-
Playlist
Playlist
-
Full Episodes
Full Episodes
The Rachel Maddow Show
Now playing
Thursday, 07/27/17Watch the full episode of Thursday night's The Rachel Maddow Show.
-
- Information
-
- Information
-
- Information
-
-
comments
Rachel Maddow StoriesRSS
In the wake of failure, McConnell looks for someone to blame
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) saw an opportunity to take health care benefits from millions of American families, and it's hardly surprising that he'd feel bitter disappointment now that his efforts have failed. But this Politico piece suggests McConnell's not paying the blame game especially well.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell expressed "regret" and "disappointment" immediately after the GOP failed to pass a minimalist Obamacare repeal bill early Friday, blaming congressional Democrats for not engaging "in a serious way" in the efforts to remedy the health care law. [...]
"Our friends on the other side decided early on they didn't want to engage with us in a serious way, a serious way to help those suffering under Obamacare," McConnell said.
There are a few ways to look at whining like this. The first is to just see it was pathetic: as became obvious last night, McConnell couldn't convince his own members to follow his lead. For him to blame the minority party for refusing to help him undermine Americans' interests is impossible to take seriously.
The second is that McConnell is plainly wrong about what Democrats were willing to do. As we discussed weeks ago, Democrats practically begged to work with Republicans on health care. They put their appeals in writing for months. GOP leaders ignored every appeal.
McConnell considered a bipartisanship approach, in a rather literal sense, the worst-case scenario. In March, House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) characterized bipartisanship as the one course of action he simply did not want to even consider.
But even putting these details aside, let's not overlook the fact that McConnell is perhaps the last person in the country who should be talking about engaging in health care policymaking "in a serious way."
Strike Three: Republicans' health care crusade collapses in Senate
Health care advocates have reason to be relieved this morning.
Senate Republicans failed to pass a pared-down Obamacare repeal bill early Friday on a vote of 49-51 that saw three of their own dramatically break ranks.
Three Republican senators -- John McCain, Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski -- and all Democrats voted against the bill, dealing a stinging defeat to President Donald Trump who made repeal of Obamacare a cornerstone of his presidential campaign.
It was McCain who ultimately cast the deciding vote in a moment of high drama on the Senate floor in the early hours of the morning.
And with that, let's have another Q&A.
What now?
Well, Senate Republicans have now run out of bills. "Repeal and replace" was voted down on Tuesday; "repeal and delay" was voted down on Wednesday; and then "skinny repeal" came up one vote short last night. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) declared last night, "It's time to move on."
Right, but what does that mean in practical terms?
No one, including Senate Republicans, can answer that with any confidence. At least in theory, senators can now begin work on some bipartisan measures intended to strengthen the current system and shore up areas in which the Affordable Care Act is struggling.
How likely is that?
It's very likely there will be at least some efforts in this direction, and a couple of Senate committees have even agreed to hold hearings (something they should have done before holding votes on legislation). There are plenty of straightforward policies that both parties should be able to accept, but whether that will happen or not is anybody's guess.
But haven't we been at this point before? In March, a House Republican plan died, we all exhaled, and then it came back to life. What's to stop that from happening again?
Thursday's Mini-Report, 7.27.17
Today's edition of quick hits:
* Elections have consequences: "The Department of Justice has filed court papers arguing that a major federal civil rights law does not protect employees from discrimination based on sexual orientation, taking a stand against a decision reached under former President Barack Obama."
* That's probably not a good sign: "Incoming White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders would not say on Thursday if the president still has confidence in his chief of staff, Reince Priebus."
* I guess the tweets didn't speak for themselves: "The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told subordinates on Thursday that the U.S. military will not make any changes to its transgender policy until President Donald Trump clarifies what he meant in a series of surprise tweets."
* On a related note: "A report for the Pentagon last year found that transition-related care would cost between about $2.4 and $8.4 million per year -- less than 0.14% of the military's medical budget. That's roughly the cost of four of Trump's trips to Mar-A-Lago, GQ noted, even using a conservative estimate of $2 million per trip."
* This would be politically unwise: "President Trump's spokesman suggested Thursday that Trump may veto a massively popular bill designed to restrain his ability to roll back sanctions against Russia, despite the very strong likelihood that lawmakers will have the votes to override it."
* Secretary of State Rex Tillerson "flashed a grin Wednesday and insisted that he is 'not going anywhere,' comments that came amid tussles with the White House over policy and staffing as well as questions about his future as the nation's chief diplomat."
Boy Scouts chief issues apology for Trump's political antics
Donald Trump addressed the Boy Scouts of America National Scout Jamboree this week, and in the absence of any impulse control, the president treated the children's gathering like a campaign rally in support of himself.
As we discussed the other day, Trump's speech included bitter criticism of journalists, pollsters, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the Affordable Care Act. He used his platform to, among other things, celebrate the 2016 electoral-college map, and threaten to fire his HHS secretary if the Republican health care plan didn't pass Congress.
At one point, Trump even told a long, meandering story about a cocktail party he attended on a yacht with a bunch of "hot" people.
Today, the Boy Scouts organization expressed public regret for the way the president conducted himself at this week's event.
The head of the Boy Scouts apologized Thursday for President Donald Trump's remarks this week at a gathering of thousands of scouts, saying "political rhetoric" should never have been inserted into the event.
In a letter posted online, Chief Scout Executive for the Boy Scouts of America Michael Surbaugh apologized to those "offended by the political rhetoric that was inserted into the jamboree. That was never our intent."
Surbaugh, in a statement that emphasized the organization's non-partisan traditions, added, "We sincerely regret that politics were inserted into the Scouting program."
Senate Republicans plan to write health care bill over lunch
As things stand, Senate Republicans are eager to pass a health care plan that doesn't exist, but Reuters reports that GOP lawmakers intend to finalize a proposal this afternoon.
Republicans leaders hope a so-called skinny bill, which repeals a few key provisions of Democratic former President Barack Obama's signature healthcare law without being a far-reaching overhaul, can draw enough votes to pass despite unified Democratic opposition. [...]
Republican senators were expected to hammer out provisions of the measure during a policy lunch on Thursday, giving lawmakers scant hours to digest its provisions before voting. Republican leaders have been sending pieces of the legislation to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office to assess its impact and determine whether it complies with Senate rules.
There's no word as to whether senators will literally use the backs of envelopes and handy cocktail napkins while writing their legislation.
It's tempting at this point to start delving into the details of what we think we know about the "skinny repeal" bill, but I'm afraid it's folly. Every few minutes, new scuttlebutt points in new directions. We should have a better sense of the legislative specifics fairly soon.
But it's worth pausing to appreciate how truly ridiculous the circumstances are. Congressional Republicans have been working on their alternative to the Affordable Care Act for seven years. And yet, in true post-policy fashion, GOP senators intend to scribble some ideas down over lunch on a Thursday afternoon, and then pass it on a Thursday night or Friday.
This is not how policymaking is supposed to work in the United States. Contemporary Republicans simply don't care.
Thursday's Campaign Round-Up, 7.27.17
Today's installment of campaign-related news items from across the country.
* If Attorney General Jeff Sessions wants to quit his current job, Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) said he'd stand down and let the former senator have his old job back. Alabama's special-election primary to fill Sessions' old Senate seat is in three weeks.
* Eric Trump, who's supposed to be helping run his father's business and steering clear of politics, wrote a new fundraising letter this week on behalf of Trump's 2020 re-election campaign.
* To the surprise of no one, Rep. Luke Messer (R-Ind.) announced yesterday he's running for the U.S. Senate next year, hoping to take on incumbent Sen. Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.). Messer will likely be part of a crowded GOP primary.
* As Rachel noted on the show last night, White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus, hoping to prove his value in Trump World, has reportedly begun touting "his ability to raise money from wealthy donors, suggesting he could bring in funds to a legal-defense fund." When Priebus was the RNC chair, he was a successful fundraiser.
* Entertainer Kid Rock published an online message yesterday, reflecting on a potential U.S. Senate campaign in Michigan next year, saying he "will be scheduling a press conference in the next 6 weeks or so to address this issue amongst others, and if I decide to throw my hat in the ring for US Senate, believe me ... it's game on." The entertainer, who supported Trump's campaign, would almost certainly run as a Republican.
Donald Trump's 'fine-tuned machine' descends into chaos
I generally don't care about warring factions and personalities in the West Wing. I do care, however, when a White House slips into chaos, due entirely to officials' own incompetence and ignorance.
Take this morning, for example.
An escalating White House war between two top advisers to President Donald Trump entered a new stage Thursday after Communications Director Anthony Scaramucci lobbed a grenade of leak accusations that were seen as an attack against chief of staff Reince Priebus.
The fracas began Wednesday night after Politico published Scaramucci's financial disclosure forms from his employment at the Export-Import Bank, where the former financier had a post before being tapped last week as Trump’s new communications director last week.
Scaramucci, the new White House communications director, insisted that "the leak" of his financial disclosure forms was "a felony," and he intended to pursue the matter with the FBI and Justice Department.
He also called into a live CNN broadcast this morning to suggest Reince Priebus was responsible. "So if Reince wants to explain he's not a leaker, let him do that," Scaramucci said.
There was, however, no leak. The financial-disclosure materials, first noted by Politico, are public documents, obtained through a simple records request.
In other words, this strange drama was sparked by Scaramucci -- who enjoys telling people he went to Harvard Law School -- not knowing what he was talking about.
The larger point, however, has less to do with who in the White House is feuding with whom, and more to do with the fact that the White House itself, after just six months, is slipping deeper and deeper into chaos.
Cornyn says process 'is about as open and transparent as it gets'
Much of what Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) has said during the health care fight is better left ignored, but he made one observation yesterday that stood out for me.
"People keep talking about a secret process. Well, this is about as open and transparent as it gets, and everybody will have an opportunity to offer an amendment, to discuss what's in the amendment, and to vote on it."
I suppose it's possible that Cornyn literally doesn't know the meaning of the words "open" and "transparent," but it's far more likely that the Senate Majority Whip is trying to gaslight the public.
It's a dynamic that requires no exaggeration or hyperbole. Senate Republicans this week began a floor fight on a health care proposal they had not yet written. While amendments are usually offered as a way to improve legislation, GOP leaders invited senators to introduce amendments on a bill they haven't read -- not because they're lazy, but because it's impossible to read a bill that does not exist.
At this point, the Senate Republican leadership continues to craft a secret measure, behind closed doors, making changes along the way following secret deals.
A vote on the GOP plan is imminent, despite the fact that no one, including senators themselves, knows anything about the bill's contents. Indeed, even now, no one can say with confidence if the bill has even been written.
House GOP rep uses colorful language to blast Senate's Murkowski
Earlier this week, Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas) expressed his frustration with "some female senators from the Northeast" who've refused to vote to take health care benefits from millions of Americans. "If it was a guy from south Texas, I might ask him to step outside and settle this Aaron Burr-style," Farenthold added.
The Texas Republican later apologized, but we nevertheless saw Rep, Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) on MSNBC yesterday, expressing a related sentiment. The Georgia congressman reflected on Donald Trump's criticism of Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), over her skepticism of the party's regressive health care plan. It led Carter to say this on the air:
"I think it's perfectly fair. Let me tell you, somebody needs to go over there to that Senate and snatch a knot in their ass."
First, there's a problem when House Republican men use violent rhetoric in reference to Senate Republican women.
Second, before yesterday afternoon, I'd literally never heard the phrase "snatch a knot in their ass," and I have absolutely no idea what it means.
White House struggles to defend Trump's ban on transgender troops
By some accounts, White House officials actually thought Donald Trump's new ban on transgender troops would be a political winner for them.
That, of course, was before the policy was denounced by members of Congress from both parties. And before the Pentagon and the Department of Veterans Affairs said they hadn't been notified of the change. And before veterans' organizations denounced the pointless discrimination against active-duty soldiers.
But perhaps the most amazing moment in the rollout of Trump's ridiculous new rules came during Sarah Huckabee Sanders' press briefing yesterday, when the president's principal spokesperson struggled to explain what the policy was and how it would work -- because she simply did not know.
A reporter asked whether transgender Americans already in uniform would be kicked out of the military. Sanders didn't know. Another asked, "How does it maintain or improve unit cohesion to leave thousands of servicemembers, some who may be overseas, serving in units overseas, in the dark about their status within the military?" Sanders couldn't answer that, either.
As the questions continued, the White House press secretary threatened to simply walk away from the podium unless reporters changed the subject.
"Guys, I really don't have anything else to add on that topic. As I do, I'll keep you posted. But if those are the only questions we have, I'm going to call it a day."
Ordinarily, when a White House unveils a new policy, affecting thousands of Americans, there are more than just a few tweets on the subject. There's supposed to be a briefing on the details of the policy, along with some background materials, and often an opportunity to hear from relevant officials within the executive branch.
But in Trump World, everything is ... different.
Pages
About The Rachel Maddow Show
Launched in 2008, “The Rachel Maddow Show” follows the machinations of policy making in America, from local political activism to international diplomacy. Rachel Maddow looks past the distractions of political theater and stunts and focuses on the legislative proposals and policies that shape American life - as well as the people making and influencing those policies and their ultimate outcome, intended or otherwise.
