Mediaboss Marketing

Citizens at town halls held by Republican members of Congress showed their displeasure with efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act, among other issues. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

In November, Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) won reelection to one of the most Republican districts in the nation, with 73 percent of the vote.

On Thursday night, he found himself facing a very different picture. Thousands of people crowded in and outside of what was supposed to be a run-of-the-mill town hall in Utah to boo him and chant, You work for us and Do your job! Reporters heard those who couldn't get into the 1,080-person auditorium yelling: Bring him out!

An equally passionate if not quite as boisterous scene played out Thursday at a health-care town hall across the country in Murfreesboro, Tenn., Republican territory through and through.

In Tennessee, Knoxville-area Rep. Jimmy Duncan (R) refused to hold a town hall givenamid all the tension. " I do not intend to give more publicity to those on the far left who have so much hatred, anger and frustration in them," he said in a letter. "I have never seen so many sore losers as there are today."

That's one way to classify what's happening. Another way: Republicans are getting an unexpected jolt from both the left and their own anxious base at these town halls and it's a moment that looks like a mirror image of the national mood almost a decade ago. The common thread between then and now: One party in control of Washington undertaking a massive change to Americans' health care. When Democrats were in Republicans' situation in 2010, they lost control of Congress and haven't regained it since.

Let's back up. In 2009, Democrats had large majorities in Congress and controlled the White House. They quickly drew on theirpolitical capital to pursue one of the biggest changes to the American health-care system in decades.

That summer, before Obamacare became law, Democrats across the nationwent home to their districts and were caught off guard by passionately angry constituents mostly conservative at town halls, fearful of how Obamacare mighttake away their rights.

NPR recalled one particularly poignant moment that epitomized the fear and fury of these town halls:

Rep. John Dingell, a Democrat, was confronted by a man who pushed his disabled son's wheelchair up to the podium.

You are a fraud, and you're sentencing this person to death under the Obama plan, the man said.

Obamacare became law without a single Republican vote. The passion helped launch the tea party and gave Republicans their biggest victories since the Great Depression.

In 2017, the initial script appears to be the same, only the players are flipped.

Republicans are fully in control of Washington for the first time in a decade, and they haven't forgotten the motivating issue for their base in 2009. Repealing Obamacare and replacing it with something else is their top priority. Republicanstook procedural steps on their first week back in Congress this January tomake that happen.

But in the absence of an agreed-upon plan to replace it and the very real threat of millions of people losing their health-care coverage in the process Republicans' confident, steady march toward health-care reform has stalled. Lawmakers themselves are anxiousabout how to smoothly pull out health care from millions of people and quickly slipsomething better in its place.

During a retreat in Philadelphia, Republican lawmakers discussed national security, defense and foreign policy. Contributors included Sens. John Barasso (Wyo.), Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), Reps. Greg Walden (Ore.), Kevin Brady (Tex.), Virginia Foxx (N.C.) and Andrew Bremberg, a top domestic policy adviser to President Trump. (Obtained by The Washington Post)

Enter a united, fired-up left, which has taken to streets across the nation not once but twice in President Trump's first few weeks in office. These protestersdidn't just come out in Washington and Los Angeles, but in Wichita, rural Virginia and Anchorage. It has all the appearance, as my colleague James Hohmann wrote recently, of the liberal answer to the tea party movement.

The question Republicans in Congress must ask themselves is where the parallels between 2009 and 2017 end. Are Thursday's town halls early warning signs of a historically major loss to come for Republicans in the 2018 midterms? (Not likely in the Senate, given the map is so favorable for Republicans.) Is this a movement that will give rise to new liberal leaders in a party that many believe desperately needs them? Or will moments like Thursday's events pull the Democratic Party further to the left in a way that hurts its electoral chances? Will these people even vote in 2018, given they expressed their frustrationafter the election?

At the very least, Thursday's town halls are broadcasting to Republicans in Congress what most of themalready know: If you're going to repeal Obamacare, you better make sure you replace it with a plan that truly is, in Trump's words, something terrific. Because health carehas proven to be an issue that gets people into town halls and out to voting booths.

Follow this link:
Republican town halls are getting very, very nasty - Washington Post

And the fury is flaring up in some of most conservative corners of the country.

On Thursday night, two Republican members of Congress -- Reps. Jason Chaffetz of Utah and Diane Black of Tennessee -- were each confronted with impassioned constituents during simultaneous events. The shouted questions, emotional pleas and raucous protesters of the evening crystalized the GOP's tough political road ahead as it forges ahead with rolling back Obama's accomplishments, including the Affordable Care Act.

In suburban Salt Lake City, local police estimated that some 1,000 people packed into a high school auditorium to see Chaffetz as hundreds more waited outside. For 75 minutes, the congressman confronted a crowd that fumed with resentment of Trump and accused Chaffetz of coddling the President.

"Folks -- I get one sentence into it, you say I'm not answering the question," an exasperated Chaffetz complained as the crowd repeatedly jeered him. "I am answering the question, OK?"

And some 1,700 miles away in the town of Murfreesboro, Tennessee, Black was met with roughly 100 protesters at a "Ask Your Reps" event hosted by the Middle Tennessee State University's College Republicans.

Mike Carlson, a 32-year-old student from Antioch, Tennessee, said that as an overweight man, he depended on Obamacare to stay alive.

"I have to have coverage to make sure I don't die. There are people now who have cancer that have that coverage, that have to have that coverage to make sure they don't die," Carlson said. "And you want to take away this coverage and have nothing to replace it with! How can I trust you to do anything that's in our interest at all?"

Jessi Bohon, a 35-year-old high school teacher who lives in Cookeville, Tennessee, was visibly emotional as she stood up and posed her question.

"As a Christian, my whole philosophy in life is pull up the unfortunate," Bohon said, a comment that drew verbal affirmation from others in the room. "The individual mandate: that's what it does. The healthy people pull up the sick."

Bohon went on to ask how Congress could be OK with "punishing our sickest people" rather than trying to "fix what's wrong with Obamacare," the sweeping healthcare law that covers 20 million Americans.

Black responded that Obamacare's individual mandate -- which requires everyone to have health insurance or pay a penalty -- still allowed millions, including many young and healthy people, to be without coverage.

"About 20 million people did actually come into the program who were uninsured," Black said. "You don't want to hurt one group of people to help the another. We can help both groups at the same time."

Bohon shot back: "How many of those people were in states where they played a political game with people's lives?"

Black appeared flustered, and declined to continue. "I'm going to pass this one," she said.

Bohon told CNN afterward that as a state employee, she receives health insurance through the state. Her question to Black, she said, was motivated in part by her Christian beliefs, as well as her upbringing in the coal-mining town of Grundy, Virginia.

"Growing up in the community that I grew up, in Appalachia, because we were so poor there that we had to take care of each other," Bohon said.

Both Carlson and Bohon told CNN that they voted for Hillary Clinton in the general election.

The same event hosted by MTSU's College Republican last year was attended by around 30 to 40 people, according to organizers. On Thursday night, the room was quickly filled to capacity while dozens outside chanted: "Let us in! Let us in!"

Black, along with two other GOP local officials, were at first asked questions that had been pre-submitted on the topics of healthcare and tax reform -- a format that clearly frustrated audience members and prompted some to interrupt.

At one point in the discussion, GOP State Rep. Mike Sparks told the room: "I'll be honest with you. As a state representative, I got health insurance. I feel a little guilty."

Multiple audience members could be heard responding: "You should."

In both Utah and Tennessee, many attendees and protesters told CNN on Thursday that they were first-time participants in politics.

Carol McCracken, a 65-year-old Salt Lake City paralegal, said she is "a child of the '70s -- this is not my first rodeo" in Democratic activism. But she said she hasn't seen the party's base as engaged as it is now since then and that she has never seen such high attendance at a congressional town hall.

If the explosion of progressives attending GOP town halls in recent days has in large part been fueled by nationwide opposition to repealing Obamacare, the topic didn't come up once at the Chaffetz's event.

Instead, it was a scattershot series of criticisms of Trump -- and of Chaffetz for aligning with the President.

When a man asked Chaffetz why he disavowed Trump over the infamous "Access Hollywood" tape -- and then backtracked before the election -- Chaffetz defended the President, saying he believes "in my heart of hearts" that Trump was the right choice.

"There was no possible way I was ever going to vote for Hillary Clinton," he said. "No way. Never."

The crowd erupted in chants of "Do your job!" when Chaffetz, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, was pressed on why his panel spent months investigating Clinton's emails but has not yet launched inquiries into Trump's taxes (Trump has declined to release his tax returns).

"You're really not going to like this part: The President, under the law, is exempt from the conflict of interest laws," he said.

Chaffetz received some positive reaction when he called top White House counselor Kellyanne Conway "wrong, wrong, wrong" for promoting Ivanka Trump's business interests in a TV interview Thursday.

But for the most part, he confronted an angry Democratic base even in deep-red Utah and in a district where he was just re-elected with a margin of victory of 47 percentage points.

Chaffetz nodded several times to the political makeup of his crowd. "You're going to disagree with this," he said as he began a defense of the GOP pushing to block Planned Parenthood from receiving federal health care dollars.

The congresman at times seemed to relish the boisterous crowd. He cited Vice President Mike Pence -- and then scoffed when the crowd booed, saying that Pence "is, like, the nicest human being." It only earned more boos.

At one point, he cast new Education Secretary Betsy DeVos -- confirmed this week on a 51-50 vote -- as a common enemy, touting a bill to abolish the Department of Education and hand all control over schools and their funding to states.

"I want to get rid of Betsy DeVos!" Chaffetz said.

A man in the crowd shot back: "We want to get rid of you!"

CNN's MJ Lee reported from Murfreesboro, Tennessee. Eric Bradner reported from Cottonwood Heights, Utah. Jeff Simon contributed to this story.

Continue reading here:
Anger erupts at Republican town halls - CNN

Newly appointed FCC chairman Ajit Pai has already chipped away at net neutrality, slowed a program that assists low-income households with broadband access, and hurt efforts to reform exorbitant calling fees for inmates and thats just his first two weeks on the job.

The chairman of the FCC has exceptional power over what the commission does and how it functions. And that means Pai, more than anyone else right now, has control over the fate of not just hot-button issues like net neutrality, but the competitive landscape of the cable and wireless industries.

Net neutrality is already being stripped away

Pais oft-repeated mission statement has been to [eliminate] unnecessary and burdensome rules at the commission. But so far, thats meant scaling back vital protections for the internet that advocates and millions of consumers loudly fought for and won. Last week, he both eased transparency requirements and approved efforts from AT&T, Comcast, and others to divide up the internet.

As Pai continues to tweak regulations, he has the ability to undermine core tenets of net neutrality and broadly reshape the FCC in the process. Some Republicans have long hoped to turn the FCC into a toothless management office, and these early actions demonstrate Pais power to help them do it.

The people responsible for enacting net neutrality rules are already worried. In a conversation with Backchannel last week about rumors that Trumps transition team wants to modernize the FCC, former commission chairman Tom Wheeler called the efforts a fraud meant to please telecom companies.

A former counselor to Wheeler, Gigi Sohn, gave the same warning just last month. "You're gonna hear a lot ... in the next six months about restricting and reforming the FCC, Sohn said at the State of the Net conference. What that really means is that folks want to eliminate the FCC's role in promoting competition, and protecting consumers, and promoting fast fair and open networks."

Some proposals would significantly weaken the commission

There are two ways Republicans can go about curtailing the power of the FCC. The more transformative method is to overhaul telecom law in order to strip out its strength as a regulator and its mandate to look out for the public good. But even with Republican control of Congress and the presidency, supporters of net neutrality and the FCC suggest it would be a challenging and time-consuming process.

The easier, if less transformative method since core functions of the FCC are ultimately dictated by law would be to have the FCC reorganize itself, which it can do in small ways on its own and in larger ways with a nod from Congress.

The Trump administration and Republican members of Congress have already expressed interest in pursuing both avenues for reform.

Trump's transition team has recommended an agency restructuring with a focus on deregulation, according to Multichannel News. Pai hasnt specifically addressed restructuring the commission, but he has signaled a disinterest in blocking mergers and said that removing unnecessary regulations is something hes touted on a perpetual loop since taking the job.

It never has gone beyond there needs to be a rewrite.

And despite the apparent difficulty, Republican members of Congress plan on rewriting telecom law. "It is clearly time for FCC reform," Senator Thune (R-SD), chairman of the Senate's Commerce Committee, said during a conference last month. "We have had many conversations about improving the agency, and this year presents a real opportunity to turn those conversations into solutions."

Determining what that means for the future of the FCC is tricky. The last update to the Communications Act was passed in 1996, and ever since then, theres been constant talk about reforming the FCC, but relatively few concrete proposals on what a truly reworked law and commission would look like.

I'm open to be part of that conversation, but it never has gone beyond there needs to be a rewrite, says Representative Eshoo (D-CA), who until this year was ranking member of the House subcommittee that oversees the FCC, in a phone call with The Verge. I really think that nothing has gone beyond those sentences being stated many many times by many members.

Without anything firm, were left divining possibilities from existing statements and proposals.

Existing suggestions for FCC reform have been fairly small in scope. Recent bills included language that would require the agency to publish its pending rules earlier (Pai is now putting this into practice) or give the commissioners flexibility to meet in private to discuss their work. Some suggestions, like improving the commissions ability to hire engineers and economists, even have a degree of bipartisan support.

Theres also a common refrain among Republicans that current telecommunications law is dated, because it hardly mentions the internet (leading to outcomes favored by net neutrality supporters, like service providers being controlled by utility-style rules). Theres an idea that the commissions regulatory distinctions between cable, radio, wireless, and so on ought to be streamlined so that it isnt controlling services that increasingly used for similar purposes like watching TV in different ways.

How any of these changes are implemented could lead to very different results. Chris Lewis, VP of the consumer advocacy group Public Knowledge, says the specific implementation of reforms is going to make all the difference.

"We advocated a few years ago that the rules around [TV distributor] competition and consumer protection should be extended ... to online video distributors," Lewis says. "If you're talking about that sort of streamlining [regulations], then yes, that makes sense. But if you're talking about streamlining that strips out basic consumer protection and competition, then really the devil is in the details."

Eshoo has a similar warning. If in fact there is an undertaking to do any kind of rewrite, you have to have a solid foundation that's established in terms of operating principles. What exactly do we want to reform? asks Eshoo. Otherwise, it'll become a Christmas tree with goodies hanging all over it for what every lobbyist in town wishes for.

Trumps transition team mostly wants the FCC to manage spectrum

Early indications are that the Trump administration is hoping for broader changes, with little interested to consumer protections or regulating the telecom industry. Multichannel News reported that the new presidents transition team has recommended streamlining the agency so that it no longer regulates communications methods like cable and wireless in different ways. That, on its face, sounds reasonable, except the transition team reportedly also wants the FCC's ability to review mergers and encourage competition handed off to the Federal Trade Commission. That would strip the agency of its most powerful protective tools.

In a conversation with The Verge last week, University of Florida professor Mark Jamison, who worked on Trump's FCC transition team, said he'd like to see the commission limit its scope to the "management of radio spectrum and, if you're going to have subsidies for rural broadband, that would be by this agency as well."

Regulating telecom competition would still be part of the commission's duty, but Jamison imagines the commission using this power "only if there's a monopoly," and not as a preventative measure, the way it does now.

That combination would essentially make the commission into a clearinghouse for wireless spectrum, with little ability to protect consumers or direct the market to a more competitive place.

Jamison declined to discuss the transition team's recommendations, saying that they were confidential, but his remarks align with some details of the report.

"Of course, carriers want [telecom issues] to get lost in that morass."

Senator Thune was also critical of the FCCs regulatory abilities during a speech at State of the Net, saying the commission has the ability to overregulate the digital world and that Novembers election proves consumers are tired of it. Thats almost certainly a poor conclusion to jump to Trump lost the popular vote by a large margin, and the 2014 net neutrality proceedings revealed strong public support for keeping the internet open but Thune is using Republicans position of power to advocate for change nonetheless. One way for us to address this concern in the digital space is to both modernize how the FCC operates and to reform what the FCC is allowed to do, he said.

A spokesperson for Representative Walden (R-OR), chairman of the House subcommittee on communications and technology, which oversees the FCC, did not respond to requests for comment.

This handing off of the FCCs regulatory abilities under the pretense of modernization is exactly what Wheeler, the former chairman, was calling a fraud. "The FTC has to worry about everything from computer chips to bleach labeling," Wheeler said. "Of course, carriers want [telecom issues] to get lost in that morass."

The biggest changes need to come from Congress

That kind of change cant just happen with a directive from Pai. An agency restructuring that would strip it of antitrust abilities in theory requires an act of Congress. Its difficult for [the FCC] to say, Well this doesn't work anymore, Jamison says. The law is still there, so that's really up to Congress to update those laws.

And rewriting telecom law isnt easy. Its traditionally been a bipartisan effort, and given the margins in Congress, it would have to be here, too.

"I assume any effort to update the Telecommunications Act would end up being bipartisan again this time around for it to be longstanding and have the consensus of what all stakeholders want," says Lewis, of Public Knowledge. "It will take some time because it's a complicated and long act."

Do you know how many years it took to write the Telecom Act of 1996? Eshoo asks. Oh my God. It was at least a decade.

Correction February 10th, 2:34PM ET: Representative Eshoo is no longer ranking member of the subcommittee on communications and technology, as this article initially stated. She remains on the committee, but left the leadership position this year.

Read the rest here:
Republicans are ready to take down the FCC - The Verge

Imagine how Republicans would have reacted if President Barack Obama had attacked a retailer for dropping his daughters product line. Or asked senators to confirm a Cabinet pick who said guns are needed in schools to defend against grizzly bears. Or tried to undermine the independence of the federal judiciary. Or equated the United States moral standing with that of Vladimir Putins Russia.

There would have been howls of outrage, of course, and multiple investigations, and even calls for impeachment. But its President Trump doing all those things, so Republicans in Congress are as meek and quiet as mice.

Perhaps the most striking thing about the chaotic and exhausting first three weeks of the Trump administration is the degree to which Republicans have held together, placing loyalty above all else. The party of Lincoln has sold its soul and like all Faustian bargains, this one will not end well.

Trump looks likely to get every one of his Cabinet nominees approved. Billionaire Betsy DeVos gave the worst performance in memory, surely one of the worst in history, at her confirmation hearing, displaying a level of ignorance that was truly shocking. Only two Republican senators Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska had the integrity to vote against her. Vice President Pence had to break a 50-50 tie, but DeVos is now the secretary of education.

And that was the closest thing weve seen to a GOP revolt in these confirmations. Not one Republican voted against confirming Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) as attorney general, despite his ugly history on civil rights. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) went so far as to formally squelch Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) so she could not read aloud a letter criticizing Sessions written decades ago by Coretta Scott King.

Trumps pick for the Labor Department, fast-food magnate Andrew Puzder, has conflicts of interest and a nanny problem; he may face some pushback. Ben Carson has zero qualifications to lead Housing and Urban Development. But if DeVos got through, its hard to imagine who would be deemed unacceptable by the GOP majority.

Over in the House, meanwhile, all the zeal for holding the executive branch accountable has gone poof. Remember how eager House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) was to investigate every real or imagined question about the Obama administration? Remember how he went after Hillary Clinton over her emails? Suddenly and this is rich he declines to launch any probe that might be seen as a fishing expedition.

Trumps attack on a private company, Nordstrom, for no longer carrying his daughter Ivankas line of merchandise? Not a big deal, Chaffetz said. Trumps hotel lease for the Old Post Office building, which makes him both landlord and tenant? Chaffetz is curious but wants to wait for an opinion by the General Services Administration, which now reports to Trump. The many potential conflicts of interest posed by Trumps worldwide business interests? Chaffetz stifles a yawn.

And only a few Republicans, including Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), have shown any interest in investigating the biggest question hanging over the Trump administration: What role did Russia play in the election? This abdication of duty is cynicism of the highest order, or perhaps I should say the lowest.

The GOPs lockstep unity has been impressive, and it may eventually allow the party to achieve some of its long-held policy goals: cutting taxes, eliminating regulations, repealing the Affordable Care Act. But there are enormous risks.

The dawn of the Trump presidency has inspired a groundswell of progressive activism around the country. The energy generated by the massive Womens March on Washington and its satellite marches last month has been sustained. Republican members of Congress have been deluged by phone calls at their offices and confronted by protesters in their home districts. The women are in my grill no matter where I go, said Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.).

If opposition to Trump unites and motivates Democrats the way that opposition to Obama did for Republicans, GOP strategists should be very worried.

Beyond the political risk, there is the existential risk of blindly following a man who continues to demonstrate his unfitness for the presidency. Trump shows no respect for American institutions or traditions. He sees those who disagree with him as haters and dismisses inconvenient facts as fake news. He deliberately stokes fear. He bristles at constitutional checks on his power.

And to think, there once was a Republican president who summoned the better angels of our nature.

Read more from Eugene Robinsons archive, follow him on Twitter or subscribe to his updates on Facebook. You can also join him Tuesdays at 1 p.m. for a live Q&A.

Read the original post:
In Congress, Republicans are quiet and meek as mice - Washington Post

Feb. 10, 2017, 9:29 a.m.

As a young man and a lover of literature, Kevin Faulconer channeled his inner Hemingway and ran with the bulls in Pamplona.

It was probably one of the most exciting, terrifying 45 seconds that I can remember, said the mayor of San Diego, throwing his head back and releasing a long, rollicking laugh.

It was also an experience, filled with recklessness and danger, hes not eager to replicate anytime soon.

At age 50, comfortably ensconced in his second term, Faulconer has emerged as the fair-haired favorite of California Republicans desperate for a serious candidate to run for governor in 2018, when term limits finally end the Jerry Brown era.

In many ways, the leader of Californias second-most-populous city seems an ideal prospect.

Theres just one problem: Faulconer insists hes not interested.

Link:
California Republicans think they've found the ideal candidate for governor. So why isn't Kevin Faulconer interested? - Los Angeles Times