Latest StoriesRSS

select from:

E.g., 2/21/2019
E.g., 2/21/2019

White House now expects the shutdown to hurt the economy even more

01/15/19 12:56PM

The most important aspect of the ongoing government shutdown -- now the longest in American history -- is the impact it's having on people. Hundreds of thousands of federal workers and their families are shouldering a tremendous burden, and many are being forced to work without pay.

There's also, of course, the effects the shutdown is having on all kinds of public-sector services, covering everything from food safety to air travel, environmental protections to the FBI.

And then there's the economy.

"Someone -- maybe Larry Kudlow? -- has to explain to Trump that the longer the shutdown, the weaker the economy will appear as the next election cycle approaches," Greg Valliere, chief global strategist at Horizon Investments, noted this morning.

How much weaker? CNBC reported this morning that the Trump administration now expects the shutdown to undermine the economy twice as much as it originally feared.

The original estimate that the partial shutdown would subtract 0.1 percentage point from growth every two weeks has now been doubled to a 0.1 percentage point subtraction every week, according to an official who asked not to be named.

The administration had initially counted just the impact from the 800,000 federal workers not receiving their paychecks. But they now believe the impact doubles, due to greater losses from private contractors also out of work and other government spending and functions that won't occur.

I imagine for some, seeing a report about 0.1% changes probably doesn't seem especially worrisome. But these modest reductions make a difference: if the shutdown lasts another two weeks, the White House expects it would reduce quarterly growth by a half a percentage point.

In other words, if the economy would otherwise grow at 2% -- a decent number -- the shutdown would push that number to 1.5% GDP growth.

The CNBC report quoted Ian Shepherdson, chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, who believes if the shutdown continues through March, it could wipe out first quarter growth altogether.

read more

Tuesday's Campaign Round-Up, 1.15.19

01/15/19 12:00PM

Today's installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.

* Ahead of a possible 2020 presidential campaign, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) will meet tomorrow with women who said they experienced harassment and discrimination while working for his 2016 campaign.

* As part of his latest round of attacks on Sen. Elizabeth Warren's (D-Mass.) ancestry, Donald Trump wrote on Twitter yesterday, "If Elizabeth Warren, often referred to by me as Pocahontas, did this commercial from Bighorn or Wounded Knee instead of her kitchen, with her husband dressed in full Indian garb, it would have been a smash!" Many Native Americans were not at all pleased. Neither were South Dakota's Republican senators.

* Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) told MSNBC this morning that her family is "on board" with her launching a 2020 presidential campaign. She quickly added, "But I'll make this decision on my own course regardless of what other candidates are doing."

* Despite New York's reputation as a reliably progressive state, it has some of the least progressive election laws. That's finally changing: state lawmakers approved some major voting reforms yesterday, including an overdue early-voting change, all of which appear likely to become law.

* A new national Gallup poll found Trump's approval rating inching lower to 37% -- the same approval rating the Republican had in the latest CNN poll. Before the shutdown began, Gallup showed the president with a 39% rating.

* The race for the Republicans' Senate nomination in Kansas is already starting to get a little crowded in the wake of Sen. Pat Roberts' (R) retirement announcement. Kansas state Senate President Susan Wagle (R) is the latest to throw her hat into the ring.

read more

Businessmen and shoppers walk on the street in New York City.

Judge blocks Trump admin from adding citizenship question to Census

01/15/19 11:20AM

The Trump administration announced in March 2018 that that the 2020 Census would include a question about citizenship status, and as regular readers know, the move immediately drew swift condemnations. The criticisms were rooted in fact: the question is likely to discourage immigrants' participation in the census, which would mean under-represented communities in the official count, affecting everything from political power to public investments.

More than a few White House critics accused the Republican administration of trying to "sabotage" the national count.

As of this morning, those same critics have reason to be pleased.

A federal judge in New York has barred the Trump administration from adding a question about citizenship to the 2020 Census.

U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman said Tuesday that while such a question would be constitutional, U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross had added it arbitrarily and not followed proper procedure.

The ruling came in a case in which a dozen states or big cities and immigrants' rights groups argued that adding the question might frighten immigrant households away from participating in the census.

As satisfying as Furman's 277-page ruling is, it should probably be seen as the first round of a multi-round fight. There are multiple concurrent cases challenging the administration's efforts, and the U.S. Supreme Court will almost certainly weigh in before Census materials are printed this summer.

But in the meantime, there's one angle to this that worth re-emphasizing: Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross playing fast and loose with the truth about how the Census change was made.

read more

A crest of the Federal Bureau of Investi

Right turns against FBI following revelations about Trump investigation

01/15/19 10:40AM

It's the kind of revelation that's still difficult to digest. The New York Times  reported on Friday night that after Donald Trump fired then-FBI Director James Comey in 2017, the FBI was so concerned about the president's behavior that federal law enforcement officials "began investigating whether he had been working on behalf of Russia against American interests."

The same report added that counterintelligence investigators "had to consider whether the president's own actions constituted a possible threat to national security."

The good news is, Republicans are deeply concerned and are demanding answers. The bad news is, they're directing those concerns at the FBI, not the president.

On Sunday, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) suggested to Fox News that the investigation was improper, and he doesn't trust some of the FBI's former top officials. As TPM noted, he wasn't the only congressional Republican directing his ire at the bureau.

Rep. Peter King (R-NY) seized on a White House talking point -- that reports of the FBI investigating whether President Trump was working for Russia prove Trump was right about the deep state -- and took it a step further Monday: "that's almost like a coup."

During an interview with Fox News on Monday, King called news of the probe "absolutely disgraceful."

The president himself this morning promoted a series of related messages via social media, including one that raises the prospect of the FBI having attempted a "coup" through its investigation.

Meanwhile, Fox News' Gregg Jarrett last night went so far as to tell a national television audience that he believes the FBI should be "reorganized and replaced with a new organization."

Well. That's different.

read more

Image: FILE PHOTO: The Pill Turns 50: A Look Back At Contraception

Courts balk at the Trump administration's new rules on birth control

01/15/19 09:27AM

Thanks to the Affordable Care Act, existing law requires private employers' health insurance plans to provide birth control services. Donald Trump's administration, following directions from social conservatives, have tried to create new rules that would exempt anti-contraception employers from following the law.

It's not working out especially well for the White House. This was the news on Sunday night.

A federal judge on Sunday temporarily blocked Trump administration rules allowing employers to refuse to provide free birth control from taking effect Monday in 13 states.

The regulations, which the Trump administration announced in October 2017, widened the pool of employers that are allowed to claim exemption from providing contraceptive coverage to include nonprofit groups, for-profit companies, other nongovernmental employers, and schools and universities.

Previously, only explicitly religious groups could opt out if they could show "sincerely held" religious objections.

U.S. District Judge Haywood Gilliam's order only applied to the 13 states and the District of Columbia which filed the case. Less than 24 hours later, however, a different judge came to a similar conclusion.

A federal judge in Pennsylvania stepped in at the last moment to pause Trump administration rules that would restrict the ability of some women to get birth control at no charge because their employers object on religious or moral grounds.

U.S. District Judge Wendy Beetlestone issued a nationwide preliminary injunction Monday afternoon, the same day the new policy was to take effect.

This clearly isn't what the Republican administration had in mind.

read more

Image: FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Donald Trump attends a working dinner meeting at the NATO headquarters in Brussels

With NATO withdrawal, Trump weighed 'gift of the century for Putin'

01/15/19 08:46AM

As retired Gen. John Kelly wrapped up his difficult tenure as White House chief of staff, he sought some credit for preventing Donald Trump from taking spectacularly damaging steps. Kelly told the L.A. Times he wanted his time in the West Wing to be judged, not by what he helped the president do, but by what he stopped the president from doing.

Such as? The retired general mentioned a handful of possible nightmare scenarios, including the possibility of American withdrawal from NATO.

Was that actually a step Trump was prepared to take? According to new reporting from the New York Times, the answer is an alarming yes.

There are few things that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia desires more than the weakening of NATO, the military alliance among the United States, Europe and Canada that has deterred Soviet and Russian aggression for 70 years.

Last year, President Trump suggested a move tantamount to destroying NATO: the withdrawal of the United States.

Senior administration officials told The New York Times that several times over the course of 2018, Mr. Trump privately said he wanted to withdraw from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.... In the days around a tumultuous NATO summit meeting last summer, they said, Mr. Trump told his top national security officials that he did not see the point of the military alliance, which he presented as a drain on the United States.

Whether the Republican president understands this or not, NATO is almost certainly the most successful and important international alliance in modern world history.

It's also something Russian President Vladimir Putin hates and would love to see destroyed from within.

Retired Adm. James Stavridis, the former supreme allied commander of NATO, told the Times an American abandonment of the alliance would be "a geopolitical mistake of epic proportion." The retired admiral added, "Even discussing the idea of leaving NATO -- let alone actually doing so -- would be the gift of the century for Putin."

read more

Rep. Steve King speaks with reporters as he leaves the House Republican Conference meeting, Oct. 4, 2013.

GOP's tolerance for Steve King is ending, after lasting too long

01/15/19 08:00AM

Last week, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa), whose record on matters of race and immigration have made him a notorious figure in modern American politics, shared a line with the New York Times that was new, even for the far-right Iowan.

"White nationalist, white supremacist, Western civilization – how did that language become offensive?" the eight-term Republican congressman said. "Why did I sit in classes teaching me about the merits of our history and our civilization?"

Republicans wasted little time in denouncing King's comments, and on Sunday, House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told CBS News's "Face the Nation" that GOP lawmakers would take some kind of "action" in response to the controversy.

Last night, the party's plan started to come into focus.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., told reporters Monday that the GOP had voted unanimously to remove Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, from all committees amid the rising uproar over his recent comments about white nationalism.

"We will not be seating Steve King on any committees in the 116th Congress. It was a unanimous decision..." McCarthy told reporters. "In light of the comments -- these are not the first time we have heard these comments. That is not the party of Lincoln, and it is definitely not America. All people are created equal in America, and we want to take a very strong stance about that."

Asked whether he would support a campaign challenge to King, McCarthy said that decision was up to the voters -- but "I think we spoke very loud and clear that we will not tolerate this type of language in the Republican Party."

This was probably the first step, not the last. The House is also expected to vote this week on a resolution formally condemning King for his comments.

The Iowa Republican, not surprisingly, is outraged, and has accused his own party's leaders of launching an "unprecedented assault" on his free-speech rights. (It's an unpersuasive case: no one has a First Amendment right to a congressional committee assignment.)

But what stood out for me is Kevin McCarthy's boast that GOP officials have made clear that they "will not tolerate this type of language in the Republican Party." Haven't they spent several years proving the opposite?

read more

Embarrassment for Trump looms in vote on Russia sanctions

Embarrassment for Trump looms in vote on Russia sanctions

01/14/19 09:52PM

Ken Vogel, political reporter for the New York Times, talks with Rachel Maddow about the political dynamics at play as Senate Democrats look to force a vote to delay the easing of some Russia sanctions while the White House lobbies Senate Republicans to reject the natural inclinations and support Trump on easing the sanctions. watch

Monday's Mini-Report, 1.14.19

01/14/19 05:30PM

Today's edition of quick hits:

* It's hard not to find this alarming: "President Trump's National Security Council asked the Pentagon to provide the White House with military options to strike Iran last year, generating concern at the Pentagon and State Department, current and former U.S. officials said."

* The administration's latest legal setback: "A federal judge on Sunday granted a request by more than a dozen states to temporarily block the Trump administration from putting into effect new rules that would make it easier for employers to deny women health insurance coverage for contraceptives."

* SCOTUS: "The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a challenge to the appointment of Matt Whitaker as acting attorney general."

* Whether Barr can be counted on to honor this commitment is a separate question: "President Donald Trump's nominee to serve as the next attorney general, William Barr, plans to tell Congress this week at his confirmation hearings that Robert Mueller's investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 campaign should continue unimpeded -- and that the public should be informed of the results of that probe."

* Stefan Passantino was the Trump White House's top ethics lawyer: "The Trump Organization has hired a lawyer who formerly worked in the White House Counsel's Office to handle the expected onslaught of investigations from House Democrats, according to people familiar with the matter."

* Oops: "A union that represents Border Patrol agents recently deleted a webpage that said building walls and fences along the border to stop illegal immigration would be 'wasting taxpayer money.'"

* That sounds awkward: "President Trump chastised his new chief of staff, Mick Mulvaney, over his handling of shutdown talks, creating an awkward scene in front of congressional leaders of both parties, according to two sources who were present."

read more