The Washington Post’s Suzy Khimm quotes Will Marshall on Jack Kemp and Empower America:
“What the Empower America folks wanted to do is move beyond the green eyeshade, balance-the-budget message of traditional conservatism. They didn’t want to have simply a negative narrative about government,” said Will Marshall, who headed a similar policy shop for Clinton’s New Democrats.
Marshall also pointed out that Kemp went out of his way to advocate for new ways of helping low-income Americans. He proposed creating specially targeted business and income-tax breaks in designated “enterprise zones” of high poverty as an alternative to direct government handouts.
PPI’s Michael Mandel was the guest of KUOW, an NPR affiliate in Puget Sound. Mandel discusses how young people are responding to a shaky economy by buying fewer cars and homes. He argues that Millennials are instead investing in education and technology.
It’s a rare event when a Senate contest affects a presidential campaign—or indeed, an entire election cycle. But for the moment, that’s what seems to have happened in Missouri, thanks to freshly minted GOP nominee Todd Akin’s witless talk about abortion and rape, and his determination (so far) to stay in the race despite threats and importuning from practically the entire Republican Party and conservative movement (with the exception of a few Christian Right colleagues). Most immediately, Akin’s big mistake has demolished what Republicans thought to be their most promising Senate takeover opportunity this year. Shortly after his primary win over two other major conservative opponents earlier this month, Akin, long considered the weakest of the available candidates, had already opened up a big lead over Sen. Claire McCaskill, and was beginning to consolidate conservative support very rapidly. Now a new Rasmussen poll (of all things!) shows McCaskill up by ten points, with Akin’s favorable/unfavorable ratio at a disastrous 35/53 level.
No one but Akin himself can get the wounded candidate off the ballot at this point, and with the deadline for an easy withdrawal and replacement by the state party having already passed, it would be complicated to make the switch, aside from the depleted resources, hurt feelings and late start a new nominee would inherit. So we are now in the midst of a game of “chicken” in which Akin may still believe the state and national GOP will relent and support his candidacy once the current furor has ended, and Republicans will undoubtedly keep the pressure on to convince him he’s throwing away a Senate seat and the good will of the party forever and ever. My money’s on an eventual withdrawal, but the hard-core public support he’s gotten to hang tough from Mike Huckabee, a pretty formidable figure in the GOP and a potential 2016 presidential candidate, is an important counterweight to that temptation. Another factor will be whether grassroots Christian Right forces around the country embrace Akin as a martyr to their ban-abortion-with-no-exceptions cause, and provide him with the money to run a credible campaign without the party, 501(c)(4) and super PAC funds he’s been denied. Continue reading “Election Watch: Akin’s Flap May Doom GOP Senate Takeover Chances”→
Without question, the big election-related event of the last week was the surprising announcement—both its content and its timing, before the Summer Olympics had ended—of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running-mate. I cannot recall any such event that (a) had so pervasive an immediate impact on the party in question’s general election strategy, and (b) was welcomed with such joy by activists in both parties.
The two dimensions of the choice are closely related. Whatever else you think of Romney/Ryan, this ticket represents a large strategic concession to the Obama campaign, which has been struggling all year to convert the election from a referendum on the economy to a choice of two future agendas for the country. Indeed, Romney’s promise that he would sign the Ryan Budget if passed by Congress was exhibit A in that effort. With Ryan on the ticket itself, and drawing enormous media attention for his views, the Obama campaign can declare “mission accomplished” in its most fundamental strategic mission (which is not to say, of course, that the “referendum” phenomenon has gone away entirely or that a downward lurch in the economy between now and November 6 might not be disastrous).
But the excitement of conservative activists about Ryan reflects their own unhappiness with the “referendum” strategy, not to mention their fears that Romney (a) might not be reliable if he wins, and (b) might not have a mandate to carry out the policies they desire. I’ve argued before that one of Romney’s problems is that he’s never quite ended the GOP primaries. The choice of Ryan achieves that objective decisively, and could give the GOP campaign slightly more tactical flexibility that it would otherwise enjoy. Continue reading “Election Watch: Democrats and Republicans Elated By Romney/Ryan Ticket”→
PPI’s Jason Gold was quoted in the Fiscal Times about the willigness of Paul Ryan to severe the government’s relationship with the troubled mortage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac:
“As the election season wears on, it’s just too big of a thing to ignore,” said Jason Gold, a senior fellow at the Progressive Policy Institute. “You’ll see the administration putting housing out there, because there’s such a void in Romney’s policies.”
There were two state primaries on July 31, in Georgia and Texas (actually a runoff for candidates failing to secure a majority in May). The latter got the lion’s share of national attention, with the predictable if not universally predicted victory of former state solicitor general Ted Cruz over Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst for the GOP Senate nomination.
Cruz won easily (57-43), overcoming a major financial disadvantage, Dewhurst’s universal name ID (he’s been in his statewide post for 10 years), and his opponent’s strong backing from most Texas Republican officials, most notably Gov. Rick Perry and two candidates dispatched from the field in May (Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert and former SMU, NFL and ESPN star Craig James). While most observers interpreted the results via the familiar template of Tea Party Insurgent Defeats Moderate Establishment Pol, what made the race fascinating was that Dewhurst was an unlikely target for an ideological purge. A self-described “constitutional conservative” with strong backing from Texas business and social-conservative groups, about the only “heresy” he could be credibly accused of was a record of occasional negotiations with Democrats in the Texas legislature. But that was enough: Cruz’s vast array of out-of-state backers (e.g., the Club for Growth, Jim DeMint’s Senate Conservative Fund, various Tea Party groups, Sarah Palin) argued that weak-kneed Beltway Republicans needed to be sent another message against any compromise with Democrats on the difficult fiscal issues expected to come up immediately following the November elections—win or lose.
Another interpretation is simply that the line separating “true conservatives” from just regular conservatives is continuing to move to the Right. Cruz is notable for embracing some of the odder memes of the Tea Party Movement, such as the demonization of any sort of controls on economic development as emanating from a United Nations-led conspiracy dating back to the adoption of a vague “Agenda 21” at the Rio conference on sustainable development back in 1992 (this has been a particular obsession of the John Birch Society, but has inspired actual legislation in Alabama and pops up regularly in state and local GOP party platforms). Continue reading “Election Watch: Texas and Georgia Go Conservative, Presidential Race Drags On”→
PPI’s Will Marshall detailed Mitt Romney’s recent adventure in the world of foreign policy over at The American Interest. Romney was able to stumble his way through a trip to Britain, Israel, and Poland all while offering very little in the form of substantive policies focusing more on criticisms of President Obama’s foreign policy.
Mitt Romney’s midsummer foray into foreign policy has left Democrats giddy with schadenfreude. More than his stumbling performance abroad, however, it’s the substance of Romney’s views that ought to really give voters pause.
Or, more precisely, lack of substance. With less than 100 days to go, Romney has yet to develop a coherent outlook on U.S. security and leadership in a networked world. What we get instead is GOP boilerplate about American greatness and exceptionalism, and a pastiche of spaghetti-against-the wall criticisms of Obama’s foreign policy.
Romney, of course, wants the election to center on the economy, and he’s offering himself, in effect, as a more experienced and capable CEO. His missteps over the past week, however, raise doubts about his ability to take over as Commander in Chief.
The sequence began with his first major foreign policy address, to the Veterans of Foreign Affairs. It was a pedestrian affair that left even conservative commentators underwhelmed, when they bothered to comment on it at all. Next, Romney embarked on his Grand Tour of three U.S. allies—Britain, Israel and Poland—supposedly dissed by Obama. The point of the exercise was to show that Romney knows how to treat America’s best friends.
The last week has continued the earlier pattern of daily fireworks in the presidential contest (excepting a brief pause in hostilities immediately after the Aurora massacre), but little if any significant movement in the polls. As anyone near a battleground state television can attest, the Obama campaign (and the Priorities USA super PAC) has continued harsh personal attacks on Mitt Romney as an out-of-touch rich man with no emotional connection with the middle class or interest in its aspirations, who is furthermore determined to cut taxes for people like him. The Romney campaign (which is now beginning to get advertising reinforcement from the very deep pockets of conservative super PACs) has responded harshly with a battery of ads and campaign speeches focusing on a clip from an Obama speech in Roanoke wherein he supposedly disrespected the personal contributions to the economy of entrepreneurs (in fact he was paraphrasing a well-known litany by Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren about the reliance of private businesses on public services and investments). It’s not entirely clear whether this intense barrage is intended simply to reinforce the general and long-standing Republican critique of Obama as someone who does not understand how the economy works and believes government is the source of all good things, or is more narrowly targeted at undermining Obama’s relatively strong standing with upscale, college-educated voters.
Despite the languorous weather and the decamping of many Americans to Vacationland, the election season is staying lively, and will probably remain so at least until the Olympics begin on July 27.
At the presidential level, there has been a notable contrast between the two campaigns and parties, and very stable polling. The main pro-Obama Super-PAC, Priorities USA, has been conducting heavy battleground state advertising pounding Mitt Romney for Bain Capital’s alleged outsourcing activities and (most recently) for his failure to release more than partial tax returns for just the two most recent years. The president and other Democrats have joined in through earned media outlets. The apparent strategy is to fatally undermine Romney’s use of his business background as a credential for the presidency, and then to go after the controversial GOP policy agenda encompassed in the Ryan Budget, which Romney has embraced. This two-pronged approach is being supplemented by a party-wide effort to make expiration of the Bush tax cuts for those earning over $250,000 a year (which has been polling quite well) as a litmus-test issue separating the two parties decisively.
Will Marshall compiled four positive economic stories for Real Clear Politics that President Obama should be making better use of in his campaign for re-election. From farming to exports there are positive signs in the economy according to Marshall.
Despite a string of doleful job and sales reports, there are signs that America is starting to get its productive mojo working again. The good news can’t come fast enough for President Obama, who needs some economic success stories he can point to.
So, at the risk of diverting readers from the cosmically important question of when, exactly, Mitt Romney stopped running Bain Capital, let’s examine four pinpricks of light that have begun to penetrate the economic gloom:
First, check out America’s phenomenally productive farmers; Monday’s Washington Post notes that the agriculture sector last year sold $136 billion worth of goods abroad, boosting farm income to a record $98 billion. When it comes to high quality and affordable food, America is still number one in the world.
But, in a perfect example of the disjuncture between what’s happening in the real world and Washington’s thralldom to entrenched interests, Congress is cooking up new justifications for costly federal subsidies for the thriving agricultural sector. The culprits include supposedly fiscally conservative Republicans, who added callousness to hypocrisy by also voting to slash food stamps for poor families.
With the Fourth of July coming up there are a lot of politicians talking about national security. These are the top ten mistakes they make. Next week we will have the top ten ways to win on national security.
10. Holocaust comparison.
It doesn’t matter whether you’re Glenn Beck or a human rights advocate. As soon as you’ve made the Holocaust / Hitler / Nazi comparison, your audience has stopped listening.
The presidential nominating contest officially came to a close on Tuesday with Utah’s primary—a reminder that this winner-take-all state was Mitt Romney’s ultimate fallback had the last real competitor standing, Rick Santorum, been able to make the Midwestern breakthrough he was so close to achieving.
Now down ballot primaries take over the spotlight, and Tuesday offered an interesting assortment of congressional contests.
There were two competitive Republican Senate primaries. One fairly nominal race was in New York, where one of 2011’s special election flavors of the month, Rep. Bob Turner (R-NY), who held the Queens seat vacated by Anthony Weiner, lost to right-wing judicial activist and Conservative Party nominee Wendy Long for the dubious privilege of taking on heavily favored Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) in November.
More than 300 women, a record high, have filed to run for Congress this year, which means a likely gain of female members come November. In addition to greater parity for women–who’ve been chronically underrepresented–more women in Congress could bring another benefit: Less gridlock.
Female senators have a markedly more bipartisan vote record than their male peers do. Moreover, studies in personality research find that women are more cooperative than men, more willing to compromise, more empathetic and, moreover, more polite.
As Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Woman and Politics at Rutgers University puts it: “Women are more likely to work across the aisle and find compromise.”
PPI Senior Fellow Anne Kim writes for The Hill on the record number of women running for Congress and their potential impact on Capitol Hill:
More than 300 women, a record high, have filed to run for Congress this year, which means a likely gain of female members come November. In addition to greater parity for women–who’ve been chronically underrepresented–more women in Congress could bring another benefit: Less gridlock.
Female senators have a markedly more bipartisan vote record than their male peers do. Moreover, studies in personality research find that women are more cooperative than men, more willing to compromise, more empathetic and, moreover, more polite.
As Debbie Walsh, director of the Center for American Woman and Politics at Rutgers University puts it: “Women are more likely to work across the aisle and find compromise.”
Ed Kilgore is a PPI senior fellow, as well as managing editor of The Democratic Strategist, an online
This week’s skirmishing in the presidential campaign revolved around the president’s immigration initiative and preparations for the Supreme Court’s decision on the Affordable Care Act, due to be handed down next week.
The executive order (technically issued by the Department of Homeland Security) offered the children of undocumented workers a two-year, renewable immunity from prosecution if they had entered the country prior to the age of 16 and are currently under 30; have a high-school diploma or GED or a record of military service; and have no serious criminal record. It’s basically a “Lite” version of the DREAM Act, which Obama also supports, in that it provides no path to citizenship. And most importantly, from a political point of view, the administration initiative is very close to what Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has reportedly been working on in the form of legislation that could free Republicans (and the Republican presidential candidate in particular) from the taint of being hostile to any remedial action to help children here illegally.
PPI Senior Fellow Anne Kim explains how to de-polarize Congress over at Roll Call:
In the last several months, the Washington policy world has begun a necessary and constructive debate over how to “de-polarize” the nation’s politics. Scholars Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein, for example, have made a compelling case for a suite of structural improvements to the political system, including redistricting and campaign finance reform.
But while most proposals have looked to fix the political system in the big picture, another place to look to reform might be Congress’ internal workings as well. In particular, Congress should consider scrapping seniority as the basis for deciding committee chairmanships, especially in the House where individual members have much less power than in the Senate.
Aside from leadership, committee chairs are among the most powerful members of Congress. They decide the legislative agenda, broker deals over major bills and shepherd them through Congress. They wield enormous influence over their colleagues and command prodigious fundraising ability.