2018 is Turning into a Political Moment for Women

 A record-breaking 257 women will appear on the ballot this fall as candidates for House and Senate seats, forming what one observer calls a pink wave that could significantly alter the direction of key US policies going forward.

A record-breaking 257 women will appear on the ballot this fall as candidates for House and Senate seats, forming what one observer calls a pink wave that could significantly alter the direction of key US policies going forward.

With all state primaries concluded, there is a record-breaking 257 women running for the House and Senate. This is more of a movement than a blip.

Lisa Lerer, writing in The New York Times, calls this “A Moment for Women,” with millions of women marching and hundreds running for political office. They won’t all win, she says, but many will win.

There are 33 races in America that feature a woman running against another woman, including in Washington’s 3rd District where GOP incumbent Jaime Herrera Beutler is facing a competitive challenge from Democrat Carolyn Long. 

Women have successfully run for office in Washington and Oregon. Washington’s two US senators and four of its 10 representatives are women. Oregon has only one woman in its congressional delegation, but women hold the governorship and lead the Oregon House. 

Nationally, many women candidates are vying for seats held by someone from the opposite and often dominant party in their districts or states. They face an uphill battle, but have in many cases succeeded by turning normally slumbering re-election races into combative contests. In the first midterm election after a new President is elected, the party out of power in the Oval Office typically picks up House seats. That could bode well for the 197 Democratic women candidates who are running.

Lerer observes this year’s batch of women candidates differs from the past when women downplayed their gender. “Candidates today are embracing it. Kids roam the campaign trail. Some candidates breast-feed in their ads. And veterans, like Arizona’s Martha McSally, tout their barrier-breaking service.”

Reflecting the #MeToo movement, Lerer says women are openly talking about their own experience with sexual abuse. “Mary Barzee Flores, in Florida, tells voters about being groped by the night manager of a Pizza Hut as a teenager. Katie Porter, in California, has talked about surviving domestic abuse.”

Gender is a factor, Lerer reports, even in races where women face other women. “Women don’t vote as a monolithic block,” she says.

Clearly, the election of Donald Trump – and the defeat of Hillary Clinton – spurred millions of women to become “political” and, for some, to enter the political arena as candidates. They have been motivated by sustained challenges to their reproductive rights and lingering pay and job opportunity inequality. Many have run to combat anti-immigration policies and sexual discrimination. A succession of high-profile sexual abuse cases involving powerful men in media, entertainment and business has stoked the political movement.

Female candidates, such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, have unseated longtime incumbents in their own party by supporting bolder action on health care and higher education. Women have spoken out on gun violence, child care and social equity. Their advocacy and campaigns have attracted higher-than-normal Democratic voter turnouts in this year’s primaries. Lerer says the “pink wave” may be the power behind a potential “blue wave” in the general election.

Lerer also offers some perspective. “At the end of all this, women are still likely to be underrepresented. Even if all the female congressional candidates won (an almost impossible proposition), women would still make up less than half of the House and less than a third of the Senate.”

Despite that, women candidates and women voters may engineer a significant shift in political direction this fall. The war may continue, but the battleground and the warriors may change dramatically.

 

Bombshell Book, Op-Ed Turn DC into a Political Whodunit

 More chaos wracked the Trump White House with a bombshell book by Bob Woodward, followed by an aftershock in the form of an anonymous op-ed published in the New York Times by someone only identified as a “senior official” in the administration. Trump’s reaction was reportedly volcanic and set off a desperate search for whodunit.

More chaos wracked the Trump White House with a bombshell book by Bob Woodward, followed by an aftershock in the form of an anonymous op-ed published in the New York Times by someone only identified as a “senior official” in the administration. Trump’s reaction was reportedly volcanic and set off a desperate search for whodunit.

Washington, DC has been a lot of things. Now it is the scene of a political whodunit.

Bob Woodward got the game going with his new book “Fear: Trump in the White House,” which chronicles audacious and embarrassing incidents during the Trump presidency, based on anonymous sources with good memories and a few purloined documents.

As shockwaves from Woodward’s book began to reverberate, The New York Times published an anonymous op-ed from a reputed “senior official” in the Trump administration who described the “resistance from within.”

News media sources, quoting anonymous administration sources, reported that President Trump’s reaction to the book and op-ed was “volcanic.” Trump called Woodward’s book “fiction” and a “joke.” He called the op-ed author a coward.

In was the perfect first act of a whodunit. The rest of the play presumably will center on finding some or all of Woodward’s sources and identifying who wrote the damning op-ed.

Trump demanded the Department of Justice, which seems to be his new “fixer” since his old fixer pleaded guilty to fraud, to conduct an investigation in the name of “national Security.” Presidential Press Secretary Sarah Sanders dismissed the op-ed as “gutless” and the Woodward book as bad journalism. According to Donald Trump Jr., the White House circle of trust just got a lot smaller.

Talk show hosts grilled talking heads for names or clues. Woodward was asked if he knew who wrote the NYT op-ed. “I don’t have any suspects,” he said. Stephen Colbert did an entire opening monologue speculating on the person Trump is “obsessed” with discovering.

 Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and author Bob Woodward’s latest book – a tell-all about the Trump White House based on 100 “deep background” interviews – hit bookshelves today, even though its shrapnel already has been felt in pre-publication excerpts.  https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/11/17828300/bob-woodward-fear-trump-sources

Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter and author Bob Woodward’s latest book – a tell-all about the Trump White House based on 100 “deep background” interviews – hit bookshelves today, even though its shrapnel already has been felt in pre-publication excerpts. https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/11/17828300/bob-woodward-fear-trump-sources

A parade of Trump senior officials, including Vice President Mike Pence, released statements saying it wasn’t them. Pence even volunteered to take a lie detector test.

Trump supporters floated the idea the Times “concocted” the anonymous op-ed. Steve Bannon said the op-ed had multiple authors and represented a “soft coup.”

Chaos is no stranger to the Trump White House, and Woodward is not a stranger to harsh criticism of his coverage of previous presidents. Woodward isn’t the first – and probably not the last – to paint a picture of dysfunction and indulgence. Though, he might be the first to describe specific incidents in which aides spirited away documents from their boss before he could sign them to avoid even more chaos.

Efforts by the Trump team to downplay or deflect from the back-to-back bombshells may not be successful. As Anderson Cooper noted, “It’s not every day or every month or every year, or certainly every administration for that matter, that someone in the administration publishes a scathing criticism of the president of the United States. It’s not every day that someone in the administration claims that many officials in that administration are working to frustrate parts of the president’s agenda and his worse inclinations.”

It didn’t help that US intelligence sources revealed North Korea is expanding its nuclear weapons capability and that reports surfaced about US officials flirting with involvement in a potential coup to unseat Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

Or former Clinton-era special prosecutor Ken Starr’s suggestion in an interview on NPR that Congress has another, cleaner weapon to express displeasure with a President – censure.

And all this on the heels of news that White House counsel Don McGahn gave 30 hours of sworn testimony to Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller, “sharing detailed accounts about the episodes at the heart of the inquiry into whether President Trump obstructed justice,” according to The New York Times.

Even memorials for 9/11 are unlikely to stop the inevitable blame game or interrupt the DC chase for whodunit. The hunt is already afoot.

Congress on Sidelines as Politics, Events Pass It By

 Congress returns from its summer recess, but still will be mostly on the sidelines as Trump tweets, court rulings and midterm elections dominate the daily news cycle. [Photo Credit: Associated Press]

Congress returns from its summer recess, but still will be mostly on the sidelines as Trump tweets, court rulings and midterm elections dominate the daily news cycle. [Photo Credit: Associated Press]

What goes on in Congress matters less these days than what goes on about Congress.

The five-day memorial for the late Senator John McCain drew attention to his lifelong dedication to duty, honor and principle, as well as a willingness to reach across the political aisle to compromise.

The mid-term elections have taken on amplified importance as a virtual referendum on President Donald Trump and as a contest for the heart of both the Republican and Democratic parties. Republican primaries are judged as battles between GOP moderates and Trump backers. Democratic primaries are viewed as tests of how far left the party may swing.

Trump’s hardline, nationalist approach to trade continues to ruffle feathers abroad and at home as farmers, manufacturers, workers and consumers fret over the end game. Congress ultimately will have to decide on any new trade deals, but for now is sitting on the sidelines. Congress is beginning to tackle the one-time subsidies Trump proposed to help farm producers cope with the impact of his tariffs.

The courts have played an outsized role in curbing Trump policies, including a ruling that forced reunification of families separated at the border, blocked blanket detention of asylum-seekers and elimination of DACA and delayed a rollback of fuel efficient standards.

The Robert Mueller investigation into Russian election meddling and potential Trump campaign collusion plugs along, with recent convictions, new grants of immunity and the pall of more indictments. Trump tells campaign rally audiences that a Democratic takeover of the House will lead to his impeachment. There are other investigations and lawsuits about Trump Organization business practices that also result in indictments, including of Trump family members.

Capitol Hill hasn’t gone completely quiet, however. This week will see the start of confirmation hearings on Trump Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, amid Democratic complaints that documents have been suppressed that might shed light on Kavanaugh’s views about executive privilege and prosecution. While the hearings could be confrontational, it appears likely Kavanaugh will win confirmation.

As the end of the federal fiscal year approaches, which in recent times has been tense with the threat of a partial government shutdown, Congress has dutifully moved 12 appropriations bills for Fiscal Year 2019. No shutdown will occur, even though Trump said it might be a good thing. Congress has even been upstaged by Trump on spending as the President unilaterally blocked scheduled federal worker pay increases.

Facebook and Twitter remain in the congressional line of sight. After being blamed for turning a blind eye to false-flag accounts, the social media platforms are being accused of putting the squeeze on conservative political voices. Trump has gone further and alleged Google has manipulated search results to play up critical news stories about him and downplay positive stories.

There is an eerie silence in the halls of Congress on efforts to denuclearize North Korea, advance a major infrastructure package, act on immigration reform or respond to the looming denouement of the Syrian conflict, which many observers believe will be a massive humanitarian crisis.

Trump tweets remain the dominant story in most daily news cycles, whether he chastises the FBI and his Attorney General, whines about his treatment by the press or insults US allies or his critics. Apart from the content of the tweets, what troubles Republicans on the Hill are their unpredictability and inconsistency, which makes pursuing a congressional agenda more difficult.

The long, smothering shadow of Trump’s tweets does give congressional Republicans more time to start their own digital firestorms. Ryan Gosling’s biopic of Neil Armstrong’s first step on the moon has drawn criticism from GOP Senators Ted  Cruz and Marco Rubio for failing to feature the astronaut planting the US flag.

Cruz, who is running for re-election this fall, and Rubio said Armstrong’s achievement was a distinctively American moment, paid for by US taxpayers. Gosling defended the omission by saying Armstrong’s achievement “transcended borders and countries.”

Of course, the back-and-forth sniping has nothing to do with Congress.

The Difference a Day Can Make - Or Not.

 Anyone can have a bad hair day. President Trump had a hair-on-fire day this week with two former associates headed to prison, an early congressional supporter indicted, the White House counsel talking to the special prosecutor and Facebook removing another trove of Russian fake accounts. [Photo Credit: Aaron P. Bernstein/Bloomberg]

Anyone can have a bad hair day. President Trump had a hair-on-fire day this week with two former associates headed to prison, an early congressional supporter indicted, the White House counsel talking to the special prosecutor and Facebook removing another trove of Russian fake accounts. [Photo Credit: Aaron P. Bernstein/Bloomberg]

Anyone can have a bad hair day. President Trump had a hair-on-fire day yesterday. His former campaign manager was convicted on bank and tax fraud charges, his personal attorney-fixer plead guilty to fraud and one of his first GOP congressional supporters was indicted for misuse of campaign funds.

Facebook announced it removed 652 fake accounts peddling misinformation that it said originated with Russian and Iranian sources. The New York Times reported White House counsel Donald McGahn has met in three interviews lasting 30 hours with Special Prosecutor Robert Mueller’s investigative team.

Most people would chalk that up as a “terrible, horrible, no good, very bad day.” However, Trump spent last evening performing at another of his free-wheeling campaign rallies, inciting his West Virginia audience to chant “Lock her up!” – an ironic anthem on the day two of his associates started on the road to prison.

Trump’s spokesperson downplayed the Manafort conviction – “nothing to do with the President” – and Cohen’s plea – “he said what he did as part of a plea deal.” Democrats unleashed attacks about corruption in the Trump camp and began referring to the President as an “unindicted co-conspirator.”

Despite all the buzz, it remains doubtful anything will change. Mueller’s special investigation into Russian meddling will continue. Chances of Congress starting an impeachment process are close to nil. And Trump supporters seem unfazed.

The 47-page indictment of GOP Congressman Duncan Hunter and his wife for improperly using campaign funds could put his bid for re-election in his San Diego congressional district in jeopardy. In the wake of the indictment, House Speaker Paul Ryan stripped Hunter of his committee assignments, but Hunter still may win re-election in what a local San Diego newspaper calls a “very red district.”

Some Senate Democrats canceled meetings with Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanugh, saying it is inappropriate to move forward on a confirmation process for someone nominated by Trump after he was implicated by Cohen in a federal elections law conspiracy. However, the confirmation hearings are slated to begin in early September and it appears Senate Republicans are congealing to support Kavanaugh, along with two or three Senate Democrats up for re-election in red states.

The Manafort conviction, Cohen plea and Facebook action on fake Russian accounts are unlikely to sway Trump supporters, though they may steel the resolve of Democrats to get out their vote to retake control of the House. Even that prospect is in doubt. Polling indicates as many as 74 House seats held by Republicans could be in play in the midterm election in November, but that number is likely to drop substantially as campaigns pick up steam in the fall.

Trump’s legal team, which appears to have convinced the President to avoid an interview with Mueller’s investigators, keeps egging the special prosecutor to wrap up his investigation before the November election. Trump’s lawyers believe – or hope – nothing will stick to the President in the final report. But even if the report points to obstruction of justice and some level of conspiracy with Russians on election meddling, there is no guarantee Trump’s supporters or even Republicans in general will be swayed. The same partisan divide will remain, with even deeper trenches.

At the end of the day, the hair-on-fire day for Trump may be just another comet news cycle that glows, then fades, replaced by new political brush fires.

 

Senators Seething in DC Humidity and Heat

 GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has annoyed Democrats, especially those facing tough re-election bids in states carried by Donald Trump in 2016, by shrinking the traditional August recess to one week, tying his colleagues to their desks in the DC heat and humidity.

GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has annoyed Democrats, especially those facing tough re-election bids in states carried by Donald Trump in 2016, by shrinking the traditional August recess to one week, tying his colleagues to their desks in the DC heat and humidity.

While members of the House of Representatives are enjoying their normal full month of August recess, the Senate is being forced to work in the festering hot swamp that is Washington DC.

GOP Majority Leader Mitch McConnell eliminated the time-honored August recess for all but one week despite 90-degree-plus temperatures and drenching humidity and the annoyance of Democrats who would prefer to be home to campaign. 

McConnell wants to use the extra floor time in August to press senators to confirm pending judicial nominees, make progress on appropriations bills and set the stage for Brett Kavanaugh’s eventual confirmation to the Supreme Court.

There is a political reason, too. McConnell is forcing Senate Democrats to stay in DC so they can’t campaign in their home states for the November election. It’s another savvy move by the seasoned Senate leader in this lopsided year where the Senate map strongly favors Republicans. Democrats are defending 26 Senate seats this November, while Republicans only need to defend nine seats. 

All 26 of those Democrats would much rather be back in their states solidifying their electoral support and raising money to build momentum for the general election. In particular, Democratic incumbents in Montana, Missouri, West Virginia and North Dakota are feeling especially constrained running for re-election in states that Trump won in the 2016 presidential election.

McConnell’s tactic will build momentum for a busy fall congressional schedule. Republican Leaders in the House and the Senate are looking to avoid a government shutdown and both chambers are ahead of schedule in passing FY19 appropriations bills. The Senate has passed seven of 12 appropriations bills, while the House has passed six. This is the best progress made on the appropriations front since 2000.

With the Senate in town, Supreme Court nominee Kavanaugh can meet with senators in August and lay the groundwork for a relatively quick nomination process in September.

Democrats are trying to slow confirmation by insisting on seeing the millions of pages of documents Kavanaugh wrote during his time in the George W. Bush White House, but the delay tactic could come at their own peril. Many pundits believe the closer the Kavanaugh confirmation vote is to the November election, the better it is for Republicans to motivate their political base. Democrats will have to decide between an all-out political fight with a slim chance of blocking Kavanaugh versus getting the vote over with in September. 

One more major item on the fall legislative schedule will likely be on a provision dubbed “TaxCut 2.0.” Republicans are trying to set a trap for Democrats by bringing up legislation that will permanently extend the individual tax cuts passed last December, which will expire in five years. Corporate tax cuts were all made permanent. Republicans want to get vulnerable Democrats on record on taxes close to the election. There also is a potential trap for Republicans who would be voting to deepen the federal deficit and remind voters about the tax cut, which hasn’t been as widely popular as GOP advocates predicted – or hoped.

A wild card McConnell cannot control is what Special Counsel Robert Mueller will do before the November election. His team is engaged now in a high-profile trial of former Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort and conducting ongoing negotiations to schedule an interview with the sitting President.

One possibility is Trump’s team declines Mueller’s terms for a face-to-face interview and Mueller follows through on his threat to subpoena Trump. The subpoena could trigger a court case by Team Trump challenging whether a sitting President can be compelled to testify. Depending on timing, questions surrounding a presidential subpoena could engulf the Kavanaugh nomination in the Senate because of his previous defense of expansive presidential powers, his reflections on the role of special prosecutors and the reality he could be sitting on the Supreme Court when and if the case gets that far.

Mueller is not politically tone deaf, so he may cut off any public actions on the Russian meddling investigation after Labor Day. However, it is unlikely he will wrap up the investigation before the November election.

If you can believe Trump tweets, indictments are possible for members of his family in connection with the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, which Trump has now acknowledged was scheduled to get dirt on his opponent from Russian sources. That could scramble McConnell’s well-laid legislative schedule, adding to the irritation of his Senate colleagues who spent their summer recess tied to their desks in DC.

Joel prof photo.jpeg

Joel Rubin is a partner and leader of CFM’s federal affairs team based in Washington, DC. He has worked on Capitol Hill and now represents Pacific Northwest interests in Congress and with federal agencies.

‘Working Big Time’ or a Disaster in Process

 President Trump lavishes praise on his trade policies, which he says are “working big time.” Linfield agricultural economist Eric Schuck disagrees and says Trump tariffs will plummet US farmers into economic oblivion.

President Trump lavishes praise on his trade policies, which he says are “working big time.” Linfield agricultural economist Eric Schuck disagrees and says Trump tariffs will plummet US farmers into economic oblivion.

President Trump has tweeted that his tariffs are “working big time.” A Linfield professor who specializes in agricultural economics offers a different verdict.

“American farmers are going to suffer losses. How large those losses will be remains an open question,” writes Eric Schuck in a guest editorial published by the News-Register in McMinnville. “The end result is this: A multitude of growers are either playing without a safety net or facing a long fall to reach that net.”

According to Trump’s tweet posted over the weekend, “Every country on earth wants to take wealth out of the U.S., always to our detriment. I say, as they come, Tax them. If they don’t want to be taxed, let them make or build the product in the U.S. In either event, it means jobs and great wealth.”

Schuck paints a starkly different picture. “The U.S. exported about $12 billion worth of soybeans to China in 2017. That represents about half the total soybean exports from the United States and almost a third of all US farm receipts for soybeans. So US soybean trade with China is a big deal. Unfortunately, China recently canceled about a million tons of orders.”

Domestic soybean producers have avoided disaster by ramping up exports to Brazil, which has picked up the slack in selling soybeans to China, Schuck explains.

“On the surface, that would seem to mean U.S. growers aren’t taking a hit from our nascent trade war with China,” he wrote.” But that couldn’t be further from the truth.  China has been our best customer in part because it pays the best price. While our soybeans are now finding an outlet in Brazil, they are doing it at a price that has tumbled nearly 20 percent in the last 90 days.”

 Linfield College agricultural economist Eric Schuck takes issue with President Trump about the impact of tariffs on US commodity producers.

Linfield College agricultural economist Eric Schuck takes issue with President Trump about the impact of tariffs on US commodity producers.

The Trump administration has acknowledged tariffs are hitting US farmers hard. Their solution is a $12 billion one-time financial bailout. Schuck thinks the tonic is as bad or worse than the tariffs. Here is his explanation:

“To add insult to injury, the proposed remedies actually make things worse down on the farm. The US Department of Agriculture has announced its intention to use the Depression-era Commodity Credit Corporation to backstop falling prices. The mechanics are convoluted, but the CCC will basically act as the buyer of last resort for crops that no longer have a market.

“This leads to the federal government holding larger stores of surplus crops, most of which will wind up going into food banks or school lunch programs. While that can be helpful in some respects, the pressure of large domestic surpluses and demand diversion through food aid programs tends to drive crop prices down even further. And that drives up the cost to US taxpayers even more.”

While tariffs may not make economic sense, compensating US growers for their impact may violate international law, according to Schuck. “Any action to aid farmers beyond current levels would most likely expose the United States to lawsuits by both China and Brazil under World Trade Organization rules. And because the trade fiasco was triggered by US actions, we would most likely lose.”

Soybean producers aren’t the only US agricultural commodity to face repercussions from Trump’s tariffs. “Cherry growers witnessed tariffs rise as much as 50 percent while their crop was in transit to China,” Schuck says.” Unable to adjust, the price paid by Chinese consumers has held steady, while the price paid to American growers has fallen through the floor. Other commodities, notably apples, pears, chicken and pork, will soon suffer similar trauma.”

Trump thinks the US Treasury will reap the benefit of his tariffs. Schuck says, “As a result, the Chinese treasury stands to be the primary beneficiary of US tariffs on Chinese goods.”

Schuck claims, “None of this needed to happen. While China can be a frustrating trading partner, especially in terms of intellectual property, there were other ways to manage the problem. The Trans-Pacific Partnership offered to collectively exert leverage over China, in concert with the rest of our trading partners, but has been cast aside by the new administration. Instead, we find ourselves adrift with virtually no international support, because we’ve simultaneously started trade wars with everyone else who might share an interest in confronting China, including Canada, the European Union and Japan.”

Somewhat futilely, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo promoted a $113 million Indo-Pacific infrastructure initiative last week, even as Asian leaders are forging ahead on a multilateral trade arrangement that reportedly would include China, but not the United States.

That provides interesting context for Schuck’s conclusion: “There’s only one way out of this: Declare victory and try to get back to the status quo. Unfortunately, that may no longer be an option.”

[The impacts from Trump tariffs continue to ripple outward, including a significant delay on a key traffic signal in Clackamas County.]

 

Natural Disasters Revive Talk of National Catastrophic Fund

 The Carr fire in Northern California, along with flooding in the East and hurricane damage and rising seas level in the Gulf states, has revived talk of a National Catastrophic Fund to provide a backup to state disaster relief funds and hopefully reduce upward pressure on homeowner and business insurance rates.

The Carr fire in Northern California, along with flooding in the East and hurricane damage and rising seas level in the Gulf states, has revived talk of a National Catastrophic Fund to provide a backup to state disaster relief funds and hopefully reduce upward pressure on homeowner and business insurance rates.

Western states are ablaze. Flash floods immerse the East. Hurricanes and tornados occur more frequently. Sea levels are rising as the global thermometer heats up.

Alarming news in stark contrast to tepid congressional action to extend national flood insurance by four months. That’s not a typo. Four months. To avert the program’s expiration during hurricane season. There was a four-month extension last year, too.

The fires, floods and fudging have rekindled calls for a National Catastrophic Fund, a bundled insurance vehicle to address all manner of catastrophes and avoid lurching from crisis to crisis, leaving victims in financial and emotional limbo.

“The catastrophe fund could provide private insurers a safety net by purchasing reinsurance and passing the savings on to consumers through lower premiums. The fund could also have a pool of money set aside for the immediate needs of victims,” The Tampa Bay Times editorialized in 2017.

Democratic Congressman Charlie Crist told NPR this week the time has come to stop equivocating and enact long-term reforms not only to national flood insurance, but also financial assistance for all national catastrophes. The former GOP governor of Florida said his state frequently suffers from serious hurricane damage and faces the specter of rising sea levels that could inundate large chunks of Florida’s coastline.

Crist said catastrophes have localized impacts, but they should be the concern of all Americans. Storm damage in the Northeast, wildfires in the West or hurricanes in the Gulf states, he argued, affect the entire country because “we’re all Americans.” 

One of the stumbling blocks to reform is political indecision about the $20 billion debt that exists in the national flood insurance program. Crist said the some or all of the debt should be forgiven as part of legislation to create a more all-encompassing fund to address damage caused by natural disasters.

The idea has been kicked around for at least a decade, but may resurface as a serious proposition in the wake of a string of disasters from coast to coast. The CEO of Allstate, one of the nation’s largest US insurance companies, endorsed the idea as far back as 2006 to provide a backup for state disaster relief funds that can easily be swamped by major events. Edward Liddy said “America is woefully unprepared” for natural disasters, which are occurring with increasing frequency.

Oregon has felt the heat of major wildfires near The Dalles and in Southern Oregon this year, even though it is early in the wildfire season. California is battling a string of wildfires from the south to the north, which have consumed homes and resulted in multiple deaths. Reports indicate parts of the Western United States may have experienced the hottest July in recorded history, and temperatures continue to climb.

‘America First’ Policies Raise Questions about US Leadership

 President Trump’s ‘America First’ policies have played well with his political base, but not so well with global leaders as tensions are growing over the specter of spiraling trade war with consumers at home and abroad likely to pay the price.

President Trump’s ‘America First’ policies have played well with his political base, but not so well with global leaders as tensions are growing over the specter of spiraling trade war with consumers at home and abroad likely to pay the price.

One of the unintended successes of President Trump’s ‘America First’ policies has been to galvanize the European Union, Japan and China to preserve and bolster multilateral trade, regulatory and security arrangements Trump disdains.

“After months of denialangerbargaining and depression, Europe and other parts of the world have accepted that Mr. Trump and his mission of disruption are not going away,” reports The New York Times.

Accounts suggest foreign leaders are stunned by Trump’s continuing attacks on traditional allies, cozy relations with Russian President Vladimir Putin and seeming disavowal of America’s role as the leading advocate of a liberal world order.

EU leaders are especially astonished at being referred to as “foes.” In June, 29 EU ambassadors to the United States sent an open letter to Trump in defense of free trade and investment policies.

“Together, the US and EU have created the largest and wealthiest market in the world. The transatlantic economy accounts for half of the global gross domestic product by value, which directly supports more than 15 million high-quality jobs and $5.5 trillion in commercial sales. And nearly one-third of the world’s trade in goods occurs between the EU and United States alone,” the letter said. The ambassadors added that EU investment in the United States exceeds US investment in Europe.

EU leaders, despite qualms about Chinese trade practices that mirror Trump’s, have met with Chinese leaders without US involvement. According to the Times, the “summit meeting produced an unusual joint declaration and a common commitment to keep the global system strong.”

The EU then signed what has been described as the largest free-trade agreement in history with Japan, again with no US involvement.

Now, the EU is preparing “whopping tariffs” in response to proposed Trump tariffs on items such as German-made cars, noting that 45 out of 50 US states export more goods and services to Europe than China, totaling around $500 billion in 2016.

 GOP Senator Ben Sasse from Nebraska may have spoken for the wave of critics who think Trump’s tariffs are undermining US exports that have taken years to cultivate and who believe his proposed $12 billion package of one-time financial aid to farmers won’t come close to co vering the long-term damage done by the tariffs.

GOP Senator Ben Sasse from Nebraska may have spoken for the wave of critics who think Trump’s tariffs are undermining US exports that have taken years to cultivate and who believe his proposed $12 billion package of one-time financial aid to farmers won’t come close to co vering the long-term damage done by the tariffs.

On the regulatory front, the EU fined Google $5.1 billion for antitrust behavior, which drew a sharp rebuke from Trump. Google plans to appeal the EU ruling, but it may be forced to reckon with it in the marketplace in the meantime.

Interestingly, the basis for the fine echoed an unusually American-sounding rationale. “Google has used Android as a vehicle to cement the dominance of its search engine,” Margrethe Vestager, Europe’s antitrust chief, told the Times. “These practices have denied rivals the chance to innovate and compete on the merits. They have denied European consumers the benefits of effective competition in the important mobile sphere.” 

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker travels to DC this week to discuss the deteriorating EU trading relationship with Trump officials.

Meanwhile, the impact of tariffs is beginning to be felt. The Associated Press carried a story last week about the stress felt by US soybean farmers, who are a target of retaliatory Chinese tariffs. One soybean farmer said he already has lost $250,000 in value for his current crop. Soybeans on the Chicago Board of trade have dropped $2 per bushel in value. Farmers interviewed say they still support Trump, but want to know what the end game is.

The Oregonian posted a story last week listing five Oregon exports at risk in a spiraling trade war with China. Noting Oregon exported $3.5 billion worth of goods to China in 2017, the article said the most vulnerable are:

  • Computer and electronic products ($2.1 billion)
  • Machinery ($435 million)
  • Chemicals ($363 million)
  • Transportation equipment ($262 million)
  • Agricultural products ($235 million)

Oregonian reporter Mike Rogoway provided a more comprehensive look at Oregon exports in a piece published in June. Among the interesting statistics Rogoway uncovered: 87,000 Fords produced in the United States were exported through the Port of Portland, 90 percent of which headed to China.

US business interests also remain frustrated at Trump efforts to negotiate changes in the North American Free Trade Agreement, which appear to have stalled and made more difficult by the election of a leftist president in Mexico.

Global tensions are growing over the budding trade war, as reflected by a statement coming out of the G20 meeting held in Argentina over the weekend. US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin attended the meeting and agreed to sign the joint statement.

Mnuchin acknowledged what he called “micro impacts” caused by the Trump tariffs, but defended them as a pathway to freer trade that is fair to the United States. News reports said Mnuchin and Chinese finance officials conversed during the 2-day meeting, but only engaged in “chitchat,” not serious negotiations.

There are harsher judgments of Trump’s policies. WorldPost editor Nathan Gardels. wrote, “The ‘American First’ president who denigrates democratic allies as foes is no longer the leader of the free world….Trump appears to be not even the leader of the United States.”

 

‘Critical’ Online Health Care Resource Quietly Shuttered

 A national clearinghouse for evidence-based health care best practices, which an OHSU official describes as a critical and singular resources, is being shuttered to save $1.2 million annually. It took a federal website watchdog to discover the online database’s disappearance.

A national clearinghouse for evidence-based health care best practices, which an OHSU official describes as a critical and singular resources, is being shuttered to save $1.2 million annually. It took a federal website watchdog to discover the online database’s disappearance.

Important battles are often fought in obscurity, such as the decision to shutter a 20-year-old online clearinghouse that serves as a convenient, reliable one-stop location for doctors to check out health care best practices.

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), which is part of the federal Health and Human Services Department, said it didn’t have the $1.2 million it costs annually to maintain the National Guideline Clearinghouse (NGC). The Trump administration has targeted AHRQ for spending cuts or even elimination.

The National Guideline Clearinghouse quietly shut down July 16 and its trove of valuable information won’t be archived. The public may never have known except for reporting by Jon Campbell carried by The Daily Beast. Campbell’s story was spotted by Andy Giegerich of the Portland Business Journal, which is how we found out about it.

Giegerich pointed out an Oregon-angle on the story. Valerie King, director of research at OHSU’s Center for Evidence-based Policy, told The Daily Beast the clearinghouse was a “critical go-to source, and there is nothing else like in the world.” King described the clearinghouse as a “singular resource” to support evidence-based health care research.

“Part of what makes NGC unique is its breadth,” King said in her interview. “Drawing on research from all over the country and the world, from professional organizations and research institutes, the site offers a free, and virtually comprehensive, body of guidelines in a centralized and easily searchable location. Rather than seeking out guidelines from dozens of individual publishers, the NGC allows researchers to find the full range of resources in one stop.”

“The OHSU center was established in 2003 to offer head-to-head comparisons of drugs to public and private organizations, as well as consumers,” Giegerich reported. He noted former Governor John Kitzhaber served as leader of the center before his election to a third term.

It’s worth pointing out Campbell is a senior investigator for the Sunlight Foundation’s Web Integrity Project, which defines its mission as “monitoring changes to government websites, holding our government accountable by revealing shifts in public information and access to Web resources, as well as changes in stated positions and priorities.” A major part of its work is “keeping track of data that has been removed during the Trump administration.” This is the group that highlighted the Trump administration’s removal of a 14-page website on Medicaid.com related to the Affordable Care Act.

Some 200,000 people visited the NGC each month prior to its closure, according to the Council of Medical Specialty Societies, which wrote the Trump administration urging it to salvage the online resource:

“Physician members across our specialty societies access NGC’s evidence-based guidelines to provide high-quality, value-based care to their patients. Given the current Administration’s focus on reducing physician burden, it should be recognized that NGC reduces the time that clinicians spend sifting through multiple society websites and peer-reviewed publications.”

Vox, also reporting on the clearinghouse closure, quoted Roy Poses with the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute about the value of vetted health care guidelines as opposed to ones written by or at the behest of drug companies:

“The vetting role played by the NGC is a critical one. Many guidelines are actually written mainly for commercial purposes or public relations purposes. A guideline written for the treatment of depression, for example, may emphasize pharmaceuticals over talk therapy. The organizations writing the guidelines may be getting millions of dollars from big drug companies that want to promote a product. The people writing them may have similar conflicts of interest. NGC’s process provided a resource comparatively free of that kind of influence.”

[Thanks to Andy Giegerich and the Portland Business Journal for discovering this story.]

 

Big News Comes Under Small Headlines

 An unremarkable resolution promoting breastfeeding provoked a stunningly aggressive action by a US delegation to throttle it, at least until the Russians stepped in to salvage the resolution.

An unremarkable resolution promoting breastfeeding provoked a stunningly aggressive action by a US delegation to throttle it, at least until the Russians stepped in to salvage the resolution.

Sometimes the most revealing stories are the ones with small headlines reporting on events occurring in the shadows. Such as the stories reporting the United States aggressively sought to block a global resolution backing breast-feeding and deleting language favoring soda taxes to reduce obesity.

In both cases, the US position appeared in alignment with positions advocated by infant formula manufacturers and soda producers. Perhaps ironically, Russian delegates stepped in to preserve the global resolution backing breast-feeding. The delegates said they based their decision on “principle.”

Research solidly supports breast feeding, which makes the US position at the World Health Assembly in Geneva all the more puzzling and stunning to delegates from around the world, according to The New York Times

This wasn’t a friendly disagreement. Ecuador offered the resolution and the American delegation threatened to “unleash punishing trade measures and withdraw crucial military aid,” the Times reported. Ecuador capitulated.

“The showdown over the issue was recounted by more than a dozen participants from several countries, many of whom requested anonymity because they feared retaliation from the United States,” the Times said. Other nations balked at requests to offer a substitute resolution in the wake of the US action. At least until Russia stepped in. The US delegates didn’t threaten the Russians.

Delegates were reportedly stunned by the “intensity” of the Trump administration’s opposition. They pointed to the $70 billion global baby food industry lurking in the shadows of the assembly. They also noted the Trump team’s position was diametrically opposed to the position expressed by the Obama administration.

“We were shocked because we didn’t understand how such a small matter like breast-feeding could provoke such a dramatic response,” an Ecuadorean official, who asked not to be identified because she was afraid of losing her job, told the Times.

At the same assembly, US officials successfully throttled a statement supporting soda taxes. That position squares with a Trump effort in NAFTA negotiations to limit Mexico’s and Canada’s ability to require labels on sugary beverages.

“The [US] delegation’s actions in Geneva are in keeping with the tactics of an administration that has been upending alliances and long-established practices across a range of multilateral organizations, from the Paris climate accord to the Iran nuclear deal to NAFTA,” the Times summarized.

The Trump administration has threatened to cut its $845 million contribution to the World Health Organization, which represents 15 percent of the group’s total budget.

“It’s making everyone very nervous, because if you can’t agree on health multilateralism, what kind of multilateralism can you agree on?” said Ilona Kickbusch, director of Global Health Center.

 

GOP, Dems in Turmoil Over Midterm Voter Pitches

 To regain political power in the midterm elections, Democrats need to reconnect with American workers who have gradually lost confidence in the party of the New Deal and the Great Society, according to a veteran Democratic political strategist. Republicans have to find a way to tout their tax plan that is sagging in popularity.

To regain political power in the midterm elections, Democrats need to reconnect with American workers who have gradually lost confidence in the party of the New Deal and the Great Society, according to a veteran Democratic political strategist. Republicans have to find a way to tout their tax plan that is sagging in popularity.

Heading into pivotal midterm elections this fall, Republicans and Democrats are both in turmoil over their value propositions to voters. Republicans may not be able to run on their record and Democrats are still searching for a platform with political traction.

Congressional Republicans planned to campaign based on a popular tax cut. However, the GOP tax cut faces sinking support, including in so-called Trump country as evidenced by a recent special House election in Pennsylvania that a Democrat captured.

Now congressional Republicans have an immigration mess on their hands. Already deeply divided, the Trump administration’s “zero tolerance” policy that separated children from their asylum-seeking parents at the border has apparently deepened the divide. House GOP leadership canceled plans last week to vote on a pair of immigration measures until after the November midterm election.

GOP congressmen face another political problem – backlash from their base if they criticize President Trump, as conservative voters seem bent on asserting at the ballot box that it is now the Trump Party, not a big-tent Republican Party.

Democrats aren’t any better off. They have a smoldering debate among progressives and centrists. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has been demonized and molded into a rallying cry for conservatives. Trump has pummeled Democrats as obstructionists. There is confusion about whether to attack or ignore Trump and what themes will work in the midterm elections to flip control of the House and not lose ground in the Senate where the GOP holds a slim 51-49 margin.

In steps Jake Sullivan, who has been a senior adviser to President Obama, Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton, with a keen read on where Democrats stand with voters and how they could earn their way back into power.

Sullivan argues in an essay published in Democracy: A Journal of Ideas that Democrats should realize public opinion is more conservative than liberals might hope on deeply divisive issues such as abortion, guns, immigration and race. Political pay dirt for Democrats, Sullivan says, lies in left-of-center economic issues such as taxation, health care, minimum wage and education funding.

“Just as the Great Depression discredited the ideas of the pre-New Deal conservatives who fought for total laissez-faire outcomes in both the political branches and the courts, so the Great Recession once again laid bare the failure of our government to protect its citizens from unchecked market excess,” Sullivan writes. “There has been a delayed reaction this time around, but people have begun to see more clearly not only the flaws of our public and private institutions that contributed to the financial crisis, but also the decades of rising inequality and income stagnation that came before — and the uneven recovery that followed. Our politics are in the process of adjusting to this new reality.”

In the face of political maps showing a lot of red, Sullivan insists “There’s something profound happening in American politics right now. A tide is moving. The center of gravity is shifting. Democrats have a rare opportunity to set bold goals and meet them. By offering new ideas based on tried and true principles –taking the big, ambitious governing style that used to define our party and our politics and putting it to work to meet the challenges of our time – we can achieve growth and fairness, innovation and equality.” 

He added, “Moments like this don’t come around that often in history. Democrats must seize this one.”

The four pillars of his advice to Democrats are:

  • Recognize that present-day jobs are as or more valuable than future jobs, which demands rethinking the contemporary workplace to ensure health insurance coverage, fair wages, antic-discrimination and the right to unionize.
  • Promote policies that reflect changing family structures with more two wage-earning parents, single mother-led households, college students moving back home and a ballooning older adult population that is living longer.
  • Talk about workers in sectors beyond manufacturing in fields such as health care and the service economy and promote workplace, tax and educational policies that sustain the American Dream, while addressing serious issues like opioid addiction.
  • Build alliances with 21st century entrepreneurial businesses to pursue tax, trade and antitrust policies in a globalized economy that keep America competitive and increase income security for US workers.

Republicans have a clearer litany of their policy views – lower taxes, fewer regulations, anti-abortion, free trade and conservative judges. However, like any party in power, the GOP has to defend what it has done – or not done – as well as it what it stands for.

Sullivan’s prescription for Democrats may be the clearest expression of what Democrats could wield to win the seats in Congress and state legislatures they need to gain back power they have gradually lost in the past decade as worker confidence has waned.

 

Questioning a Policy of Treating Children as Political Prisoners

 Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley wasn’t satisfied hearing about the effects of a Trump administration policy to separate children from their asylum-seeking Latin American parents, so he went to Texas to see the border processing center and the former Walmart store where untold children are being held effectively like political prisoners.

Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley wasn’t satisfied hearing about the effects of a Trump administration policy to separate children from their asylum-seeking Latin American parents, so he went to Texas to see the border processing center and the former Walmart store where untold children are being held effectively like political prisoners.

Oregon Senator Jeff Merkley wasn’t satisfied hearing about the Trump administration “zero tolerance” policy that separates children from their asylum-seeking parents when they surrender at our southern border. He wanted to see what was happening first-hand. He came away calling it Trump’s “zero humanity” policy.

As he relates in an op-ed published over the weekend by the Portland Tribune, Merkley showed up at the McAllen, Texas border processing center. What he saw, he says, left a “searing” memory and confirmed his worst fears. “Essentially, this adds up to the Trump administration choosing to inflict tremendous trauma on children to discourage families from seeking asylum in the United States,” Merkley wrote.

When he asked border processing center the rationale to separate children from their parents, Merkley says he was told they were just following orders. (Trump officials say tough measures are needed to secure the nation’s southern border and prevent MS-13 gang members from slipping into the country.)

Merkley described the place as a large warehouse with chain link fencing to create “holding cells.” He saw young children formed into lines. Some of the children were only four or five years old. Chilling images sadly and starkly reminiscent of a bygone, but not forgotten time. And it’s apparently not working. According to border agents, as many as 650 children were culled from their parents in a single 12-hour period and as many as 11,000 effectively orphaned children are being held in resettlement camps. The horrors asylum-seekers are escaping are worse than the horrors the Trump team inflicts.

From the border processing center, Merkley followed the trail of children to a detention facility in Brownsville, Texas, located in a former Walmart and run by a nonprofit. The senator had sought permission to view the facility, but it wasn’t granted. He figured he would try knocking on the door and see what happened. He didn’t get in.

“I don't know how many children are there. I don't know if they have sufficient counselors. I don't know how successful agencies are in finding homes for them across the country. I don't know if they are in contact with their parents, but I've heard that is extremely difficult,” Merkley recalled. “I do know this: The policy that brought children there, separated from their parents, is absolutely horrific and wrong.”

It isn’t surprising Merkley is using his unrequited trip to Texas as a political springboard:

“Americans should be outraged that our tax dollars are used to inflict spiteful and traumatizing policies on innocent children. I am calling on the relevant Senate committees to hold hearings about this situation. And I'm calling on all Americans to register their opposition with their House and Senate members.

“As a parent, I cannot imagine the horror of having my kids taken from my arms with no idea where they're going or when I might see them again. When I think of that little 4- or 5-year-old boy, stranded and scared – and think of the hundreds, perhaps thousands more children who are experiencing that same suffering – my heart breaks and my blood boils.”

Merkley’s appeals, at least so far, haven’t moderated the Trump policy. In fact, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced this week stricter conditions for people seeking political asylum. Whatever the merits of discounting domestic abuse and gang violence as reasons to grant asylum, the message was clear – don’t come, you’re not welcome, we will treat you as criminals.

Merkley rhetorically asks Trump: “What nation can justify inflicting harm on children to discourage parents from exercising the international right to seek asylum from persecution? No religious tradition nor moral code in the universe supports such a strategy.” The only strategy where such a policy makes some semblance of sense is a political strategy in which immigrants are the problem and barbed borders are the solution.

 

Zig-Zagging Trump Trade Policies Put Northwest on Edge

 Trump trade policies seem destined to trigger a global trade war, which could have a serious economic impact on the Pacific Northwest that relies heavily on export of airplanes, machinery, technology, agricultural products and services. Disrupted trade also could harm  manufacturers with supply chains throughout the Pacific Rim.

Trump trade policies seem destined to trigger a global trade war, which could have a serious economic impact on the Pacific Northwest that relies heavily on export of airplanes, machinery, technology, agricultural products and services. Disrupted trade also could harm  manufacturers with supply chains throughout the Pacific Rim.

The Pacific Northwest is especially dependent on international trade and the threat of a global trade war has many business leaders on edge. Perhaps none more so than at Daimler Trucks in Portland that employees more than 2,000 workers who are mostly engineers.

Despite some mixed signals, President Trump has moved ahead to impose a 25 percent tariff on imported steel and a 10 percent on imported aluminum. He also has singled out Mercedes-Benz for an outright ban on imports, citing national security and his personal angst at seeing New York’s Fifth Avenue clogged with the popular German luxury car.

Mercedes-Benz manufactures SUVs, GLE coupes and C-class cars at its Tuscaloosa, Alabama plantBMW manufactures luxury cars in Spartanburg, South Carolina, which the company says produces 1,900 vehicles per day, the highest daily output of any BMW car plant in the world. Spartanburg is the exclusive manufacturing site for BMW’s X-class vehicles, which are exported worldwide.

For Oregonians, a greater concern would be the impact of Trump’s tariffs on Daimler Trucks, which maintains its North American headquarters in Portland. Much of the company’s truck manufacturing has been shifted to the Southeast and Mexico. What largely remains in Portland are corporate teams and engineers “designing the future of commercial vehicles.”

Daimler Group is the corporate parent for Mercedes-Benz Cars and Daimler Trucks.

 President Trump has singled out German car manufacturer Mercedes-Benz, which is a sister company to Daimler Trucks that manufactures and designs commercial vehicles at its North American Headquarters in Portland

President Trump has singled out German car manufacturer Mercedes-Benz, which is a sister company to Daimler Trucks that manufactures and designs commercial vehicles at its North American Headquarters in Portland

Officials at Daimler aren’t alone in fretting about fallout from a potential trade war. The Seattle Times quoted officials from the aluminum and agricultural sectors, as well as union officials, raising alarms about impacts from tariffs on multi-country supply chains, direct exports and price increases that could affect everything from Boeing airplanes to new housing. A Seattle homebuilding official said higher tariffs on steel could increase the price of a new house by up to $5,000.

Depending on how China and the European Union impose reciprocal tariffs, emerging markets pursued by Northwest exporters such as winemakers could be squeezed. Tariffs slapped on by Mexico and Canada also could have disruptive effects.

In addition to the tariffs, what baffles and irks US trading partners is the unpredictability of Trump's trade policy, if it can be called a trade policy. Negotiations occur, agreements are reached and then Trump goes in a different direction, as he did with the bilateral trade deal struck with South Korea and with the Chinese talks two weeks ago.

Trump’s trade steps also raise hackles on Capitol Hill. Many Trump supporters were stunned when he agreed to back off punishment that the Chinese said could force the collapse of ZTE, a huge telecom company facing charges of ignoring US export sanctions imposed on North Korea and Iran. A Texas court fined ZTE $1 billion and ordered it could not receive any US-made components and software for seven years.

EU officials, who share US concerns about restrictive Chinese industrial policy and alleged intellectual property theft, have urged the Trump administration to form a united front on policies and negotiations aimed at winning major concessions from the Chinese.

However, Trump’s mistrust of multilateral arrangements appears to drive his actions. Despite warnings from economists, Trump has put trading relations with Canada, Mexico, China, South Korea, Japan and the European Union in a state of flux. Reciprocal tariffs are being imposed and talks about updating existing trade deals have stalled.

Trump’s nationalist trade policy may win applause in steel-producing states, but could trigger discontent and growing fears of an economic slowdown in the rest of the country as crucial midterms approach this fall that will determine who controls Congress for the next two years.

Republicans Hold Their Breath; Democrats Keep Debating Themselves

 The 2018 midterm election is just six months away, with congressional Republicans eager to defend their record in the face of unpredictable Trump tweets and Democrats still groping for the right mix of messages that will move America.

The 2018 midterm election is just six months away, with congressional Republicans eager to defend their record in the face of unpredictable Trump tweets and Democrats still groping for the right mix of messages that will move America.

With the pivotal 2018 midterm elections less than six months away, it is timely to assess likely Republican and Democratic campaign themes. They aren’t exactly obvious. And neither is the election outcome, which could be a blue wave or red dawn.

The one sure thing is that Republican candidates will be tethered to President Trump, whether they like it or not. His zig-zags on trade, immigration and diplomacy will vex GOP incumbents and hopefuls, especially in Farm and Rust Belt states. Trump’s doubling-down on culture war issues will buoy social conservatives and complicate campaigns for Republicans running in swing districts or blue states.

Democrats appear to be still arguing over their 2018 themes. Do they run against Trump and tout the prospect of his impeachment? Or do they focus on bread-and-butter issues such as health care, income security and retooling job training? And what about the ongoing Russia investigation?

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told NPR last week congressional Republicans should run on their record. “This is the best year and a half for right-of-center policies since I've been here,” he said. “Everything from tax relief, to repealing the individual mandate to 15 uses of the Congressional Review Act. We mentioned the courts, comprehensive tax reform.”

In the same interview, McConnell admitted the GOP faces a stiff wind to hold on to one or both houses of Congress. That’s largely because of the shadow cast by the Robert Mueller investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election, potential Trump campaign collusion with Kremlin-connected Russians and presidential obstruction of justice. The failure to reach a deal on immigration – from an expanded border wall to protections for DREAMers who were brought to the United States illegally by their parents, but have grown up in America. Then there is Trump going off message, even on the issue of the importance of the 2018 mid-term elections. 

Democrats are torn by deep divisions, which have clouded their 2018 campaign messaging and eroded what once was a commanding leaded over Republicans. The progressive wing of the Democratic Party wants the campaign to center on new initiatives such as universal health care insurance, a federal jobs guarantee, tougher enforcement of anti-trust regulations and allowing the US Post Office to enter the consumer lending business. Center-left Democrats worry that isn’t the political chemistry to turn red states into blue ones. In early-state contested primaries, progressive candidates seem to be carrying the day, but the question remains whether they can win in November.

If Democrats have an ace up their sleeve, it is the number of women running for office.

If Democrats weren’t confused enough, conservative commentators have egged them on, with political cracks about House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and identity politics.

The gang at FiveThirtyEight conducted an online chat about midterm election themes. Micah Cohen, the politics editor, put government corruption and Trump’s behavior at the top of his list and downplayed trade, the economy, education, Social Security and the Russian investigation. Nate Silver, the creator and editor of FiveThirtyEight, said Democrats should concentrate on health care, the Russian investigation and gun control because they are tangible issues. Senior political writer Claire Malone recommended centering on Trump administration corruption, ethical lapses and rollbacks of environmental and consumer protection.

Polling continues to show that Trump’s political base remains solid, even though there are some cracks beginning to appear among college-educated women and disaffected union workers. The same is true on the Democratic side, which has been energized by Trump policies and congressional attempts to repeal Obamacare. Republicans need to hold on to their moderates while Democrats need to hold on to their progressives. Both parties need to appeal to unaffiliated voters who think the country isn’t moving in the right direction and GOP control of all the levers of federal power hasn’t moved in the country in the right direction.

While the national stakes in the election are clear – control of the House and Senate, most congressional elections tend to boil down to local issues and candidates. But national politics does play a role. Texas Senator Ted Cruz’ role in a federal government shutdown earned him an unusually well-funded Democratic opponent. Democratic Senator Jon Tester of Montana is facing a stiff re-election test in the face of criticism by Trump on Tester’s role in blocking his nominee to head the Veterans Administration. If Trump can pull off a verifiable deal to denuclearize North Korea, that could sway voters in the fall.

Only 48 out of 435 House seats are regarded as competitive by political experts. To regain control of the House, Democrats need to flip 25 GOP seats and not lose any of their incumbents. Democrats will likely concentrate on the 25 House districts that gave majorities to Hillary Clinton in 2016, but are held by Republicans. A 25-seat switch in the midterm election following a presidential election is not uncommon historically.

Democratic chances to regain control of the Senate, which the GOP holds by a slim 51-49 margin, are complicated because they have far more incumbents to defends. Democratic hopes go out the window if they lose seats they hold now in West Virginia, Indiana, Missouri and Montana. Their best hopes to gain seats are in Nevada, Arizona, North Dakota and Tennessee,

Meanwhile, congressional Republican candidates will be holding their breath about the next Trump tweetstorm and Democrats will continue debating how to approach the American electorate as a preferred alternative to GOP control. For Republicans, six months can be like infinity. For Democrats, six months can go by in a blink of the eye.

 

How to Make an Impossible Presidency Bearable and Successful

 John Dickerson of CBS News wrote the cover story for The Atlantic that explores whether the modern US presidency is too big for any individual leader. There aren’t many answers for how to shrink the job or enlarge the men and women who occupy the White House.

John Dickerson of CBS News wrote the cover story for The Atlantic that explores whether the modern US presidency is too big for any individual leader. There aren’t many answers for how to shrink the job or enlarge the men and women who occupy the White House.

John Dickerson isn’t the first or last to wonder in print whether the US presidency has outgrown a single occupant.

In the cover article for the latest edition of The Atlantic, Dickerson contrasts today’s outsized view of the US presidency with the James Polk era, when the wife of the 11th President of the United States insisted bands played “Hail to the Chief” when he entered a room – so people would recognize him.

Dickerson, who is now part of the CBS Morning News team, says the problems President Donald Trump seems ill-equipped to deal with in the Oval Office may be a reflection of the growing difficulty of one man – or one woman – to represent the best interests of 327 million citizens while managing 2 million employees in the federal government (not counting US military personnel).

Ivana Trump, one of the ex-wives of President Trump, confirms Dickerson’s thesis. She says Trump loves his personal freedom and feels trapped by all the demands on the President, including reading mounds of material about virtually every subject and corner of the world. Trump didn’t even know his namesake son was being divorced until his ex-wife told him during one of their monthly calls.

The demands on modern Presidents have led others to question the human capacity of a single person to fill the job. Jeremi Suri’s “The Impossible Presidency” traces how the presidency has advanced from George Washington, who was assumed above pedestrian politics, to today when Presidents must be commander-in-chief, world leader and a political wunderkind. The presidency was a radical idea hatched by James Madison and Alexander Hamilton to be an “impartial, fair, forward-looking and unifying” force to guide the nation as a “model of virtuous behavior.” If anyone like that exists today, he or she probably couldn’t get elected as dog catcher, let alone President of the United States.

The talents required for a President are sprawling. They must be the war chief, preside over national sorrow and divine how to manage the economy, pretty much full-time on television – and now Twitter. Every misstep is magnified. Nothing is off-limits. Every problem sooner or later finds itself under the porte-cochére of the White House.

It is an interesting historical footnote that Washington never slept a night in the White House, John Adams was the first president to occupy the White House while it still was under construction. His impressions were less than superlative. Many modern presidents have referred to the White House as a prison. Trump compared it to a third-rate hotel. It would seem the digs don’t detonate the sparks of ambition to become President.

Which raises the question, why do people run for President? They tell supporters they want to make a difference, but they must realize the odds are stacked against them, especially when a President from one party serves with a Congress controlled by the other party. The founding fathers saw the wisdom of separation of powers, but they probably didn’t anticipate as much friction in the wheels of government as we witness today.

Dickerson lays much of the blame for dysfunction at the collective hands of the presidency. Since Andrew Jackson, American Presidents have become more powerful, more visible and more outgunned. They command an army that increasingly has become a covert operation. They appear on television in the Oval Office and make promises, which they often are unable to keep. They oversee a sprawling administration they can hardly contemplate, let alone manage. For the record, Jackson was an activist President trying to shrink the federal government, especially the National Bank.

If the problem with the presidency is obvious, solutions are opaque. Some have called for the United States to adopt a system closer to Britain’s parliamentary system, with a prime minister chosen by the controlling party. Others have emphasized the importance of bringing a competent team to Washington, DC to manage the levers of power. Still others have said government should be run more like a business.

The presidency is unlikely to morph into a prime minister that must seek approval, symbolic or otherwise, from the sovereign. Presidential teams are increasingly hard to assemble and keep in place for even a single term. The skills it takes to succeed in business may not be synonymous with what it takes to lead the nation. A CEO can give orders; a President has to find delicate balances on issues such as nuclear weapons that never reach the desk of a business executive.

In his book, Suri said Franklin Roosevelt was able in relative leisure to conduct war after Pearl Harbor. “Twenty years later, even as John F. Kennedy was confronting nuclear Armageddon in the form of the Cuban missile crisis, he was struggling to find time to deliberate with his closest advisers. His calendar was packed. The problem: a massive expansion of presidential power and responsibility.”

Dickerson concurs. He recalls how in 1938 some 100 demonstrators dressed up as Paul Revere and carried signs saying American didn’t want a dictator, a response to the first major reorganization of the executive branch since 1787. The reorganization was the result of a study commissioned by Roosevelt who basically said, “I need help.”

Since then, the world of Presidents has gotten a lot more intense. Nowadays, Presidents are held responsible for federal agents unable to provide emergency housing for hurricane victims. Maybe Harry Truman’s “The buck stops here” sign needs some editing.

If skeptics need evidence, Dickerson said they should scan the 300 photos of Barack Obama taken by White House photographer Pete Souza that shows the President who hosts endless meetings, comforts wounded soldiers, negotiates with world leaders and high-fives kids in Halloween costumes.

“The presidential brain must handle a wider variety of acute experiences than perhaps any other brain on the planet,” Dickerson writes. “Meanwhile, the President lives in a most peculiar unreality. His picture is on almost every wall of his workplace. The other walls contain paintings of the men who achieved greatness in his job, as well as those who muddled through. It’s like taking a test with your competition’s scores posted around you.”

His best advice for a future successful President: Empower his or her Cabinet. Study up to hit the road running. Concentrate on a few well-chosen goals. Force Congress to do its job. Claim some personal down time. Those steps won’t make the presidency less challenging, but it might help a future officeholder do the job in ways that transcend partisanship.

 

Yet Another Unbelievable, Wacky Week in Washington, DC

 As weeks go in Washington, DC, this has to be one of the wackiest as President Trump plots an attack on Syria, Facebook is accused of being a monopoly and former FBI Director James Comey’s memoir says the White House is run like a forest fire. And that doesn’t include the retirement announcement of House Speaker Paul Ryan and former Speaker John Boehner’s decision to advocate for legal medical marijuana.

As weeks go in Washington, DC, this has to be one of the wackiest as President Trump plots an attack on Syria, Facebook is accused of being a monopoly and former FBI Director James Comey’s memoir says the White House is run like a forest fire. And that doesn’t include the retirement announcement of House Speaker Paul Ryan and former Speaker John Boehner’s decision to advocate for legal medical marijuana.

You can’t say nothing is happening in the nation’s capital. You just can’t believe what’s happening.

President Trump is preparing to respond to a poison gas attack of civilians in Syria, signaled a reversal on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal and had a tweet tirade over a raid of the home and office of his personal attorney, Michael Cohen. Trump said the raid was “disgraceful.” Cohen’s attorneys said it was “unnecessary and inappropriate.” Cohen said the agents who carried out the raid were “polite and respectful.” Media reports suggested the purpose of the raid may have been to seize recordings Cohen made of his conversations, including with Trump.

GOP House Speaker Paul Ryan announced he is retiring at the end of his term, fueling speculation of an impending GOP shellacking in the mid-term elections this fall. Meanwhile, Ryan’s Republican predecessor, John Boehner, announced his views on cannabis have “evolved” and he will advocate for legalization of medical marijuana.

Former FBI Director James Comey’s tell-all memoir is leaked that delivers scathing criticism of Trump as “unethical and untethered to the truth” and more like a mob boss than the leader of the free world. Trump responded on Twitter by calling Comey an “untruthful slime ball” and a “leaker” of classified information. Somewhere in the West Wing, former strategic advisor Steve Bannon was trying to convince Trump aides to go gonzo.

Secretary of State nominee Mike Pompeo underwent confirmation hearings where some of the most heated questions centered on what he says to Trump in their private conversations. Meanwhile, the Senate moved forward the nomination of a former coal industry lobbyist as the top deputy at the Environmental Protection Agency.

Senate and House committees, including the House Energy and Commerce Committee chaired by Oregon Congressman Greg Walden, grilled Facebook founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg about failures to protect user privacy. Questioning zeroed in on whether Facebook is a monopoly and should be regulated.

The Congressional Budget Office issued an updated analysis of the GOP tax cut indicating it will result in a $1.9 trillion deficit and 80 percent of the benefit will accrue to foreigners, which complicates Republican campaign plans to tout the tax cut as a major achievement. Retiring Tennessee Senator Bob Corker told reporters voting for the GOP-backed tax cut may have been his biggest blunder in office. Trump dismissed the CBO findings.

Despite promising a swift response with “new, smart missiles,” Trump and his national security team were still debating how and when to respond to Syria’s renewed used of chemical weapons in light of Russia’s threat to defend Syrian military installations if attacked by US missiles or armed forces.

Trump’s tariff talk, which rattled stock markets, angered farmers and drew reciprocal tariffs, cooled off after Chinese President Xi Jinping gave what observers viewed as a conciliatory speech on trade relationships and included a reference to protection of intellectual property of foreign companies. Despite tough talk on the campaign trail and quick action when in office to dump US participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Trump suddenly recognized the continued efforts of the other 11 Pacific Rim partners to write fair trade rules as a possible source of leverage on China.

Trump chose to stay in Washington, DC instead of attending a Latin American summit focusing on trade, including apparently stalled talks on revisions to the North American Free Trade Agreement. Vice President Mike Pence, who is filling in for Trump, is expected to hear pushback from Latin American leaders about Trump’s comments and actions toward Latino immigrants. Aides to Pence said his individual meetings with leaders are intended to “soften the edges” of US foreign policy and immigration views.

The week provided a lot for Trump to fume about, prompting stories about the President’s renewed consideration of firing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein and Special Counsel Robert Mueller. Previous musings about such firings have been dismissed by the White House, Trump’s lawyers and Republican leaders on the Hill. However, this week Senate Judiciary Chair Charles Grassley sought expedited consideration of bipartisan legislation to insulate the Mueller investigation from any adverse action by Trump.

Toward the end of the week, Trump pardoned Lewis “Scooter” Libby, the former chief of staff for Vice President Dick Cheney, who was convicted in 2007 of perjury and obstruction of justice involving the leak of a CIA officer’s identity. Libby’s sentence was commuted by President George W. Bush, but not pardoned. The timing of Trump’s pardon seemed like a signal that he would protect those who protect him.

The beehive in Washington, DC this week didn’t include any mention of or tweets about North Korea. The leaders of North and South Korea are scheduled to meet April 27 and a face-to-face meeting between Kim Jong-un and Trump is anticipated in either May or June.

 

Some Hate, But Most Love the FY 2018 Spending Spree

 Overriding fiscal hawks and rebuking President Trump, the bipartisan congressional FY 2018 spending package sweetens a lot of federal funding pots and will set up a shopping spree to get the money spent before the fiscal year ends this fall.

Overriding fiscal hawks and rebuking President Trump, the bipartisan congressional FY 2018 spending package sweetens a lot of federal funding pots and will set up a shopping spree to get the money spent before the fiscal year ends this fall.

Fiscal hawks hated it. President Trump said he would never sign another bill like it. Pundits said it was a rebuke to President Trump’s priorities and reflected poorly on his reputed negotiating prowess. Just about everyone else thought it was great.

The $1.3 trillion Fiscal Year 2018 spending bill gave new meaning to the word “omnibus.” Not only did it cover the waterfront of federal activity, it sweetened most of the federal spending pots, which is expected to energize efforts to get the money out the door by September 30, the end of the fiscal year, with the eager assistance of Members of Congress facing tougher-than-usual re-election battles.

Defense spending went up sharply, but there also were significant spending bumps for a variety of programs from community development block grants to funding for buses, a priority for The Bus Coalition. Rural areas will benefit from a tripling of grant money for rural TIGER projects, nearly $1 billion for rural water and sanitary waste projects and $685 million for rural broadband. The Secure Rural Schools program, almost given up for dead, was extended for another two years, benefiting Pacific Northwest interests.

Despite giddiness over the spending spree anticipated by passage of the spending package, there is a sober recognition this could be the last significant action by Congress until after the mid-term election in November. Results from special elections and President Trump’s lagging popularity have excited Democrats while alarming Republicans that control of one or both houses of Congress could flip, creating even more roadblocks to Trump’s agenda.

The combined fiscal effects of the GOP tax cut and the FY2018 spending measure may pour cold water on what will likely be equally generous FY2019 appropriations. In February, Congress agreed to similarly large topline spending levels for both defense and domestic discretionary spending for FY2019. A budget in hand this early typically greases the wheels of the appropriations process, but some congressional observers predict Congress will punt major spending decisions until after the November election to avoid defending an unpopular vote on the campaign trail.

The President complained the omnibus spending package contained a lot of “giveaways” to gain Democratic votes. In addition, the measure didn’t include a lot of Trump priorities, from his border wall to steep cuts in the Environmental Protection Agency, State Department and National Institutes for Health. It did include provisions blocking private school vouchers and increasing the budget for after-school programs and student mental health services and violence-prevention initiatives. And several regional projects were salvaged, such as $300 million to remove toxic sediment from the Great Lakes and $73 million to restore Chesapeake Bay, both of which were Target administration targets.

Major policy issues, including action on the tenuous situation for so-called “Dreamers,” were notably absent. The package managed to sneak in two provisions related to gun violence, presumably to forestall a more public discussion of the issue. One provision will increase incentives for federal agencies and the military to upload records into the background-checking system used for gun purchases. The second lifts the ban on Centers for Disease Control conducting research on gun violence, but provides no funding for it. Such research has been blocked by the Dickey Amendment, named after a GOP congressman who sponsored it, but later changed his mind.

The negotiations that led to the spending package became a focal point for criticism. Conservative commentator Ann Coulter ripped Trump for failing to achieve his primary priorities even though he touted his negotiating skill in his presidential campaign. Coulter’s criticism was echoed by Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer who clucked that Trump had been out-negotiated. Earlier, he compared negotiating with Trump to Jell-O.

In an odd postscript to the spending deal, Trump has privately pressured the Pentagon to divert some of its enlarged budget to build his border wall.

 

 

Nation’s Capital Waiting, Watching for Deadlines, Shoes to Drop

 Turbulent clouds hovering over the US Capitol are apropos for the bevy of big issues and decisions that are pending, and for the prospects of more unexpected shoes to drop.   Photo Credit: J. Scott Applewhite, AP

Turbulent clouds hovering over the US Capitol are apropos for the bevy of big issues and decisions that are pending, and for the prospects of more unexpected shoes to drop. 

Photo Credit: J. Scott Applewhite, AP

Washington, DC is full of apprehension as big events loom. More West Wing staff changes. An omnibus spending bill. President Trump’s message to Congress explaining his steel and aluminum tariffs. A pending deadline on the Iran nuclear deal. Anticipated face-to-face talks with North Korea. Possible gun violence legislation. And new developments in the Russian meddling investigation.

Last week saw a continuation of the revolving door for the Trump team and rumors persist that National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster may be the next to get the boot. Ousted Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and McMaster have urged a more cautious approach toward Iran, which runs counter to what Trump wants. The President’s personal staff remains in flux, too.

Intensive bipartisan negotiations continue on a massive spending package, which Congress tasked itself with approving by this Friday as part of brokered deal last month to prevent another federal government shutdown. There was hope pieces of the $1.3 trillion spending measure would fall into place so it could be passed in something resembling normal order. That hope appears dashed, as disagreements persist on everything from women’s health to Trump’s border wall and from campaign finance to a major transportation project in New York and New Jersey. Negotiations are tricky because many House and Senate Republicans are expected to oppose the measure as fiscally reckless, which means it will fall to Democrats to approve it, so they have bargaining power to set the terms.

Trump’s abrupt decision to impose stiff tariffs on steel and aluminum imports. Within 30 days of when the tariffs go into effect, Trump must tell Congress formally why he imposed them – and whether and how he may exempt some nations from the tariffs. Many congressional Republicans aren’t keen on the tariffs because of their unintended effects on other parts of the economy and their potential to start a global trade war. Trump’s top economic adviser quit after Trump announced the tariffs. The European Union and some steel-producing countries have threatened trade retaliation, either through tariffs or shifting large purchases, such as commercial aircraft, from US to other suppliers. The tit-for-tat could result in one or more countries, including the United States, filing unfair trade complaints with the World Trade Organization.

The Tillerson firing (the former head of Exxon-Mobile learned he was canned while on the toilet, according to press reports) and the shaky status of McMaster are likely linked to the May 12 deadline Trump faces on whether to extend the waiver on Iranian sanctions lifted as part of the 2015 nuclear arms deal. Trump said he reluctantly waived sanctions in January, but has sounded more bellicose since then toward Iran. He has sided with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who views the deal as weak. Trump also has aligned with Saudi Arabia in a conflict in Yemen that is effectively a proxy war between the Saudis and Iranians, which both seek greater influence in Middle East.

Trump said he wanted a secretary of state closer to his mindset as he approaches personal negotiations with North Korea.

Leader Kim Jong-un sometime this spring. Trump chose CIA Director Mike Pompeo to replace Tillerson, but that nomination could face trouble in the Senate as two GOP senators have already said they would oppose his confirmation. There is uneasiness that Trump and his administration may not be prepared to deal with Kim, but the talks appear on the road to happening as North Korea and Sweden, which is the American shadow voice, explore ways to find a peaceful resolution.

The Parkland, Florida school shootings sparked a vigorous, student-led national push for gun violence legislation. Florida lawmakers and GOP Governor Rick Scott approved a measure over objections from the National Rifle Association. The NRA subsequently challenged the constitutionality of one provision in the bill raising the legal age to buy long weapons from 18 to 21 years old. Trump has bounced around on what he would support, including support for arming some school teachers, but there are hints of a building bipartisan consensus in Congress to strengthen background checks before gun purchases – and possibly take further steps. For his part, Trump has asked his administration to find a way to ban bump stocks, a device used in the Las Vegas massacre to turn a semi-automatic weapon into a virtual machine gun.

Despite boastful predictions by Trump and his team that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation would wrap up soon, the opposite appears true. Last week’s news included subpoenas issued to the Trump Organization for documents relating to its dealings with Russian financial interests. The firing of Andrew McCabe from the FBI just before he was set to retire, which was celebrated in Trump tweets, may have added more propellant to charges of obstruction of justice. While the firing of McCabe may have been inspired as a way to discredit him as a witness against Trump, but it also removed any shackles McCabe may have felt to tell what he knows about Trump attempts to blunt the Russia meddling issue.

If that wasn’t bewildering enough, there also is the Stormy Daniels spectacle. The former porn star and her new attorney are keeping the story about a sexual encounter and hush money front and center. Trump has denied having a fling with Daniels, despite pictures of the two of them together and negotiations on Trump Organization email between his fix-it attorney and Daniels that resulted in a $130,000 hush money payment just before the 2016 election. Last week, Trump’s team baffled observers by declaring Daniels owed $20 million for violating terms of the non-disclosure agreement.

There is never a dull moment in the nation’s capital, and probably never an empty bar seat.

 

Perspective on Multilateral Trade Deals and Trade Wars

 President Trump’s intention to impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum caused ripples on Wall Street, outcries from companies that depend on global supply chains and warnings from economists who cited the cost of trade wars.

President Trump’s intention to impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum caused ripples on Wall Street, outcries from companies that depend on global supply chains and warnings from economists who cited the cost of trade wars.

President Trump’s threat to impose a 25 percent tariff on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum imports stunned Wall Street, infuriated US international trading partners and confounded economists.

Trump defended his proposed tariffs as campaign promises he intends to keep. More fundamentally, they reflect his view that bilateral trade deals that his administration would negotiate would be better for Americans than multilateral trade pacts, which he has deplored as unfair to US workers. So far, few nations have shown much interest in bilateral trade deals. The United States and a post-Brexit United Kingdom will need to work out bilateral trade arrangements, but that can’t occur until the UK is officially out of the European Union.

Stunned Wall Street investors worry about the ripple effects of a trade war on the broader US economy. International trading partners are contemplating retaliation. Economists point to the unpleasant history of trade wars. Trump says trade wars can be good and winnable.

Like immigrant bans and border walls, unilateral tariffs have gone out of favor in the globalized economy. Since tariffs levied as a cure to the Great Depression, which in actuality deepened and lengthened the depression, industrialized nations have moved toward multilateral military, diplomatic and trade arrangements. NATO, the United Nations, the European Union and the North American Free Trade Agreement are prime examples.

The motivation for multilateral arrangements is to provide for greater security and enhanced economic opportunity at the expense of some domestic industries and workers. The underlying macroeconomic theory is that allowing countries to realize their competitive advantages on a greater scale will create more prosperity than protecting domestic markets. The winners tend to be consumers and global companies that have clear rules to follow for their international supply chains. The losers are industries and economic sectors that can’t compete globally.

The losses are not insignificant and can be enormously destructive in regional or state economies such as the Rust Belt. Politicians and organized labor have responded to abandoned factories, displaced workers and failing farms by blaming “free trade” and taking aim at NAFTA and the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership, which was intended to connect US economic interests into an Asian Pacific trading community.

Even though Trump withdrew from the TPP, the other 11 nations involved have continued to pursue a trade pact among themselves, for among other reasons self-protection against China’s growing economic power and its interest in pursuing separate trade deals with Japan, Indian and South Korea. European nations created an economic union, including a common currency, to leverage their collective market in the face of a dominating US economy, which now boasts a $17 trillion annual gross domestic product.

Along the way, the globalization of finance overwhelmed global trade in goods. Capital sloshes across national borders thanks to creative finance and the advent of shell companies, almost without regard to national banking regulations or tax policy.

One of the largest ironies in the current trade dispute is that China’s excess capacity in steel and aluminum production has driven down prices globally, as China has until recently encouraged its corporations and wealthy individuals to invest billions in overseas businesses and real estate. Lower prices and a stream of investment capital have fueled economic growth from Africa to America.

The United Kingdom’s vote in 2016 to exit the European Union a year from now has revealed how difficult it is to depart from a multinational economic arrangement. Currency exchange restrictions, foreign worker status, border crossings and trade are complex issues and, depending on final Brexit agreements, could crimp international investment in the UK, discourage immigrant labor and require a hard border with Ireland.

Trump officials say US steel and aluminum producers need protection because they are vital to American security interests, which is akin to developing countries defending tariffs to protect their infant industries. One challenge with selective tariffs is they have a habit of spreading. For example, Trump threatened to impose tariffs on European autos if the EU retaliated to his steel and aluminum exports.

Former US trade officials say the Trump tariffs violate international trade agreements and lead to litigation before the World Trade Organization. Trump might consider withdrawing from the 160-member WTO, but trade officials warn that could risk unraveling the global economic order, which dates back to the 1994 General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. One of the GATT principles is preventing countries with excess capacity in a commodity from dumping products on the international market at below cost. Some have argued the United States should pursue an anti-dumping case against China. U.S. Steel argued for that approach as far back as 2016.

Trump’s call for tariffs surprised Republican leaders on Capitol Hill. Over the weekend on Face the Nation, South Carolina GOP Senator Lindsey Graham said Trump should reconsider imposing tariffs because they raise consumer prices and “let China off the hook.” “China wins when we fight with Europe. China wins when the American consumer has higher prices because of tariffs that don't affect Chinese behavior. If you want to affect China get back in the Trans-Pacific Partnership, be present in Asia, hit them on intellectual property theft, hit them on currency manipulation, hit them about steel dumping. China is winning and we're losing with this tariff regime.”

 

Two Under-the-Radar Issues Attract Solutions, Not Slogans

 As Congress bogs down on how to resolve immigration and gun violence challenges, no less serious problems of sex trafficking and paid family leave have attracted solution-searching instead of sloganeering and raise hopes for bipartisan compromises that could pass into law before the end of this year.

As Congress bogs down on how to resolve immigration and gun violence challenges, no less serious problems of sex trafficking and paid family leave have attracted solution-searching instead of sloganeering and raise hopes for bipartisan compromises that could pass into law before the end of this year.

As appropriations, immigration and guns dominate congressional headlines, two issues seem to be picking up bipartisan traction on Capitol Hill – paid family leave and sex trafficking.

President Trump has opened the door to paid family leave legislation. First daughter Ivanka Trump and GOP Senator Marco Rubio are teaming up on a proposal that would allow people to tap into their future Social Security benefits to pay for family leave. Congressional Democrats are pushing a more aggressive plan that would increase employee and employer payroll taxes to cover the cost of paid family leave.

Five states, including Washington, already require paid family leave. Eight states, including Oregon, have expanded the length of unpaid family leave. Most US workers are covered by the Family Medical Leave Act, which allows up to 12 weeks of unpaid time off for a newborn child or care for an aging parent. The City of New York expanded its family leave policy to include recuperation from domestic abuse.

 Paid family leave is an issue that has attracted bipartisan interest because it impacts business productivity, employee satisfaction and family structure. The conservative American Enterprise Institute and the liberal Brookings Institution undertook a joint look at the issue of paid family leave and have been  blogging  about what they jointly concluded for the past year.

Paid family leave is an issue that has attracted bipartisan interest because it impacts business productivity, employee satisfaction and family structure. The conservative American Enterprise Institute and the liberal Brookings Institution undertook a joint look at the issue of paid family leave and have been blogging about what they jointly concluded for the past year.

Supporters of paid family leave point to data showing only 14 percent of US workers have access to paid family leave through their employers. Most employees, they suggest, cannot afford to take off long amounts of unpaid leave. 

Opponents say mandating paid family leave will make it more expensive to hire employees and lead to fewer jobs. Businesses are caught in the middle and disapprove of what has become a patchwork of family leave policies state to state and, in some cases, community to community.

NPR ran a story that included a vignette about Joe Fain, a Washington state senator, who took an unpaid leave when his son was born and became an advocate for the benefit. At the time, the City of Seattle had adopted expanded leave policies, which led businesses to push the state legislature to act. Fain says, in the same way, states are now pushing for federal action.

While the various sides of this issue aren’t close to a compromise, there is broad agreement that paid family leave is important to getting newborns off to a good start and to helping families cope with illnesses by aging parents.

Senator Rob Portman, an Ohio Republican, is pushing hard for legislation to protect potential sex trafficking victims and make online websites liable if they enable sex trafficking. His bill, called Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, has attracted 60 congressional cosponsors and is supported by law enforcement, civil rights and faith-based groups.

Portman says he became interested in the subject after meeting with Ohio constituents who described incidents of sex trafficking in their communities, in many cases associated with opioid abuse. Portman says sex trafficking is big business that has increased, despite tougher penalties, because of what he called the “ruthless efficiency” of the “dark side of the internet.” He blames an 850 percent increase in sex trafficking since 2015 on the “emergence of companies like Backpage.com, which probably has about 75 percent of the commercial sex traffic on one site.”

Some technology companies have pushed back on Portman’s cure of removing legal immunity for online platforms, claiming it would expose the companies behind those platforms to lawsuits for content their users post. Loss of legal immunity, they say, could chill continuing development and expansion of online platforms.

While paid family leave and sex trafficking solutions will require answering significant policy questions, they may provide Congress with an easier avenue to address serious social problems plaguing America than trying to reform immigration policy or agree on ways to stem gun violence. If nothing else, these complex issues have not been reduced to polarizing slogans, which is allowing for collaborative conversations and potential bipartisan compromises.