Jun.25
Political News, Now.
Univision Severs Ties With Donald Trump and Beauty Pageants
Donald J. Trump’s business empire was dealt its first casualty Thursday as a result of his decision to run for president.
Univision said that it was ending its relationship with the Trump Organization, that it will not air the Miss USA pageant on its network next month, and that it is severing ties with the Miss Universe Organization. Mr. Trump is a part owner of the Miss Universe Organization, the umbrella group for both the United States and world beauty pageants.
Univision said the decision was because of Mr. Trump’s recent remarks about Mexican immigrants. During his presidential announcement last week, Mr. Trump proposed building a wall along the border to keep criminals and “rapists” from sneaking into the United States.
“At Univision, we see firsthand the work ethic, love for family, strong religious values and the important role Mexican immigrants and Mexican-Americans have had and will continue to have in building the future of our country,” the company said in a statement.
Mr. Trump said in a statement that Univision was breaking a contract because of pressure from the Mexican government. He also vowed not to be silenced on the subject, arguing that the United States was being damaged by costly trade deals with Mexico and an influx of illegal immigrants who are taking American jobs.
“I have great respect for Mexico and love the Mexican people, but my loyalty is to the United States and making our country great again,” Mr. Trump said.
In a subsequent interview with Politico, Mr. Trump suggested that former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida would have apologized for angering the Mexican government with such blunt remarks.
“Anyone else would be subservient to that,” Mr. Trump said. “Bush would say, I’m sorry, keep ripping us off.”
The jab at Mr. Bush comes as a poll this week showed Mr. Trump trailing him by a small margin in New Hampshire, the first primary state.
More Posts
New Hampshire Poll Shows Bernie Sanders in Dead Heat With Hillary Clinton
The next time Hillary Rodham Clinton visits New Hampshire, she need not look over her shoulder to find Bernie Sanders; the Vermont Senator is running right alongside her in a statistical dead heat for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination, according to a CNN/WMUR poll released on Thursday.
The poll shows Mrs. Clinton drawing 43 percent of likely Democratic primary voters compared to 35 percent for Mr. Sanders, but with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus five percentage points, the race is a statistical tie.
While Mrs. Clinton has been enormously popular in New Hampshire, her favorable ratings have dropped almost 20 points since February, while Mr. Sanders’s have been climbing. And his negatives are lower than hers. So their net favorability ratings (favorable minus unfavorable) are now equal, at 55 percent.
In her favor, however, is that most voters appear to view Mrs. Clinton as by far the stronger leader, and as having the personal characteristics that are most presidential. She also trounces Mr. Sanders on her perceived ability to handle important issues, with more voters saying she is best able to handle the economy, terrorism, trade and health care.
Working against her is the hefty 28 percent who view her as the “least honest.”
Working to Mr. Sanders’s advantage: Most voters believe he “best represents Democrats like yourself” and “cares the most about people like you.” The one issue that voters said he was better able to handle than Mrs. Clinton was dealing with “big banks and corporations.”
The poll, conducted by the University of New Hampshire, interviewed 1,010 voters from June 18 to 24. The margin of sampling error for the entire poll was plus or minus three percentage points, but for the 360 likely Democratic primary voters who were interviewed, it was plus or minus five percentage points.
A Suffolk University poll last week also found Mr. Sanders making headway against Mrs. Clinton, trailing her by 10 percentage points, just outside that poll’s margin of sampling error of plus or minus four percentage points.
In N.H., Rubio Is Pressed on Trade and Immigration
SALEM, N.H. – Senator Marco Rubio defended his conservative credentials on two issues that are roiling the right – immigration and trade – as he returned to the campaign trail on Thursday.
The Florida Republican, who had taken a breather from campaigning as he crisscrossed the country on a fund-raising tour, had not taken questions from the public since casting a decisive vote on Tuesday that allowed President Obama’s trade bill to advance in the Senate.
Some conservatives, who objected to giving Mr. Obama enhanced negotiating powers to complete a major Pacific trade accord and derided the legislation as “Obamatrade,” blamed Mr. Rubio for providing a crucial 60th vote that assured the legislation could move forward. Others accused Mr. Rubio of not even reading the bill.
In a town-hall-style meeting here on Thursday, Mr. Rubio was asked to explain himself.
“There’s been some controversy on whether or not you actually read the bill,” one woman pressed him. “Why did you vote for it?”
“First of all,” he said, “I did read the bill. Second of all, it’s not Obamatrade. It’s called free trade.” To further underscore his point, he invoked a conservative hero: “We voted on fast-track authority, which Ronald Reagan was for.”
Whether Mr. Rubio was convincing or not was unclear. The crowd of about 200, which applauded politely on and off during the hour-long event, was not particularly enthusiastic.
He was also asked to clarify his position on overhauling immigration, an issue that still dogs him with many on the right, two years after he dropped his support for a comprehensive Senate bill that would have provided undocumented immigrants with the opportunity to become citizens.
Mr. Rubio was unequivocal. He said he no longer supported one sweeping, omnibus bill, adding, “Anyone who insists on doing it all at once is basically out of touch with reality.”
Instead, Congress must first pass a law that provides for greater border security, then prove that illegal immigration is under control. Otherwise, he said, “the votes aren’t there — the public won’t support it.”
Many in the crowd did not seem too familiar with Mr. Rubio, 44, who announced his campaign for president in April and quickly shot to the top of many polls. Several of the questioners seemed interested in testing his conservatism.
Mr. Rubio spoke less than two hours after the Supreme Court upheld a key provision of the Affordable Care Act that allows for the federal health care exchange to provide coverage in states that have not set up their own exchanges. The decision, written by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., an appointee of President George W. Bush, angered many conservatives.
One man in the crowd asked, “What are you going to do differently from the past two Republican presidents, who gave us Souter and Roberts?” (David Souter, a former justice appointed by the first President Bush, often voted with the court’s liberal wing.)
Mr. Rubio responded that he would appoint “people that will actually interpret and apply the Constitution, not expand and redefine it.” He added that his understanding of the Constitution was fixed. “The Constitution is not a living and breathing document,” he said, noting that the next president could appoint as many as three Supreme Court judges.
Chris Christie to Announce Decision on 2016 Campaign
Gov. Chris Christie will announce Tuesday in Livingston, N.J., whether he will run for president in 2016, a source close to his campaign confirmed.
Mr. Christie has been traveling the country under the banner of his political organization, Leadership Matters for America, delivering policy heavy speeches on entitlement reform and education, along with holding town hall meetings as part of a “Tell It Like It Is” tour.
Mr. Christie will make his announcement at Livingston High School, his alma mater.
A spokesman for the New Jersey governor declined to comment.
Once considered a Republican front-runner, Mr. Christie has since seen his national standing decline, as he has struggled to overcome the George Washington Bridge scandal and low approval ratings in his home state.
The news of his announcement was first reported by WNYC.
Republicans in Congress Ponder Next Move on Health Care
The Supreme Court’s decision on the Affordable Care Act subsidies left Republicans in Congress badly divided on their next steps.
This year, the House and Senate approved a budget that included the same parliamentary twist that helped secure the Affordable Care Act’s passage. So-called “reconciliation” would allow Republicans to pass major health care changes that cannot be filibustered in the Senate — as long as those changes impact the government’s spending and revenue.
House Speaker John A. Boehner said repeatedly that no decision had been made on how reconciliation would be used. That seemed to throw cold water on members of his conference pledging to move forward quickly after Thursday’s court decision.
If the court had sided with the plaintiffs, Republicans had hoped to force President Obama to negotiate a new health care law more to their liking. Now, any significant legislation will simply be vetoed, Republicans conceded.
That leaves them with a decision: Try to do something modest that could overcome a veto, or press forward with a true replacement for the Affordable Care Act? House Republicans vowed to press forward.
“The president’s made it clear he’s not signing anything, even bipartisan bills,” said Representative Kevin Brady, Republican of Texas and a leading health care legislator on the House Ways and Means Committee. “He will continue to be an obstructionist, so we are going to have to focus on what we think is right.”
Lawmakers can make changes to the health care law’s tax increases and spending provisions, but they cannot make policy changes that do not impact the government’s finances, like regulations on the insurance market, and possibly the mandates on health care coverage Republicans dislike the most.
Representative Tom Price, Republican of Georgia and the chairman of the House Budget Committee, who wrote the “reconciliation” language, said he would press forward with a full replacement of the A.C.A.
“The goal is to get the American people to speak loudly enough through their representatives to get this administration moving in the right direction,” he said.
But it was also clear the court ruling would slow that process. And Senate Republicans were not nearly as enthusiastic.
“I wouldn’t want to say anything is fruitless because around here you do what you can do at the time you can do it,” said Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, one of the small group of Republicans who tried to write the health care law before ultimately abandoning it.
Representative Pete Sessions, Republican of Texas and one of the leadership’s point people in preparing for the decision, said he would introduce draft legislation to replace the A.C.A. But, he said, that would only begin the discussion.
“We’re not going to do what the Democrats did and ram this through,” he said.
First Draft Focus: Breaking News in Washington
Verbatim: Hillary Clinton Supports Supreme Court Decision
Yes! SCOTUS affirms what we know is true in our hearts & under the law: Health insurance should be affordable & available to all. -H— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) June 25, 2015
Republicans Cite Health Care Ruling in Pushing Candidacies
Republican presidential candidates were quick to pivot off the Supreme Court’s ruling to uphold Affordable Care Act subsidies, arguing that the decision shows the need to replace President Obama with a member of their party.
Former Gov. Rick Perry of Texas said that it should not be left to the Supreme Court to “save us from Obamacare.”
“We need leadership in the White House that recognizes the folly of having to pass a bill to know what’s in it,” Mr. Perry said. “We need leadership that understands a heavy-handed, one-size-fits-all policy does nothing to help health outcomes for Americans.”
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida said the court erred in trying to correct Mr. Obama’s mistakes. The decision was another reason that he should be elected president, Mr. Rubio said.
I remain committed to repealing this bad law and replacing it…— Marco Rubio (@marcorubio) June 25, 2015
Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin said the decision should be more motivation for Congress to overturn the law.
“Today’s Supreme Court ruling upholding the administration’s implementation of Obamacare means Republicans in the House and Senate must redouble their efforts to repeal and replace this destructive and costly law,” he said.
Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky said he was the man to lead the overturn of the law.
“This decision turns both the rule of law and common sense on its head,” Mr. Paul said in a statement. ” As president, I would make it my mission to repeal it, and propose real solutions for our health care system.”
Former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida said that if he becomes president, he will make fixing the health system through the private sector a top priority.
“We need to put patients in charge of their own decisions, and health care reform should actually lower costs,” Mr. Bush said. “Entrepreneurs should be freed to lower costs and improve access to care – just like American ingenuity does in other sectors of the economy. ”
The Republican National Committee decided to focus its statement not on Mr. Obama, but on Hillary Rodham Clinton and the 2016 election.
“Today’s ruling makes it clear that if we want to fix our broken health care system, then we will need to elect a Republican president with proven ideas and real solutions that will help American families,” said Chairman Reince Priebus. “Hillary Clinton supports big government mandates and expanding the government’s reach into our health care system, maneuvers that have made our health care system worse off.”
The statement made no direct reference to Mr. Obama.
Verbatim: Justice Scalia Coins Health Law Word — Scotuscare
We should start calling this law Scotuscare.”
— Justice Antonin Scalia, in his dissenting opinion on the Affordable Care Act subsidies case decided at the United States Supreme Court.
Today in Politics: Obama Prepares to Speak Again in Wake of Violence
Good Thursday morning from Washington, where President Obama has a long-sought trade deal waiting to be signed and to where Gov. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana has officially declared that he wants to move. But Mr. Obama’s focus now is on a landmark church in Charleston, S.C., and on the eulogy he has to give on Friday for a friend who was shot and killed along with eight others.
On Friday, Mr. Obama will once again serve as consoler-in-chief after an unthinkable act — this time the killing of nine African-Americans during a Bible study at a South Carolina church.
Mr. Obama has repeatedly been called upon to channel anger and sadness after tragedy. He did it in Arizona, when a gunman shot a member of Congressand many others at a shopping center. He did it in Connecticut after 20 elementary school students and seven adults were killed in Newtown. And he did it after three people were killed in the Boston Marathon bombings.
But even as the president and his speechwriter were in “the early stages” of writing the eulogy for the Rev. Clementa C. Pinckney, aides said it was unclear whether he would also use the opportunity to again address new calls for gun control and the debate about the Confederate battle flag.
“The focal point of the president’s remarks will be to pay tribute to Reverend Pinckney and the eight others whose lives were lost in that terrible attack,” said Josh Earnest, the president’s press secretary.
That leaves open the possibility that Mr. Obama will once again lament the lack of stronger gun measures, though he has made it clear he believes that Congress is unlikely to agree unless public pressure shifts drastically.
And while the Confederate flag is in the political spotlight, Mr. Obama may view the funeral as an inappropriate moment to weigh in on a divisive social issue.
Still, Mr. Obama has surprised in the past. His remarks at the memorial service for the children in Newtown were billed by aides as springing merely from an emotional moment. Instead, he issued a demand for Congress to enact sweeping gun laws.
Michael D. Shear
Stay tuned throughout the day: Follow us on Twitter @NYTpolitics and on Facebook for First Draft updates.
What We’re Watching Today
While the campaign trail runs primarily through the early voting states on Thursday, Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont will hold a news conference in Washington on overhauling the estate tax.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who came in fourth in a New Hampshire poll this week, will be in the state for events, including two town-hall-style meetings.
And Mike Huckabee, Ben Carson and Rick Santorum, all Republicans, will each hold several events in Iowa.
The Trade Battle Nears Its End on Obama’s Desk
Democrats bowed to the inevitable and lent their support to the worker assistance package that is expected to pass the House on Thursday as the battle over fast-track trade power for Mr. Obama draws to a close.
After considering one last stand against the trade measure by opposing aid for workers displaced by foreign competition, Democrats concluded that it made no sense for them to reject millions of dollars in assistance for the very people they said they were trying to protect.
Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the Democratic leader who initially fought the assistance, said that approving it would allow the trade focus to shift to the specifics of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the closely held trade agreement being negotiated between the United States and 11 other countries, including Australia, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam. Ms. Pelosi said that Democrats intended to “shine a bright light” on details of the deal and that they hoped the administration followed through on pledges to strike an agreement Democrats could support.
But approval of fast-track power significantly reduces the leverage of trade opponents. Fast-track legislation needed backing from Democrats in the Senate to overcome a filibuster and in the House because some Republicans didn’t trust the administration to negotiate an acceptable deal. Under the rules Congress just approved, the Trans-Pacific Partnership can pass the House and Senate on simple majorities, meaning that, in theory at least, not a single Democratic vote would be required in either chamber.
– Carl Hulse
Bulletins: Jindal Makes His Case; Webb and Clinton Take Some Heat
Mr. Jindal declared his candidacy for president on Wednesday and made his initial announcement via a hidden camera. Here is a look at his stand on some central issues and what his path to victory might be.
Jim Webb, the former senator from Virginia and a Democrat considering a run of his own, was criticized on Wednesday for writing on Facebook that the Confederate flag issue should be framed in the larger complexity of the Civil War.While the flag had been used as a symbol of racism in recent decades, he said, that was not always the case.“We should also remember that honorable Americans fought on both sides in the Civil War, including slave holders in the Union Army from states such as Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware, and that many nonslave holders fought for the South,” Mr. Webb wrote.
Speaking at an African-American church in Missouri on Tuesday, Hillary Rodham Clinton said that “all lives matter,” offending some on Twitter and in the crowd. They felt she was missing the point of the mantra “black lives matter,” which was used across the country in protests over the police-involved deaths of unarmed black men.
Our Other Favorites From Today’s Times
Mr. Sanders has not had the same success, or seeming effort, as Mrs. Clinton has had in introducing himself to black voters, representing a test of his campaign’s relevancy even as he draws large crowds.
Gov. John R. Kasich of Ohio, though he has yet to formally declare his candidacy, hopscotched across Iowa, and with some blunt talk, seemed to make new friends.
And in an open letter to Mr. Obama, former advisers have warned that the nuclear deal with Iran “may fall short of meeting the administration’s own standard of a ‘good’ agreement.”
Congress Evades the Press, 1-0
Congresswomen joined in a bipartisan effort on Wednesday night to eke out a 1-0 victory over the Washington press corps at a charity softball game.
A rare pitchers’ duel under an even rarer cloudless sky in the capital, the game took just an hour and tied the series between the two sides, 3-3.
Jill Agostino of The New York Times pitched a scoreless game until the bottom of the fifth inning, when Representative Cheri Bustos, Democrat of Illinois, hit a line drive into center that was misplayed, allowing her to advance to third. Two batters later, Representative Kristi Noem, Republican of South Dakota, drove in Ms. Bustos to give the congresswomen the only run they would need.
Representative Kathy Castor, a Democrat of Florida who made two important stops in the field, was named her team’s most valuable player. In a postgame interview, Ms. Castor told First Draft that her team’s 7 a.m. practices had instilled a crucial piece of advice: “Keep your eyes open when you go to catch the ball.” She said she would keep the M.V.P. trophy in her House office.
The game raised $195,000 for the Young Survival Coalition, a group that supports women with breast cancer.
“We are a very competitive bunch, so winning is a big deal,” said Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Democrat of Florida and one of the Members’ captains. “But at the end of the day, we all win because we raise a bunch of money for breast cancer.”
— Nicholas Fandos
What We’re Reading Elsewhere
If the Supreme Court rules against the Obama administration over the Affordable Care Act, as many Republicans hope, it could still “create a quandary” for conservative candidates, Reuters writes.
Mr. Obama was interrupted by a heckler during a speech at the White House about same-sex marriage. He had the heckler escorted out and told the crowd he was fine with a few hecklers, but not when it was a guest at his house who was “eating the hors d’oeuvres” and “drinking the booze.”
And Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin signed bills eliminating 48-hour waiting periods to buy handguns, and to allow off-duty and retired police officers to carry guns in schools.
Mr. Jindal has a great résumé, but he may have missed his moment in announcing for president, Politico reports. At least he’s not the “REO Speedwagon of politics,” like Sarah Palin.
Like the Politics Newsletter? Get it delivered to your inbox.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a comment-- or suggestions, particularly of topics and places you'd like to see covered