goodlatte said, pointing to a Nadler news release boasting that the resolution would force a GOP vote on Trump. Our oversight efforts can and should be better than that, Goodlatte said.

Also opposing the resolution was Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the former chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee who had gained headlines in recent days by calling on Sessions to step aside and allow an independent prosecutor to handle theRussia probe. Sessions, a former senator, was an early endorser of and key adviser to Trumps campaign, and he has close ties to seniorWhite House aides.

But Issa said Goodlattes plan to send a letter to Sessions was fitting and appropriate as a first step, noting his own history while Oversight Committee chairman of being a prolific sender of letters. Virtually without fail, my investigations started with letters, he said. So I, with utmost of respect for my colleagues, would ask that we use the system first.

Nadler reminded Issa that he filed his resolution only after three letters Democrats had sent toRepublicans went unanswered.

Issaassured him he would persist: I have a long history of limited patience. . . . I am, if nothing else, tenacious.

The debate took place over the course of several hours Tuesday evening, not long beforeTrump was set to arrive on Capitol Hill to address a joint meeting of Congress for the first time, and it was attended by a capacity crowd of liberal activists who were gaveled quiet on several occasions after cheering Democrats remarks.

The final vote was 18 to 16 along party lines to report the resolution unfavorably, meaning it will not be taken up on the House floor. Besides rejecting the underlying resolution, Republicans also voted down amendments that would have expanded it to include documents on White House contacts with the FBI and on Justice Department deliberations on Sessionss possible recusal.

Theresolution of inquiry stands to becomea tool that Democrats, with little leverage as the minority party, will use to highlight issues with the Trump administration.Rep. Joe Kennedy (D-Mass.) introduced another such resolution Monday to force Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price to releaserecords concerning the administrations plans to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act.

Tuesdays Judiciary Committee vote came a day after Democrats attempted to bring a resolution to the House floor calling on Trump to release his tax returns to Congress and the public, whichhe has long refused to do, citing an ongoing Internal Revenue Service audit.

The attempt was turned back on a procedural vote that followed party lines. Two Republicans, Reps. Walter B. Jones Jr. of North Carolina and Mark Sanford of South Carolina, declined to join their GOP colleagues and voted present.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said afterward that by turning back the sense of Congress resolution that they had made themselves accomplices to hiding President Trumps tax returns from the American people.

The American people deserve the truth about Russias personal, political and financial grip on President Trump, she said. If theres nothing there, then what are Republicans afraid of?

Originally posted here:
Republicans vote down attempt to advance debate on Trump-Russia allegations - Washington Post

WASHINGTON Democrats have long claimed the bulk of black voters and the issues important to them.

But some Republicans who recognize their party can't survive without expanding their base are seizing on what they think could be a winning cause: historically black colleges and universities.

U.S. Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina, the Senate's only black Republican, on Tuesday helped facilitate a day-long conference at the Library of Congress with more than 90 presidents of HBCUs from across the country.

With Scott, and U.S. Rep. Mark Walker, R-N.C., as the official co-hosts, the conference pulled together a starring cast of prominent congressional Republicans, including House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., and U.S. Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C.

Representatives from Boeing, Michelin and Northrop Grumman discussed efforts to recruit from HBCUs. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos delivered a keynote address at lunch.

Simultaneously, President Donald Trump on Tuesday rolled out an executive order to create a new White House initiative on HBCUs, which would establish a new presidential advisory board, among other things.

The HBCU "fly-in" on Capitol Hill was the first event of its kind, even beyond the eight years of the Barack Obama presidency.

"Frankly, the attention we received in the last 45 or so days exceeds not just this past administration, but the past three or four administrations," Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., president and CEO of the Thurgood Marshall College Fund, told reporters. "We are on the front page of the Wall Street Journal today. Black colleges."

There are 107 HBCUs in the United States, eight of which are in South Carolina. They partially rely on the federal government for funding through grants, financial aid and appropriations.

HBCU leaders say they have lost billions of dollars over the past years during Obama's tenure and before that. A major focus on Tuesday was on funding and whether Congress would appropriate the necessary dollars to revitalize resource-starved institutions.

Scott and Walker said the gathering was the first step in forging new relationships and that tangible legislative solutions were still to come. They couldn't promise anything in regard to specific funding levels.

A lack of commitment to properly funding HBCUs has riled some critics who view Republican interest in black education policy warily and as disingenuous and self-serving. Some Democrats have also slammed DeVos and the GOP for being out of touch. They targeted DeVos for a statement calling African-Americans "pioneers in school choice" when black students were being turned away from white schools.

House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi of California called it a "mind boggling ignorance of history and the enduring effects of institutional racism."

On Tuesday, Scott acknowledged that DeVos could have been more articulate.

"Is there a better way to word things? Yes," he said. "Clarity in your statements is always important."

He also acknowledged accusations of GOP pandering to HBCU presidents and African-Americans with weary recognition.

"I try to remind some of my friends that being a Republican is tough; being a black Republican is praise-the-lord tough," Scott said.

"(Republicans) have the responsibility and opportunity right now, leading both the House and Senate," Walker added. "We would not want to one day look back and regret the fact that we hadnt done all that we can do."

Missing from the program Tuesday was U.S. Rep. Jim Clyburn. The third ranking House Democrat and most senior black lawmaker in Congress has made helping HBCUs one of his legacy issues, particularly his alma mater, South Carolina State University.

Clyburn said he didn't feel threatened that Republicans are starting to stake a claim in traditional Democratic policy territory.

"They're welcome," he said of the GOP.

Emma Dumain is The Post and Courier's Washington correspondent. Reach her at 843-834-0419 and follow her @emma_dumain.

Read the original here:
Sen. Tim Scott helps Republicans lead on HBCUs - Charleston Post Courier