Mediaboss Marketing

NEW HAVEN >> Kate Adams is ready to start her own legacy of public office.

It wont be easy. She knows it. After all, Adams is a rarity in New Haven. Shes one of just three Republican-affiliated residents who will seek the partys nomination for fall elections. She joins John Carlson, who wants to run for the Ward 6 seat, and Joshua Van Hoesen, who seeks to reclaim Ward 18 for Republicans.

All three will be seeking a formal nomination when the Republican Town Committee holds a meeting July 20 at 200 Orange St.

Former Ward 18 Alder Arlene DePino is the last Republican member of the Board of Alders. She decided not to run for re-election on the board in 2011.

Advertisement

Adams wants the partys nomination to run for the Board of Education. Originally from Wallingford, Adams father, Andy Bravo, held office in the towns school board for 14 years and also served as the towns Republican committee chairman for six years.

I was always kind of around local politics growing up, Adams said. My parents wouldnt let me stay up for New Years Eve, but they would let me stay up to see election results.

Adams, 25, is a Southern Connecticut State University graduate currently working as an education coordinator for the Integrated Refugee & Immigrant Services, an organization providing resources for refugees in the state. Working for the office sheds light on Adams political standing; its a far cry from President Donald Trumps stance on refugees, whom the president has sought to limit under his administration.

I view myself as a moderate Republican, Adams said, adding shes more concerned with fiscal priorities.

On social issues, Adams said shes more liberal, supporting the LGBTQ community and immigrants.

Even so, her personal stance seems to clash with the ideals of the partys most public and powerful figure.

Its going to be difficult, especially with the state of the country, Adams said.

No matter what party member the president belongs to, earning votes is a challenge for Republicans in New Haven.

We have an uphill challenge, Jonathan Wharton, Republican Town Committee chairman, said. We already have that challenge whether Trump is in the White House or not.

Adams, a SCSU political science professor, is a former pupil of Wharton. Since being elected chairman last spring, Wharton has been optimistic about the partys chances to make a dent in the Democrats majority in the Board of Alders and Board of Education.

Van Hoesen, 27, is a lead software engineer at Accounting System Integrators. He attended the University of New Haven and has lived in New Haven for five years, purchasing a home in the city following his attendance at UNH. He said finding his ideals aligning with the New Haven Republican party is one of the reasons he felt motivated to run.

The lack of Republican representation on the Board of Alders adds another facet of motivation to my running as I believe that a diverse set of ideals and perspective will only lead to greater community strength; though we all are working towards a brighter future, if my profession as a computer programmer has taught me anything, there are many different ways to achieve a goal, Van Hoesen said in an email.

The party has been successful in recommending and earning appointees to city commissions, but hasnt successfully earned an elected seat yet since DePinos departure. This years prospective party candidates could have been larger.

We actually had two or three more names. We had more people but they chose not to run, Wharton said.

Wharton said theres recently been more interest in the partys development. There are other positive signs for the party, like what happened two years ago, when a little-known Yale senior named Ugonna Eze very nearly pulled off an upset in the Yale-centric Ward 1. Eze lost by 17 votes to current Alder Sarah Eidelson, D-1, a margin so narrow it triggered a recount.

I think everyone was surprised, Wharton said. It was a wake-up call for Democrats.

The party hosted a fundraiser June 29 in New Haven to begin raising money for its interested candidates. Among those in attendance were Connecticut Republican Party Chairman JR Romano and state Sen. George Logan, R-Ansonia.

Logans successful election inspired Carlson, who called Logan an old friend. Carlson, 48, said in an email he has lived on Greenwich Avenue for nearly his entire life. Hes worked as a teacher in Bridgeport for 17 years.

For years, I thought about running for office. Not being one to seek the limelight, I never did, Carlson said. If not now, when, and if not me, who? People are constantly moving to places they perceive as better. Why not strive to make where you are the best place to be?

Carlson said he doesnt think Ward 6s current alder, Dolores Colon, a Democrat, is getting the job done.

For too long, Democrats have had a strangle hold on New Haven, Carlson said. If they had all the answers, New Haven would be heaven on earth by now.

Adams said shes reached out to school administrators to try and understand their biggest concerns. She has already started formulating her primary focuses, including offering more assistance to ESL students at New Haven Public Schools. Her work at IRIS involves interacting mostly with children whose first language isnt English. There needs to be more educators in local schools addressing this population of students.

Its worrying, not just for the kids I work with but the kids that (live) in New Haven, Adams said. Everybody deserves an equal amount of time with, hopefully, a full-time ESL teacher in every school. This would entail finding room in the school board budget, Adams said. While this would impact the districts budget, Adams said improving students success on standardized testing could improve the amount of funding the district would receive.

Adams said shes looking forward to campaigning and meeting other candidates. The seat shes after is currently the most crowded in the field. Two Democrats, incumbent Edward Joyner and newcomer Jamell Cotto, are vying for their partys nomination.

It will be an interesting election, thats for sure, Adams said. Well just have to see what happens.

Reach Esteban L. Hernandez at 203-680-9901.

Continue reading here:
New Haven Republicans set to nominate three candidates for fall election - New Haven Register

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnells new plan is to ask Republicans to suspend reality until after casting their vote: Regardless of what the bill actually says, it means whatever they want it to mean.

To state the obvious, this is not exactly a strong position. Conservatives will believe they are being betrayed, while Republicans (and everyone else) who want to preserve Medicaid wont believe the reassurances.

McConnell, whether his reputation as a master legislative technician is deserved or not, is no fool. He simply has only a few choices remaining at this point in the game. Playing pretend is one of the last tools left at his disposal.

The bottom line remains where its been since January: Very few congressional Republicans want to be responsible for the changes that repeal-and-replace would produce including, of course, taking health insurance away from millions of Americans. Even fewer want to be responsible for killing the item at the top of the Republican rhetorical agenda since spring 2010.

At the same time, theres a group of very conservative members who want to take advantage of a rare unified government opportunity to roll back major parts of the Great Society.

Theres just no way to square that circle.

And House Speaker Paul Ryan, for better or worse, has done an excellent job of boxing McConnell in. Ryan was able to get something through the House by basically using the same logic McConnell is attempting now: Secure the support of various factions by promising that their objections would be dealt with later on in the other chamber. That was sufficient for those who were unhappy with the House bill but didnt want the blame for defeating it.

And then Ryan has made it clear (or at least effectively bluffed) that the House will accept intact whatever the Senate will do, making it harder for McConnell to do the same thing senators believe that anything they pass will wind up as law, and theyll be liable for the effects.

Republicans have become increasingly desperate over the last few months to find a way to fulfill their campaign pledge to repeal and replace Obamacare.

But their streak of mistakes began years earlier. There have been many, many off-ramps available since the Affordable Care Act was signed well, really, since the original bill first hit Congress.

Republicans had plenty of chances to shift to fixing the health care system instead of claiming they were able to fully replace the status quo. Or they could have defined repeal and replace as something that they really could have accomplished.

Or they simply could have declared victory and moved on to something that was more promising for them, such as taxes in other words, they could have gone with a pretend and rename version of repeal and replace.

Its still not clear what the fate of this legislation might be. The surface problem remains the same: Its hard to satisfy the very conservative demands of Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz without losing the votes of the least conservative Republican senators such as Dean Heller, Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins and vice versa.

But I think the underlying question remains a more basic one: Do Republicans really want to pass a bill? Not just are they willing to vote for it, but do they really care about getting this done?

If they do, its likely that compromises will eventually be found. If they either dont want to pass anything or, more likely, just dont feel all that strongly about it, then they probably wont.

What goes into the answer to that question are several things:

Basic political calculations is it worse to break their promise on repealing Obamacare, and taking responsibility for managing a law they never supported in the first place or is it worse to be stuck with responsibility for the replacement?

Policy considerations they may really care about the effects of the status quo compared to the replacement bill in their districts and across the nation. And who knows what other considerations any of the 52 Republicans might have.

Its anyones guess what that adds up to. But I certainly dont hear very much enthusiasm about the bill from any congressional Republicans so far. That might (might!) be the most important hint about what is about to happen.

Read this article:
Jonathan Bernstein: Republicans are running out health care reform options - Omaha World-Herald

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell unveiled a revised GOP health-care proposal on July 13 but two other Republican senators released a competing plan. Here's how it all breaks down. (Peter Stevenson/The Washington Post)

There are rare moments when the national spotlight falls upon a theretofore little-known member of Congress and everyone waits to see what that persons decision will be on a critical issue. For instance, prior to now it would be shocking if more than 1 in 100 Americans outside Nevada had ever heard of Dean Heller, the most vulnerable Republican senator up for reelection in 2018.

But he is about to decide whether tens of millions of Americans lose their health coverage, millions more face skyrocketing costs and millions lose the security theyve enjoyed for only a few short years.

Not just Heller, actually. There are a few other Republican senators whose votes on the gruesome Republican health-care plan are still up in the air. Two Republicans Rand Paul of Kentucky and Susan Collins of Maine have said emphatically that they wont support this bill. Because the GOP has only a 52-48 advantage in the Senate, all thats needed is one more to vote no and the bill is dead. According to The Posts whip count, there are seven others who have indicated they have concerns about it: Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.), Bill Cassidy (La.), Bob Corker (Tenn.), John McCain (Ariz.), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Rob Portman (Ohio) and Ben Sasse (Neb.).

Considerthe nature of the choice theyre faced with. Lets be clear that almost no one thinks this bill will actually be good for Americans. It will leave20 million fewer Americans with health coverage, scale back the help that middle- and lower-income Americans now get to afford insurance, increase deductibles, lead to skyrocketing premiums for older people and gut protection for those with preexisting conditions, to name just a few of the things it does. Despite the removal of some of its biggest tax giveaways, it still contains many provisions that benefit the wealthy while waging an all-out assault on the poor. It is, in short, an abomination.

So perhaps its not surprising that when Republicans are asked about this bill, they cant even bring themselves to make an affirmative case for it. They say one of two things, and often both: First, that Obamacare is terrible, so something has to be done, and second, that they promised for seven years that theyd repeal it and they have to keep that promise. Neither one of those is an argument in favor of this bill.

So as these senators weigh their options, on one side they have the somewhat abstract notion of keeping a promise to GOP primary voters, and on the other side they have the substantial and demonstrable harm the bill will do to their constituents. That this is a remotely difficult choice for them tells you a lot about who these people are.

Lets take a look at just one piece of this puzzle, the effect of the bills evisceration of Medicaid. If this bill succeeds, not only will the ACAs expansion of Medicaid be rolled back, but also the program will be slashed even further and converted to a block grant, which would give states the flexibility to kick enrollees off their insurance and scale back benefits. While were awaiting the Congressional Budget Offices score of this latest version, the Medicaid provisions havent changed from the previous version the CBO scored, in which it said that 15 million people would lose Medicaid. The Center for American Progress took the CBOs estimates and broke them out by state; here are the figures for what our wavering senators would do to the people theyre supposed to represent:

To clarify, these numbers dont represent everyone who would lose coverage, only those who would lose Medicaid; the total numbers would be even higher. And there may well be other senators who could be persuaded to vote no. But each one of those senators has to understand the spectacular human suffering he or she might unleash. How do you say to a family who lost health coverage and is thrown into a pit of worry, despair, financial vulnerability and in many cases literally even death (yes, people die when they cant get medical care), Sorry about that, but primary voters would have been mad if I didnt repeal Obamacare, so youll just have to suffer? How do you say that to thousands and thousands of families?

And as for the politics, if theyre afraid of a backlash if their party fails to pass this bill, just wait until they see the backlash if they do pass it.

There is no perfect choice for these senators, no choice that will see them hailed from both sides of the aisle and guarantee their reelection. But there is a better choice, both substantively and politically. The only question is whether they have the compassion, and the courage, to choose it.

See the original post:
A small number of Republican senators now face a career-defining choice - Washington Post

A Pew poll released Mondayshows that Republicans views ofhigher education institutions havetaken a dramatic turn forthe worsesince 2015.

In September 2015, 54percent of Republicans told Pew that they had a positive stance on college and universities, while 37percent felt negatively toward them.

Today, their attitude seems to have taken a complete U-turn, with 58percent of Republicans saying that colleges and universities had a negative effect on the way things are going in the country. Only 36percent maintainedthat theyre good for the country.

Meanwhile, 72percent of Democrats and independents who lean Democrat have a positive attitude toward the institutions. According to Pew, this stance hasnt changed much in recent years.

This striking switch among Republicans echoes a trend among conservatives ofblasting PC culture and censorship of free speech on college campuses and taking legislative action against it.

On June 20, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) held a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on free speech on college campuses titled Free Speech 101: The Assault on the First Amendment on College Campuses.

According to the Washington Post, Grassley charged that free speech appears to be sacrificed at the altar of political correctness.

Also present was Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who lamented, Its tragic what is happening at so many American universities where college administrators and faculties have become complicit in functioning essentially as speech police.

Two days after the hearing, the Wisconsin State Assembly passed a GOP-backed bill allowing college administrators to expel students for disrupting college speakers, according to NBC.

Wisconsin Gov.Scott Walker (R) applauded the move:

Read more from the original source:
Poll: Majority Of Republicans Now Say Colleges Are Bad For America ...

Has America hit peak anti-intellectualism?

Aside from the election of Donald Trump, a businessman born into wealth whose only notable expertise is in reality television, there is now more evidence that the right-wings long game of denigrating U.S. institutions to reshape political discourse is succeeding. A new Pew Research Center poll released on Monday revealed that there is one U.S. institution perceived through a larger partisan divide than even the media: Its college.

For the first time, a majority of Republicans think that colleges and universities have a negative impact on the country. Fifty-eight percent say that colleges are having a negative effect on the way things are going in the country, according to Pew. In other words, the Wall Street banks are more popular with Republican voters than Stanford, Harvard or the University of Akron.

Just two years ago, a majority of Republicans, 54 percent, rated universities effect as positive. As Pew noted, this shift in opinion has occurred across most demographic and ideological groups within the GOP, but in particular the poll found that positive views of colleges among Republicans under the age of 50 sunk by 21 percentage points from 2015 to 2017. While Republican views of colleges and universities remained largely the same throughout much of the Obama administration, 65 percent of self-identified conservatives now say that colleges and universities have a negative impact on the country. Positive views of colleges dropped even among Republicans who hold a college or graduate degree, declining by 11 percentage points during the last two years.

Democrats and independents who lean Democrat, on the other hand, continue to hold a positive attitude toward such institutions, with 72 percent saying they approve of higher education.

Republican politicians in recent years have pushed back on the four-year degree, building upon their long-hyped attack on institutes of higher education as bastions of liberal indoctrination.

Last month, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, held a hearing titled Free Speech 101: The Assault on the First Amendment on College Campuses. The Wisconsin State Assembly passed a bill last month allowing college administrators to expel students for disrupting college speakers.

Its likely no coincidence that just as conservatives decry the scourge of political correctness on liberal arts campuses, their campaign to undermine the institutions that defend a growing diversity of voices among students and faculty is bearing fruit. Arizona Republicans recently threatened to cut funding by 10 percent from public institutions that offer courses and events that are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group or advocate solidarity based on ethnicity, race, religion or gender.

Donald Trumps threats to defund the University of California at Berkeley following a February melee in protest of right-wing provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos scheduled appearance harken back to Ronald Reagans 1966 campaign for governor of California, during which he pledgedto clean up the mess at Berkeley caused by a small minority of hippies, radicals and filthy speech advocates. The right has long decried the ivory towers of academia, but now that those ivory towers are increasingly filled with members of marginalized communities, such attacks are beginning to resonate with average Republicans.

Between Election Day last November and April 2017, the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) hasdocumented at least 330 incidents of bias on university campuses. More than 135 incidents since the start of the 2016 academic school year, the SPLC reports, have involved recruitment efforts by white supremacists.

Link:
America hits peak anti-intellectualism: Majority of Republicans now ...