Subject: H4A News Clips 6.25.15
From: Alexandria Phillips <[email-masked]>
To: Alexandria Phillips <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2015 07:28:13 -0400
List-Id: <HRCRapid.hillaryclinton.com>

*H4A News Clips*

*June 25, 2015*

*LAST NIGHT’S EVENING NEWS*

All three networks briefly reported on Bobby Jindal entering the Republican
presidential field. Jindal is now the 13th Republican candidate to enter
the field.

*LAST NIGHT’S EVENING
NEWS........................................................................
**1*

*TODAY’S KEY
STORIES.....................................................................................
**5*

Clinton takes a ‘just enough’ strategy to fundraising // AP // Julie
Bykowicz and Ken Thomas – June 24,
2015.............................................................................................................................................
5

Clinton’s gay supporters: What enthusiasm gap? // Politico // Annie Karni –
June 25, 2015....... 7

Clinton to miss convention of liberal activists, bloggers // AP // Ken
Thomas – June 24, 2015.. 10

*SOCIAL
MEDIA.................................................................................................
**11*

Ken Thomas (6/24/15, 10:43 AM) – Hillary Clinton not appearing at
@NetrootsNation in Phoenix; campaign cites scheduling conflicts w/ events
in IA &
Ark...................................................................... 11

Hunter Walker (6/24/15, 11:14 AM) – Mississippi Senator Roger Wicker says
the state’s flag should be
replaced...............................................................................................................................
11

Scott Wong (6/24/15, 11:07 AM) – House set to vote on TAA on Thursday if it
passes Senate quickly, GOP lawmakers
say......................................................................................................................
11

Bernie Sanders (6/24/15, 2:04 PM) – I strongly support the Voting Rights
Advancement Act of 2015.          11

PublicPolicyPolling (6/24/15, 6:22 PM) – Jim Webb’s number of black
supporters on our national poll last week:
0.................................................................................................................................
11

*HRC NATIONAL
COVERAGE............................................................................
**11*

Hillary Clinton’s ‘All Lives Matter’ Remark Stirs Backlash // NYT // Alan
Rappeport – June 24, 2015          11

Bernie Sanders Gains on Hillary Clinton in Bloomberg Early-State Polling //
Bloomberg // John McCormick - June 25,
2015.......................................................................................................................
12

Democrats Try to Force Republicans to Release Clinton Confidant Testimony
// Bloomberg // Billy House – June 24,
2015.......................................................................................................................
15

Should Political Campaigns Stop Using Free Labor? // Bloomberg // Emily
Greenhouse – June 24, 2015   16

Clinton’s Fundraising Rounds Include Law Firms: Business of Law //
Bloomberg // Ellen Rosen – June 24,
2015.....................................................................................................................................
18

GOP 2016’s battle for second fundraising war // CNN // Sara Murray,
Theodore Schleifer, and Tom LoBianco – June 24,
2015.......................................................................................................................
20

Hillary Clinton to skip major progressive event // MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald
– June 24, 2015. 23

Hillary Clinton’s 3-Word Misstep: ‘All Lives Matter’ // NPR // Tamara
Keither – June 24, 2015 24

The Race That Defined Hillary’s Strategy // The Daily Beast // David
Freelander – June 25, 2015                25

The Clinton-Confederate Flag Conspiracy Theory Is a New Low // Daily Beast
// Patricia Murphy – June 24,
2015....................................................................................................................................
28

Bill Clinton To The United Daughters of the Confederacy // Buzzfeed //
Andrew Kaczynski and Christopher Massie – June 24,
2015.........................................................................................................
30

Hillary Clinton Hires The Strategist Who Broke Her 2008 Campaign //
Buzzfeed // Ben Smith – June 24,
2015...........................................................................................................................................
30

Why Hillary Clinton Still Needs Terry McAuliffe // National Journal // Ben
Pershing – June 24, 2015         32

Hillary Is Now Trapped By Her Support for Global Trade at State // The
Fiscal Times // Edward Morrissey // June 25,
2015.......................................................................................................................
35

*OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL
COVERAGE.................................................. **37*

*DECLARED..................................................................................................
**37*

*O’MALLEY...............................................................................................
**37*

Presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley among those paying respects to slain
S.C. pastor // WaPo // John Wagner – June 24,
2015........................................................................................................
37

O’Malley heads to South Carolina to mourn massacre victim // CNN //
Elizabeth Landers – June 24,
2015............................................................................................................................................
37

Martin O’Malley pays respects to slain S.C. state senator // Washington
Examiner // Ariel Cohen – June 24,
2015....................................................................................................................................
38

*SANDERS.................................................................................................
**39*

Bernie Sanders Lags Hillary Clinton in Introducing Himself to Black Voters
// NYT // Patrick Healy and Jonathan Martin – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................
39

Bernie Sanders Walks A Fine Line On Gun Control // NPR // Jessica Taylor –
June 24, 2015.... 42

This Quirky New Hampshire Law Might Keep Bernie Sanders Off The Ballot //
NPR // Jessica Taylor – June 24,
2015...............................................................................................................................
43

Sanders struggling to get his message out to Latino and black voters,
experts say // Fox News Latino // June 24,
2015...............................................................................................................................
45

Corporate Greed Must End // HuffPo // Bernie Sanders – June 24,
2015................................. 47

Bernie Sanders & Cornel West: The radical alliance that could change
everything // Salon // Matthew Pulver – June 24,
2015.......................................................................................................................
48

The Bernie Sanders Phenomenon // The Hill // David Russell – June 24,
2015........................ 51

Sanders’ ‘Shocking’ Senior Statistic // FactCheck.Org // Brooks Jackson –
June 24, 2015.......... 53

*CHAFEE...................................................................................................
**55*

*UNDECLARED............................................................................................
**55*

*WEBB......................................................................................................
**55*

Jim Webb Criticized for Comments on Confederate Flag // NYT // Alan
Rappeport – June 24, 2015             55

Jim Webb: Confederate soldiers fought honorably // Politico // Nick Gass –
June 24, 2015...... 56

Jim Webb Pushes Back on Behalf of Confederate Flag Supporters // Bloomberg
// Arit John – June 24,
2015............................................................................................................................................
57

Presidential Hopeful Jim Webb Defends Confederate Soldiers // TIME // Sam
Frizell – June 24, 2015       58

Jim Webb: “Honorable Americans Fought On Both Sides Of The Civil War” //
Buzzfeed // CJ Ciaramella – June 24,
2015.......................................................................................................................
59

*OTHER....................................................................................................
**59*

Obama Victory on Trade Wins Him New Fight With Fellow Democrats //
Bloomberg // Carter Dougherty and Angela Greiling Keane - June 25,
2015...................................................................................
62

Mass. Democratic Party invites presidential hopefuls to speak // Boston
Globe // Jim O’Sullivan – June 24,
2015.....................................................................................................................................
65

*GOP.................................................................................................................
**65*

*DECLARED.................................................................................................
**65*

*BUSH.......................................................................................................
**65*

Jeb Bush Picks Woody Johnson as Finance Chairman // WSJ // Beth Reinhard
and Patrick O’Connor – June 24,
2015...............................................................................................................................
65

Bush campaign taps New York Jets owners as national finance chairman //
WaPo // Ed O’Keefe – June 24,
2015.....................................................................................................................................
66

Jeb Bush’s Super PAC is Blurring ‘Jeb!’ Signs in Its Own Ad. Here’s Why. //
National Journal // Shane Goldmacher – June 24,
2015.................................................................................................
67

Jeb Bush Is Slow to Catch Fire in Iowa // Sentinel Republic // Eugene
Robinson – June 24, 2015 68

*RUBIO......................................................................................................
**70*

Marco Rubio fights conservative backlash over his support of Obama trade
authority // Miami Herald // Alex Leary – June 24,
2015...........................................................................................................
70

Rubio’s Cuba views at odds with young Hispanic-Americans // The Hill //
Eddie Bejarano – June 24,
2015............................................................................................................................................
71

*PAUL........................................................................................................
**72*

Rand Paul In 2007: Trans-Texas Corridor Could Lead To “North American
Union,” US-Mexico Currency // Buzzfeed // Christopher Massie – June 24,
2015.................................................................... 72

Sen. Rand Paul to sue IRS, U.S. Treasury // Washington Times // Ralph Z.
Hallow – June 24, 2015             73

*CRUZ........................................................................................................
**75*

Cruz pulls another boneheaded move // WaPo // Jennifer Rubin – June 24,
2015................... 75

Ted Cruz Takes Aim at ‘Washington Cartel’ // Bloomberg // Heidi Przybyla –
June 24, 2015.... 77

‘Speaker Cruz’ strikes again // MSNBC // Steve Benen – June 24,
2015................................... 78

The House GOP is punishing rebellious members. Ted Cruz is steamed about
it. // Vox // Jonathan Allen – June 24,
2015.......................................................................................................................
79

Ted Cruz mum as his South Carolina campaign co-chairmen lead fight to let
Confederate flag fly // NY Daily News // Cameron Joseph – June 24,
2015.............................................................................
80

Ted Cruz just upped the populist ante for 2016 Republicans // Fortune //
Tory Newmyer – June 24, 2015 82

Ted Cruz depicts lonely fight against “Washington cartel” // Dallas Morning
News // Todd J. Gillman – June 24,
2015...............................................................................................................................
83

*PERRY.....................................................................................................
**85*

Talking with Rick Perry about Iran, China, the Confederate flag // WaPo //
Jennifer Rubin – June 24,
2015...........................................................................................................................................
85

*GRAHAM.................................................................................................
**86*

Lindsey Graham’s zombie claim about no fugitive being arrested after a
failed gun background check // WaPo // Glenn Kessler – June 24,
2015...........................................................................................
86

Lindsey Graham Says Charleston Shooting Reminded Him Of ‘Mideast Hate’ //
HuffPo // Igor Bobic – June 24,
2015...............................................................................................................................
89

Lindsey Graham’s racist Charleston jab: White supremacist suspect showed
“Mideast hate” //Salon // Sophia Tesfaye – June 24,
2015........................................................................................................
90

Lindsey Graham’s Charleston-Response Dumpster Fire Just Got Hotter //
Vanity Fair // Kia Makarechi – June 24,
2015................................................................................................................................
91

Lindsey Graham Criticizes Hillary Clinton on Equal Pay // Free Beacon //
Joe Schoffstall - June 25, 2015  92

*CARSON...................................................................................................
**93*

Carson: Maryland neighbor flew, then took down Confederate flag // CNN //
Tom LoBianco and Jeremy Diamond – June 24,
2015......................................................................................................
93

Ben Carson: “Political Correctness” Could Destroy U.S. Like It Did Ancient
Rome // Buzzfeed // Christopher Massie – June 24,
2015.........................................................................................................
94

*TRUMP....................................................................................................
**94*

Is Donald Trump the honey badger of American politics? // WaPo // June 24,
2015................. 94

Donald Trump, the Edsel Ford Fung of Candidates, Tells Baltimore It’s ‘Got
No Spirit, None’ // Bloomberg // Melinda Henneberger – June 24,
2015..................................................................................
96

Trump jokes about being behind Bush in New Hampshire poll // CNN //
Theodore Schleifer – June 24,
2015...........................................................................................................................................
98

Donald Trump responds to Neil Young’s diss // CNN // Sophie Tatum – June
24, 2015............ 99

Does Donald Trump Put His Money Where His Mouth Is? Campaign Contributions
Say, ‘He’s Fired.’ // The Blaze // Jennifer Kerns – June 24,
2015...............................................................................
100

*UNDECLARED..........................................................................................
**102*

*WALKER................................................................................................
**102*

Scott Walker to sign legislation expanding gun rights in Wisconsin // WaPo
// Jenna Johnson – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
102

Scott Walker signs two pro-gun bills // Politico // Daniel Strauss – June
24, 2015.................. 103

Walker says Obama, federal government must fix subsidies // AP // Scott
Bauer – June 24, 2015 103

Gov. Scott Walker Signs Bills to Loosen Wisconsin Gun Laws // AP // June
24, 2015.............. 105

Scott Walker Ensnared by Wisconsin Budget as White House Run Beckons //
Bloomberg // John McCormick – June 24,
2015.....................................................................................................................
106

*JINDAL..................................................................................................
**108*

Bobby Jindal Announces Bid for President // NYT // Manny Pernandez – June
24, 2015....... 108

Bobby Jindal Expected to Enter Fray Near the Bottom of the Pile // NYT //
Manny Fernandez – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
110

Bobby Jindal Enters Crowded GOP Presidential Race // WSJ // Reid J. Epstein
– June 24, 2015 111

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal Set to Enter Republican Race for President //
WSJ // Reid J. Epstein – June 24,
2015...................................................................................................................................
112

Bobby Jindal might be Republicans’ Obama. But not in the good ways. // WaPo
// Chris Cillizza – June 24,
2015...................................................................................................................................
114

In launching long-shot bid, Bobby Jindal vows to be a ‘doer’ as president
// WaPo // David A. Fahrenthold – June 24,
2015......................................................................................................................
116

How Bobby Jindal lost his way // WaPo // Editorial Board – June 24,
2015............................ 119

Bobby Jindal to announce presidential plans Wednesday // WaPo // David A.
Fahrenthold and James Hohmann – June 24,
2015...................................................................................................
120

Bobby Jindal hits Jeb Bush, hard, as he announces White House Run //
Politico // Eli Stokols – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
123

Louisana long-shot // Politico // Katie Glueck and Eli Stokols – June 24,
2015....................... 124

Now Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is in the Republican race // AP // Melinda
Deslatte – June 24, 2015      127

Louisiana Gov. Jindal looks ready to jump into 2016 race // AP // Melinda
Deslatte – June 24, 2015           129

Bobby Jindal Teases Cute Kid Videos Ahead of Announcement // Bloomberg //
Ali Elkin – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
130

Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal Vows to be a Doer in Race Full of Talkers //
Bloomberg // Margaret Newkirk – June 24,
2015..............................................................................................................................
131

Louisiana Governor Jindal announces run for president in 2016 // Reuters //
Emily Stephenson and Alistair Bell – June 24,
2015............................................................................................................
133

Bobby Jindal faces an uphill fight in the crowded 2016 field // CNN //
Rebekah Metzler and Ashley Killough – June 24,
2015......................................................................................................................
134

Bobby Jindal’s kids were unaware of announcement video taping // CNN //
Theodore Schleifer – June 24,
2015...................................................................................................................................
137

5 Things You Should Know About Bobby Jindal // NPR // Jessica Taylor – June
24, 2015....... 138

Bobby Jindal’s Plan To Stop Being A Punchline And Actually Win // Buzzfeed
// McKay Coppins – June 24,
2015...................................................................................................................................
140

Bobby Jindal Is Running For President // Buzzfeed // Kyle Blaine – June 24,
2015................ 144

*KASICH..................................................................................................
**145*

John Kasich Appeals to Iowa as He Ponders White House Bid // NYT // Trip
Gabriel – June 24, 2015         145

GOP’s Kasich opposes deporting millions in US illegally // AP // Thomas
Beaumont – June 24, 2015          146

The challenge of being a Wall Street candidate // MSNBC // Steve Benen –
June 24, 2015..... 147

John Kasich: George W. Bush was a ‘steamroller’ in 2000 // Washington Times
// David Sherfinski – June 24,
2015...................................................................................................................................
148

*OTHER...................................................................................................
**148*

Univision, Washingto Post to host Republican candidates forum // Politico
// Hadas Gold – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
148

Mitt Romney seeks role as Republican kingmaker // The Hill // Jonathan
Easley – June 25, 2015                149

Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush: How the Presidential Campaign Is Testing a
Friendship // ABC // Veronica Stracqualursi – June 24,
2015..............................................................................................
152

Fox News Poll: Bush, Trump score post-announcement bumps // Fox // Dana
Blanton – June 24, 2015    154

Univision Is Going To Hold A Republican Presidential Candidates’ Forum
After All // Buzzfeed // Adrian Carrasquillo – June 24,
2015................................................................................................
157

*OTHER 2016
NEWS........................................................................................
**158*

Campaign swag and "Made in America" in the 2016 election // CBS News //
Jenna Sakwa - June 25, 2015 158

*TOP
NEWS.....................................................................................................
**160*

*DOMESTIC................................................................................................
**160*

Federal Hate Crime Charges Likely in South Carolina Church Shooting // NYT
// Matt Apuzzo, Michael S. Schmidt and Richard Pérez-Peña – June 24,
2015................................................................. 160

Trade battle ends as Dems wills supports workers aid bill // Politico //
Lauren French and John Bresnahan – June 24,
2015......................................................................................................................
162

In reversal, Wicker calls for removal of Mississippi Confederate flag //
Politico // Burgess Everett – June 24,
2015...................................................................................................................................
163

Conservative Groups Bracing Republicans for Obamacare Ruling // Bloomberg
// Sahil Kapur – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
164

*INTERNATIONAL......................................................................................
**167*

The Many Miseries of Yemeni Families // NYT // Hanna Ingber - June 24,
2015.................... 167

No bailout deal yet for Greece as meeting cut short // AP // Derek
Gatopoulos and Raf Casert - June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
173

*OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS...................................................................
**174*

Morning Plum: Hillary can’t run from the trade debate forever // WaPo //
Greg Sargent – June 24, 2015   174

Hillary Clinton’s dodginess is overpowering her message // WaPo // George
F. Will – June 24, 2015           175

The Insiders: Hillary Clinton’s failure of diplomacy // WaPo // Ed Rogers –
June 24, 2015...... 177

Can Hillary Clinton step forward on race without leaving white voters
behind? // WaPo // Jannell Ross – June 24,
2015..............................................................................................................................
178

Book Review – “The Hillary Doctrine: Sex & American Foreign Policy” // CFR
// Micah Zenko – June 24,
2015..........................................................................................................................................
180

Presidential wannabees ought to embrace, not fear, Hispanic conference in
Kansas City // Kansas City Star // Mary Sanchez – June 23,
2015.............................................................................................
182

Hillary Clinton, in a talk about race, hits a sour note // Kansas City Star
// Steve Paul – June 24, 2015        183

*TODAY’S KEY STORIES*

*Clinton takes a ‘just enough’ strategy to fundraising
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/de68c22d7d2442e3bb2f625543ca65b7/clinton-takes-just-enough-strategy-fundraising>
// AP // Julie Bykowicz and Ken Thomas – June 24, 2015 *

The stars are out to raise money for Hillary Rodham Clinton: Lady Gaga and
Tony Bennett at the Plaza Hotel, Jon Bon Jovi at home in Jersey. So, too,
are the Democratic Party's wealthiest donors, from a Facebook co-founder to
the heiress of a brewing fortune.

Yet even as Clinton picks up the pace of fundraising this month, the
front-runner for her party's presidential nomination is holding back in
some ways — a "just enough" strategy that her supporters say will pay off
over time.

The goal when she files her first fundraising report next month is to post
a number that reassures Democrats she will have the resources to compete
with the eventual Republican nominee, but doesn't chase away the
small-dollar donors who would make up her strongest base of support in the
general election.

"Her approach has been smart, disciplined and focused on the long-term,"
said Chris Lehane, a Democratic strategist who worked with hedge fund
billionaire Tom Steyer on one of Clinton's first fundraisers this year.
Lehane said the 100-person reception sold out within 24 hours. "They easily
could have put on a far bigger event of 1,000 people or more."

Clinton's supporters have tried to tamp down the expectations for the
fundraising totals her campaign will disclose next month, when she and the
other declared candidates for president will report how much they have
raised through the end of June to the Federal Election Commission.

Unlike in 2008, Clinton is collecting money only for the primary contest,
an amount capped at $2,700 per individual. If Clinton wins the Democratic
nomination, she can return to her donors to ask for another $2,700 for the
general election.

Since announcing her candidacy in mid-April, Clinton has raised at least
$17 million, based on the number of people her campaign says have attended
49 fundraising events through Monday night. She held fundraisers Tuesday in
Chicago and in St. Louis, where she raised money at Grant's Farm, a
historic home owned by the Busch family, at an event hosted by beer heiress
Trudy Busch Valentine.

Clinton is focused primarily on raising money for her actual campaign.
Others have emphasized super PACs, which can accept donations of unlimited
size but are prohibited from coordinating directly with the candidates they
support. Republican Jeb Bush spent six months raising money for a super PAC
before beginning traditional campaign fundraising. That approach has helped
him amass as much as $100 million already.

Most of Clinton's fundraisers have also been smaller events at private
homes, with audiences of no more than 250 people each giving the maximum.
While backers says she could draw much larger crowds, many of the events
have been half that size, putting the former secretary of state into what
supporters say is her comfort zone.

"She was phenomenal," said John Morgan, a Florida attorney who hosted a
220-person reception last month at his home near Orlando. "She took a photo
with every single guest."

The one-on-one time with donors, even if limited to a few minutes, is what
inspires supporters to go beyond simply writing a check, Lehane said. "It's
a re-investor approach. They'll go on to ask their friends to give."

Many of the biggest Democratic donors have already feted Clinton, or plan
to in the next few weeks. Among them: billionaire Facebook co-founder Chris
Hughes and Chicago media billionaire Fred Eychaner.

And she's relied upon celebrities, too. "Spiderman" star Tobey Maguire held
a backyard event last week that raised $500,000. On Wednesday, she'll
appear with Bennett and Lady Gaga in New York. Next week, Bon Jovi will
perform at his New Jersey home for Clinton and some of her donors.

Her staunchest supporters say attendees at such events are leaving with a
sense of purpose.

"People aren't just writing checks. They are raising, too," said Andy
Spahn, who connects Democrats to Hollywood money and helped with one of
Clinton's most lucrative fundraising trips so far, a May 7 visit to Los
Angeles packed with morning, noon and night events.

Among small donors — those who give $200 or less, usually online — Clinton
has competition. The campaign of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has suggested
it has raised $8 million, with an average contribution amount of $40,
through mid-June.

Yet Clinton is also applying some of the best practices of President Barack
Obama, who raised almost 65 percent of the $33.2 million he collected in
the first three months of his re-election campaign from small-dollar donors.

Her campaign this week has been promoting a raffle to attend dinner with
Clinton. She is hawking cutesy souvenirs such as $30 red T-shirts that look
like her go-to pantsuits. And the campaign has an array of $20 happy hours
planned, including one Friday at Union Cafe in Columbus, Ohio.

Kiki McLean, a former 2008 Clinton campaign adviser, headlined a happy hour
Tuesday night in Washington. McLean said she has no official role with the
campaign, but said small events such as hers encourage involvement.

"I want to make sure they are up to speed on what they can do as
volunteers," McLean said, "just like me."

*Clinton’s gay supporters: What enthusiasm gap?
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/clintons-gay-supporters-what-enthusiasm-gap-119409.html>
// Politico // Annie Karni – June 25, 2015*

LGBT groups see a breakthrough — a Democratic front-runner who preaches
full equality.

Hillary Clinton won’t be marching in New York City’s Pride Parade on Sunday
in Manhattan, and she has no plans to march in any pride parades across the
country, but her absence hasn’t diminished the community’s enthusiasm for
her.

Indeed, many gay leaders are so on board for her campaign that they prefer
she spend time building support elsewhere instead of marching alongside
them.

“She’s a former secretary of state, and they’re coming up on fundraising
deadlines,” said Beth Shipp, executive director of LPAC, the “lesbian super
pac,” which endorsed Clinton in April, justifying Clinton’s absence. “She
is getting pulled in all directions, by all sources. The fact that the
campaign is putting up a presence at pride events, even without her there,
is great.”

Clinton’s campaign is registered to participate in the New York parade, and
top staffers and volunteers are planning to march, flying campaign banners.
And on Saturday in New Hampshire, New York Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, who
grew up in Hanover and is the first openly gay person to be elected to
Congress from New York, will host the kickoff event for the “LGBT Granite
Staters for Hillary,” in Portsmouth.

With colleges out for the summer, and sought-after millennial voters harder
to herd, pride events have become a golden summer opportunity for Clinton’s
campaign to generate much-needed excitement. The LGBT community represents
a unique group this election — for the first time, the country has shifted
its views on same sex-marriage so a Democratic presidential front-runner
can embrace a platform of full equality for all. And gay leaders have never
been more eager to get on board in a big way.

“She’s really awesome,” gushed Shipp. “What other candidate have you ever
seen put two same-sex couples in their announcement video? That set the bar
for the community in a way that other campaigns have not done before.”
Shipp said it was also meaningful to her that Robby Mook, Clinton’s
campaign manager, is openly gay.

Clinton, who marched in the Pride Parade when she first ran for Senate, has
long cultivated the gay vote. But her record of support for gay-rights
issues, particularly during her husband’s presidency, was never ahead of
her time — in 2000, Clinton said she did not support gay marriages. And in
2003, when asked about the Defense of Marriage Act, Clinton equivocated,
saying through a spokesman that “this issue is in a state of evolution.”

This cycle, Clinton has said she supports a constitutional right for
same-sex couples to marry — an evolution from a position she touted last
year when she said same-sex marriage should be left to the states to
decide. Her evolving record on the issue makes the LGBT community’s broad,
seemingly universal embrace of her candidacy stand out all the more.

To some gays and lesbians, Clinton’s personal story — as a woman who has
persevered despite obstacles and attacks — is inspiring. Others point to
her gay friends. And still others acknowledge her less-than-perfect record
on gay issues but accept the sincerity of her commitment this time around.

“There’s no question that Hillary has evolved on the issue of marriage and
recognition of LGBT families,” said former New York City Council Speaker
Christine Quinn, who is gay. “But you can say that about almost every
progressive national leader. There were few national Democrats who five or
10 years ago were where I would have wanted them to be on this issue.
What’s profound for me as it relates to [Clinton’s] evolution is that it’s
a very personal evolution. I’ve always seen her working on this issue,
listening, being with people who were LGBT.”

For Quinn, the more meaningful signal was the gay and lesbian couples
featured in her announcement video: “It stood out like neon for me. It’s
thrilling. It feels like such an enormous change and a huge step forward.”

The campaign has continued to make public signs of inclusion to the LGBT
community. “You would be hard-pressed to embrace our community more
aggressively than her campaign is,” Quinn said, pointing to the campaign
changing its official Twitter avatar to a rainbow-colored “H” on the day
the Supreme Court took up the case to decide whether same-sex couples have
a constitutional right to marry.

On Tuesday, Clinton’s campaign released a new video, titled “Equal,” with
footage of same-sex couples tying the knot. A voice-over features clips
from Clinton’s kickoff speech and her 2011 speech in Geneva, where she
declared that “gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay
rights.” And Brynne Craig, the campaign’s deputy national political
director, is in the final stages of hiring an LGBT outreach coordinator for
the campaign.

The campaign has also been successfully shoring up cash from the LGBT
community.

Hillary Clinton marches along Fifth Avenue in Manhattan during the annual
Gay and Lesbian Pride Parade in New York 25 June 2000.

Laura Ricketts, the openly gay co-owner of the Chicago Cubs, who in 2008
bundled money for Barack Obama, hosted a house party fundraiser for Clinton
in Chicago last month. At a fundraiser in Washington, D.C., last month,
Clinton spoke before a majority lesbian crowd, hosted by Claire Lucas and
Judy Dlugacz, founders of a cruise line targeting gay women. On Wednesday
night, gay icons Lady Gaga and Tony Bennett headlined Clinton’s first large
low-dollar fundraiser at the Plaza Hotel in Manhattan.

The online campaign store sells a $30 “Hillary Pride Tank,” a “Pride bumper
sticker pack” for $5, and the $30 “LGBTQ Vee.”

Critics view Clinton’s evolution on gay marriage as politically expedient,
moving at the same time the whole country has dramatically shifted its
views on the issue. Her supporters said it doesn’t matter.

“One of her platforms is equality for all, which is not something we saw in
2008,” said Eunic Ortiz, president of the Stonewall Democrats of NYC, which
won’t endorse any candidate until 2016. “The general feeling is she’s a
welcome voice for our community.” Ortiz was willing to forgive Clinton’s
previous record on gay marriage. “It’s something she has evolved on,” said
Ortiz. “This is now equality for all, and we are looking forward.”

Quinn recalled meeting with Clinton during her 2000 run for New York
Senate. A small group of elected officials and leading LGBT advocates
gathered at the home of Jeff Soref, a major gay fundraiser, in Gramercy
Park.

“[Clinton] spoke personally and powerfully about the gay couple who lived
near her parents in Arkansas,” Quinn recalled. The couple, Larry Curbo and
Dillard Denson, are mentioned in Clinton’s memoir “Living History” as dear
friends of her father who helped break down his stereotypes about
homosexuals. “I think they were literally with her father on his deathbed.
Meeting those two men was a pivotal moment opening up her mind. To me
that’s what you want, for someone moving on this issue: coming at it from a
personal perspective.”

*Clinton to miss convention of liberal activists, bloggers
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/d3224f3be2714fdc8e8db0401f589dc7/clinton-miss-convention-liberal-activists-bloggers>
// AP // Ken Thomas – June 24, 2015 *

ST. LOUIS (AP) — Hillary Rodham Clinton isn't expected to show at an annual
convention of liberal activists and bloggers often courted by Democratic
presidential candidates.

Netroots Nation organizers said Wednesday that Democratic presidential
candidates Bernie Sanders and Martin O'Malley have confirmed their
attendance at the July 16-19 conference in Phoenix.

Clinton's campaign cited a scheduling conflict, with commitments in Iowa on
July 17 and Arkansas on July 18. Sanders and O'Malley plan to speak at the
Iowa dinner.

About 3,000 activists are planning to attend the Netroots Nation
convention, which will also feature Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. Many
liberals had hoped she would challenge Clinton for the nomination.

Clinton remains the dominant Democratic candidate but one of her challenges
in the primaries will be generating support among some liberals who have
been hesitant to back her campaign, wary of her willingness to rein in Wall
Street excess and her past support of trade deals.

Clinton last appeared at Netroots Nation in 2007 — then called Yearly Kos —
at a presidential forum that also included then-Illinois Sen. Barack Obama,
former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards and others.

She received a tepid response from activists, some of whom disapproved of
her vote in favor of the 2003 invasion of Iraq and her acceptance of
campaign contributions from lobbyists.

Raven Brooks, Netroots Nation's executive director, said the conference is
hopeful the Clinton campaign "will reconsider addressing this core
progressive community who are most eager to hear from her."

Brooks said former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee, a former Republican
seeking the Democratic nomination, would not be invited to the event and
organizers would monitor the presidential field to decide whether to invite
others like former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, who is exploring a campaign.

*SOCIAL MEDIA*

*Ken Thomas (6/24/15, 10:43 AM)*
<https://twitter.com/KThomasDC/status/613704012936966144>* – Hillary
Clinton not appearing at @NetrootsNation in Phoenix; campaign cites
scheduling conflicts w/ events in IA & Ark.*

*Hunter Walker (6/24/15, 11:14 AM)*
<https://twitter.com/hunterw/status/613711712252858369>* – Mississippi
Senator Roger Wicker says the state’s flag should be replaced.*

*Scott Wong (6/24/15, 11:07 AM)*
<https://twitter.com/scottwongDC/status/613710055167389696>* – House set to
vote on TAA on Thursday if it passes Senate quickly, GOP lawmakers say.*

*Bernie Sanders (6/24/15, 2:04 PM)*
<https://twitter.com/SenSanders/status/613754642468601856/photo/1>* – I
strongly support the Voting Rights Advancement Act of 2015.*

*PublicPolicyPolling (6/24/15, 6:22 PM)*
<https://twitter.com/ppppolls/status/613819626644897792>* – Jim Webb’s
number of black supporters on our national poll last week: 0.*

*HRC** NATIONAL COVERAGE*

*Hillary Clinton’s ‘All Lives Matter’ Remark Stirs Backlash
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/24/hillary-clintons-all-lives-matter-remark-stirs-backlash/?smid=tw-share>
// NYT // Alan Rappeport – June 24, 2015 *

Hillary Rodham Clinton is facing backlash for saying that “all lives
matter” in an African-American church in Missouri on Tuesday, offending
some who feel that she is missing the point of the “black lives matter”
mantra.

Mrs. Clinton’s remarks at Christ the King United Church of Christ in
Florissant, Mo. — only a few miles north of Ferguson, where a black
teenager was shot by a white police officer last August — came during a
broader discussion of civil rights in America.

She was talking about how a disproportionate number of young people of
color are out of school and out of work and, explaining that everyone needs
a “chance and a champion,” she recalled how her mother was abandoned as a
teenager and went on to work as a maid.

“What kept you going?” Mrs. Clinton remembered asking her mother. “Her
answer was very simple. Kindness along the way from someone who believed
she mattered. All lives matter.”

The remark caused a stir on social media, with some African-Americans on
Twitter suggesting that Mrs. Clinton had lost their votes.

The Rev. Renita Lamkin, who was in the audience at the event, told NPR that
Mrs. Clinton’s comment did not go unnoticed.

“That blew a lot of support that she may have been able to engender here,”
she said.

The phrase “black lives matter” has become a rallying cry in the last year
amid a spate of episodes around the country, including the 18-year-old
Michael Brown’s death in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, where white
police officers have been accused of using excessive force against black
suspects.

Judith Butler, a professor at University of California, Berkley, summed up
the frustration with the use of “all lives matter” in The Times in January.

“When some people rejoin with ‘All Lives Matter’ they misunderstand the
problem, but not because their message is untrue,” she wrote. “It is true
that all lives matter, but it is equally true that not all lives are
understood to matter which is precisely why it is most important to name
the lives that have not mattered, and are struggling to matter in the way
they deserve.”

Mrs. Clinton has not been opposed to using the phrase in the past,
declaring that “yes, black lives matter” at a gala in New York last year.

The controversy comes as Mrs. Clinton has sought to address racial issues
in a more direct manner than she was able to in 2007, when she was running
against someone who would go on to become the first black president.

Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist who is black, defended Mrs. Clinton
and said that her remarks on Tuesday should be taken in the context that
she was discussing her mother.

*Bernie Sanders Gains on Hillary Clinton in Bloomberg Early-State Polling
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-25/bernie-sanders-gains-on-hillary-clinton-in-bloomberg-early-state-polling>
// Bloomberg // John McCormick - June 25, 2015*

The results of simultaneous polls in Iowa and New Hampshire suggest a
Democratic appetite for a Clinton rival and highlight potential
vulnerabilities for the front-runner.

Bernie Sanders is gaining on Hillary Clinton in Iowa and New Hampshire,
with an appeal as an issue-oriented protest vehicle potentially capable of
slowing any coronation of the popular front-runner.

In simultaneous surveys, the U.S. senator from Vermont received nearly a
quarter of support from likely Democratic caucus and primary voters in the
states that host the first presidential nomination balloting early next
year, cutting sharply into Clinton's still-huge lead.

The polls suggest substantive and symbolic support for the socialist, as
well as a craving among some Democrats for a Clinton rival to rise.

“I want to try to get him along as far as I can,” said Democratic poll
participant John Murphy, 74, a retired railroad worker in West Des Moines,
Iowa. “He’s going to bring up some issues that she may not want to talk
about.”

The surveys were commissioned to test sources of strength for Sanders, who
has seen audiences at his campaign events swell in recent weeks. The polls
were conducted June 19-22 by West Des Moines-based Selzer & Co. in Iowa and
Washington-area Purple Strategies in New Hampshire, the latter done in
cooperation with Saint Anselm College. The margin of error on the full
samples—401 in Iowa, 400 in New Hampshire—is plus or minus 4.9 percentage
points.

In Iowa, Clinton leads Sanders 50 percent to 24 percent, and in New
Hampshire, 56 percent to 24 percent. That's a six- to eight-point increase
in his support since those states were polled by Bloomberg Politics and
partners in May.

With nearly identical support in Iowa and New Hampshire, the polls suggest
Sanders' rise isn’t just because he enjoys New England neighbor-state
status. In both states, he gets higher marks than Clinton on authenticity
and willingness to take on Wall Street and financial elites.

Along the campaign trail, Sanders appears to be changing some minds: His
unfavorable rating in Iowa is just 4 percent, down 8 percentage points
since May. At the same time, 57 percent now view him positively, up 10
points from the last poll.

“You can make the case that a certain amount of Bernie Sanders’s support is
a protest vote, but there’s more to it than that,” said J. Ann Selzer,
president of Selzer & Co. “People like him. They like what he stands for.
They like showing up at his events and hearing him say things they believe
in.”

Clinton’s support has dropped by 7 points in Iowa and 6 points in New
Hampshire. Among likely Democratic voters, she's viewed favorably by 88
percent in Iowa and 86 percent in New Hampshire. That's up two points since
May in Iowa and unchanged in New Hampshire, and comparable to the
popularity of her husband, former President Bill Clinton.

Yet Sanders' team points to mounting evidence that the white-haired,
sometimes seemingly grumpy senator could offer voters an appealing
alternative to Clinton, a former U.S. secretary of state, senator, and
first lady viewed as the overwhelming Democratic nomination front-runner.

“It's tremendous progress that he is making with voters in the first two
states,” Tad Devine, Sanders' chief political strategist, said of the poll
findings. “It's something we felt on the ground.”

While Sanders is indeed enjoying something of a mini-surge in the two
states, the polls show he's almost certain to hit a ceiling eventually,
said Purple Strategies' Doug Usher.

“Clinton remains enormously well-known and well-liked in New Hampshire, a
state she won before,” Usher said. “She benefits from a gender gap in a
primary that will be disproportionately female, and even Sanders’ voters
admit Clinton is likely the nominee. As long as Democrats like both
candidates simultaneously, Sanders will have an uphill climb.”

The New Hampshire survey shows the race not as close there as a poll
released last week by Suffolk University, which had Clinton at 41 percent
and Sanders at 31 percent. Unlike the Bloomberg Politics/Saint Anselm poll,
the Suffolk survey didn’t start with a database of registered voters,
instead relying more on the self-reported likelihood of voting in the
primary. It also included Vice President Joe Biden, while this one didn’t.

Clinton swamps Sanders on who can beat the Republican nominee in the
general election, foreign-policy experience, and knowing how to get things
done in Washington. The two find roughly equal support among likely
Democratic voters on who will fight for average people and who will care
for people like themselves. Depending on the state, Sanders has a 7- to
18-point edge on taking on Wall Street and a 12- to 17-point advantage on
authenticity.

“His priorities are right and he’s not going to just crumble under the
status quo,” said Anne Welch, 59, a caregiver who lives in Penacook, New
Hampshire. “He won’t compromise.”

Welch, who once lived in Vermont and met Sanders, said she supported
Clinton in 2008. “I kind of feel like I’m betraying my gender,” she said.

Clinton's team has worked to dampen expectations, noting that it's rare for
a Democratic candidate who isn't an incumbent president to win more than 50
percent in Iowa's caucuses. The goal is to try to avoid having her seen as
a wounded front-runner should she fail to dominate the first contest. In
2008, she finished third in Iowa and her aura of inevitability was badly
damaged by an insurgent Barack Obama.

That sense of inevitability is strong again in Iowa and New Hampshire, with
four-fifths of likely Democratic voters in both states saying they think
Clinton is destined to be the nominee. Even among supporters of Sanders, 69
percent of those in Iowa say she'll be the party's eventual nominee.
Clinton’s own Iowa supporters are even more confident, with 93 percent
saying she'll be the standard-bearer. Her campaign declined to comment on
these polls.

Among independents likely to participate in the Iowa caucuses—about a fifth
of the probable electorate—Sanders leads Clinton, 35 percent to 29 percent.
In May, she led with that group by 19 points. (The margin of error is
higher in subgroups like these.)

Women in Iowa are much more likely to back Clinton than men are, 59 percent
to 39 percent. Among women, she leads Sanders 59 percent to 19 percent,
while it’s much narrower advantage among men, 39 percent to 30 percent.

While some Democrats and independents are welcoming Sanders to the race
with their support, it doesn't mean they're rejecting Clinton.

Almost nine in 10 who are supporting Sanders in New Hampshire, and 83
percent in Iowa, say they're backing him because of what he stands for.
Just 13 percent in Iowa and 9 percent in New Hampshire say their decision
is because they don't want Clinton to get the nomination, or because they
want to send her a message.

Matthew Cook, 27, who just completed a physics degree and lives in
Waterloo, Iowa, said Sanders has been “a really consistent politician,
which is hard to find.” He plans to vote for Sanders if for no reason other
than to push Clinton on the issues he cares most about, including gay
marriage, climate change, and fair trade.

“She needs to come out and firmly state where her opinions are,” he said.
“There can’t be any ambiguity.”

*Democrats Try to Force Republicans to Release Clinton Confidant Testimony
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/democrats-try-to-force-vote-on-releasing-hillary-clinton-confidant-s-testimony>
// Bloomberg // Billy House – June 24, 2015 *

Democrats on the House panel investigating the September 11, 2012 attacks
in Benghazi are invoking a "right" they say permits them to force a public
committee vote on releasing Hillary Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal's
closed-door testimony.

The five Democrats are making the demand in a letter dated Wednesday to the
committee chairman Trey Gowdy of South Carolina.

Led by Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the Democrats write that the panel's
deposition procedures, as adopted by the House, allow them to require the
committee to "promptly schedule a public business meeting to consider,
debate and vote on the proposal to release Sidney Blumenthal's deposition
transcript."

They say release of a transcript of Blumenthal's closed-door testimony
"will resolve public disagreements that have arisen from the selective-and
sometimes inaccurate-descriptions of his testimony and his emails that have
appeared in the press."

Jamal Ware, a spokesman for the committee's Republican majority, accused
the Democrats of spurning Gowdy's offer to discuss the issue. "Chairman
Gowdy atempted to schedule a meeting," Ware said in a statement, "but the
Democrats chose to send out a press release instead."  He noted that
Blumenthal is being treated just like every other person who has testified.
"The committee has not released the transcript of any other witness and the
chairman is not inclined to treat this witness differently," Ware said.

Blumenthal was called to give a closed-door deposition last week about
memos and advice on Libya he sent then-Secretary of State Clinton prior to
the attacks on the U.S. facilities in which four Americans were killed.

Since then, there have been leaks to the media about his emails to Clinton
about Libya and Benghazi when she was secretary of state. The committee
released 60 of those missives last week, but not any of Blumenthal's
testimony.  The committee Democrats, and Blumenthal's lawyer, James Cole,
have complained some of those have given an inaccurate account of what
occurred in the deposition.

In their letter, the committee Democrats say that the procedure for
releasing depositions is specifically spelled out in a committee rule. They
say it reads: "The chair and ranking minority member shall consult
regarding the release of depositions. If either objects in writing to a
proposed release of a deposition or a portion thereof, the matter shall be
promptly referred to the Select Committee for resolution."

"It appears that all of the prerequisites have been filled," the Democratic
lawmakers wrie, which notes Democrats began asking for the public release
of the Blumenthal transcript last week.

"Since all of the steps have been fulfilled as required by the Deposition
Procedures adopted by the House, we request that you promptly schedule a
business meeting of the Select Committee so Members may consider, debate,
and vote on this important matter," they write.

*Should Political Campaigns Stop Using Free Labor?
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-25/should-political-campaigns-stop-using-free-labor->
// Bloomberg // Emily Greenhouse – June 24, 2015 *

Carolyn Osorio, who graduated in 2013 from Pratt Institute, seems to be a
one-woman weapon against the axiom of apathetic millennials: She's a young
person of political passion. In an op-ed column published Wednesday in USA
Today, she describes high-school nights spent sleeping in a Hillary for
America t-shirt and tears shed upon Clinton’s concession to Barack Obama.

When Clinton announced her intention to seek the presidency in 2016, Osorio
practically vaulted on board.  “I quickly applied for and was offered a
position as a Hillary for America fellow to work on the campaign,” she
writes. “I couldn't have been more excited — until I was told I'd have to
move to Nevada and work full time on my own dime.”

Hillary Clinton’s young campaign prides itself on a kind of thriftiness.
Her campaign manager Robby Mook has reportedly boasted to donors and staff
alike that he is “really, really cheap.” Staff members, according to the
Washington Post, are using personal cellphones for work. And the other day,
campaign chairman John Podesta got from Manhattan to D.C. by Vamoose bus: a
$30 ride. He called it “solidarity.”

This may be what the candidate herself was going for, in her decision to
road trip from New York to Iowa in a clunky van called “Scooby,” as soon as
her campaign officially launched. Nowadays, she’s mostly flying commercial.

Since Osorio graduated from college, with a degree in art theory,
criticism, and history, she hasn’t found a job. “Two straight years of
unemployment,” she writes. She hoped that Clinton would at least pay the
people who work for her (and not short hours) the minimum wage. “I had
hoped a trailblazer would be more willing to break the mold of indentured
servitude that haunts my generation,” Osorio writes. “Finding out that
Hillary perpetuates the exploitation known as unpaid internships was like
discovering that Santa wasn't real.”

Osorio points to a broader issue: What kind of a job is it, to pitch in on
a political campaign? And shouldn't remuneration be explicit?

“We’re thrilled to welcome volunteers for the summer, just like other
campaigns in both parties have done in the past,” Jesse Ferguson, a
spokesperson for Clinton, wrote to me by e-mail. “Many successful fellows
from a similar program during the Obama campaign now work with us on this
campaign and we’re sure the same will be true with many from this  group.
The latest evidence of the intense grassroots interest in Hillary Clinton’s
campaign comes from the tremendous interest in our fellows program.”

Clinton's camp has lately received a spate of negative attention for the
reliance on “free labor.” But its practices are far from unusual.
Volunteers and interns are the backbones of the modern political campaign.
Obama’s team had this kind of program in both 2008 and 2012, and it helped
them dominate. The Republican National Committee has launched a similar
program to train volunteers and staffers, perhaps as a kind of catchup.

Osorio says she'll vote for Clinton anyway, but she believed she would be
paid.

Rachel Bien, a lawyer who specializes in low-wage labor at Outten & Golden,
said these kinds of presumptions or implications matter when courts
evaluate the totality of the circumstances in determining whether a
position is volunteer, or a job. “To the extent that the relationship looks
more like an employment relationship because you have to complete an
application, you’re screened, you’re meeting prerequisites, it looks more
like a job or employment situation than a volunteer position that’s open to
anyone who wants to volunteer regardless of background, education,
situation, etcetera,” she said by phone Wednesday.

Michael Harper, a scholar of labor relations at the Boston University
School of Law, sees political volunteering as elementally different from
regular employment. “It would be inappropriate to apply the standards of
the Fair Labor Standards Act to voluntary activity on political campaigns –
which is First Amendment activity that we don’t want to monetize,” he said.

Neither Harper nor Bien knew of exact precedent in the legal system, when
it came to volunteers. But Bien mentioned the Supreme Court ruling in 1985,
in Tony and Susan Alamo Foundation v. Secretary of Labor, in which the
Department of Labor found that the religious organization had violated the
minimum wage, overtime, and record-keeping provisions of the Fair Labor
Standards Act even though the volunteers considered themselves volunteers;
the conditions of their compensation—food, clothing, shelter, and other
benefits—made it an employment relationship.

“The government has created a whole lot of exceptions for itself,” Bien
said. Osorio herself, in her column, acknowledges how common unpaid work is
in the political industry. “At the same time the administration was
cracking down on unpaid internships in the private sector, it continued not
paying the 300 annual interns in the White House,” she wrote.

Bien said she considers the matter Osorio raises “really
problematic—especially coming from someone like Hillary Clinton who has
been really supportive of min wage laws and has publicly called on
businesses to pay interns. When you have young people—many of whom can’t
find employment, as Hillary recognizes—working long hours, day in and day
out, to help, at the end of the day someone needs to be supporting them.
The burden otherwise falls on family or the government.”

“I hope that Hillary will reconsider what she’s doing her and will pay her
interns,” she said.  “It would set a great precedent.”

*Clinton’s Fundraising Rounds Include Law Firms: Business of Law
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/clinton-s-fundraising-rounds-include-law-firms-business-of-law>
// Bloomberg // Ellen Rosen – June 24, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton’s fundraising schedule for the next two weeks is nothing
but hectic. And, as Bloomberg Politics reports, among the 26 events she’s
set to attend between June 22 and July 3, at least two involve law firms.

She is scheduled to be at a Wednesday afternoon fundraiser hosted by
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP and at another on June 30 hosted by Julissa
Reynoso, a former U.S. ambassador to Uruguay who’s now a partner at
Chadbourne & Parke LLP, according to invitations obtained by Bloomberg.
George Pataki, one of the Republicans seeking his party’s nomination, is
counsel at Chadbourne.

Campaign spokesman Josh Schwerin declined to comment on the number of
fundraisers Clinton has scheduled. Many events come with a recommended
contribution of the $2,700 legal maximum for her primary campaign or
require attendees to raise at least $27,000.

After the quarter ends, the Clinton campaign, like all the others, must
file disclosures with the Federal Election Commission.

Forty-Four Firms Meet ‘Gold Standard’ of Women’s Prominence

The Women in Law Empowerment Forum has released its list of big firms that
meet their “gold standard.” This year, 44 have met four of the group’s six
requirements, the minimum needed for the accolade.

Those criteria are that women are: 20 percent of U.S. equity partners or,
alternatively, one-third of non-lateral attorneys that became U.S. equity
partners within the previous 12 months; 10 percent of firm chairs and
managing partners; 20 percent of the primary governance committee; 20
percent of the compensation committee or its equivalent; 25 percent of the
U.S. practice group leaders and department heads; and 10 percent of the top
half of U.S. equity partners in terms of compensation.

Eight firms met all six benchmarks: Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett &
Dunner LLP; Hogan Lovells LLP; Holland & Hart LLP; Littler Mendelson PC;
Reed Smith LLP; Schiff Hardin LLP; Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP; and Sutherland
Asbill & Brennan LLP.

The other 36 firms are: Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz PC;
Ballard Spahr LLP; Bryan Cave LLP; Cooley LLP; Davis Polk & Wardwell LLP;
Davis Wright Tremaine LLP; Dentons US; DLA Piper LLP (US); Dorsey & Whitney
LLP; Faegre Baker Daniels LLP; Haynes & Boone LLP; Hughes Hubbard & Reed
LLP; Jackson Lewis PC; K&L Gates LLP; Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP;
Latham & Watkins LLP; Lathrop & Gage LLP; Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP;
McCarter & English LLP; McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP; Morgan, Lewis &
Bockius LLP; Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP; Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe
LLP; Paul Hastings LLP; Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP;
Perkins Coie LLP; Polsinelli PC; Quarles & Brady LLP; Shearman & Sterling
LLP; Sidley Austin LLP; Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP; Skadden, Arps,
Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP; Steptoe & Johnson LLP; Stinson Leonard Street
LLP; Stoel Rives LLP; and Thompson Coburn LLP.

The Above the Law blog noted that six of the firms -- Cooley; Fulbright &
Jaworski, now Norton Rose Fulbright; Paul Hastings; Reed Smith; Shook
Hardy; and Sutherland Asbill -- had the highest percentage of women on
their management committees, based on 2013 data from the American Lawyer.

Lawsuit News

LG Settles With Conservation Groups Over New Jersey Headquarters

LG Electronics Inc. reached a settlement with several conservation groups,
allowing the company’s U.S. unit to build a $300 million headquarters in
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, after amending the design.

Opponents had said the building would ruin views of the Palisades, a
200-million-year-old stretch of rocky wilderness above the western shore of
the Hudson River.

The new design will retain the project’s scale while protecting the views,
LG said in a statement Tuesday. Under the settlement, the conservation
groups agreed to withdraw litigation challenging zoning approvals.

The groups include the Natural Resources Defense Council, the New Jersey
State Federation of Women’s Clubs, the New Jersey Conservation Foundation,
the New York-New Jersey Trail Conference and Scenic Hudson, a Poughkeepsie,
New York-based preservation group.

Laurance Rockefeller, an environmental lawyer whose family donated the land
80 years ago that became the basis for Palisades Interstate Park, took part
in the settlement talks.

The new design for the building calls for a five-story north wing almost 70
feet (21 meters) high and a three-story south wing. LG will also use
landscape, lighting and other design features to reduce visual impact on
the park, a National Natural and Historic Landmark.

The project has been in the works since 2009, but was delayed by two
lawsuits challenging zoning approvals. Both suits were dismissed by a New
Jersey Superior Court judge in August 2013; that decision was on appeal.

On the Move

Loeb & Loeb LLP has hired Jason Lilien, previously a partner at Zuckerman
Spaeder LLP, as a partner. Lilien, a former bureau chief of the New York
State Attorney General’s Charities Bureau, has joined the firm’s charitable
giving and tax-exempt organizations practice in New York.

Holland & Knight LLP has hired Kelly Franklin Bagnall as a partner in
Dallas. Bagnall, previously a member of Dykema Gossett PLLC, specializes in
the hospitality industry with a focus on operations, as well as commercial
litigation and general business counseling.

Lowenstein Sandler LLP announced that David Elkind has joined the firm as a
partner in its Washington office. Elkind, an insurance coverage litigator,
was previously a partner at Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP.

David Posner has joined Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP as a partner in
the litigation department. Posner, previously a partner at Otterbourg PC,
will lead the bankruptcy and financial restructuring team in New York.

McDermott Will & Emery has hired labor and employment litigator Kristin
Michaels as a partner in its trial practice group in Chicago. Michaels was
previously a partner at Seyfarth Shaw LLP and has represented clients in a
range of industries.

*GOP 2016’s battle for second fundraising war
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/24/politics/2016-election-republican-fundraising/index.html>
// CNN // Sara Murray, Theodore Schleifer, and Tom LoBianco – June 24, 2015
*

The money race for second place is on.

With a June 30 fundraising deadline drawing near, speculation over how much
money Republican presidential candidates will collect is reaching a fever
pitch. It's already clear that Jeb Bush will come out on top regardless of
whether he hits or even surpasses the $100 million target many in the donor
world set for the former Florida governor. The more interesting question,
many donors and campaign operatives say, is who will come in second.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has an unusually broad donor list thanks to his
highly publicized recall election and big dollar backers like Chicago Cubs
co-owner Todd Ricketts. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio has worked meticulously to
make inroads with prominent GOP fundraisers who aren't sold on Bush. And
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has drawn in small dollar donors, as well as the
support of a handful of super PACs. A leader of the super PACs backing Cruz
expects those groups and the official campaign committee to raise a
combined $50 million by the end of the week.

"When it comes to fundraising in a presidential race, it's the expectation
game," said Craig Robinson, a GOP activist in Iowa and editor of The Iowa
Republican website. "Every candidate has a different bar they're going to
have to clear."

The price tag to wage a competitive primary campaign is likely to come in
well below $100 million. Republican fundraisers said if a candidate and
allied groups can raise $10 million to $20 million by the end of the month,
they will be viewed as credible rivals.

Anthony Scaramucci, the founder of SkyBridge Capital who is supporting
Walker, said he expects Walker to raise $15 million to $22 million.

"There's a number that's enough and there's a number that's not enough,"
Scaramucci said. "The $20 million number is enough."

The best-positioned candidates should plan to barrel into Iowa with $20
million to $40 million in the bank between their campaign accounts and
their super PACs, GOP strategists said.

A candidate could win the Iowa caucuses with as little as $2 million,
Robinson said. And in New Hampshire, "there's sort of a practical limit on
how much TV time you can buy," said Tom Rath, a GOP operative there.

But a bitter faceoff in Florida -- the home state of Bush and Rubio -- is a
much more expensive proposition.

It could cost $20 million to $30 million, said Miami-Dade Republican Party
Chairman Nelson Diaz, for candidates to cover the four major media markets
and adapt to a new primary system due to the timing of the Florida contest.
All of the state's delegates will be awarded to the winner of the March 15
primary, the earliest possible date when states can do so rather than
divvying them up proportionally.

"Only one of them survives the encounter in Florida," said Steve Schmidt,
who was the senior strategist for Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign
in 2008.

All of this requires not only strong fundraising, but also disciplined
spending. That's particularly true for Bush and Rubio. While other
candidates may chart their course to victory by investing heavily in a
single state, both contenders from Florida are expected to compete in
several states simultaneously.

"Obviously we want to raise as much as we can and then be very careful
about how we spend it," said Rubio spokesman Alex Conant. "We're not going
to raise as much as the others."

Rubio will spend the rest of the month crisscrossing the country to average
roughly one fundraiser a day. He'll do most of that on commercial flights
while a lean staff keeps his campaign headquarters humming.

At a recent Bush fundraiser in Washington, donors forked over $2,700 per
person to stand around tables munching on potato chips and croissant finger
sandwiches as organizers sought to keep event overhead costs low.

"We understand that we're going to have to compete everywhere and that
we're going to need the resources to compete everywhere," said Tim Miller,
a spokesman for the Bush campaign. That requires building a campaign
operation that's flush with cash and ready to spring into action when a
number of states hold their contests on March 1.

The leader of Cruz's super PACs said the structure -- four separate
organizations largely controlled by three donors -- allows them to minimize
costs by tapping donors' own professional networks.

"Everybody thinks this structure, as it relates to us, is somehow limiting
our capacity and there's a chokehold -- actually it's the opposite," said
the group's leader. "I'm not going to have to buy a whole bunch of
computers that I throw away at the end of this deal."

Candidates' overall fundraising totals will receive plenty of attention,
but Republicans cautioned that every dollar isn't created equally. Many
candidates will be able to stretch their dollars further than Bush, who has
the biggest target on his back and will have to combat fatigue from his
family name.

Frank VanderSloot, a GOP fundraiser in Idaho and chief executive of
wellness company Melaleuca, said he views Bush, Walker and Rubio as the top
tier of GOP candidates. At the moment, Rubio is his favorite.

Bush faces a tougher path because of his family legacies, VanderSloot said.
At a recent board meeting for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Mr. VanderSloot
said some business executives confessed they were uncomfortable with the
idea of "crowning" another Bush president.

"There's a general feeling of we don't have a monarchy here," Mr.
VanderSloot said.

Bush's unique hurdles help explain why he and his allies are pressing
donors for big contributions right up to the fundraising deadline.

After wrapping up his official announcement in Florida, Bush hopped on a
call with his finance director and donors and prodded them to give to his
official campaign account, according to someone familiar with the call.
Dave Kochel, the campaign's senior strategist, assured fundraisers that
Bush would be a formidable competitor in the early states.

The super PAC supporting Bush has been making similar moves. On a call last
week, Mike Murphy, who is running the group, encouraged donors to keep up
their fundraising so he could "weaponize" their total.

*Hillary Clinton to skip major progressive event
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/hillary-clinton-skip-major-progressive-event>
// MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald – June 24, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton will not attend the Netroots Nation liberal organizing
conference next month due to a scheduling conflict, organizers confirmed to
msnbc, skipping the marquee annual progressive gathering for a second year
in a row.

Fellow Democratic presidential candidates Martin O’Malley and Bernie
Sanders will both hold town hall style meetings at the conference scheduled
for July 16-19 in Phoenix, Arizona. Clinton will be holding events that
weekend in Iowa and Arkansas.

“Our campaign looks forward to earning the support of the Democrats
participating in this conference but Hillary Clinton has scheduling
conflicts which will prevent her from attending. She wishes them the best
on their conference,” said Clinton campaign spokesperson Jesse Ferguson.

Former Sen. Jim Webb was not invited because he has not declared whether he
will run for the Democratic nomination. Former Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln
Chafee, who was a Republican until 2013 and joined the 2016 presidential
race as a Democrat, was also not invited.

“We don’t have plans to invite Chafee,” said Netroots Nation executive
director Raven Brooks. “We’re going to continue to look at the field as it
evolves but since it is a town hall format we don’t want to steal time from
the candidates we have on board just to be inclusive.”

Netroots, originally started by DailyKos founder Markos Moulitsas to
organize online opposition to the Iraq War, is perhaps the largest annual
gathering of progressive movement activists in the country, and often
attracts Democratic candidates and officeholders.

Clinton was invited to attend last year as well, but did not. Sen.
Elizabeth Warren gave the keynote address and the super PAC Ready for
Warren used the speech to kick off their effort to draft the senator.

With Warren still refusing to consider a White House bid, Ready for Warren
recently decided to switch their allegiance to Sanders, who has quickly
become a favorite of progressive activists.

Clinton attended the conference in 2007, along with most of the other
Democratic presidential candidates that year, including Barack Obama. Her
campaign offered a top level surrogate to speak on her behalf this year,
but organizers wanted attendees to hear from the candidates themselves.

The AP first reported the news that Clinton would not be attending.

*Hillary Clinton’s 3-Word Misstep: ‘All Lives Matter’
<http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/24/417112956/hillary-clintons-three-word-gaffe-all-lives-matter>
// NPR // Tamara Keither – June 24, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton's speech Tuesday at a historic black church in Missouri was
mostly well-received by the audience, but three words angered some of the
activists she was hoping to appeal to.

Clinton spoke to frequent applause about religion, racism, access to
education, repairing communities and the shooting last week in Charleston,
S.C.

The church where Clinton spoke, Christ the King United Church of Christ, is
in Florissant, Mo., fewer than 5 miles from where the rioting and
protesting happened in Ferguson.

But she's now facing criticism on social media after using the phrase "all
lives matter" — which has been used by some as pushback to the phrase
"black lives matter." The latter phrase, which hung on a banner outside the
church, was widely used by protesters in Ferguson and other cities.

Before using the phrase, Clinton was retelling an anecdote about the
lessons she learned from her mother.

"I asked her, 'What kept you going?' Her answer was very simple. Kindness
along the way from someone who believed she mattered. All lives matter."

To some in the pews, what Clinton said fell flat. Or worse:

"With her statement that all lives matter, that blew a lot of support that
she may have been able to engender here," said Renita Lamkin, a pastor at
the St. John AME Church in St. Charles. She is white and while protesting
in Ferguson was hit in the gut with a rubber bullet. Her passion comes in
part because her children are African-American.

"My children matter," she said. "And I need to hear my president say that
the lives of my children matter. That my little black children matter.
Because right now our society does not say that they matter. Black lives
matter. That's what she needs to say."

Clinton's campaign points out she did say "black lives matter," late last
year. But that didn't stop a flood of complaints on Facebook and Twitter
after Clinton's speech:

Gabrielle Kennedy, also in audience at the church, had a more charitable
reaction.

"I knew when she said it that there would be people who would not be happy
with that. But I am of the belief that it's a process," she said.

'It Takes Time'

In nearby Ferguson, burned-out businesses are still boarded up on West
Florissant Avenue. Charles Davis, owner of the Ferguson Burger Bar, counts
his blessings.

"We were saved by God. Nothing happened to us," Davis said.

But business still isn't back to where it was. And neither is the
community. Ferguson is trying to heal from the wound ripped open when a
black 18-year-old was shot by a white police officer.

"It takes time. A year is not long enough. But what people should
understand is a lot of changes that needed be made has been made," he said.

Many of the activists who rose up after the shooting of Michael Brown were
on hand when Clinton spoke.

She spoke about the recent shooting in Charleston, and asked, "How do we
make sense of such an evil act? An act of racist terrorism perpetrated in a
house of God?" Clinton also praised the ability of the families of the
victims to look at the accused gunman and offer forgiveness.

After her speech, still in front of an audience, Clinton sat down for an
hourlong discussion with community leaders. Kennedy, who was there, gives
Clinton credit for coming to Missouri and listening.

"What you saw on that stage there, in the pulpit area there, how we take
care of ourselves. This is us doing us, and it's fabulous stuff," Kennedy
said.

A pastor delivered a final prayer before Clinton left. And in it, she
called for this to be the beginning of a conversation. Not the end.

*The Race That Defined Hillary’s Strategy
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/25/the-race-that-defined-hillary-s-strategy.html>
// The Daily Beast // David Freelander – June 25, 2015*

How Terry McAuliffe’s campaign for governor of Virginia was a dummy run for
2016.

Commonwealth since 2013 when she headlined a rally for Terry McAuliffe, a
longtime friend vying to become governor.

But Virginia has a hold on Hillary.

That’s because the playbook for Clinton to win the presidency in 2016 was
written in that race, which saw McAuliffe eke out a closer than expected
victory against Ken Cuccinelli, the sitting attorney general and a hero to
Virginia tea partiers.

Many of the same people that carried McAuliffe to victory are trying to do
the same for Clinton. There is Robby Mook, Clinton’s well-regarded campaign
manager. Josh Schwerin, who works on rapid response out of Brooklyn, served
as McAuliffe’s press secretary. The campaign’s political director, field
director and research director have all found jobs with Team Clinton.

And many of the operatives who battled against them have gone on to the
various Republican campaigns vying for the chance to take on Clinton. Danny
Diaz, a senior strategist for Cuccinelli, was recently named Jeb Bush’s
campaign manager. Chris LaCivita, another top aide, is now helping lead
Rand Paul’s campaign. Wesley Donehue, who ran Cuccinelli’s digital
operation, is close to Marco Rubio.

Now, Team Clinton is set to take the strategy that won them a medium-sized
state in a low-turnout, off-year election, and take it national, while
Republicans are pouring over that same playbook and looking for holes.

Every campaign is unique, but McAuliffe in 2013 and Clinton in 2015 face a
similar set of challenges. Back then, McAuliffe was trying to come back
from an embarrassing defeat in a Democratic primary four years earlier,
much as Clinton is now.

McAuliffe was a longtime front-person for the Clinton operation, and so he
was relatively well known among voters. In order to reintroduce him to
Virginians, the campaign embarked on a low-key listening tour of the
forgotten corners of the state, where McAuliffe heard voter concerns while
scribbling notes—much as Clinton did with her campaign rollout this spring.

“I think you see a lot of similarities,” said one Republican who worked on
the race. “McAulifffe was a Democrat who was trying to run a, ‘Oh, just
ignore my political past, ignore my scandal, ignore all of the background
noise,’ a lot like Clinton is trying to do now. And whoever the Republican
is is going to have the same kind of ideological edge that Ken had.”

And, like McAuliffe, Clinton faces historical headwinds. For four decades,
Virginia had followed a pattern of electing governors someone from the
party that had lost White House the year before; McAuliffe was the first to
break that pattern.

Clinton’s team, meanwhile, acknowledges that one of her biggest hurdles
will be overcoming the pattern of voters looking to a new party for
leadership after two terms in the White House by the opposing party.

Both trends are not merely historical oddities, strategists say, but
evidence that voters are often looking for change and tire quickly of the
ruling party. If ties to Obama could prove problematic for Clinton, the
botched rollout of the Obamacare website—a law, it should be noted, that
McAuliffe loudly championed—nearly finished McAuliffe.

In order to counteract the gathering clouds of bad news, the McAuliffe
operation put a premium on data and organizing. It’s much the same with
Clinton now, who has pledged to put organizers in every state and who is
counting on a data operation that surpasses event the sophistication of
what the Obama team put together in 2012.

“I don’t think Republicans realize yet how we are able to get turnout in
places in places that are favorable to us,” said one veteran of the race.

McAuliffe avoided a primary (not unlike Clinton, who is so far avoiding a
competitive one) but still took strikingly liberal positions on social
issues regardless. This is proof, Democratic veterans of his campaign say,
that the center of the electorate is shifting rapidly away from the
Republicans.

Clinton is trying the same strategy, staking out liberal positions on gay
rights, immigration, the economy and the environment with the belief that
the center of the electorate is far closer to the Democratic base on these
matters.

But the governor’s race was not one in which the Democrats touted McAuliffe
much; rather, they made the race all about Cuccinelli, an unabashed
conservative who bragged of his record of suing the federal government and
who opposed gay marriage and abortion. This did not make for a particularly
joyful campaign, with Time Magazine branding it “The Dirtiest, Nastiest,
Low-Down Campaign in America.”

“What is significant is that McAuliffe was able to win it even with pretty
low turnout, and he did it because the Republicans gave him a far right
candidate and he was relentless on the social issues,” said Larry Sabato,
the director of the University of Virginia Center for Politics. “This is a
transferable issue in 2016, and one that Republicans are vulnerable on, no
question about it.”

McAullife, he added, was merely, “the non-Cuccinelli on the ballot. And if
Hillary Clinton wins, it is for the same reason that McAuliffe wins—not
because they are exciting or because people love them but because they are
the other guy on the ballot.”

Although Cuccinelli lost by a little over two points, Republicans say that
he outperformed expectations. Polls in the final weeks of the race had
Cuccinelli down by close to ten. He was outspent by $15 million dollars,
and swamped on the airwaves in the race’s final weeks.

But Republicans from around the country have highlighted an exit poll that
showed him beating McAuliffe among voters age 18-24. Republicans say this
is proof that the youngest cohort of the millennial generation is less
focused on social issues and less likely to vote Democratic when Obama is
not on the ballot.

But it wasn’t enough. And the main lesson Republicans took from the
near-upset hold has to do with the primary. Cuccinelli became the GOP
nominee after conservatives grabbed hold of the nominating process and
elbowed aside a far more mainstream alternative. A very winnable race
became a loss after Cuccinelli never attempted to try to bridge the party’s
divide.

What Republicans should learn from the race is to make sure they “get a
better candidate,” said Tom Davis, a Republican former Congressman from the
northern part of the state.

“We had a lot of advantages in that contest, but Republicans keep doing too
good of a job of bringing out the Democratic base.”

*The Clinton-Confederate Flag Conspiracy Theory Is a New Low
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/24/the-clinton-confederate-flag-conspiracy-theory-is-a-new-low.html>
// Daily Beast // Patricia Murphy – June 24, 2015 *

Out of the swirl of chaos, grief, grace, and courage that has followed the
Charleston shooting, partisan politics has mostly kept its rightful place
nowhere near the state of South Carolina.

But the national debate over the future of the Confederate flag that flies
in front of the state’s capitol has unwittingly given rise to one of the
more bizarre Clinton conspiracy theories to date: that Bill and Hillary
Clinton, despite decades as civil rights advocates and their right-wing
caricature as Northeast liberal elites, are closet Confederate sympathizers.

The meme took off on Sunday, when The Daily Caller ran a story under the
headline “Flashback: Bill Clinton Honored the Confederacy on Arkansas State
Flag.”

The next morning, the hosts of Fox & Friends debated whether Hillary
Clinton had refused to denounce the Confederate flag flying in front of the
South Carolina (though she actually did denounce it in 2007) out of loyalty
to her husband, who, Elisabeth Hasselbeck said, “signed a law honoring the
Confederacy in Arkansas and about the flag’s design in 1987...that stated,
‘the blue star is to commemorate the Confederate states of America.”

The legislation that The Daily Caller, Fox & Friends, and now dozens of
conservative blogs are referencing was a bill to make the flag that
Arkansas had flown since 1924 the state’s official flag. That flag includes
four stars, three to symbolize the countries that held the Arkansas
territory—Spain, France and the United States—and the fourth, as Hasselbeck
said, “to commemorate the Confederate states of America.”

Nowhere in the state’s legislative history does it explain why the
63-year-old flag needed to be made official, but Arkansas historians have
two explanations. First, the legislature was moving to give the state a
number of “official” designations—think “official state butterfly,”
“official state grain”—as it celebrated its sesquicentennial.

Second, Bill Clinton and the state legislature were in the process of
pushing through a series of measures to ban flag desecration as the U.S.
Supreme Court debated and eventually struck down the 48 state laws against
flag burning, including Arkansas’s ban. Historians told me they believed
the 1987 flag bill was passed to specify the official design of the state
flag in conjunction with that effort. As governor, Clinton later signed a
bill making it a crime to burn or deface a flag, a move that drew vocal
complaints from the American Civil Liberties Union.

It is true that Clinton did nothing in his time as governor to remove the
state flag’s reference to Arkansas’s role in the Confederacy. But by all
accounts, the bill he signed making the state’s flag official was not
created as a Confederate memorial. The sponsor of the bill, longtime
Arkansas legislator W.D. “Bill” Moore, has since died, but former Rep.
Steve Smith said, “I served with Bill Moore in the early 1970s, and he was
hardly a neo-Confederate. Nor was Bill Clinton.”

In 2007, Hillary Clinton said she thought South Carolina should remove the
Confederate flag from the capitol grounds entirely, not just from the front
of the capitol.

The more recent Clintonian history related to the Confederate flag is
easier to find and may be one of the more straightforward positions either
Clinton has ever taken. Both have been consistently, unambiguously against
its use.

During Bill Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign, he endorsed then-Georgia
Gov. Zell Miller’s fruitless attempt to remove the St. Andrews Cross from
the Georgia state flag, a change that eventually came nine years later, and
made Miller the keynote speaker at his 1992 Democratic National Committee
nominating convention.

In 2000, as South Carolina wrestled with the future of the Confederate flag
that still flew above its capitol, then-President Clinton gave the state
his unsolicited advice during a visit to Allen University, a historically
black college in Columbia, S.C., just miles from the state capitol: Take
the flag down. “As long as the waving symbol of one American’s pride is the
shameful symbol of another American’s pain, we have bridges to cross in
this country and we better get across them,”' he told the students.

When Hillary Clinton became a candidate for president herself in 2007, she
said much the same thing during her own visit to the state, telling the AP
she thought South Carolina should remove the Confederate flag from the
capitol grounds entirely, not just from the front of the capitol.

And Tuesday, after South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley’s call to finally remove
the Confederate flag from the capitol grounds in the wake of the Charleston
tragedy, Hillary Clinton called it the right thing to do.

“I appreciate the actions begun yesterday by the governor and other leaders
of South Carolina to remove the Confederate battle flag from the State
House, recognizing it as a symbol of our nation’s racist past that has no
place in our present or our future,” Clinton said. “It shouldn’t fly there,
it shouldn’t fly anywhere.”

There are more than enough reasons for members of the conservative media to
be dubious about the Clintons: the deleted emails, the paid speeches, the
Friends of Bill you thought went away with the Y2K bug but were actually
just sitting on the Clinton Foundation payroll waiting for the next Clinton
administration to begin.

But accusing either Clinton of being a Confederate sympathizer, past or
present, is a conspiracy beneath even its creators.

*Bill Clinton To The United Daughters of the Confederacy
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/heres-a-1994-letter-from-president-bill-clinton-to-the-unite#.fjEnXWE6Q>
// Buzzfeed // Andrew Kaczynski and Christopher Massie – June 24, 2015*

As president, Bill Clinton sent a number of letters to the United Daughters
of the Confederacy, the society of female descendants of veterans of the
Confederate army.

The organization, founded in 1894, has sponsored a number a Confederate
memorials throughout the south, including memorials to General Robert E.
Lee and General Thomas Jonathan “Stonewall” Jackson in the National
Cathedral. In the past, articles in the group’s magazine argued that the
“glorious blood-red Confederate Battle flag” is “an emblem of Freedom.”

“I am delighted to honor the United Daughters of the Confederacy as you
celebrate your 100th anniversary,” read a letter printed in their magazine
in 1994 from the then-president.

“One of the most rewarding of human experiences is the coming together of
people to share common experiences and interests,” wrote Clinton.

“For 100 years, the United Daughters of the Confederacy has maintained and
built upon the wonderful legacy of your founders. The strength of your
organization today is a testament of the vision of your founders and to
your commitment to your shared goals.”

“I congratulate you on your achievement, and I extend best wishes for many
years of continuing success,” he concluded.

A 1996 version of the magazine also cited a letter from then-President Bill
Clinton. In 2008, the website Black Commenter found several other letters
attributed to the then-president that ran in the magazine.

*Hillary Clinton Hires The Strategist Who Broke Her 2008 Campaign
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/hillary-clinton-hires-the-strategist-who-broke-her-2008-camp#.imrYmgXGy>
// Buzzfeed // Ben Smith – June 24, 2015 *

Hillary Clinton has hired the key tactician behind her stunning 2008
primary defeat, a sign both of her campaign’s intense focus on a Democratic
Primary that is shaping up as a joke, and of her team’s obsession with
avoiding the mistakes of her last campaign.

A campaign official confirmed to BuzzFeed News that Jeff Berman has joined
the campaign as a consultant, and has quietly been working for Clinton
since her launch earlier this month.

Berman’s name may not ring bells even for fairly obsessive political
junkies — he’s not an MSNBC regular, doesn’t much talk to reporters, and
has spent most of his professional life in private legal practice.

But reporters who covered the hallucinatory December and January of
Clinton’s collapse will remember him, first, as a tense and reedy voice on
a conference call the night of January 19, 2008. Clinton had just won
Nevada, we thought, because she won about 500 more delegates through a
caucus process that was more like a melee than a vote. I had filed my story
and was walking to my gate at McCarran International Airport when Obama’s
campaign manager, David Plouffe, convened a conference call on what seemed
at first a technical, even absurd, premise: That by virtue of some obscure
rule, Obama had actually won.

“Obama had a majority in the district that had an odd number of delegates,
so he won an extra seat,” Berman explained to flummoxed reporters that
night. “Where Clinton won, the delegates were split evenly.”

(The substance of this point is a nice illustration of how insane the
mechanics of American elections are, and is roughly explained here. The
politics of it are that Berman realized early that the only part of Nevada
that actually mattered was the rural north, and so Obama organized like
hell in Elko.)

It’s hard to overstate how crucial Berman’s minute calculations, his
frighteningly accurate predictive spreadsheet, and the traps he laid
through the early states, were to Obama’s victory. When I profiled him that
May, a prominent Clinton backer called him the campaign’s “unsung hero.” He
subsequently told his story in a detailed book, The Magic Number, which is
a kind of mechanical counterpoint to an election that looks, in retrospect,
like the natural course of history. He’s a bit of a living legend in the
small world that can speak fluently about this stuff. One of his peers,
Jerry Goldfeder, wrote last December that this was the most important hire
Clinton could make.

By hiring Berman, Hillary Clinton isn’t just planning to refight the last
war: She is planning to nuke its battlefields, to gird her loins for a
contest that is vanishingly unlikely to repeat itself. (The 2008 election
was the only contest in modern memory in which a delegate fight mattered.)
Indeed, if there’s a knock on her highly functional early campaign
organization, that’s it: She’s seems to be reacting to her 2008 defeat in
part by running the race she should have had that year, when in fact this
is the cycle, if there ever was one, to take the primary for granted and
run to the middle from the start.

It’s not, of course, quite that simple. Clinton has the resources to win
easily in the Democratic Primary, but Iowa caucusgoers are people of the
left, and Bernie Sanders will get his piece, and Clinton needs to be seen
to take their votes seriously. It’s hard to knock her for hiring the best
people, and doing it right.

Berman, who declined to give me an interview when I wrote that glowing
profile of him in 2008 (“I’ve got ten things on my plate and I’m still
trying to win this fucking thing” was all I got), declined to comment on
his new role with Clinton, as did a campaign spokesman.

But he seems to be bearing down with characteristic intensity, leaving a
job at the law and lobbying firm Bryan Cave this spring to start his own
public affairs firm. (His clients, according to the federal lobbying
registry, included the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and TransCanada, the
company building the controversial Keystone oil pipeline.) He remains a key
figure on the Democratic National Committee’s rules committee, a venue in
which he pretty much rolled his counterpart on the Clinton campaign, Harold
Ickes, on a then-crucial point involving the machinations of the Florida
Democratic Party in 2007.

All this is to say that: Whatever happens to Hillary Clinton this time
around, she’s not going to let Bernie Sanders steal an odd-numbered
delegate from her.

*Why Hillary Clinton Still Needs Terry McAuliffe
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/why-hillary-clinton-still-needs-terry-mcauliffe-20150624>
// National Journal // Ben Pershing – June 24, 2015 *

Terry McAuliffe chaired Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign during the
2008 race, and he spent his time doing Terry McAuliffe things: raising
untold millions of dollars, jousting loudly on TV with Republicans and, by
all appearances, never sleeping.

With Clinton coming to Northern Virginia Friday to headline an event for
the state party, McAuliffe is helping her again for 2016, but in a
strikingly different role: as the governor of a vital swing state—and a
relatively popular one at that—who is more than happy to dispense advice to
Clinton and any other Democrats who care to ask.

"In 2007 and '8, I spent 500 days on the road. … I can't do anything like
that," McAuliffe said. What he can do, though, is lay the groundwork for
next year—he hopes—by winning the Virginia state Senate back this year.
Then he can take that political organization, which already overlaps
significantly with Clinton's, and put it at her disposal.

"The work we do on the ground for the Senate will immediately flip, become
presidential," he told National Journal in an interview earlier this year.
"So we're going to do a lot of work this year."

The other way he can help Clinton, McAuliffe argued, is "for me to continue
to create jobs. Here is a very pro-business governor who is popular—[that]
is a great message. I think if I continue doing what I'm doing and keep
people happy and they're happy, that helps her a lot. That really does help
her win the state."

Virginia and its 13 Electoral College votes have become a crucial part of
Democrats' formula for keeping the White House. The commonwealth is
considered a case study for how the party can claw back some of the
modernizing New South from Republicans, alongside North Carolina and
eventually—Democrats hope—Georgia. A reversal of that narrative in 2016
would be demoralizing for Democrats.

McAuliffe's journey to the governor's mansion has been an odd one. The man
who wore a Hawaiian shirt on television, who was linked to some of
President Bill Clinton's more unsavory fundraising practices, who had been
dismissed as a glorified salesman, now holds the title that once belonged
to Thomas Jefferson.

Particularly in the final days of McAuliffe's gubernatorial campaign, when
Bill Clinton barnstormed the state with him, McAuliffe held up Clinton's
presidency as a governance model he hoped to emulate in Richmond.

McAuliffe didn't just manage—albeit on his second try—to become governor.
He's managed to make voters like him. Multiple polls taken this year have
pegged his approval rating around 50 percent; Virginians who think he's
doing a good job roughly outnumber those who don't by a 2-1 margin.

In McAuliffe's telling, those numbers are the direct result of other
metrics—jobs created, deals closed, Virginia exports boosted. The
governor's message is incessantly focused on jobs and economic development,
and that, he says, is an easy sell that he's happy to share with his peers:
"Gina from Rhode Island"—that would be Gov. Gina Raimondo—"called me the
other day, asked me how I did it."

Republicans see things very differently. They say the state's economy isn't
nearly as vibrant under McAuliffe as he makes it out to be. And if
McAuliffe is popular, it's only because he's playing small ball. He's
stopped pushing hard for his more controversial proposals, and has little
hope of achieving one of his most important campaign planks: expanding
Medicaid. In addition to adding low-income Virginians to the insurance
rolls, the plan was also meant to free up money from the state budget that
McAuliffe wanted to spend on an ambitious education program.

But McAuliffe's hopes ran into an anti-Obamacare GOP wall in Richmond, and
his best chance of squeezing the Medicaid plan through dissolved last year
when a Democratic state senator, Phil Puckett, resigned under controversial
circumstances and flipped the chamber to the Republicans.

He's also mostly avoided fights over divisive social issues, though
McAuliffe notes that his election was itself a kind of milestone for a
Southern candidate. "It was a very unique campaign for Virginia—gay rights,
women's rights. … I called for gun-control legislation. No one's ever run
statewide in Virginia and talked about those issues," McAuliffe said.

(McAuliffe did wade into another controversial Southern topic this week,
announcing Tuesday that he wants to phase out state-sponsored license
plates that include an image of the Confederate flag.)

But he didn't discuss those topics in a vacuum—he is not given to lectures
about morality. What he did on the campaign trail, Clinton and other
swing-state Democrats might note, was relentlessly link those social issues
to economic ones. McAuliffe's biggest selling point, both before and after
he was elected, has been his ability to reel big companies into Virginia,
just as he's long reeled big donors into the Clinton orbit. Making Virginia
inhospitable to women or gay workers, he said, was bad for business.

So does that mean the state is inching inevitably from the purple column to
blue? No. President Obama took Virginia in 2008 and 2012, and Democrats
have won three of the last four governor's races and four consecutive U.S.
Senate contests. But Sen. Mark Warner barely won reelection in 2014, and
Republicans—aided by better off-year turnout and gerrymandering—control the
General Assembly.

Two April polls—one from Quinnipiac University and another from Christopher
Newport University—showed Clinton narrowly leading multiple Republican
candidates in hypothetical 2016 Virginia matchups, but the situation
inevitably looks different now, with a big, messy GOP field, than it will
when there is but one Republican, and both candidates have spent more time
in the daily campaign grinder.

"In a presidential year, we're always purple trending blue, because of
turnout," McAuliffe said, though that assessment depends on Clinton roughly
approximating Obama's astronomical turnout among African Americans and
other low-propensity voting groups. That's where he can provide more help:
McAuliffe's 2013 campaign borrowed several data wizards from the 2012 Obama
effort, and Virginia Democrats have a wide technological and voter-file
advantage over their GOP counterparts.

Robby Mook, who ran McAuliffe's campaign, is now doing the same for
Clinton. Brynne Craig, who served as McAuliffe's political director, has
been on Clinton's staff for more than a year. Michael Halle, who guided
turnout operations as head of the Virginia coordinated campaign in 2013, is
now working for Clinton in Iowa along with three other McAuliffe alums:
Michelle Kleppe, Lenora Hanks, and Kate Cummings. McAuliffe 2013 and
Clinton 2016 also share a spokesman, Josh Schwerin, plus several more
researchers and digital staffers.

Those advisers, particularly Mook, helped McAuliffe run a far more
effective campaign than he did in 2009, and perhaps they can do the same
for Clinton in her own second effort. McAuliffe has changed in ways that
might be instructive to his friend. He appears to be more organized, more
disciplined, and (slightly) less caffeinated.

"You've got to go through this process," he said, adding that this time
around, "she is going to be a totally different candidate."

*Hillary Is Now Trapped By Her Support for Global Trade at State
<http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Columns/2015/06/25/Hillary-Now-Trapped-Her-Support-Global-Trade-State#sthash.lU3pRPLu.dpuf>
// The Fiscal Times // Edward Morrissey // June 25, 2015*

Now that the fight over Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) has finally
concluded, we can marvel at some of the stunning contradictions that
emerged during the debate. Republicans ended up giving Barack Obama his
first significant second-term achievement, Chris Cillizza wrote at The
Washington Post. Democrats nearly humiliated their own President. Somehow,
in the midst of all these contradictions and surprises, Hillary Clinton may
have done the most damage to herself.

First, Obama ended up proving his lame-duck status in a most embarrassing
manner. The liberal wing of Capitol Hill Democratic caucuses signaled
loudly and clearly that they had no confidence in their own President on
the key progressive theme of anti-globalization.

Until now, Obama had achieved little in trade negotiations during his
six-plus years as president. The exception-- he concluded leftover
negotiations with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea from George W. Bush’s
administration, all in 2011 under Hillary Clinton. More than a dozen more
potential agreements have languished during the Obama term.

Clearly, Obama doesn’t have an itch for free trade.  Obama might be
forgiven for thinking that his own party would give him the benefit of the
doubt on TPP. Instead, Democrats gave Obama a massive vote of no confidence
on trade.

Noah Brier, co-founder of one of the best-regarded content marketing
start-ups, provides his perspective to help you achieve more.

The Republican impulse to rescue Obama didn’t make much sense to the
conservative base, either. For years, GOP leaders have warned that Obama
had arrogated unprecedented and unconstitutional powers, most recently on
his executive actions on immigration. But they also charge him with abuse
of power regarding Obamacare, too. House Republicans took Obama to court to
fight Obama’s unilateral rewriting of statutory deadlines on mandates in
the latter case, and have won an initial round of litigation to block the
former.

Republican leadership argued that the party’s philosophical commitment to
free trade and the long precedent for fast-track authority made this the
right call. However, they ended up making the argument that Obama can be
trusted with extraordinary authority, at least when it comes to Republican
priorities. The conundrum tripped up GOP presidential candidates too,
especially Ted Cruz, who changed direction at the last minute to oppose TPA
only to see it pass anyway.

None of the politicos caught up in this did worse than Hillary Clinton did,
however. As Secretary of State, she spent three years negotiating the
parameters of the Trans-Pacific Partnership deal. Jake Tapper at CNN went
through the archives of the State Department and the media, finding
forty-five separate occasions in which Secretary Clinton extolled the TPP
trade bill. The final endorsement came just before she left office, in
January 2013, a few months before starting to write her second memoir,
ironically titled Hard Choices. Soon after, she started planning her next
run at the presidency.

The White House clearly expected Hillary to provide Obama with support for
TPP. After all, in Hard Choices (pages 69-70), she had written that TPP
“would link markets throughout Asia and the Americas, lowering trade
barriers while raising standards on labor, the environment, and
intellectual property.”

In the 2014 memoir of her time as America’s top diplomat, she concluded
that “TPP won’t be perfect – no deal negotiated among a dozen countries
ever will be – but its higher standards, if implemented and enforced,
should benefit American businesses and workers.” On top of that, Hard
Choices argues that TPP is “a strategic initiative that would strengthen
the position of the United States in Asia.”

Instead of making that case and demonstrating her foreign-policy
experience, Hillary stonewalled the media on the question of both TPA and
TPP. In her big campaign relaunch speech, she never mentioned trade and
only spoke passingly about foreign policy. NBC’s Chuck Todd pressed Team
Hillary strategist John Podesta the next day about why Clinton remained
silent on trade. Todd got no answer on her TPP or TPA position.
Progressives, moderates, and the media began to discuss the silence from
Hillary on what had been one of her big initiatives at State.

Almost a week later, Hillary finally staked out a position, but only on
TPA, and even then not without hedging it. Cornered by experienced Nevada
political analyst Jon Ralston, Hillary finally said she’d “probably not”
vote for fast-track authority if she still had her Senate seat. However,
she explained that TPA was “a process vote,” not the same at all as TPP, on
which she still refused to take a position.

That “process,” though, was needed to serve the cause of finalizing “the
signature economic pillar of our strategy in Asia.” If TPP was both as good
and as important as Hillary described it in her memoir, then why object to
TPA at all? Democrats opposed TPA entirely to prevent TPP.

The only way out of this conundrum for Hillary would have been the failure
of the TPA bill – and she almost got her way with this last-minute nudge.
Instead, GOP leadership and Obama twisted enough arms to finally get TPA
passed, which means that the US can finalize TPP and present it to the
Senate. That will need to happen before the 2016 election, as the Senate
will no doubt want to debate it thoroughly, and a post-election session of
Congress may pass on taking broad action on trade after the US elects a new
president to take over from Obama, no matter who it is.

When TPP comes to the Senate, everyone will finally get a close look at it.
If it’s as bad as progressives believe, then Hillary will come under fire
for having worked on a bad trade agreement, just as progressives still
blame Bill Clinton for NAFTA. If it turns out to be benign, that will raise
questions about Hillary’s lack of political fortitude in failing to support
her own initiative. She will be accused of being willing to torpedo what
she herself called “a strategic initiative” to strengthen the US in a very
critical theater, all to pander to the Democratic grassroots for her own
selfish career aspirations.

In other words, she loses either way, thanks to her refusal to share her
positions with voters. Hillary Clinton wants a coronation, but the trade
fight could very well dethrone her.

*OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL COVERAGE*

*DECLARED*

*O’MALLEY*

*Presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley among those paying respects to slain
S.C. pastor
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/24/presidential-hopeful-martin-omalley-among-those-paying-respects-to-slain-s-c-pastor/>
// WaPo // John Wagner – June 24, 2015 *

Democratic presidential hopeful Martin O’Malley is heading to South
Carolina on Wednesday to pay his respects to the late state Sen. Clementa
Pinckney, among those killed in last week’s church massacre, according to
two associates familiar with O’Malley’s plans.

The former Maryland governor is planning to join other mourners at the
capitol in Columbia, where Pinckney will lie in state this afternoon,
according to the O’Malley associates, who spoke on the condition of
anonymity because they are not authorized to talk on behalf of his campaign.

Pinckney was also the pastor at the historic Emanuel AME Church in
Charleston, where a gunman killed him and eight others at a Bible study.

On a previous trip to South Carolina, an early presidential nominating
state, O’Malley paid a visit to the Charleston church. Pinckney pulled
together a group of clergy and community leaders to meet with O’Malley in
the basement of the church and gave him a tour, according to one of
O’Malley’s associates.

In the aftermath of the shootings, O’Malley has been outspoken about the
need for additional national gun-control measures, noting that Maryland
lawmakers passed state legislation at his urging in 2013. O’Malley has also
been among those calling for the removal of the Confederate flag from the
capitol grounds in South Carolina and other states where it still flies.

O'Malley's planned trip on Wednesday was first reported by CNN.

*O’Malley heads to South Carolina to mourn massacre victim
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/24/politics/omalley-south-carolina-pinckney/index.html>
// CNN // Elizabeth Landers – June 24, 2015 *

Presidential hopeful Martin O'Malley on Wednesday will head to the Palmetto
State to pay his respects to the late state Senator Clementa Pinckney,
according to a legislative aide familiar with the governor¹s plans.

The trip will be short as the former Democratic Maryland governor is
scheduled to arrive in Columbia midday and will head directly to the State
House. O'Malley plans to pay his respects to the senator, who was shot and
killed along with eight others in the Charleston church massacre last week,
and fly out after an hour.

A group of state senators and representatives will accompany a horse-drawn
caisson carrying the body of Pinckney through Columbia as they walk down
Main Street to the capitol. Senator Pinckney will lie in state from 1 p.m.
until 5 p.m.

As the controversy surrounding the Confederate flag continues to boil here
in the humid heat of South Carolina, the chamber in which Pinckney once
served voted Tuesday to head into a special session to consider removing
the flag from state grounds.

In the meantime, the Confederate flag will continue to fly over the State
House as Pinckney lies in state.

*Martin O’Malley pays respects to slain S.C. state senator
<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/martin-omalley-pays-respects-to-slain-s.c.-state-senator/article/2566949>
// Washington Examiner // Ariel Cohen – June 24, 2015 *

Democratic presidential hopeful Martin O'Malley has headed down to South
Carolina to pay his respects for the late state Sen. Clementa Pickney in
the wake of the Charleston massacre.

Coming from New Hampshire Wednesday morning, O'Malley's visited the rotunda
lobby of the South Carolina State House in Columbia, where Pickney's body
is lying in state.

Pickney was shot and killed along with eight other congregants during a
Wednesday evening Bible study last week.

During a previous trip to South Carolina, O'Malley visited the Charleston
Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal church. Pickney pulled together a small
group of clergy and members of the community to meet with O'Malley in the
basement of the church and discuss issues relevant to the early voting
primary state.

In the wake of the mass shooting, O'Malley has been extremely vocal about
gun control, racism and the Confederate flag. Just two days after the June
17 shooting the former Maryland governor sent an email to his supporters
stating that he was "pissed" about the violence propagated by guns, and
that he was now "doubling down" his efforts on gun control.

O'Malley also supported removing the Confederate flag from the state
capitol building in South Carolina, launching a campaign on his website to
"restore the flag to a museum."

"Many states in our country fly this rallying banner for hate. It's a
symbol of 150 years of bigotry and racism — a reminder of a time the United
States failed to live up to its founding principles, and we should take it
down," O'Malley said

As O'Malley visited the Statehouse, the flag continued to fly over
Pickney's body.

*SANDERS*

*Bernie Sanders Lags Hillary Clinton in Introducing Himself to Black Voters
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/politics/bernie-sanders-lags-hillary-clinton-in-introducing-himself-to-black-voters.html?_r=1>
// NYT // Patrick Healy and Jonathan Martin – June 24, 2015 *

Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is climbing in the polls in Iowa and New
Hampshire, and he has drawn thousands of people to rallies for his
presidential campaign recently in Denver and Minneapolis. But the shooting
last week in Charleston, S.C., has highlighted a daunting obstacle he faces
in the Democratic primary contest: Black voters have shown little interest
in him.

Even his own campaign advisers acknowledge that Mr. Sanders is virtually
unknown to many African-Americans, an enormously important Democratic
constituency.

Though he led sit-ins as a civil rights activist in the 1960s, helped the
Rev. Jesse L. Jackson Sr. pull off a surprising campaign victory in Vermont
in 1988, and espouses liberal policy ideas broadly popular with many
Democrats, Mr. Sanders has had little direct experience with black voters
as a politician in a state that is 95 percent white. And they have been
largely absent from his campaign events so far.

Mr. Sanders, 73, had planned to start introducing himself to larger numbers
of African-Americans last Sunday at a large gathering in Charleston, but he
quickly postponed the event after the church killings. The massacre also
revived debate over a highly charged issue on which Mr. Sanders has a mixed
record: gun control.

Hillary Rodham Clinton is working assiduously to cement her support among
black voters. In an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll this week, 95 percent of
nonwhite Democratic voters said they could see themselves supporting Mrs.
Clinton for the nomination in the primary. Only about one-quarter of
respondents said they could see themselves voting for Mr. Sanders.

And Mrs. Clinton is hardly sitting still: She has spoken out assertively on
race relations and gun control over the past week, and she visited a black
church on Tuesday near Ferguson, Mo., where the killing of an unarmed black
man by a white police officer in August ignited protests.

Mr. Sanders has lamented “the ugly stain of racism that still taints our
nation,” but he has yet to take the subject on in a forceful way.

Given the makeup of the Democratic primary electorate, Mr. Sanders’s
capacity to win support among blacks represents a test of his relevance: It
will help determine whether he can drain many votes from Mrs. Clinton or is
bound to be merely a nuisance candidate with a following among the most
ideologically driven liberal whites.

Mr. Sanders’s advisers concede that Mrs. Clinton is more familiar and
popular among black Democrats, but they say his background and views will
allow him to speak credibly to African-Americans in places like Charleston,
Ferguson and elsewhere. His struggle, they say, is to introduce himself
swiftly and on a broad scale so that his remarks resonate and have an
impact.

“We’re reaching out, but it’s no secret that Bernie represents a state that
is heavily Caucasian, and his decades of work on issues of importance to
African-Americans aren’t known amid the national conversation on race that
is underway,” said Jeff Weaver, Mr. Sanders’s campaign manager. “I don’t
think it’s presumptuous of him to speak out on these issues. And his
message — the need for more good-paying jobs, and opening up higher
education regardless of wealth and family background — will have strong
appeal with African-Americans and many other voters.”

The challenge facing Mr. Sanders as a Ben & Jerry’s candidate seeking the
nomination of President Obama’s party was on vivid display last month in
Burlington, Vt., at his first campaign rally.

Nearly all the speakers who preceded him — including the two ice cream
entrepreneurs — were white, as were nearly all the supporters, many of them
in tie-dyed clothes, who thronged a park on the shores of Lake Champlain.
His jeremiads about campaign-finance overhaul and climate change inspired
cheers and ovations. But he made no mention of problems of deep concern to
many African-Americans, like policing, gun control, racial inequities or
the high numbers of black men in prison.

“The Bernie Sanders voter is still a Volvo-driving, financially comfortable
liberal who is pretty much white,” said Paul Maslin, a pollster who worked
for the 2004 presidential campaign of Vermont’s last Democratic contender,
Howard Dean. “I don’t see how Bernie takes large numbers of black voters
away from Hillary Clinton, and he needs to if he wants any shot at the
nomination.”

David Axelrod, formerly Mr. Obama’s chief strategist, noted that insurgent
Democrats like Gary Hart and Mr. Dean who were able to win over many white
voters fell short because they could not attract blacks.

“There’s no doubt she understands coalition politics and she is burnishing
her coalition,” Mr. Axelrod said of Mrs. Clinton. “You have to have a track
record and some roots in these communities, and she does.”

Mr. Sanders, in a recent interview, said he believed his call for a
“political revolution” to change an array of policies, such as ending
tuition at public colleges, could win over black voters in the months ahead.

Indeed, when he visited New England College in Concord, N.H., last month, a
few black and white undergraduates described how their student loans,
ranging from $10,000 to $16,000, made them anxious about the future. Mr.
Sanders responded with empathy but also with a fiery intensity that evoked
his own days as a student activist, when he protested segregated campus
housing at the University of Chicago and participated in the 1963 March on
Washington.

Since then, though, his politics have been characterized by a focus on
class-based solidarity and uplift, reflecting his style of democratic
socialism. While Mr. Sanders endorsed the 1988 campaign of Mr. Jackson, who
won the Vermont caucus that year, he also said at the time that he
disagreed with Mr. Jackson about “whether the Democratic Party can be the
real vehicle for social change,” and said a third party was necessary. (Mr.
Jackson did not return messages seeking comment.)

Tad Devine, a senior adviser to the Sanders campaign, predicted that Mr.
Sanders’s battles for equal rights and against income inequality would
“resonate powerfully with African-American voters.”

He continued, “And we also believe that the way to win support from
African-American voters in the primaries is to demonstrate that he is a
viable candidate with a real chance to succeed by doing well in the early
contests.”

One of those is the South Carolina primary, where Mr. Sanders’s challenge
has been crystallized. The church massacre last week and the murder of a
black man, Walter Scott, by a white police officer in April have thrust
racial discrimination and gun access to the center of the campaign, in a
state where blacks can represent a majority of primary voters.

Complicating matters for Mr. Sanders, the one issue on which he is not
unambiguously to the left of Mrs. Clinton — gun control — is emerging as a
critical litmus test. Representing a rural state with a rich hunting
tradition, Mr. Sanders has a mixed record on guns. He first won a House
seat in part because the incumbent Republican he defeated had supported an
assault-weapons ban. (Mr. Sanders also supported the ban but opposed the
Brady bill, which President Bill Clinton signed into law.)

By contrast, Mrs. Clinton has moved aggressively to emphasize her support
for gun restrictions since the Charleston shootings, saying in an interview
last week, “Let’s just cut to the chase: It’s guns.”

Mrs. Clinton, mindful of the biracial coalition Mr. Obama built in South
Carolina in 2008 when he handed her a stinging loss, has already visited
its African-American population centers twice. Mr. Sanders has yet to
reschedule his first trip.

“She’s talking about the issues we care about,” said Bakari Sellers, a
former South Carolina state representative who is black and is supporting
Mrs. Clinton. “Whether it’s voting rights or police reform, Hillary is
attacking them head-on.”

As for Mr. Sanders, he said, “I’m not hearing Bernie Sanders’s name at the
barbershops.”

*Bernie Sanders Walks A Fine Line On Gun Control
<http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/24/417180805/bernie-sanders-walks-a-fine-line-on-gun-control>
// NPR // Jessica Taylor – June 24, 2015 *

In the wake of last week's Charleston church shootings, 2016 Democratic
presidential candidate Bernie Sanders explained his competing concerns
between gun rights and gun safety.

"I think guns and gun control is an issue that needs to be discussed,"
Sanders told NPR's David Greene in an interview that will air on Thursday's
Morning Edition. "Let me add to that, I think that urban America has got to
respect what rural America is about, where 99 percent of the people in my
state who hunt are law abiding people."

In the wake of the tragedy that took the lives of nine African-American
parishioners at the Mother Emanuel African Methodist Episcopal Church, many
Democratic politicians have renewed calls to tighten gun-control measures.
Sanders said he's open to a conversation about what to do next on
gun-control measures and would go along with stricter background checks,
for example. But he noted in the interview that those measures alone
wouldn't solve the problem of gun violence in America.

"So obviously, we need strong sensible gun control, and I will support it,"
Sanders told Greene. "But some people think it's going to solve all of our
problems, and it's not. You know what, we have a crisis in the capability
of addressing mental health illness in this country. When people are
hurting and are prepared to do something terrible, we need to do something
immediately. We don't have that and we should have that."

For left-leaning senators from largely rural, pro-gun states — like Vermont
— it can be tough to strike a balance talking about guns. Sanders has had a
mixed voting record on guns. He voted to end the "gun-show loophole" and in
favor of the 2013 universal background check bill and assault-weapons ban
following Sandy Hook Elementary school massacre that left 20 children dead.
But, previously, Sanders voted to allow guns on Amtrak and against the
Brady bill.

It's a stance that could prove problematic for the insurgent White House
hopeful. While Sanders has staked out forthright positions mostly to the
left of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, guns is one issue where
he is more toward the middle of the current field. It's one he doesn't
bring up as often as his other rivals, either.

Sanders explained that as a representative of his state, he has to have
their interests at heart, but argued that could put him at a good place to
bridge a compromise.

"I think the people of Vermont and I have understood for many years that
what guns are about in Vermont are not what guns are about in Chicago, Los
Angeles or New York, where they're used not for hunting or target practice
but to kill people," Sanders said. "I think, interestingly enough, I'm in a
very good position representing a rural state to bring forth common-sense
legislation regarding guns."

He added, "I can understand if some Democrats or Republicans represent an
urban area where people don't hunt, don't do target practice, they're not
into guns. But in my state, people go hunting and do target practice.
Talking about cultural divides in this country, you know, it is important
for people in urban America to understand that families go out together and
kids go out together and they hunt and enjoy the outdoors and that is a
lifestyle that should not be condemned."

For more from Sanders on foreign policy, his 2016 chances and more, tune
into Morning Edition on Thursday.

*This Quirky New Hampshire Law Might Keep Bernie Sanders Off The Ballot
<http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/24/416929786/this-quirky-new-hampshire-law-might-keep-sanders-off-the-ballot>
// NPR // Jessica Taylor – June 24, 2015 *

Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders is on the rise in New Hampshire. But
that might not matter if the Independent senator from Vermont can't get on
the Democratic ballot in the first-in-the-nation primary state.

Due to a quirky New Hampshire filing process — and Sanders's status as an
independent rather than a registered Democrat — there are lingering
questions about how easy it will be for him file for the primary next year.

State law says that presidential candidates must be a registered member of
the party whose primary ballot they are trying to get on. In fact, the
Declaration of Candidacy they must fill out is fairly straightforward
(emphasis added):

I, ____, swear under penalties of perjury that I am qualified to be a
candidate for president of the United States pursuant to article II,
section 1, clause 4 of the United States Constitution, which states, "No
person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at
the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the
office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office
who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been
fourteen years a resident within the United States." I further declare that
I am domiciled in _____, in the city (or town or unincorporated place) of
_____, county of ____, state of ____, that I am a registered member of the
_____ party; that I am a candidate for the nomination for the office of
president to be made at the primary election to be held on the ____ day of
_____; and I hereby request that my name be printed on the official primary
ballot of said _____ party as a candidate for such nomination.

It's one of those blanks that is problematic — asking candidates to say
"that I am a registered member of the _____ party. Sanders is not a
registered member of the Democratic Party, having been elected every time
as an independent. Early in his career, he made failed runs as part of the
Liberty Union Party.

He did appear on the Democratic primary ballot in Vermont for the Senate in
both 2006 and 2012, winning their primary, but he declined the nomination
both times so he could run as an independent. Still, the avowed socialist
has always caucused with Democrats and is even ranking member of the Senate
Budget Committee.

Former Rep. Charlie Bass, R-N.H., says that isn't enough evidence for the
Vermont senator to make the cut, especially with his explicit rejection of
the Democratic nomination in his state twice.

"In short, Sanders is not a Democrat, has not been elected as a Democrat,
has never served as a Democrat and cannot plausibly claim, at least in New
Hampshire, to be a Democrat," Bass wrote in a Washington Post op-ed.

Even if he wanted to register as a Democrat, he couldn't — Vermont, like 19
other states in the country, doesn't have party registration. Other
previous candidates for president who came from states that didn't register
by party — such as both George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush from Texas and
Al Gore from Tennessee — were able to prove a party history because they
had been on ballots and won primaries many times.

But Sanders's candidacy presents the state with a quandary it hasn't faced
before — and one that its top elections official isn't even sure how it
will shake out.

"Whenever the question has come up, there was some way to usually show the
person has been on the ballot of that party," New Hampshire's long-serving
Secretary of State Bill Gardner told NPR. "I really don't know."

Gardner noted that if Sanders does put down Democrat and there are any
challenges to the validity of that, or if he is rejected outright, disputes
would be heard by the New Hampshire Ballot Law Commission. The five-member
committee is made up of three Republicans and two Democrats.

For their part, Sanders's campaign doesn't seem to be worried yet. "We
don't think it's going to be an issue," his spokesman, Michael Briggs, told
Politico. Briggs did not respond to a request for comment from NPR.

One thing Sanders does have on his side is that both the national and state
party have recognized him as a legitimate Democratic candidate for
president.

"At the end of the day, Sen. Sanders will appear on the New Hampshire
Democratic Party ballot," New Hampshire Democratic Party Chairman Ray
Buckley confidently predicted.

He told NPR he believes "the law is very clear" that its parties determine
who is on their party's ballot, and that "we would be the ones, if it were
necessary, to take the secretary of state to court" to ensure Sanders is on
the ballot.

The quirky law and wording is actually one that is unique to just the
Granite State, according to Richard Winger, who publishes the Ballot Access
News newsletter.

"New Hampshire just doesn't ever seem to worry that its election laws might
be unconstitutional, because they should," said Winger.

He pointed to a 1986 Supreme Court case, Tashjian v. Republican Party,
which struck down a Connecticut law that primary voters had to be members
of that party after the Connecticut GOP adopted a law allowing independent
voters to vote in their primaries. Winger says that case could be used to
justify getting Sanders on the ballot, too, since the state party supports
his inclusion.

"New Hampshire is the only state dumb enough to say a candidate has to be a
registered member of that party," said Winger.

*Sanders struggling to get his message out to Latino and black voters,
experts say
<http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2015/06/24/sanders-struggling-to-get-his-message-out-to-latino-and-black-voters-experts/>
// Fox News Latino // June 24, 2015 *

Vermont senator and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders may be seeing a
surge in popularity in the early primary state of New Hampshire, but that
doesn’t appear to be translating with either Latino or African-American
voters.

A notoriously small crowd gathered last week during his speech at the
National Association of Latino Elected Officials (NALEO), appearing to
indicate that even when overwhelmingly popular in the white Granite State
and throughout the generally progressive state of New England, Sanders
still has a good deal of work to when it comes winning over Latino voters.

"His name recognition in the Latino community is somewhere in between zero
and extremely low," Matt Barreto, a pollster who focuses on Latino voters,
told the Los Angeles Times. "And you're not going to win an election
without Latino support."

The outspoken lawmaker, who is 73, has spent his lengthy political career
campaigning for votes in Vermont – a state that is 94 percent white – and
has little experience in focusing a campaign on minority issues. The oldest
presidential candidate to so far jump into the fray so far, many observers
say that he will likely have trouble appealing to an overwhelming younger
Latino electorate in key swing states like Nevada and Colorado.

"If your only significant constituency is older white voters, that'll be
good in Iowa and New Hampshire, but when you hit Nevada and South Carolina
you're in another world," Democratic strategist Bill Carrick said. "If
you're going to be the nominee, you're going to have to do pretty well
among Latino, African American voters, women, single women and millennials.
That's the challenge for Bernie Sanders — to become more than a niche
candidate and become a candidate with a broad coalition of support."

Despite the low attendance last week during his speech at NALEO, Sanders
was well received by the crowd and he addressed the immigration head-on
after being previously criticized for focusing too much on other issues.
The self-described socialist painted his views on the issue through an
economic spectrum, while also giving a personal anecdote about his own
upbringing in an immigrant household – a departure for a candidate who
usually forgoes stories about his past.

"We cannot continue to run an economy where millions are made so vulnerable
because of their undocumented status," Sanders said. "Who benefits from
this exploitation?"

Along with Latinos, Sanders also has his work cut for him with the
African-American community, as - despite his work in the civil rights
movement and his friendship with Jesse Jackson - even Sanders admits he is
little known among the demographic compared to his rival Hillary Clinton.

In the last week, Clinton has not rested on her laurels as she has spoken
forcefully about race relations and gun control in the wake of the deadly
church shooting in Charleston, S.C. and she visited a black church on
Tuesday near Ferguson, Mo., where the killing of an unarmed black man by a
white police officer in August ignited protests nationwide.

Sanders, on the other hand, has derided "the ugly stain of racism that
still taints our nation," but he has yet to take the subject on in a
forceful way.

"We’re reaching out, but it’s no secret that Bernie represents a state that
is heavily Caucasian, and his decades of work on issues of importance to
African-Americans aren’t known amid the national conversation on race that
is underway," Jeff Weaver, Sanders’s campaign manager, told the New York
Times. "I don’t think it’s presumptuous of him to speak out on these
issues. And his message — the need for more good-paying jobs and opening up
higher education regardless of wealth and family background — will have
strong appeal with African-Americans and many other voters."

Sanders ability to appeal to Latino and African-American is seen by many as
a test of his relevance as a candidate and whether or not he can be a real
challenge to Clinton come nomination time or will be just someone helping
shape the dialogue during the Democratic debates.

A recent CNN poll found that just 5 percent of nonwhite Democratic voters
said they were likely to support Sanders compared with 65 percent who
favored Clinton (in 2008 Clinton beat up 2-to-1 in garnering the Latino
vote.)

Clinton has already made concerted efforts in going after Latino voters -
laying out her immigration plan last month at a Las Vegas high school,
hiring well-known "Dreamer" Lorella Praeli to work on her campaign and
sending her campaign's political director, Amanda Renteria, to NALEO to
shake hands and make contacts ahead of Clinton’s speech.

While Clinton has broadened her support base and her campaigning to
minority groups, Sanders is perceived as being the candidate for the
tie-dyed, white Vermont liberals.

"The Bernie Sanders voter is still a Volvo-driving, financially comfortable
liberal who is pretty much white," said pollster Paul Maslin.

*Corporate Greed Must End
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-bernie-sanders/corporate-greed-must-end_b_7653442.html>
// HuffPo // Bernie Sanders – June 24, 2015 *

Here is the reality of the American economy. Despite an explosion in
technology and a huge increase in worker productivity, the middle class of
this country continues its 40-year decline. Today, millions of Americans
are working longer hours for lower wages and median family income is almost
$5,000 less than it was in 1999.

Meanwhile, the wealthiest people and the largest corporations are doing
phenomenally well. Today, 99 percent of all new income is going to the top
1 percent, while the top one-tenth of 1 percent own almost as much wealth
as the bottom 40 percent. In the last two years, the wealthiest 14 people
in this country increased their wealth by $157 billion. That increase is
more than is owned by the bottom 130 million Americans -- combined.

Over the last 40 years, the largest corporations in this country have
closed thousands of factories in the United States and outsourced millions
of American jobs to low-wage countries overseas. That is why we need a new
trade policy and why I am opposed to the 12-nation Trans-Pacific
Partnership now before Congress.

Large corporations and their lobbyists have created loopholes enabling
corporations to avoid an estimated $100 billion a year in taxes by shifting
profits to the Cayman Islands and other offshore tax havens. That is why we
need real tax reform which demands that the very wealthy and large
corporations start paying their fair share of taxes.

Corporate America has mounted vigorous anti-union campaigns, making it
harder for workers to collectively bargain for decent wages and benefits.
That is why we must make certain that workers are given a fair chance to
join a union.

As a result of the Supreme Court's disastrous Citizens United decision,
corporations and the very wealthy are now spending billions to elect
candidates who will represent their interests. That is why we need a
constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and move toward public
funding of elections.

Instead of putting resources into innovative ways to build their businesses
or hire new employees, corporations are pumping 98 percent of their
record-breaking profits into buying back their own stock and increasing
dividends to benefit their executives and wealthy shareholders at the
expense of their workers. It is a major reason why CEOs are now making
nearly 300 times what the typical worker makes.

We have got to demand that corporations stop manipulating their shares to
reward their executives and billionaire shareholders through the use of
stock buybacks.

We also must do a lot more to rebuild the middle class, check corporate
greed and make our economy work again for working families.

We need to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour over the next several
years. With 70 percent of the economy dependent on consumers buying goods
and services, the best way to expand the economy is to raise wages and
create good jobs to increase the purchasing power of the American people.

We need to create millions of decent-paying jobs rebuilding our crumbling
infrastructure; our roads, bridges, dams, rail, airports, levees and dams.

We need to pass pay equity for women workers. It is not acceptable that
women receive 78 cents on the dollar compared to male workers doing the
same job.

We need to end the scandal of companies taking advantage of outdated rules
to avoid paying overtime to "supervisors" -- often earning less than
$30,000 a year -- when they clock 50 or 60 hours a week on the job.

We need to make certain that every worker in this country receives
guaranteed paid sick leave and vacation time.

We need to encourage business models that provide employees the tools to
purchase their own businesses through Employee Stock Ownership Plans and
worker-owned cooperatives. Workers at employer-owned companies are more
motivated, productive and satisfied with their jobs.

It is time to say loudly and clearly that corporate greed and the war
against the American middle class must end. Enough is enough!

*Bernie Sanders & Cornel West: The radical alliance that could change
everything*
<http://www.salon.com/2015/06/24/bernie_sanders_cornel_west_the_radical_alliance_that_could_change_everything/>*
// Salon // Matthew Pulver – June 24, 2015*

Senator Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign is already enjoying success
that few could have predicted. Bernie is a big deal. Well, OK, if you’re a
white progressive he’s a big deal. Otherwise, you may have no idea who he
is, according to reporting this morning in the New York Times. The Times‘
Patrick Healy and Jonathan Martin write that “black voters have shown
little interest in [Sanders]” and that “[e]ven his own campaign advisers
acknowledge that Mr. Sanders is virtually unknown to many
African-Americans, an enormously important Democratic constituency.”

But as his presidential campaign gains altitude and attention, Sanders may
be on the way to securing the most difficult black progressive endorsement
there is: the blessing of Professor Cornel West, one of America’s leading
public intellectuals. Celebrity is rare in American academe, but the
eccentric West (along with MIT’s Noam Chomsky) is something of a superstar
scholar. He’s our Slavoj Žižek, but with far better hair and a sense of
fashion.

Speaking with Grit TV’s Laura Flanders in early June, the black academic
icon was asked by the host if he will be supporting the increasingly
popular candidate for president.

“I love brother Bernie,” West replied. “He tells the truth about Wall
Street. He really does.”

But West, who feels burned and spurned by President Obama, his team, and
the Democratic Party generally, then turned immediately to the specter of
Hillary Clinton. Sanders, though an independent socialist in the Senate, is
running for the Democratic Party ticket, and West worried aloud about
submission to the party hegemon, Secretary Clinton.

“I’m not a Hillary Clinton fan at all,” he said resolutely. “So if he uses
his power to hand it over to her I’ll be deeply upset.”

West, ever-critical and stubbornly conscientious, was an early skeptic of
then-Senator Obama’s campaign in 2007-08, only to sign on to the Obama team
and do 65 events for the candidate after a conversation between the two
convinced West of Obama’s progressive bona fides. Similarly, West has
withheld a ringing and thorough endorsement of Sanders, citing Sanders’
positions on the Israel-Palestine conflict.

“But I also think, in terms of foreign policy, on the one hand we have
escalating anti-Jewish hatred around the world, and we’ve got to fight
anti-Jewish hatred under all conditions,” West began. “On the other hand,
we have a vicious Israeli occupation that needs to be highlighted, because
occupations are wrong.”

West continued: “I don’t hear my dear brother Bernie hitting that, and I’m
not gonna sell my precious Palestinian brothers and sisters down the river
only because of U.S. politics. The truth cuts over and against whatever the
political arrangement is. So we’ve got to be able to somehow keep track of
anti-Jewish hatred, which is evil, and occupations of whatever sort—in this
case, the vicious Israeli occupation that’s evil as well. And I think
Bernie might pull back on some of those issues.”

Senator Sanders has caught some flak for what’s seen by some as a
less-than-progressive position on the Israeli occupation of Palestinian
territory and its insanely disproportionate responses to extremists’
attacks from Gaza. Much of the recent criticism seems to be founded on a
contentious town hall meeting with constituents in August 2014, when the
senator and progressive pro-Palestine attendees descended into a shouting
match, during which verbal fray he angrily told an interrupting
interlocutor to “shut up!”

It must be said that Sanders’ positions and rhetoric on the Israeli
occupation are reliably to the left of virtually all of Congress, if only
marginally. But it must also be said, however, that being slightly leftward
of the pack on Israel-Palestine in Washington is a far cry from active
dissent in support of Palestinians’ rights to territory and safety. West
voices the frustrations of many who see Sanders’ marginal progressivism on
the conflict as much too little to affect the monolithic support which
otherwise characterizes both parties. Some might even see Sanders as a
curious, misshapen crag on that monolith.

Sanders appears a little (but only a little) freer to buck D.C.’s lock-step
approval of Israeli occupation and aggression. The summer 2014 Israeli war
on Gaza, which so angered the Vermont town hall attendees, was endorsed by
79 senators (40 Democrats and 39 Republicans) via Resolution 498, which
Sanders refused to cosponsor. The resolution was adopted unanimously
without a vote, so a refusal to cosponsor is something like a vote against
the proclamation. However, Senators are permitted the right to object
(which Sanders did not) when unanimous support for a resolution is
requested, making Sanders’ refusal to cosponsor the measure something like
a whisper of disapproval.

And whispers don’t stop wars.

The war on Gaza officially sanctioned by the U.S. Senate left more than
2,100 Gazans dead, 500 of them children, with the Israeli citizen death
toll at 6, one of whom was a child. The (very much bipartisan) narrative
that Hamas and other extremists’ rocket attacks share any sort of
commensurability with the Israel Defense Forces’ assault is vehemently
rejected by American leftists and many progressives—that is, much of the
base on whose support Sanders’ campaign relies.

Sanders was also the first senator to boycott Israeli Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to congress in March of this year, just half a
year after the Gaza war. But Sanders explained his rationale in terms of
partisan etiquette, not moral objection to the Netanyahu government’s
actions. Sanders cited the crass campaigning he saw in the prime minister’s
visit, what he viewed as the “Congress of the United States being used as a
prop or a photo opportunity for [Netanyahu’s] reelection campaign.” The
internationally recognized criminality of the Israeli state’s occupation
was left unmentioned as a reason to boycott the address.

That doesn’t cut it for West on Israel and Palestine. But even a passing
grade from Professor West is tantamount to an endorsement these days, as
West’s critical blade has been ground to a razor-sharp edge in the years
since President Obama’s inauguration. West has weaponized his singular
word-smithing and placed the president in his verbal crosshairs, calling
Obama a “war criminal,” a “Rockefeller Republican in blackface,” a “global
George Zimmerman,” a “black mascot of these Wall Street oligarchs,” a
“drone presidency” and a “counterfeit.”

Senator Sanders is constitutionally incapable of committing most of the
sins West attributes to Obama. While Obama might have been labeled a
“socialist” by Republicans, he is in many ways a defender of the neoliberal
status quo. Sanders is a proud democratic socialist. A Sanders foreign
policy would very likely look less hawkish than Obama’s, and his would
certainly be less trigger-happy than a potential Clinton Pentagon.

Though he’s become something of a pariah in black academic circles, West is
still a captivating and rousing speaker and Sanders could perhaps use West
on the campaign trail. He might not be someone Sanders brings along in Iowa
or New Hampshire, but once the campaign trail swings south and to the
cosmopolitan coasts, West might be a valuable voice in places Sanders’
unpolished, heavily Brooklynite earnestness doesn’t work as well. And
Sanders could be the candidate West thought he was getting in Obama.

*The Bernie Sanders Phenomenon
<http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/245937-the-bernie-sanders-phenomenon>
// The Hill // David Russell – June 24, 2015 *

As this very early stage of the presidential campaign continues, the
speculation is rampant as to the outcome of the nominating process and then
the election itself. Despite media bias, which includes burying stories,
misrepresentation, dismissal and ridicule, Sen. Bernie Sanders's (I-Vt.)
candidacy is becoming a reality. He is actually gaining traction.

Sanders appears at a rally in Colorado that draws a crowd that is at least
as large as Hillary Clinton's "kickoff" event in New York and larger than
any crowd attracted by the Republican candidates. Ann Coulter, conservative
political commentator, and certainly no fan of Democrats, suggests Sanders
would be a stronger candidate against Republicans than Clinton. Why?
Because he appeals to the American workers, rather than Clinton, "who's now
on the side of the Chamber of Commerce." According to the most recent
Suffolk University poll, Sanders and Clinton are essentially tied among men
in New Hampshire, even though Clinton holds a 19 percentage point lead
among women.

The most intriguing comment of late was quoted by a middle-aged
conservative leaving a Sanders rally in Iowa. Paraphrasing: "He may
actually have a chance. What he says should appeal to everyone I know."

Most everything that is written or said at this point in the campaign needs
to be taken as hyperbole, since it is really early and the time when
inaugural events of the season receive the enthusiasm of base support that
overstates broad acceptance. It is still the fact that only 25 percent of
the electorate identify themselves as liberal, versus 35 percent as
conservative. It is still the fact that the overwhelming polling results
show Clinton's lead over Sanders starting at 38 percent and moving up from
there to 55 percent (Real Clear Politics has Clinton's lead over Sanders
averaging 47 percent). It is also clear that Clinton has shifted her
rhetoric to a more progressive tone, and that will impact voters as more
moderates enter the fray. It is also the case that Sanders is relatively
unknown and has very little of name recognition enjoyed by Clinton.

We have argued that Sanders actually does have a chance, not just because
the message is candid and direct, but because his appeal crosses party
lines. The "disappearing middle class" he refers to includes 80 percent of
the Republican Party. Coulter is right: Sanders actually does pose a
greater threat to a Republican candidate more so than Clinton.

So, the question becomes how that threat can, or should, materialize?
Starting with the facts on the ground, it is the case that Sanders has
raised money from over 200,000 contributors whose contributions averaged
$40. What if Sanders had access to the Obama for America contact list that
included 13.5 million donors? To quote from an article that appeared in
Reader Supported News, "According to Marshall Ganz, one of the architects
of Obama's 2008 organizing strategy, Obama's campaign had 3,000 organizers
who recruited thousands more local leaders, who then helped mobilize 1.5
million volunteers and 13.5 million contributors." What would happen if
that support moved to the Sanders's column? Not likely right now, but you
never know.

Sanders's independent status in the Senate may be remembered when he
filibustered in 2010 against extending "tax breaks for the wealthy." At the
time, he was considered quite the maverick, but he is now joined by Sen.
Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), whose agenda and presence has literally changed
the dynamic of the Senate Democratic caucus. It is no longer easy for
senators to "get along by going along," and her powerful stance against the
influence of Wall Street banks, income inequality and the Trans-Pacific
Partnership has created an underlying current that forced or permitted
Clinton's move to the left as she began her campaign. While Warren has
publicly endorsed Clinton, the legitimacy of progressive stances also
indirectly benefit Sanders. And Warren's astuteness as a politician
virtually guarantees that she will end up endorsing either outcome, also a
plus for Sanders.

The compelling need for Sanders at the moment is not just "more of the
same." His message does resonate with virtually every worker, at every
level, irrespective of party affiliation. It is clear that his current
strategy of being as ever present and available in the primary efforts in
New Hampshire and Iowa and engaging in other venues to introduce himself
will, and should, continue. This strategy is garnering success.

What he has also to address is the media's need to continuously slander him
with innuendo. "Sanders the socialist from Vermont." "Sanders rumored to
have dual Israeli citizenship." "Sanders the grumpy old man." Or the
repeated exclusion of his name from discussion or consideration when
campaign topics are addressed.

In the past, Sanders has made himself continuously available to MSNBC,
which draws essentially no one other than its less than 1 million viewers.
Moving up to a slot on "Real Time with Bill Maher," which he did this past
week, broadens the audience to 4 million viewers. So, if he can keep
snagging coverage from National Public Radio, that number would rise to 34
million (the average listening audience for its news broadcasts). But he
needs to extend that reach to the guys who speak to conservatives like Don
Imus (3.25 million average), Rush Limbaugh (14.25 million), Bill O'Reilly
(3.2 million), Sean Hannity (11.75 million), Dr. Laura Schlesinger (8.5
million), Michael Savage (7 million), etc.

It is not just because Sanders needs to introduce himself cross party
lines; it is because he is indifferent to bluster. While conservatives like
Limbaugh, O'Reilly or Hannity have made it their preferred mode of
operation to interrupt, outshout or bully their interviewees, Sanders is
impervious, and he stays on message no matter what is being said. And that
is all that is actually needed. He needs to do as he has done for the past
40 years: just keep saying the same simplified message over and over again.
It is hard to listen to if you're expecting variety, but his is the right
message. Bernie Sanders is a true phenomenon.

*Sanders’ ‘Shocking’ Senior Statistic
<http://www.factcheck.org/2015/06/sanders-shocking-senior-statistic/> //
FactCheck.Org // Brooks Jackson – June 24, 2015 *

Sen. Bernie Sanders has repeatedly claimed that 1 in 5 seniors “live on an
average income of $7,600 a year.” The reality is not quite so shocking

.

After we inquired, the expert who generated that income estimate revised it
upward to $8,263, using more up-to-date figures and adjusting for a minor
mistake.

Furthermore, that income figure does not count such non-cash government
benefits as food stamps, housing assistance, Medicare or Medicaid, or
proceeds from reverse mortgages. Nor does it include personal funds such as
savings or insurance proceeds.

Sanders has made his remarks on senior income more than once, most recently
in a Senate floor speech on senior hunger. The Vermont senator, who is
running for the Democratic presidential nomination, is seeking more funding
for senior programs through the Older Americans Act.

Sanders, June 16: The truth is — and this is really a shocking truth — that
20 percent of seniors in America live on an average income of $7,600 a
year. Between us, I don’t know how anybody can live on $7,600 a year,  let
alone older people who need more medicine and more health care.

He used the same figure on Jan. 16 and April 10.

However, that figure is too low. And it’s not correct to say that these
low-income seniors “live on” that cash income alone.

$7,600, Updated and Corrected

When we asked where Sanders got his $7,600 figure, his campaign referred us
to Eric Kingson, a professor of social work at Syracuse University and an
outspoken advocate of raising Social Security benefits. Kingson, in a
telephone interview and an exchange of emails, told us he had calculated
the figure using statistics published by the Social Security Administration
for the year 2008. Since then, the SSA has issued updated figures covering
2012, which are now the most recent available.

Using the more recent figures, and also correcting for what he termed a
“minor” mistake (he says he failed to include a slice of households with
income between $13,000 and $13,999 who are just at the top of the lowest 20
percent), Kingson said the correct income figure should be “about $8,263.”

Strictly speaking, this is not a perfectly accurate average. To calculate
that, we would need access to the SSA’s survey data on each household,
allowing us to add up all the incomes of all households and then dividing
by the number of households. But we’ve looked over Kingson’s calculations
and agree that given what’s available, his assumptions are reasonable and
the $8,263 figure is a close approximation.

But — it’s not all that the bottom 20 percent is “living on.” That cash
income figure – which includes things such as interest and dividends, as
well as withdrawals from tax-deferred plans such as an IRA or 401(k) —
covers total cash income for households made up of a single person age 65
or older, or a married couple where at least one spouse is age 65 or older,
but it does not include many resources commonly available to seniors,
especially low-income seniors.

What’s Not Included

For example, food stamps and housing aid are not counted, according to the
Social Security Administration. Especially for the lowest-income seniors,
those can be significant sources of support. In fiscal year 2014, for
example, the average monthly food-stamp benefit per person was more than
$125, for a total of more than $1,500 for a full year. And in 2011, the
Obama administration announced $749 million in so-called Section 202 grants
to help nonprofit groups provide housing aid for very low-income elderly
people. Those and other federal assistance programs result in lowered rents
for many years to come.

Also not counted in the “cash income” figure is financial assistance from
the federal Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which laid out
nearly $3 billion in block grants to states last fiscal year.

And since Sanders made a point of mentioning medicine and health care, it
should be noted that Medicare reimbursements also are not counted as cash
income. Also absent from the official definition of income is the value of
Medicaid, the federal-state program that provides additional benefits,
including long-term care in nursing homes, for low-income elderly people.

Loans — including proceeds from so-called “reverse mortgages” — are also
not counted as income. A total of more than 900,000 reverse mortgages have
been issued since 1990. Nearly all go to those over age 65, as a borrower
must be at least 62 to qualify and the average age of those taking out such
a loan for the first time was nearly 72 as of 2012, the last year for which
the government produced such information.

Other receipts not counted as “income” are withdrawals from savings,
insurance proceeds, gifts from relatives or friends, capital gains (such as
profit from sale of a personal residence), and any lump-sum insurance
payments or inheritances, such as those from a deceased spouse.

We have no way of calculating how much all these kinds of receipts would
add to the average if they were counted as “income” — but there’s no
question that many seniors rely on them to “live on.”

Average Versus ‘Less Than’

Sanders arrives at a low figure by focusing on the average cash income of
all those in the bottom 20 percent — many of whom by definition bring in
more than the average. The Social Security Administration says those in the
bottom 20 percent earn up to $13,292, which is the upper limit of the
bottom “quintile,” or bottom fifth. (See the footnote on Table 10.5)

We don’t mean to dismiss the hardships faced by the least affluent seniors
among us, which can be substantial. Sanders would have been correct to say
that 20 percent of seniors in America lived on cash income of less than
$13,292 in 2012 — not counting non-cash government assistance. That’s a
meager figure, to be sure. It’s just not quite the “shocking truth” that
Sanders would have voters believe.

*CHAFEE*

*UNDECLARED*

*WEBB*

*Jim Webb Criticized for Comments on Confederate Flag
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/24/john-kasich-appeals-to-iowa-as-he-ponders-white-house-bid/>
// NYT // Alan Rappeport – June 24, 2015 *

Former Senator Jim Webb, the Democrat from Virginia, has struggled to
generate much excitement over his potential presidential campaign, but on
Wednesday he managed to attract some attention with some curious comments
about the Confederate battle flag.

In a statement on Facebook, Mr. Webb said that any discussion of the flag
needed to be tempered with respect for the “complicated history of the
Civil War.”

He went on to explain that while the flag had been used as a symbol of
racism in recent decades, 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.

The Confederate flag has been denounced by Democrats and Republicans alike
in the last week since the killing of nine churchgoers in Charleston, S.C.
Mr. Webb’s sentiment was rebutted by even his most loyal backers on
Wednesday.

“As one of your most enthusiastic supporters, I have to disagree with you
on this issue,” David Dickerson wrote in a comment on Mr. Webb’s post. “As
a fellow Southerner, I prefer to take Robert E. Lee’s path and disassociate
from that flag and what it stands for.”

Others, such as Jordan Genso, expressed disappointment.

“I don’t need to agree with you on every issue in order to support you, but
this should be low-hanging fruit for you to be on the right side of,” Mr.
Genso wrote. “And there’s no reason not to state that the Confederate
battle flag represents a quasi-nation whose short existence was spent
trying to fight for an immoral cause.”

Mr. Webb has a history of defending the confederacy. In a 1990 speech at
the Confederate Memorial in Arlington, Va., he said, “I am not here to
apologize for why they fought, although modern historians might contemplate
that there truly were different perceptions in the North and South about
those reasons, and that most Southern soldiers viewed the driving issue to
be sovereignty rather than slavery.”

In 2008, Politico reported that Mr. Webb’s book “Born Fighting” seemed to
sympathize with the Confederate cause, potentially giving pause to then
Senator Barack Obama as he was vetting potential running mates. In Mr.
Webb’s book, Born Fighting, he wrote about acquiring a Confederate
headstone through the Veterans Administration for a great-great-grandfather.

A Vietnam War veteran who has been considered a potential presidential
candidate over the years, Mr. Webb announced last year that he was forming
a presidential exploratory committee. This year, he said the Democratic
Party could do a better job appealing to white working-class voters.

On Wednesday, Mr. Webb recalled that the Confederate Memorial at Arlington
National Cemetery was meant to recognize the character of soldiers who
fought on both sides of the Civil War.

“This is a time for us to come together,” he said, “and to recognize once
more that our complex multicultural society is founded on the principle of
mutual respect.”

*Jim Webb: Confederate soldiers fought honorably
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/jim-webb-confederate-flag-stance-119379.html?hp=l3_4>
// Politico // Nick Gass – June 24, 2015 *

Former Virginia senator and potential Democratic presidential candidate Jim
Webb weighed in on the Confederate flag debate on Wednesday, urging careful
consideration of both sides of the historical argument.

“This is an emotional time and we all need to think through these issues
with a care that recognizes the need for change but also respects the
complicated history of the Civil War. The Confederate Battle Flag has
wrongly been used for racist and other purposes in recent decades. It
should not be used in any way as a political symbol that divides us,” Webb
wrote in a Facebook post.

Americans should remember that people on both sides fought honorably, Webb
said, “including slave holders in the Union Army from states such as
Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland and Delaware, and that many non-slave holders
fought for the South.”

“It was in recognition of the character of soldiers on both sides that the
federal government authorized the construction of the Confederate Memorial
100 years ago, on the grounds of Arlington National Cemetery,” he wrote.

This is not the first time that Webb has addressed the Civil War’s legacy
in the commonwealth.

Almost 17 years before he became a senator, he spoke at the Confederate
Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery on June 3, 1990, the birthday of
Confederate President Jefferson Davis.

“These men, like all soldiers, made painful choices and often paid for
their loyalty with their lives. It is up to us to ensure that this
ever-changing nation remembers the complexity of the issues they faced, and
the incredible conditions under which they performed their duty, as they
understood it,” Webb said more than 25 years ago.

On Wednesday, Webb struck a similar tone.

“This is a time for us to come together, and to recognize once more that
our complex multicultural society is founded on the principle of mutual
respect,” he wrote.

Webb’s caution stands in sharp contrast to the stance of Democratic
frontrunner Hillary Clinton, who on Tuesday called the flag “a symbol of
our nation’s racist past that has no place in our nation’s present or
future.

“It shouldn’t fly there, it shouldn’t fly anywhere,” Clinton said.

*Jim Webb Pushes Back on Behalf of Confederate Flag Supporters
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/jim-webb-pushes-back-on-behalf-of-confederate-flag-supporters>
// Bloomberg // Arit John – June 24, 2015 *

Former Virginia Senator and Vietnam war veteran Jim Webb has finally
weighed in on the national debate over the Confederate flag—kind of.

Days after every major official and declared presidential candidate
announced their stance on the flag, Webb released a statement on Facebook
stating that while the flag has been used for "racist and other purposes"
that not all Confederates were bad, and not all members of the Union were
good.

"The Confederate Battle Flag has wrongly been used for racist and other
purposes in recent decades. It should not be used in any way as a political
symbol that divides us," Webb wrote. "But 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 non-slave holders fought for the South."

While other leaders have either called for the flag to come down or
supported South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley's decision to call for the
flag's removal, Webb asks for Americans to "come together, and to recognize
once more that our complex multicultural society is founded on the
principle of mutual respect."

Every other major leader who has officially joined the race or are getting
close has made their stance on the flag clear, either calling for the flag
to come down, supporting Haley's decision, or saying that it's a matter
best left to South Carolina. Webb is expected to announce his decision on
running for president by the end of the month.

Meanwhile, Webb declined to comment on the flag to the Washington Examiner
on Monday, and has a history of defending the Confederate flag in the past.
In his statement, he notes that it was "in recognition of the character of
soldiers on both sides that the federal government authorized the
construction of the Confederate Memorial 100 years ago." During a 1990
speech at the memorial, Webb said historians should consider "that most
Southern soldiers viewed the driving issue [of the Civil War] to be
sovereignty rather than slavery."

It's not clear that declining to call for the flag's removal will help him
with Democrats, though Bill Kristol, the conservative editor of the Weekly
Standard, was immediately impressed.

*Presidential Hopeful Jim Webb Defends Confederate Soldiers
<http://time.com/3934237/jim-webb-confederate/> // TIME // Sam Frizell –
June 24, 2015 *

Former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb said on Wednesday that the Confederate flag
has been wrongly used as a racist symbol, but stopped short of condemning
the flag outright. He also added that Americans should remember “honorable”
Civil War veterans, “including slave holders in the Union Army.”

“The Confederate Battle Flag has wrongly been used for racist and other
purposes in recent decades. It should not be used in any way as a political
symbol that divides us,” said Webb in a statement emailed to TIME in
response to questions about whether the Confederate flag should be removed
from Virginia license plates in the wake of the Charleston shooting.

“But 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 non-slave
holders fought for the South,” said Webb.

Webb is also the only 2016 candidate not to condemn the Confederate flag
outright or support a push to remove it from the South Carolina capitol
grounds. Republicans Scott Walker, Rand Paul and Jeb Bush as well as all
the other Democratic candidates have spoken out against the flag.

A likely candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination who counts
two relatives among Confederate Army veterans, Webb has a long history of
defending Dixie soldiers and the flag. He is the last 2016 presidential
hopeful to speak publicly about the flag.

In striking an ambivalent tone, Webb is seeking to criticize the racist
appropriation of the flag, but hold on to his Scots-Irish southern roots,
which he often references. (His 2005 book “Born Fighting” is subtitled “How
the Scots-Irish shaped America.”)

At the Confederate Memorial at Arlington National Cemetery in 1990, Webb
said that Confederate soldiers are “misunderstood by most Americans” and
recognized them for “enormous suffering and collective gallantry.”

“It was in recognition of the character of soldiers on both sides that the
federal government authorized the construction of the Confederate Memorial
100 years ago, on the grounds of Arlington National Cemetery,” Webb said in
his statement to TIME.

*Jim Webb: “Honorable Americans Fought On Both Sides Of The Civil War”
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/cjciaramella/jim-webb-honorable-americans-fought-on-both-sides-in-the-civ#.tgxNXByb3>
// Buzzfeed // CJ Ciaramella – June 24, 2015 *

Former Democratic Virginia senator and possible 2016 presidential candidate
Jim Webb weighed in on the controversy over the Confederate Battle Flag
Wednesday, saying it was used for racist purposes but that “honorable
Americans fought on both sides of the Civil War.”

In a Facebook post Wednesday, Webb wrote: “This is an emotional time and we
all need to think through these issues with a care that recognizes the need
for change but also respects the complicated history of the Civil War. The
Confederate Battle Flag has wrongly been used for racist and other purposes
in recent decades. It should not be used in any way as a political symbol
that divides us.”

“But 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 non-slave
holders fought for the South,” Webb continued. “It was in recognition of
the character of soldiers on both sides that the federal government
authorized the construction of the Confederate Memorial 100 years ago, on
the grounds of Arlington National Cemetery.”

“This is a time for us to come together, and to recognize once more that
our complex multicultural society is founded on the principle of mutual
respect,” he concluded.

Webb previously declined to comment on the Confederate flag, and is the
last of the likely 2016 candidates from both parties to stake out a
position.

Webb previously said he would announce his presidential intentions by the
end of June.

*OTHER*

The Shameless Dolores Huerta
<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/25/the-shameless-dolores-huerta.html>
// The Daily Beast // Ruben Navarrette Jr. – June 25, 2015

A reminder that former UFW chief Dolores Huerta, the left’s favorite Latina
activist, wasn’t always so pro-immigration.

Our Spanish phrase of the day is “sin verguenza.” It means someone without
shame. As in: Dolores Huerta—the East Coast liberal establishment’s
favorite Hispanic and someone who is held up as an iconic labor leader and
civil rights figure—is a sin verguenza.

The former vice president of the United Farm Workers union has long
exploited her celebrity status. Now, in the 2016 election, Huerta is
opportunistically working with People for the American Way, a Washington
DC-based liberal organization that has never shown the slightest interest
in Latinos or their concerns, in a campaign designed to use the immigration
issue to influence Latino voters.

“I believe the Latino community can be the ‘deciders’ and we saw that
happen in the 2008 election and the 2012 election,” Huerta recently told
the Latino-themed news site Latin Post.

Huerta’s message to Latino voters—as sponsored by People for the American
Way—is a variation on something that she said during a speech at a Tucson,
AZ high school in 2006: “Republicans hate Latinos.” So be sure to vote
Democratic.

The goal is to discredit any 2016 Republican hopeful who might have a shot
at winning Latino votes. Huerta’s targets so far include Sen. Marco Rubio
of Florida, Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

About Rubio, she said to Latin Post: ”I think that he (Rubio) is a person
we cannot trust because I think he's an opportunist and he's going to say
what he needs to say just to get himself elected. He speaks out of both
sides of his mouth.”

About Cruz, she said the senator was, through his opposition to Obamacare,
at least partially responsible for the “hundreds and thousands” of Texans
without health insurance.

And about Bush, she said the GOP establishment favorite can’t be trusted:
“He's another one that first he's against immigration and then says he's
for immigration.”

The left’s strategy of using Huerta to launch these attacks is based on
three assumptions: that Latinos care about immigration above other issues;
that Latinos will vote for candidates who are vouched for by other Latinos;
and that—when Latino Republicans like Cruz and Rubio need to be
attacked—the optics are better when other Latinos fire the salvos.

“It’s not a question of your surname or the language that you can speak,”
Huerta told Latin Post. “It’s a question about what values you hold.”

Even as someone who has given lip service to empowering Latinos
politically, Huerta went on to explain why she wants a woman (Clinton) in
the White House and not a Hispanic Republican (Rubio or Cruz). In other
words, ethnicity and language take a back seat to gender and party
affiliation.

What makes this ploy of using immigration as a battering ram against
Republicans not just cynical but offensive is that—despite Huerta’s recent
efforts to re-invent herself as some kind of immigrant advocate—she is
nothing of the kind.

That is not who is she now, or who she has ever been. Huerta is a labor
leader pure and simple, and, as such, she spent most of her activist career
standing next to union members who, convinced that immigrants take jobs and
lower wage for U.S. workers, want less immigration, not more of it.

That story is as old as the hills. It’s why the 1986 Immigration Reform and
Control Act—the last significant comprehensive immigration reform measure
passed by Congress—was strongly opposed by the AFL-CIO and other labor
groups.

We’re supposed to be believe that it’s all different now. The narrative
cooked up by liberals and the media is, sometime during the last quarter
century, organized labor learned to stop worrying about foreign competition
and embraced immigration.

But that’s fiction. It never happened. The labor movement is more committed
than ever to defeating immigration reform efforts that include a path to
citizenship for the undocumented. The only difference is now organized
labor has learned to be craftier in camouflaging its true agenda.

Just like Huerta, who is obviously hoping that—on the topic of
immigration—Latinos will be long on outrage toward Republicans and short on
memory when it comes to the UFW.

We’re not supposed to remember that, 40 years ago, the union—which Huerta
claims she co-founded—was routinely criticized by Latino leaders like Bert
Corona, a community organizer and co-founder of the Mexican-American
Political Association, for demanding that the Immigration and
Naturalization Service send agents into the fields to arrest and deport
illegal immigrants who had crossed the picket line.

We’re not supposed to remember that, in 1973, UFW officials set up a "wet
line" on the Arizona-Mexico border to prevent Mexican immigrants from
crossing into the United States. Under the supervision of Cesar Chavez's
cousin, Manuel, who was something of a loose cannon, union members
physically attacked the immigrants until they were bloody. At the time, The
Village Voice scolded the UFW for conducting a “campaign of random terror
against anyone hapless enough to fall into its net.”

I’ve recalled this history directly to Huerta, in face-to-face
confrontations at various events in California that quickly turned ugly.

And we’re not supposed to remember that, in 1979, Chavez testified before
Congress—not to demand more protection for illegal immigrants but to demand
that the INS do a better job of removing them from the fields.

I’ve recalled this history directly to Huerta, in face-to-face
confrontations at various events in California that quickly turned ugly. On
the defensive, she insisted none of it ever happened, and claimed that she
can say this definitely because, not only does she speak for the union, she
in fact “is” the union. The woman is either in denial, dishonest, or
delusional.

Huerta will have a tougher time explaining away her more recent betrayal of
the Latino community. As an outspoken supporter of Hillary Clinton in 2008,
Huerta blasted Barack Obama as not responsive to Latino concerns, calling
him a “Johnny come lately” to the cause. She even took umbrage to the Obama
campaign’s slogan—“Yes we can!,”—which she insisted sounded a lot like the
UFW’s rallying cry of “Si se puede.”

”Now they're copying our slogan," she told a reporter at the time. "But you
cannot build a relationship no más con una palabra—just with one word.”

Eventually, the relationship between Obama and Huerta improved. In 2010,
the president invited Huerta to a state dinner at the White House honoring
Mexican President Felipe Calderon. In 2012, Obama presented Huerta with the
Presidential Medal of Freedom.

Now—despite the fact that Obama broke his promise to make comprehensive
immigration reform a top priority of his presidency, deported more than 2
million people, divided hundreds of thousands of families, and falsely
claimed that those who were removed were predominantly criminals—Huerta
sings the praises of the Johnny Come Lately she once criticized.

Let’s see, Huerta accuses Republicans running for president of being
blinded by ideology, flip-flopping on immigration, and selling out. She
should know. She is an expert on these things.

This is our leader, our moral compass? Says who?

White liberals may have decided among themselves that Dolores Huerta
represents Latinos, but she only represents herself. She is an opportunist.
She bartered away her credibility. And she needs to spend the 2016 election
where she belongs: on the sidelines.

*Obama Victory on Trade Wins Him New Fight With Fellow Democrats
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-25/obama-victory-on-trade-wins-him-new-fight-with-fellow-democrats?cmpid=yhoo>
// Bloomberg // Carter Dougherty and Angela Greiling Keane - June 25, 2015 *

After battling his own party over trade policy for months, President Barack
Obama has won a prize no politician would envy: another fight with his
friends.

Congressional approval of fast-track negotiating authority Wednesday after
six months of cajoling by Obama is just one step on the way to what he says
will be a landmark, 12-nation free-trade agreement with Pacific Rim
countries.

Democrats and liberal groups are already promising a new fight if and when
the actual trade pact, known as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, comes to a
vote. That could be early next year just as the campaign to succeed him
gets into full swing, putting Hillary Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner,
on the spot with labor and other core constituencies.

“We all recognize that the next debate will be over Trans-Pacific
Partnership itself,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California, who
opposed the fast-track measure, wrote Wednesday in a letter to fellow
lawmakers. She predicted a “lively and thoughtful debate” among Democrats.

Both trade policy and relations with China -- a country pointedly not part
of the trade negotiations -- will be topics for the 2016 races for
president and Congress. The White House wants to complete a deal this year,
and Japanese Economy Minister Akira Amari said Wednesday it might wrap up
at a meeting of trade ministers in July.

Divided Democrats

“The debate has only begun,” said Simon Rosenberg, president of the New
Democratic Network, a Democratic-leaning research group that supports
Obama’s trade agenda. “The debate will shift from the abstract discussion
of trade to a very specific discussion of TPP.”

Trade is an issue that has divided Democrats since 1994, when the North
American Free Trade Agreement, the deal labor unions blame for millions of
manufacturing job losses, took effect. Clinton’s husband, then-President
Bill Clinton, signed NAFTA and wrangled it through Congress.

With the liberal wing of Democrats gaining influence in the party and
standing mostly opposed to the next, and even bigger, trade deal, Clinton
has tacked left. Having once backed the accord as secretary of state, she’s
now wavering.

“What she made very clear from the beginning is she’s going to respect the
president and let him bring the deal back and she’ll look at it and make up
her mind,” Rosenberg said. “It’s likely she’ll be supportive, but she’ll
use this to remind people that trade policy doesn’t operate in an economic
vacuum.”

Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, a self-described socialist who currently is
Clinton’s main challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, is an
unequivocal opponent of the trade deal.

Business Support

Eric Schinfeld, president of the Washington Council on International Trade
in Seattle, said advocates are in a race with presidential politics.

“November 2016 will really shape the dynamics of the next trade vote,”
Schinfeld said.

Still, Julian Zelizer, a professor of history and public affairs at
Princeton University, said Obama has no reason not to use the fast-track
powers he just obtained, which lets him submit trade deals to Congress for
a quick, up-or-down majority vote without amendments.

“If you are going to go this far in angering the base of the party then you
use the procedure to get the deal or it’s not worth it,” Zelizer said.

Final Vote

The bill Congress just passed lays out a procedure, including written
notifications, a study of the economic impact and limited debate, that
could take about six months before a final vote is cast on the agreement.

U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman told a group of CEOs in Washington
on June 10 that business will need to gin up something similar to its
lobbying effort on fast-track trade authority to get the deal approved by
Congress. “It may not be at the same intensity for six months, but that
will be a big debate,” Froman said.

The business lobby, in turn, wants Obama to keep making the public and
private case for the accord, especially to lawmakers, said John Engler,
president of the Business Roundtable, which coordinated the business push.
Obama’s willingness to mobilize top officials, including Defense Secretary
Ashton Carter, convinced them he was serious about persuading lawmakers to
back fast track.

“A goal of the administration should be to make sure no one can go to the
floor and say, ‘I didn’t know what’s in this agreement,’” Engler said in an
interview. “There’s no time to sit back.”

Mobilizing

Engler also called on the administration to mobilize the different
industries that would benefit from the Pacific trade deal. Under the pact
taking shape, agricultural exporters could ship more to Japan, more
American financial services would be for sale in Asia, while Silicon Valley
would see restrictions on how governments can curb data flows. The
pharmaceutical industry may get stronger patent protection and automakers
could see exports rise.

Liberal groups who opposed fast track are vowing to redouble their efforts
to defeat the Pacific trade deal, well aware that congressional approval of
fast track means Obama can probably finalize an agreement with the other
nations: Japan, Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Malaysia, Mexico, New
Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam.

“What it doesn’t mean is that Congress must pass such a TPP,” said Robert
Weissman, president of Public Citizen, an advocacy group. “When the
inexcusable and anti-democratic veil of secrecy surrounding the TPP is
finally lifted, and the American people see what is actually in the
agreement, they are going to force their representatives in Washington to
vote that deal down.”

*Mass. Democratic Party invites presidential hopefuls to speak
<https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/06/24/mass-democratic-party-invites-presidential-hopefuls-speak/omCGZaiZ8tasNPGxH9KxDP/story.html>
// Boston Globe // Jim O’Sullivan – June 24, 2015 *

Massachusetts is known less for its electoral significance in presidential
primaries than its functional role as an ATM for campaigns. But that hasn’t
stopped the state Democratic Party from issuing invitations to four
presidential candidates offering speaking roles at its Sept. 19 convention
in Springfield.

State party chairman Thomas McGee, a state senator from Lynn, penned a
compelling missive laden with innuendo about the ancillary benefits for
presidential candidates who might take the time to address party activists
in the Bay State.

“I know you have a close eye on New England considering the role our region
plays with the nation’s first primary just over the border in New
Hampshire,” McGee wrote in a form letter sent to former Rhode Island
governor and US senator Lincoln Chafee, former secretary of state Hillary
Rodham Clinton, former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley, and Vermont
senator Bernie Sanders. (Former US senator from Virginia Jim Webb has not
formalized a candidacy.)

In case none of them took that hint, McGee sweetened the pot: “Addressing
our convention allows you the opportunity to recruit and solidify an active
volunteer that will travel to New Hampshire and beyond.”

Party officials said Wednesday they had yet to receive RSVPs.

*GOP*

*DECLARED*

*BUSH*

*Jeb Bush Picks Woody Johnson as Finance Chairman
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/06/24/jeb-bush-picks-woody-johnson-as-finance-chairman/>
// WSJ // Beth Reinhard and Patrick O’Connor – June 24, 2015 *

Woody Johnson, a top fundraiser for the last three Republican presidential
nominees and the owner of the New York Jets football team, will serve as
national finance chairman for Jeb Bush’s presidential campaign.

The announcement isn’t unexpected, considering Mr. Johnson’s visibility,
standing by Mr. Bush throughout his recent trip to Europe and flying him
there on his private jet. Mr. Johnson has been a supporter of New Jersey
Gov. Chris Christie, and his decision earlier this year to back Mr. Bush
was viewed as a setback to Mr. Christie, who is likely to launch a 2016 bid
this summer.

Mr. Bush is trying to raise money at a furious pace during the two weeks
between his June 15 campaign launch and June 30, when he is required to
disclose his fundraising total to the Federal Election Commission. The
campaign is trying to incentivize donors by inviting those who raise
$27,000 by the end of the month to a July 9-10 retreat at his family’s
compound in Kennebunkport, Maine.

The pursuit of campaign money, one $2,700 maximum donation at a time, comes
after six months in which Mr. Bush crisscrossed the country soliciting
unlimited checks for his super PAC. The PAC is expected to report more than
$100 million at the end of July, outgunning the crowded GOP field.

Mr. Johnson is seen as one of the GOP’s top fundraisers for his ability to
convene top Wall Street financiers and heirs to some of the country’s
fortunes. He was a top rainmaker for the past two Republican nominees,
former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and Arizona Sen. John McCain, with a
reputation for making as many as 50 calls a day on behalf of the candidates
he supports. He is credited with raising $7 million for Mr. McCain in a
single night during the 2008 campaign.

The billionaire Jets owner tends to stick close to the candidates and their
top advisers, and he developed a close personal bond with Mr. Romney. When
the 2012 nominee considered a third White House run earlier this year, he
broke the news to a small group of well-heeled donors assembled at Mr.
Johnson’s Midtown Manhattan office.

“Jeb is a bold and thoughtful leader with the vision and experience to
ensure our nation’s greatest days remain ahead,” Mr. Johnson said in a
statement to The Wall Street Journal.

Jack Oliver, senior adviser to Barclays and a top fundraiser for the 2000
and 2004 presidential campaigns by Mr. Bush’s brother, George W. Bush, will
serve as his national finance co-chairman. Other co-chairs are expected to
be named later.

*Bush campaign taps New York Jets owners as national finance chairman
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/24/bush-campaign-taps-new-york-jets-owner-as-national-finance-chairman/>
// WaPo // Ed O’Keefe – June 24, 2015 *

Jeb Bush has tapped a top fundraiser for the last three Republican
presidential nominees to serve as his finance chairman.

Woody Johnson, the owner of the NFL's New York Jets and heir to the Johnson
& Johnson empire, will take on the role, Bush's campaign announced
Wednesday morning. Veteran Republican fundraiser Jack Oliver will serve as
a finance co-chairman.

Johnson, Oliver and Bush finance director Heather Larrison will be
responsible for meeting Bush's goal of raising $5 million this month for
his recently-launched campaign. Bush this week is on a nationwide
fundraising tour with stops in Orlando, New York, Chicago, Dallas, Houston,
Tulsa and Atlanta. An event last Friday at Washington's Union Station drew
approximately 300 supporters, according to attendees.

Sally Bradshaw, a top adviser to Bush, said in a statement that the
campaign is "honored" to have Johnson and Oliver's support.

"Woody’s longstanding commitment to public service and strong track record
of working with people of different backgrounds to accomplish big goals
represent the values and priorities of Jeb’s campaign," she said.

Johnson said in a statement that Bush "is a bold and thoughtful leader with
the vision and experience to ensure our nation’s greatest days remain
ahead."

News of the new roles was first reported by The Wall Street Journal.

Johnson's decision earlier this year to support Bush over New Jersey Gov.
Chris Christie was viewed as a sign of growing support for the former
Florida governor. In the months since, he's become a frequent and active
adviser and supporter of Bush's campaign and traveled with him on his
recent tour of Germany, Poland and Estonia.

He's been a big financial backer of the presidential campaigns of George W.
Bush, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Mitt Romney.

Oliver is a senior adviser to Barclays and Bryan Cave LLP, an international
law firm based in St. Louis. He was national finance chairman for the
Bush-Cheney 2004 reelection campaign.

*Jeb Bush’s Super PAC is Blurring ‘Jeb!’ Signs in Its Own Ad. Here’s Why
<http://www.nationaljournal.com/2016-elections/jeb-bush-s-super-pac-is-blurring-em-jeb-em-signs-in-its-own-ad-here-s-why-20150624>.
// National Journal // Shane Goldmacher – June 24, 2015 *

Jeb Bush's super PAC makes no secret of its plans to spend tens of millions
of dollars to help Bush win the Republican presidential nomination next
year.

But in the group's new 30-second video promoting Bush—a compilation of
highlights from his announcement speech earlier this month—the group is
blurring the multitude of "Jeb!" stickers and signage in the Miami crowd.

It's not for style. It's to comply with the law.

Federal election law says that broadcasting written or graphic materials
prepared by a campaign amounts to a contribution and, thus, is subject to
campaign-contribution limits.

The whole point of a super PAC is to raise and spend money outside those
limits.

So the group blurred the "Jeb!" signs at the event.

"They are avoiding this allegation" of reproducing campaign materials, said
Paul S. Ryan, senior counsel for the Campaign Legal Center.

It's not clear if there are plans to advertise the Web video, which clocks
in at exactly 30 seconds, on TV or online. A spokesman for the Right to
Rise USA, the pro-Bush super PAC, declined to comment for this story.

The relevant section of the federal code says that "the dissemination,
distribution, or republication, in whole or in part, of any broadcast or
any written, graphic, or other form of campaign materials prepared by the
candidate" constitutes a contribution to the candidate.

The idea behind the rule, Ryan explained, is to prevent an outside group
from simply taking a candidate's yard signs and reproducing them, or
recording a candidate's TV ad and re-airing it.

Ryan's group and other campaign-finance reformers have been highly critical
of the arrangement between Bush and his super PAC, in which the two worked
together for months ahead of Bush's formal entry into the race this month.
Earlier this year, the Campaign Legal Center asked the Department of
Justice to investigate what it called "willful violations" of federal law.

In this particular instance, the Bush super PAC appears to be cautiously
adhering to the law.

Super PACs have been steadily pushing the boundaries of coordination and
the reproduction of campaign materials in recent years. Numerous
candidates, perhaps most memorably Mitch McConnell last year, have posted
video B-roll of their candidates online, hoping super PACs use the
favorable footage in ads.

The specific right of outside groups to use such B-roll actually came
before the Federal Election Commission in 2012. The six-member panel,
divided equally between Democrats and Republicans, deadlocked on the
matter. Super PACs have used such candidate-produced footage ever since.

*Jeb Bush Is Slow to Catch Fire in Iowa
<http://sentinelrepublic.com/jeb-bush-is-slow-to-catch-fire-in-iowa/7229/>
// Sentinel Republic // Eugene Robinson – June 24, 2015 *

“I will take nothing and no one for granted”, the 62-year-old Bush, a son
and brother of two ex-presidents, told a crowd of supporters at a
university in Miami.

Bush, as he’s done before, assigned responsibility to Clinton for what he
regards as President Barack Obama’s misbegotten foreign policy. Americans
would just have to deal with the fact that these two families are never,
ever going away.

The Republican presidential candidate and ex- Florida governor said that
easing immigration laws, loosening regulation, and simplifying the tax code
would be part of his formula to almost double the nation’s current economic
growth. Especially for a candidate who’s been eyeing a bid for the White
House for quite a while now, you’d think that all the digital bases would
be covered and all the possible web properties related to that candidate or
his/her name would be secured and under control.

Yet when it comes down to Hillary against the field, the poll suggests it’s
going to be either Rubio or Bush that’ll give Clinton the greater
challenge. But the same poll in May found him at just 10 percent, tied with
his onetime protege, Sen.

It wasn’t until past year that the predominantly Republican Florida
Legislature tackled fixing this inequity so that it wouldn’t become a
campaign issue for the unpopular Republican Gov. Rick Scott, who was facing
re-election.

The dynastic consequences of such a pairing in November 2016 have not gone
unnoticed among many voters and rivals, of course.

But is there anybody who believes Jeb Bush is the man to take on the
pampered elites?

One of those, Correct the Record, is blazing an entirely new trail – and
one that some election watchdogs say is questionable – by planning to
coordinate directly with the Clinton campaign. The following day, he said
it somehow dishonored US troops to even ask the question. “And the answer
is not all that positive for her”.

Yet a defiant Bush has showed small willingness to placate his party’s
right wing.

Bush, whose wife is Mexican-born, addressed the packed college arena in
English and Spanish, an unusual twist for a political speech aimed at a
national audience.

But family political dynasties are rare in our history because they are so
hard to replicate.

Several speakers broke into Spanish, including Bush himself, who is fluent
in the language.

Thanks to the super PAC that served as his campaign-in-waiting for six
months, the Republican contender said he’s raised more money in 100 days
than any Republican operation in modern times. Then, after winning the
nomination, he would have to shift back toward the center – but not so
abruptly that he disillusioned true believers. Still, Bush commands 94
percent name identification among likely Michigan voters, followed by Paul
with 82 percent, Rubio at 70 percent and Walker trailing far behind at 55
percent. That, in turn, could mean that a finish in the top tier – rather
than an outright win – has more meaning than in the past. Bush has had
everything in his life handed to him on a silver platter. “The people who
know, know that”.

Early opinion surveys place Bush in the middle of the Iowa pack among
republican candidates.

In that poll, Bush did better than Rubio, though he still was down to
Hillary in a head-to-head contest Bush with a 51-40. He is smart,
experienced and deeply informed about domestic policy issues such as
education. His brother, the 43rd president, and his father, the 41st
president, were not in attendance for his presidential announcement speech
in Miami on Monday.

*RUBIO*

*Marco Rubio fights conservative backlash over his support of Obama trade
authority
<http://miamiherald.typepad.com/nakedpolitics/2015/06/marco-rubio-fights-conservative-backlash-over-his-support-of-obama-trade-authority.html>
// Miami Herald // Alex Leary – June 24, 2015 *

Sen. Marco Rubio has a new headache from the right: His support for
President Obama’s Pacific trade deal.

“Marco Rubio Casts Deciding Vote For Obamatrade Without Even Reading It,”
screamed a headline in Breitbart News, which last rode the Florida
Republican on immigration.

Deciding vote is hyperbolic but Rubio’s was essential as the measure was
advanced Tuesday by 60 votes, the exact number needed to overcome the
Senate’s procedural hurdles.

A number of conservative groups have lashed out at giving Obama fast track
authority on trade deals, claiming the accords have been created in secret
and warning it wouuld bring in more foreign workers. Plus they don’t want
to give Obama any more power.

Rubio felt it enough to push back on Twitter today, linking to a National
Review story that says Rubio did read the deal.

As noted earlier, the trade issue has divided Republican candidates. In the
Senate, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz voted no yesterday.

Rubio after the vote breezed by reporters without taking questions. He
hasn’t said much publicly about the deal lately but was a visible champion,
writing in the Wall Street Journal and calling on action during his first
foreign policy speech as a presidential candidate.

“It is more important than ever that Congress give the president trade
promotion authority so that he can finalize the Trans-Pacific Partnership
and the Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership,” Rubio said in a
May 13 speech before the Council on Foreign Relations.

Jeb Bush also supports the deal.

*Rubio’s Cuba views at odds with young Hispanic-Americans*
<http://thehill.com/opinion/letters/246076-letters-rubios-cuba-views-at-odds-with-young-hispanic-americans>*
// The Hill // Eddie Bejarano – June 24, 2015*

As a young Hispanic-American, I am deeply concerned and saddened about the
position Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) has taken in response to President
Obama’s decision to thaw relations between our country and Cuba — mainly
that he, if given the opportunity, would continue to implement policies
that reflect the political realities of the Cold War.

Similar to Rubio, my parents left their home nation of Peru because of
political reasons. Unlike Rubio, I do not let the views of a generation of
scarred Peruvians define my contemporary worldview. There is no doubt my
parents’ political experiences have left their mark on me, but the world
today is vastly different from when they immigrated to the U.S.

It is no longer safe to assume that the entire Cuban-American community
supports punitive policies against Cuba. According to a poll conducted in
2014 by Florida International University in Miami, 62 percent of
Cuban-Americans ages 18-29 oppose continuing the embargo policy in place.
Among registered voters, 51 percent favored continuing the embargo and 49
percent opposed it.

The statistic that I found most significant discussed what percentage of
respondents supported reestablishing diplomatic ties between the U.S. and
Cuba. Sixty-eight percent of respondents favored diplomatic relations with
Cuba, with 90 percent of young respondents favoring a shift in our current
diplomatic policy. However, support for reconstructing diplomatic relations
with Cuba dropped precipitously for age groups older than 70.

From these figures, I can only deduce that Cuban-American politicians such
as Rubio are approaching a momentous fork in the road. As he campaigns for
the Oval Office, I ask that he consider a few important questions. Is a
policy that continues to isolate Cuba beneficial to the U.S. or the people
of Cuba? And is his Cuba policy reflective of the broader Hispanic-American
community or solely that of an older Cuban diaspora? If he is to be the
face of the Hispanic-American community, then it is my hope that his
worldview, and specifically his Cuba policy, is not held hostage by the
political experiences of our parents’ generations.

“What do we want? New clean energy! When do we want it? Now!” seems to be
the rallying cry of investors that have put forth $4 billion to invest in
clean energy technology. What The Hill’s June 16 article “Private investors
pony up $4 billion for clean energy” doesn’t mention, however, is the
initiative set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency called the
Clean Power Plan. This plan, which would mandate meaningful reductions in
carbon dioxide, would reduce carbon pollution by 30 percent by the year
2030. States are able to meet their goals by either making existing power
plants more efficient or moving toward sustainable, clean energy.

What does the Clean Power Plan have to do with clean energy investments?
Everything! The White House hosted a Clean Energy Investment Summit on June
16, which laid out promises from businesses and organizations to “go
greener” by turning toward clean energy. The Clean Power Plan, which
provides tremendous opportunity for states to go green, promotes solutions
to reducing pollution and addressing global warming concerns. Clean energy
is achievable through investor support and the Clean Power Plan, and we
should keep states accountable for this promise to moving toward better
solutions.

Let your elected officials know that you want to invest in what’s best.

*PAUL*

*Rand Paul In 2007: Trans-Texas Corridor Could Lead To “North American
Union,” US-Mexico Currency
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/christophermassie/rand-paul-in-2007-north-american-union#.opE61ep5m>
// Buzzfeed // Christopher Massie – June 24, 2015 *

Republican presidential candidate Rand Paul said in December 2007 that a
highway between Mexico and the United States could lead to a “North
American Union,” comparing the relationship between the US and Mexico to
the early stages of the European Union’s formation.

Paul, who at the time was campaigning for his father Ron Paul, then a
Republican presidential candidate, said on the Future Quake radio show that
his father had been unfairly “ridiculed” for discussing the possibility of
a “North American Union.”

“After my father mentioned the North American Union he was completely
ridiculed, not only just in the debate, but Newsweek came out and wrote an
article just completely making fun of him, saying it was all crazy people,”
Paul said. “But you know the funny thing about it is, they’re saying it’s
all just crazy people, but it’s already being built. I mean, the road is
being built. The Trans-Texas Corridor.”

Proposed by Texas Gov. Rick Perry in 2002, the Trans-Texas Corridor was
initially intended to be a 4,000 mile network of highways and railways.
According to the Houston Chronicle, Perry claimed it was necessary partly
because of increased Mexican truck traffic “following passage of the North
American Free Trade Agreement.” The idea was largely scrapped in 2009.

Echoing his father, who argued that the “superhighway” would link the US,
Mexico, and Canada, and that “the ultimate goal” included an “integrated
North American Union—complete with a currency,” Rand Paul dismissed the
notion that the corridor was a secret “conspiracy.”

“There’s already money funded for it,” he said. “It’s been a huge debate in
the Texas legislature, it’s not like it’s a secret. I mean, the Texas
legislature voted against it because they were going to take so much land
from so many farmers to build this road. So it’s not like some secrecy or
conspiracy that no one knows about. It needs to be publicized obviously so
people will talk about it, but it’s happening. So it’s a real thing.”

Paul then said that the President of Mexico had “talked about having, you
know, a currency,” saying that this was “the same thing” as what happened
with the European Union.

“The President of Mexico apparently has talked about having, you know, a
currency and I know people have called it the Amero,” he said. “I’m not
sure where that started. But think about it: the European Union was talked
about for twenty years before it finally occurred and this is the same
thing.”

He concluded by saying that organizations like the Council for Foreign
Relations and the Trilaterals Commission didn’t think it was “a big deal”
to have “countries sort of together in one currency.”

“Most people—until people got on our side started thinking about the loss
of sovereign entity and the dangers of this—they thought about it as a very
bland sort of subject, they would have it at their meetings, all these, you
know, the Council for Foreign Relations, the Trilaterals Commission, these
type of folks. These are real organizations that exist. They talk and they
talk about these things and they think it’s not a big deal. They think we
should have all countries sort of together in one currency and they think
it’s of some benefit somehow.”

*Sen. Rand Paul to sue IRS, U.S. Treasury
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/sen-rand-paul-sue-irs-us-treasury/>
// Washington Times // Ralph Z. Hallow – June 24, 2015 *

Rand Paul is poised to become the first major presidential candidate in
memory to sue the government he seeks to lead as president.

The Kentucky senator will take legal action against the U.S. Treasury and
the Internal Revenue Service for what he says is the denial of his
constitutional right to vote on more than 100 tax-information treaties that
the Obama administration unilaterally negotiated with foreign governments,
The Washington Times has learned.

In what the suit says is a violation of Article II, Section 2 of the
Constitution, President Obama has not consulted the U.S. Senate about the
treaties nor given the Senate an opportunity to approve or disapprove of
the treaties. The administration calls them “intergovernmental agreements.”
They require foreign banks to gather and share private financial
information about millions of Americans living and working outside the U.S.
— information they would not have to disclose to the U.S. government if
they lived and worked in the U.S.

The treaties or agreements are the enforcement mechanisms of the Obama
administration’s Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), enacted by a
Democratic-controlled Congress in 2010.

The act is despised by many of the estimated 8.7 million Americans living
overseas, a record number of whom have — with great anger and reluctance,
according to those who have spoken to the foreign and U.S. press —
renounced their U.S. citizenship rather than attempt to comply with FATCA.

What percentage of them simply want to evade paying taxes to the U.S.
government and to the foreign governments in whose countries they work
and/or reside is unknown. The U.S. is one of the few countries that taxes
its citizens on income earned and property held both at home and abroad.

President Obama pushed for the passage of FATCA as a means of capturing
hundreds of millions of dollars in income and property taxes owed to the
Treasury by those Americans living and working outside the U.S. But many
Americans living abroad say the Treasury and the IRS are treating them as
guilty of tax evasion until proven innocent.

“Obama owns this,” said Indiana-based GOP superlawyer Jim Bopp, the lead
attorney for Mr. Paul and other plaintiffs in the case. “FATCA passed
Congress right after Obama was elected, when the Democrats had majorities
in both houses” of Congress.

“The issue is inescapably partisan for that reason and for the fact that no
Republican [in the U.S. House] supported the passage of FATCA,” Mr. Bopp
said. “The U.S. government didn’t start enforcing it until Obama started to
target U.S. citizens overseas in the belief that they had a lot of money
but not a lot of political clout sufficient to fight back.”

Nations that have approved these bilateral agreements or treaties with the
U.S. include such major economic powers as China, Britain, India, Israel,
Ireland, Canada, Australia, Japan, Germany, France, Spain and Switzerland,
as well smaller states once considered as tax havens such as Bermuda, the
British Virgin Islands, Lichtenstein and Luxembourg. So far, 112 nations
have agreed to collect or receive private financial information about
Americans in those countries and to turn the information over to the U.S.
government.

Constitutional clash

Mr. Paul, a Republican who announced his presidential bid in early April,
will join six other plaintiffs in the suit that a new organization called
“Republicans Overseas Action” expects to file in a southern Ohio federal
district court the week of June 29. The court’s Republican makeup is
considered at least open to the constitutional arguments that the
plaintiffs lay out.

The other plaintiffs base their claim of legal standing to sue the Treasury
and the IRS on FATCA’s requirement that they surrender personal information
in violation of the Fourth Amendment’s ban on unreasonable search and
seizure and on the Eighth Amendment ban on cruel and unusual punishments —
in this case, unusually large financial penalties for late filings, however
innocent, or for noncooperation.

FATCA requires foreign banks to violate the privacy of their American
customers by disclosing bank balances and all financial transactions. The
U.S. law levies a hefty 30 percent fine on foreign financial institutions
that don’t cooperate with the Treasury’s requests. The fine is actually
levied against the American customer of the foreign bank, but critics say
no bank can keep its customer base with fines of that magnitude.

The law also directly fines the American holder of a foreign account as
much as 50 percent of the highest balance that was in that account at any
time during a 12-month period as penalty for not reporting.

Mr. Paul’s suit argues that the administration purposely avoided calling
the arrangements “treaties” and instead labeled them as “intergovernmental
agreements” to escape having to get Senate approval. Earlier this year, Mr.
Paul introduced a Senate bill to repeal FATCA. But Senate Majority Leader
Mitch McConnell has not scheduled debate on the bill.

Michael DeSombre, an American residing in Hong Kong, is the worldwide
president for Republicans Overseas Action. He sees Democratic presumptive
nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton as vulnerable on the FATCA controversy.

“When FATCA was enacted in 2010, Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.
Many overseas Americans complained how unjust and destructive this law is
to U.S. embassies and consulate general offices around the world. What I
want to know is what did Hillary do with those reports in this election,”
said Mr. DeSombre.

The other plaintiffs in the suit Mr. Paul has joined say they have been
denied banking and financial services in the foreign countries where they
live and work. The foreign banks don’t want to be burdened with the expense
and paperwork to comply with FATCA and therefore simply refuse to accept
Americans as clients.

The Republican National Committee and the recently formed Republican
Overseas Action aim to get as many of those Americans living or working
outside their country to register in one or another of the swing states
that decide the presidency in close elections. Republicans Overseas Action
is paying for the lawsuit Mr. Paul has joined as plaintiff.

The driving force behind the suit is a longtime conservative activist on
the Republican National Committee, Solomon Yue of Oregon.

“The best way to defend 8.7 million overseas Americans’ right to privacy
and constitutional protections is to cripple the IRS, FATCA and enforcement
tools through legal action on constitutional grounds all the way to the
U.S. Supreme Court,” said Mr. Yue, founder and vice chairman of Republicans
Overseas Action Inc.

*CRUZ*

*Cruz pulls another boneheaded move
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/06/24/cruz-pulls-another-boneheaded-move/>
// WaPo // Jennifer Rubin – June 24, 2015 *

Well, if Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) can go from hiring the “Southern Avenger,”
a neo-Confederate, to decrying the Confederate flag as “inescapably a
symbol of human bondage and slavery, and particularly when people use it
obviously for murder and to justify hatred so vicious that you would kill
somebody,” we should rank Sen. Ted Cruz’s flip-flop on trade less harshly.
Still, in the space of a week he voted for fast-track authority, heard
cries from the far right and then reversed himself — and still had the
nerve to denounce GOP leaders with whom he voted the first time around.
Politico explains:

The Texas firebrand and Republican 2016 presidential hopeful had been a
vocal supporter of trade legislation, even co-authoring a Wall Street
Journal op-ed in April saying that the fast-track bill, known as Trade
Promotion Authority, is a “fair deal” for the American worker. In May, he
voted to advance the TPA bill, which also included a worker aid package
favored by Democrats.

But just hours before a decisive Tuesday vote, Cruz [changed] his tune. . .
. Cruz, who has long aligned himself with the tea party wing of the party,
has taken some flak from the right for backing the trade bill initially —
so voting “no” now could insulate himself from some of that criticism. Yet
it could further alienate himself from big business and deep-pocketed
donors who are staunch proponents of expanded markets.

Now, even before this latest jaw-dropper, Cruz was in no danger of getting
mainstream support. There are not too many non-tea partyers who appreciate
him after orchestrating the shutdown, going whole-hog on anti-immigration
reform, whipping up support for an anti-gay marriage constitutional
amendment and advancing a frankly incoherent worldview (yes on destroying
the Islamic state, no on the NSA and on anymore troops). He’s in single
digits in most state and national polls, overshadowed at this stage by the
likes of Ben Carson and former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee — whose
supporters he appears to be chasing after.

Cruz likes to fancy himself as the only principled man inside the Beltway,
but with stunts like the trade flip-flop he makes crystal clear that his
only deeply held belief is self-promotion. Coverage in Texas media of his
about-face was stinging, painting him as a political coward. (“For months,
Sen. Ted Cruz backed a critical part of President Barack Obama’s trade
agenda. But after weeks of taking heat from conservatives, Cruz abandoned
his support for Trade Promotion Authority on Tuesday.”) And the  Wall
Street Journal editorial board observed, “Much of the opposition [on the
far right] has been pure opportunism, an attempt to parlay distrust of
all-things-Obama into talk-show rating points or Internet clicks. The
hucksters make up false accusations and spread them like Elizabeth Warren.
Top prize for such opportunism goes to Ted Cruz, who turned against the
trade bill at the last minute.”

In his spinelessness (and oddly on both trade and the Islamic State, not to
mention Syria, where both celebrated the refusal to enforce the red line)
he most closely resembles Hillary Clinton. She too never met a position she
was not willing to modify or discard (opposition to gay marriage, support
for the Iraq war, free trade) to keep pace with the base of her party.

The winner of the GOP primary will be the candidate who can dominate one or
more segments of the primary electorate, and then bring the others over.
That means being responsible enough not to scare moderates, businesspeople
and big donors who think a primary responsibility of governing is to keep
the government open and who recoil when candidates plunge into trade
protectionism, anti-immigration reform rhetoric, anti-government extremism
and vociferous opposition to gay marriage. That also means embracing a
tough, consistent foreign policy and advancing a credible pro-growth
agenda. As for the far right, Cruz simply has too much competition, some
from fresher faces than his.

Maybe Cruz has figured out that he isn’t viable as a presidential candidate
and is now seeking Sarah Palin-like status. He could want to be a celebrity
of the far right who does not really govern or move issues but is
completely simpatico with a dogged but small sliver of the electorate, and
with talk radio. In that regard his biggest competition may be Carson — or
Donald Trump.

*Ted Cruz Takes Aim at ‘Washington Cartel’
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/you-re-fired-republicans-target-their-own-for-opposing-obama-on-trade>
// Bloomberg // Heidi Przybyla – June 24, 2015 *

Senator Ted Cruz showed today how he intends to capitalize on the
anti-Washington, obstructionist persona he's worked hard to perfect.

In a speech to the Heritage Foundation in Washington, Cruz outlined the
populist theme he'll take across the country in his bid for the 2016
Republican presidential nomination, taking aim at big U.S. banks,
lobbyists, corporate "welfare" and the "Washington cartel."

The Texas first-termer portrayed himself as a victim of the "corrupt,
backroom deals'' that, in his view, dominate Washington. Cruz said he's
been "vilified" by Democrats, Republicans and the media for bucking
congressional leaders on issues running the gamut from raising the debt
ceiling to a vote yesterday granting President Barack Obama negotiating
authority for international trade agreements. Cruz unsuccessfully opposed
both.

"The Washington cartel has amassed more and more power at the expense of
the American taxpayer with the same recipe repeated over and over again,"
he said.

"Washington is looking for solutions for Washington," he added, declaring
that those "invariably help the rich and well connected."

Opposes Ex-Im Bank

Cruz singled out for criticism the U.S. Export-Import Bank, whose practices
he called tantamount to corporate "welfare," the Dodd-Frank banking
legislation that he said has suffocated community banks and government
subsidies for ethanol and sugar.

All of the 2016 presidential contenders are trying to weave populist
rhetoric into their stump speeches in an effort to address rising income
inequality in the U.S. But Cruz's approach of blaming Washington for the
economic anxieties many Americans are experiencing speaks to the limited
government, anti-establishment wing of his party's conservative base voters.

Rivals' plans

The senator, who was the first major presidential candidate to launch a
campaign for the the White House in March, has yet to release an economic
plan. Some of his rival candidates already have done so. Kentucky Senator
Rand Paul has proposed tax breaks to help companies investing in poor
communities and Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has called for revamping
programs for the poor and middle class.

Cruz's speech signals that he plans to make a selling point of his role
obstructing bipartisan legislation on budget and spending agreements,
raising the debt ceiling, pro-immigration policy and surveillance laws.

When he was asked "how can we be sure that you are not part of this mess?"
during a post-speech question-and-answer session, Cruz boasted that  he's
become a pariah in his party, even sharing an anecdote about one
closed-door luncheon where fellow Republicans "screamed and yelled" at him
for not going along with legislation to raise the debt ceiling.

"You can say a lot of things about me, but beloved by my colleagues in
Washington is not one of them,'' said Cruz.

*‘Speaker Cruz’ strikes again*
<http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/speaker-cruz-strikes-again>* //
MSNBC // Steve Benen – June 24, 2015*

As the Senate prepared to vote yesterday on a key procedural measure on
trade, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) made an announcement. Though he’d recently
voted for Trade Promotion Authority – better known as “fast track” – the
Texas Republican had changed his mind, and explained himself in a piece for
a right-wing website.

Cruz argued, in a piece circulated to reporters by Heritage Action, that
congressional Republican leaders in both chambers struck a secret deal with
Democrats to renew the Export-Import Bank and tied the policy to trade
bill. There’s no proof of any of this – Cruz’s piece didn’t include any –
and GOP leaders denied the claims.

But as Roll Call noted, the senator was just getting started.

[Cruz] went after Boehner for punishing conservatives, “wrongly stripping
Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., of his subcommittee chairmanship, and reportedly
threatening to strip other conservatives of their chairmanships as well.”

If that wasn’t direct enough, Cruz had a couple of questions: “Why does
Republican Leadership always give in to the Democrats? Why does Leadership
always disregard the promises made to the conservative grassroots?”

He added later in the day, “I think it was wrong for the Speaker to punish
a conservative for voting his conscience.”

Cruz has repeatedly partnered with House Republicans – the senator has
teamed up with the lower chamber so often that he’s earned the “Speaker
Cruz” nickname – but this was an unusually brash shot across the House
GOP’s leadership’s bow.

It was also a curious move. Cruz’s enthusiastic “fast track” support was
supposed to be an opportunity for him to prove his interest in actual
policymaking. But just as TPA was poised to pass, the Texan ran to
Breitbart to thumb his nose at his ostensible Capitol Hill allies.

Roll Call added that after his announcement, “senior GOP aides were
practically lining up Tuesday to offer anonymous quotes bashing Cruz.”

One said, “If Cruz is so concerned about his poll numbers, maybe he should
spend more time campaigning and less time meddling in the House to avoid
these desperate ‘I was for it, before I was against it’ ploys.”

So what’s the end-game here? Cruz’s poll support enjoyed a brief boost
shortly after his presidential campaign kickoff, but his backing has faded
and he remains nowhere near the top tier. Presumably, the far-right senator
is looking for new ways to connect with the GOP base.

The strategy that he’s settled on appears to focus on criticizing his
party’s congressional leadership and championing rank-and-file Republican
members – whose endorsements Cruz would no doubt welcome.

The plan, in other words, is for Cruz to run for president as the candidate
most disliked by his own party’s top officials.

*The House GOP is punishing rebellious members. Ted Cruz is steamed about
it. <http://www.vox.com/2015/6/24/8840149/GOP-punishment-ted-cruz> // Vox
// Jonathan Allen – June 24, 2015 *

Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz ripped GOP leaders in Congress
Wednesday for punishing conservatives who voted to kill President Barack
Obama's trade agenda, escalating a fight the Texas senator wants to have
with his party's establishment.

Following a series of votes on trade two Fridays ago, House Republican Whip
Steve Scalise kicked three Republicans out of their spots on the party's
vote-counting team, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC) was stripped of a subcommittee
chairmanship, and Red State's Erick Erickson reported Wednesday morning
that Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) is in danger of losing his post as president of
the freshman class.

The Meadows decision is a "shameful example" of a leader seeking
retribution "because of his principled objections" to giving the president
fast-track trade authority, Cruz said in a speech at the conservative
Heritage Foundation.

Cruz, who is currently mired in the second tier of Republican presidential
hopefuls, would need a big boost from conservative activists to make a real
play for the nomination in 2016. That was his target audience in weaving
the retribution anecdotes into a larger narrative pitting conservatives
against what he calls the "Washington cartel" of politicians in both
parties, lobbyists, and the mainstream media.

He has little to lose in going after Republican leaders, particularly in
the House, because they already detest his brand of take-no-prisoners
politics. They were incensed in late 2013 when his refusal to give up on
repealing the Affordable Care Act paved the way for a government shutdown.
And GOP leaders hate that Cruz often complicates their agenda by riling up
House conservatives.

The relations have grown so frosty that John Boehner has taken to
communicating with Cruz by gesture: The New York Times reported last month
that the House speaker's response to a question about Cruz's campaign was
to raise his middle finger.

Republican retribution

Meadows, Buck, and the three Republicans kicked off the whip team all voted
against the GOP leadership on the rule for debating a package of trade
bills — a serious no-no in a chamber that operates on majority-party rule.
Voting against a rule is considered more disloyal than voting against a
bill because it threatens the ability of party leaders to control which
legislation comes to the floor.

The House and Senate eventually passed fast-track trade authority for Obama.

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) the chairman of the Oversight and Government
Reform Committee and a Boehner ally, said he alone made the call to knock
Meadows from the top spot on of one his panel's subcommittees.

Meadows said in a tweet that he won't vote with GOP leaders if he thinks it
will harm his home district.

Boehner defended the Meadows move Wednesday after a GOP caucus meeting,
according to the Hill.

"I think the chairman made the right decision. I made it clear to the
members I supported that decision."

*Ted Cruz mum as his South Carolina campaign co-chairmen lead fight to let
Confederate flag fly
<http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ted-cruz-s-campaign-chairmen-fight-confederate-flag-article-1.2269296>
// NY Daily News // Cameron Joseph – June 24, 2015 *

Ted Cruz's South Carolina campaign co-chairmen are leading the fight to
keep the Confederate flag flying on state Capitol grounds, and Cruz's
campaign won't say if he agrees with them.

State Sen. Lee Bright, a Republican, was one of just two state senators to
vote against taking down the flag on Tuesday, a day after calling
bipartisan efforts led by Republican Gov. Nikki Haley following the murders
of nine black churchgoers in Charleston a "Stalinist purge" of his southern
heritage.

And South Carolina state Rep. Bill Chumley, another of Cruz's three
presidential campaign co-chairmen in the state, agrees with him, told CNN
Tuesday night that "We're focusing on the wrong thing here" when asked
about the flag, saying the problem was that none of the churchgoers were
armed.

"These people sit in there and waited their turn to be shot. That's sad,"
he said. "Somebody in there with the means of self-defense could have
stopped this. And we'd have less funerals than we're having."

Cruz has said he sees "both sides" of the flag debate and wants to leave it
to South Carolinians to decide, and his campaign won't say whether he
agrees with Bright and Chumley.

Cruz’s campaign says it’s leaving it up to the state to decide whether the
flag should come down.

"Sen. Cruz has said consistently that this is an issue that South Carolina
should solve and that's exactly what's happening. South Carolinians, some
of whom agree and some of whom disagree with the removal of the flag from
the state grounds, are arguing it out, and that's proper, and that's where
I'm going to leave it," Cruz strategist Rick Tyler told the Daily News.
“When outsiders come into a state and try to dictate what it should be
doing that's not proper."

Bright told the Daily News he hadn't talked to Cruz's campaign about the
issue, and wanted to wait until the victims were buried to begin the debate
in earnest.

But he defended his position, saying it was "beyond the pale" for people to
compare the white supremacist who murdered the African Americans to
Confederate generals like Robert E. Lee.

"Obviously you want to show love and respect to people who've lost loved
ones but to blame it on the Confederate flag, it's hard to see how that's
going to bring racial healing. What you've seen in Charleston is racial
healing, I don't know how it's going to make it better by taking our flag,
that'll offend a big part of our population," he said.

The Confederate flag has been a source of controversy in South Carolina
after a white supremacist gunned down nine black churchgoers last week in a
Charleston church.

Bright said removing the flag would give too much attention and power to
Dylann Roof, the white supremacist accused of shooting the nine black
churchgoers.

"He'll be remembered as the guy who brought down the Confederate flag and I
just don't think we're going to give him that kind of attention," he said.
“He'll be the reason the flag came down."

Bright is a Tea Party activist in the state who badly lost a primary to
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) last year. Graham is now running for
president, and has joined Gov. Haley in pushing for the flag's removal.

Tyler pointed out that while Cruz was solicitor general he'd filed an
amicus brief with the Supreme Court opposing the Ku Klux Klan's attempt to
adopt a highway in Missouri.

"He's not some Johnny-come-lately when it comes to purging racism," he said.

*Ted Cruz just upped the populist ante for 2016 Republicans*
<https://fortune.com/2015/06/24/cruz-attacks-cronyism/>* // Fortune // Tory
Newmyer – June 24, 2015*

Ted Cruz just raised the bar for Republican presidential hopefuls angling
for the fiery populist mantle.

In a 40-minute stemwinder delivered to a friendly crowd at the Heritage
Foundation on Wednesday, the junior senator from Texas inveighed against a
corrupt alignment of corporate and political power that he shorthanded as
the “Washington Cartel.” That’s apparently new coinage, and you can expect
to hear a lot more of it as Cruz tries to elbow his way out of the GOP
presidential primary’s second tier and into serious contention for the
nomination.

His speech was short on policy prescriptions, and he’s already struck on
the anti-establishment theme that organized it. But the acidity of his
vitriol tipped the rhetorical pH scale. “Lobbyists and career politicians
today make up what I call the Washington Cartel,” he said. “And it operates
very much like other cartels. It operates like OPEC. I don’t know, like
sheikhs, if they actually wear robes. But they nonetheless on a daily basis
are conspiring against the American people.” In Cruz’s formulation, every
moneyed interest and every leading pol, Republicans included, are in on it:
Big banks, “GM and Chrysler and its suppliers,” “union bosses,” “rich
yuppies” buying Teslas, “fat cat insurers,” Enron, Solyndra, Air India and
the other beneficiaries of the Ex-Im bank, corn growers, wind energy
purveyors, sugar producers, Big Box retailers, and their giant online
brethren.

As he spoke, the Senate was preparing to take the last step in handing
President Obama fast track authority to wrap work on the 12-nation Trans
Pacific Partnership trade agreement. Cruz had been an early and important
ally for the White House in its bid to secure that negotiating wiggle room.
Back in April, he joined House Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.)
in penning a Wall Street Journal op-ed calling the authority essential to
“send a signal to the world. America’s trading partners will know that the
U.S. is trustworthy and then put their best offers on the table.”

The Obama administration viewed Cruz’s endorsement as a major coup. Heading
into the thick of the debate, the White House worried over keeping other
Tea Party-affiliated Republicans on board with its trade agenda, since the
whole project needed near-uniform GOP support. Cruz’s position made it safe
for wary House Republicans to climb aboard.

But on Tuesday, as the White House’s push for fast track faced its final
significant challenge in the Senate, Cruz defected. The problem, he
suggested without evidence, was that Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) had
thrown a deal with Democrats to save the Export Import bank into the
bargain. And that federal agency, which exists to help finance American
exports, has become a bête noire for the anti-corporatist right that Cruz
seeks to champion. “There’s too much corporate welfare, too much cronyism
and corrupt dealmaking, by the Washington cartel,” he wrote in the op-ed
explaining why he soured on fast track that slyly previewed his Wednesday
line. So an uncharitable view of Cruz’s flip on fast track might note its
timing a day before the Heritage talk and the fact that it brought his
position on the issue of the day neatly into line with his theme.

Obama’s trade push — a defining priority he shares with the big business
lobby — cleared the Tuesday hurdle, with no votes to spare, mostly on the
backs of Senate Republicans. As Cruz lit out in a different direction, his
Wednesday address laid a new marker for those of his presidential rivals
who likewise hope an attack on the system they seek to lead will prove a
winning formula.

*Ted Cruz depicts lonely fight against “Washington cartel”
<http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/2015/06/ted-cruz-depicts-lonely-fight-against-washington-cartel.html/>
// Dallas Morning News // Todd J. Gillman – June 24, 2015 *

Casting himself as a rare truth-teller in the Senate, Texan Ted Cruz
depicted his brief career in Washington as a lonely fight against
entrenched interests – one that has made him an outcast within the Senate,
and uniquely positioned for the presidency.

“There’s some Republicans who say gosh, if someone’s been vilified, we
can’t nominate them for anything because they’re all beaten up and
bloodied,” Cruz said. “That’s the lie of the Washington cartel. That means
the only people we ever nominate are people who never take on the
Washington cartel. And you know what, if you’ve never taken on the
Washington cartel you’re not going to magically start once you take office.”

Cruz spent an hour at the Heritage Foundation, a conservative group
headquartered near the Capitol led by former Sen. Jim DeMint, a tea partier
who was a key Cruz patron in the 2012 Texas Senate fight.

Now the Texan is one of more than a dozen GOP candidates vying for traction
in a crowded 2016 field. At Heritage, he railed as he often does against
career politicians in both parties, and the lobbyist-industrial complex
that props them up. He called it twisted logic for anyone to depict him as
selfish and attention-grabbing for the way he’s tackled the Senate—often
defying GOP leaders.

“If I’m selfish, then I must be a blithering idiot. Because who selfishly
would welcome the derision, the abuse, your fund-raising shut off from this
town, nasty press stories written one after the other after the other, all
planted by Republicans,” Cruz said.

“That’s a very odd — you know what the selfish thing to do is? Come here
and smile. Give an empty speech, bloviate occasionally at a think tank.
Vote with the crowd. Don’t rock the boat…. You go to the parties, lobbyists
write you checks,” he said.  “It is not hard to coast and stay in office
forever.”

The “Washington cartel” took the brunt of Cruz’s remarks. He cited a number
of manifestations of the powerful interests that align to protect the
status quo, to the detriment of small businesses and struggling families.

He called the Export-Import Bank a killer of American jobs. Businesses in
Texas and around the country have been urging Congress to reauthorize the
bank, whose charter expires at the end of the month and which provides loan
guarantees to U.S. exporters and their customers overseas. Cruz cited data
showing that 10 of the biggest U.S. firms enjoy the majority of the
benefits.

“It’s hard to imagine an institution that is more emblematic of corporate
welfare than the Export-Import Bank,” Cruz said. “It’s good to be the king,
and it’s good to be a major donor to the king.”

He defended his about-face on fast-track Trade Promotion Authority this
week – a tool long used by presidents of both parties to close
international trade pacts – in part by noting rumors that GOP leaders in
the House and Senate had privately struck a deal to allow a vote on Ex-Im
reauthorization to seal support from holdouts on trade. The leaders have
denied such a deal.

“Excellent,” Cruz said. “Prove it. If there is no deal we should let Ex-Im
expire and stay expired. For once, all Congress has to do is do nothing,
and if Congress is good at anything, it’s doing nothing…. Let it expire and
end the gravy train for Washington lobbyists on the Export-Import Bank.”

He boasted that he alone among GOP contenders for president went to an Iowa
agriculture summit earlier this spring and declared his opposition to
subsidies for ethanol, a corn-based gasoline substitute.

“It’s very easy for conservative politicians to talk about ending cronyism…
but when you’re standing in front of the beneficiaries, that’s when you
separate talk from action,” Cruz said.

He blasted both sugar subsidies and proposals to require all online
retailers to collect sales tax as other examples of crony capitalism at
work.

On sugar, he said, federal policies hold down production to artificially
boost prices and profits, and those policies stem directly from heavy
lobbying; sugar accounts for 0.2 percent of American farming, he said, yet
it accounts for 40 percent of the lobbying outlays from crop farming.

As for online taxation, he called that a perfect convergence of powerful
interests. Big box, brick-and-mortar retailers have long demanded a level
playing field, complaining that online merchants can undercut them by not
collecting sales tax. But the biggest online sellers have begun collecting
such taxes, so they’re also trying to close the loophole.

That makes small entrepreneurs “a common enemy,” Cruz said, and “in
Washington, there’s nothing more beautiful than when the lobbyists align.”

*PERRY*

*Talking with Rick Perry about Iran, China, the Confederate flag
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2015/06/24/talking-with-rick-perry-about-iran-china-the-confederate-flag/>
// WaPo // Jennifer Rubin – June 24, 2015 *

I spoke by phone with former Texas governor Rick Perry, who, after
announcing his candidacy for president, has moved up a bit in the polls. He
looks very likely to make the cut for the first debate on Fox News and is
benefiting from his retail political skills and his seriousness on policy,
something absent in his 2012 run.

I asked him about the latest developments in Iran, a fiery and defiant
speech from the supreme leader and disclosure of a secret annex that would
assist Iran with its nuclear program. “I’m glad that I don’t have President
Obama as the negotiator for my next car,” he says ruefully. “But this is
deadly serious. You don’t give away your strongest positions up front. In
this case sanctions were working, and [Iran] came to the table.” Perry
criticizes easing up on sanctions in the Joint Plan of Action. “Billions of
dollars [for Iran] were freed up,” he says. “I’m really concerned he
doesn’t care what’s in the deal as long as he gets a deal.” He ticks off
his own demands: “Suspend enrichment. Full access to all facilities,
including military facilities. If not, there is no deal. They need to end
their ICBM program. That’s not even on the table. If not to deliver a
nuclear missile, why do you have [an ICBM] program?” And, Perry says, Iran
will need to end support for terrorism. None of that seems possible under
the current president.

Perry is also critical of Obama’s response, or lack thereof, with regard to
China’s cyberattack. “It appears that all they’ve been doing is discussing
talking to China. We’ve got to quit talking and start acting.” He says
what’s needed are sanctions on companies or entities that benefit from
cyberterrorism, travel bans on those who perpetrate it and development of a
blacklist of bad actors that can be shared with private companies and
allies. He also says, “They’ve been stealing our intellectual property for
years. They have universities that teach this, that teach hacking. We need
to end any transnational cooperation with universities that are cultivating
hacking.” His complaints about the Obama-Clinton-Kerry foreign policy don’t
stop there. “The way China operates is that if you do not have a strong
position, they consider it a sign of weakness,” he says. He then launches
into a discussion of enhancing our relationship with India. “With [Prime
Minister Narendra] Modi, they are very interested in building a
relationship, especially economically.” He criticizes the administration
early on in denying a sale of fighter jets. “They bought it from the
French, the Mirage.” The failure to help friends and punish enemies,
leaving allies in the lurch, he says, is “an across-the-board” feature in
the administration’s foreign policy.

We turn to the Confederate battle flag controversy. Perry dealt with a
similar issue concerning the flag on license plates, but he shares another
incident not discussed much. “Texas was part of the old Confederacy and
there were a number of places the Confederate flag cropped up. One was a
plaque in the state capitol that was offensive to a pretty substantial
group of people.” He acknowledges that at first he did not see the need to
move a marker citing Confederate pension monies were used to build part of
the capitol. “I mean, it had been there for 150 years. I was hesitant to
move it. But I had really good friends — [former lawmakers] Ron Wilson and
Al Edwards, Texas’s deputy secretary of state Coby Shorter and my counsel
Bill Jones — all African American — who said, ‘This is really offensive.’
The license plate was the same issue. It needed to be handled with dignity
and respect.” On moving the plaque (to a museum-like setting in the state
courthouse) and removing the flag from state license plates, he says, “I
think we handled it properly and now it is not a contentious issue.” Perry
also boasts that under his governorship Texas had the highest graduation
rate for African Americans. The same for Hispanics. (Fact checkers say this
occurred in 2012-2013.) “There is not a more powerful message than that . .
.  that we care about you,” he says.

Perry hails from a red state, so his legislative successes tend to be
minimized on the theory he had compliant Republicans. Perry disputes that:
“Not one thing big thing did we do — tort reform, education — that we did
with just Republicans. We needed some Democrats as well.” He recalls
working with a Democratic African American lawmaker from Houston on a sex
trafficking bill. “You couldn’t find someone more different than me, but I
found out if we’re respectful we could work together.”

Perry is known nationally as a pugnacious fighter against federal
overreach, but that characterization is incomplete, at least from his
vantage. “My observation is a leader’s job is to bring people together. It
is easy to pit people against each other — on race, on gender,” he says. In
2012, his sympathetic view toward illegal immigrants (granting them
in-state tuition) was seen as a liability. Now that record may be a plus,
at least in the general election. After the Obama years — filled with
racial tension and massive government incompetence — presenting himself as
a successful governor from a diverse state might be an effective message.
In that regard, he might be the most effective non-Jeb Bush candidate in
the field.

*GRAHAM*

*Lindsey Graham’s zombie claim about no fugitive being arrested after a
failed gun background check
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/06/24/lindsey-grahams-zombie-claim-about-no-fugitive-being-arrested-after-a-failed-gun-background-check/>
// WaPo // Glenn Kessler – June 24, 2015 *

“Well, 80,000 people failed a background check last year or two years ago.
Nine thousand were felons on the run from the law and not one of them was
arrested or prosecuted. Absolutely, if I get to be president of the United
States, you fail a criminal background check, you try to buy a guy when
you’re not supposed to, you’re going to meet the law head on.”

–Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), interview on CNN, June 19, 2015

Two years ago, we examined a similar claim by Graham and found it seriously
deficient, giving him Three Pinocchios. And yet we find that he is still
going on television and spreading this misinformation. In this case, he
repeatedly brought up this factoid during an interview about the tragic
mass shooting at a church in Charleston, S.C.

Graham, who is running for the 2016 GOP nomination for president, decried
the “lack of dedication” to capturing fugitives and asserted, “If I get to
be president of the United States, you fail a criminal background check,
you try to buy a gun when you’re not supposed to, you’re going to meet the
law head on.”

A Graham spokesman did not respond to a query about why the senator has
failed to drop this false claim. Time for a refresher course!

The Facts

Graham is referring to 2010 statistics concerning the National Instant
Criminal Background Check System (NICS), which is done through either the
FBI or state agencies. The data has not been updated since then.

(We should note that FBI figures actually show nearly 14,000 fugitives were
denied gun permits in 2010, not 9,000 as Graham said.)

The key purpose of the background checks in the Brady law is to prevent
certain individuals — particularly those with criminal records — from
easily buying guns. But from its inception, few people have been prosecuted
for lying on the application form. A 2000 General Accounting Office report
and a 2004 Justice Department Inspector General report disclosed a lack of
clear guidelines for prosecution but also indicated that these are very
hard cases to make.

In 2010, the FBI referred about 76,000 denials of firearms to an arm of the
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), but after a
review 90 percent were not deemed worthy of further investigation while
another 4 percent turned out to be incorrect denials. But then even of the
relatively small percentage of cases referred to ATF field offices, another
quarter turned out to be a case of mistaken denial and most of the rest had
no prosecutorial merit.

In the end, 62 cases were referred for prosecution, but most were declined
by federal prosecutors or dismissed by the court. Out of the original
76,000 denials, there emerge just 13 guilty pleas.

As the IG’s report stated:

We believe that the number of referrals and prosecutions is low because of
the difficulty in obtaining convictions in NICS cases.  These cases lack
“jury appeal” for various reasons.  The factors prohibiting someone from
possessing a firearm may have been nonviolent or committed many years ago.
The basis for the prohibition may have been noncriminal (e.g., a
dishonorable discharge from the U.S. military).  It is also difficult to
prove that the prohibited person was aware of the prohibition and
intentionally lied to the FFL [federally licensed dealer].  We were also
told that in parts of the United States where hunting historically has been
part of the regional culture, juries are reluctant to convict a person who
attempted to purchase a hunting rifle.

On the surface, these numbers might suggest Graham is on the right track.
But, as we explained before, it would be wrong and misleading to assume
that the federal numbers tell the whole story about prosecutions stemming
from background checks. Here’s what a Justice Department official explained
about the people listed as fugitives in the NICS data:

Speaking generally since we’re talking nearly 14,000 — most of these people
are state fugitives, not federal fugitives.  When NICS denies based on an
outstanding warrant, they routinely call the issuing jurisdiction (that
would be state/local law enforcement) and let them know that the fugitive
is, at that moment, at “Bob’s gun shop” trying to buy a gun.  In most
cases, that means the issuing jurisdiction (state/local) will send a radio
car to Bob’s (the gun shop), scoop up the fugitive, then prosecute him/her
in state court for whatever charges are pending.  That means they get
prosecuted on those charges — not NICS/gun offenses.

In other words, Graham is citing incomplete data. The state fugitives would
turn up in state statistics, not federal data. Unfortunately, as far as we
can tell, there does not appear to have been any nationwide study of how
many fugitives are captured via background checks.

However, the 2000 GAO report said “if the background check indicates that
the prospective purchaser is a fugitive (i.e., an outstanding arrest
warrant exists), applicable law enforcement agencies can attempt to arrest
the individual….Although no comprehensive statistics are available, some of
these individuals subsequently have been arrested as a result of having
been identified by the background check process.”

We also did spot checks of some of the annual reports filed by state police
agencies. None list the data in the same way but both Pennsylvania and
Virginia, which have state-run systems, indicated that they identified and
arrested fugitives in 2010 using background checks.  In the most recent
year available, 2013, both states indicated that they also arrested
fugitives as a result of gun background checks.

From Virginia’s 2013 report:

The VFTP processed 479,253 transactions in 2013. Of these, 2,412 were
denied based on the results of a criminal history record check or the
identification of another disqualifying record. During 2013, 168 wanted
persons were identified for extraditable offenses, which resulted in the
arrest of 124 individuals wanted in Virginia and 5 individuals who were
named in an outstanding warrant from another state. In 2013, the State
Police requested 961 criminal investigations related to the illegal sale or
attempt to purchase firearms, which resulted in 654 (68%) closed arrests.

From Pennsylvania’s 2013 report:

A total of 132 individuals with active warrants were apprehended in 2013.
Since its inception on July 1, 1998, the PICS is responsible for the
apprehension of 1,723 individuals.

The Pinocchio Test

This is emerging as a “zombie claim” — something that keeps popping up even
after it has been debunked. As we explained before, just looking at the
federal-level data does not tell the whole story. While there is no
comprehensive nationwide survey of fugitive prosecutions, the state-level
data from Virginia and Pennsylvania clearly shows that fugitives have been
arrested as a result of the Brady law. Pennsylvania alone indicated that it
has arrested about a 100 fugitives a year in the past 17 years.

Yet Graham persists in falsely claiming that “not one of them was arrested
or prosecuted.” We have little choice but to increase the Pinocchio rating
on this claim to Four.

*Lindsey Graham Says Charleston Shooting Reminded Him Of ‘Mideast Hate’
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/24/lindsey-graham-mideast-hate_n_7657558.html>
// HuffPo // Igor Bobic – June 24, 2015 *

Last week's horrific shooting in a black church in Charleston, South
Carolina reminded Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) of violence in the Middle
East.

"I don't know how you can sit with somebody for an hour in a church and
pray with them and get up and shoot them. That's Mideast hate," Graham said
Wednesday on the Senate floor. "That's something I didn't think we had
here, but apparently we do."

Asked by a reporter after his speech to clarify his comments, Graham told
NBC's Frank Thorpe, "What ISIL is doing, that kind of hate. It's kind of
that hard-heart, that, you know, heart that has been hardened after
generations of hate."

Graham made a similar comment last week in an interview the morning after
the shooting.

"To go into God's space and do this, I don't know," he told ABC News. "You
can't explain it. … I go to the Middle East a lot. I've seen hate up close.
I've seen communities where everybody has been killed because they're a
different religion, and you think that's just over there. Sometimes it's
not just over there."

The presidential hopeful, who serves on the Armed Services Committee, is
one of the most hawkish voices in the U.S. Senate. Last month, he called
for sending an additional 10,000 U.S. troops to Iraq. He also maintains
that the war there was not a mistake.

In his speech on the Senate floor on Wednesday, Graham praised the
community of Charleston for welcoming the alleged shooter, Dylann Storm
Roof, into their Bible study.

"He went to Charleston with a plan. The people in the church had no idea
who he was or what he had in mind, and he came into the church and he was
sitting in the pews by himself, and they invited him up for the Bible
study," he said. "And spent an hour with him. And he said they were so
nice, I could almost have backed out. That says a lot about them. Says a
lot about him."

Earlier this week, Graham reversed course and joined South Carolina Gov.
Nikki Haley (R) and a slew of other Palmetto State lawmakers in calling for
the removal of a Confederate battle flag located on the grounds of the
state capitol. He previously defended the flag as "part of who we are."

*Lindsey Graham’s racist Charleston jab: White supremacist suspect showed
“Mideast hate”
<http://www.salon.com/2015/06/24/lindsey_grahams_racist_charleston_jab_white_supremacist_suspect_in_charleston_showed_mideast_hate/>
//Salon // Sophia Tesfaye – June 24, 2015 *

This is why we can’t have nice things.

South Carolina Senator and Republican candidate for president Lindsey
Graham took to the Senate floor today to honor the victims of last week’s
shooting at a historical African-American church in Charleston but instead
of simply acknowledging the solemn moment, Graham reached back into his
derisive ways to blast suspected shooter Dylann Roof’s actions as
inexplicable like “Mideast hate.”

“I don’t know how you could sit in a church and pray with them for an hour
and shoot them. That’s Mideast hate. That’s something I didn’t think we had
here but apparently we do” said Graham.

South Carolina’s political class had come together in near unanimity to
call for the removal of the Confederate Flag from federal grounds just days
before, leading to the flag being yanked from major retailers and other
southern state capitols, but Graham’s statement signals an unwillingness to
refrain from divisive language until the victims had all received a burial.

On Tuesday, the son of infamous segregationist Strum Thurmond made an
impassioned commitment to racial reconciliation in a speech calling for the
Confederate flag’s removal:

We must take down the Confederate flag, and we must take it down now. But
if we stop there, we have cheated ourselves out of an opportunity to start
a different conversation about healing in our state. I am ready. Let us
start the conversation.

Graham had previously tweeted his hopes for healing in South Carolina:

*Lindsey Graham’s Charleston-Response Dumpster Fire Just Got Hotter
<http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/06/lindsey-graham-charleston-mid-east>
// Vanity Fair // Kia Makarechi – June 24, 2015 *

Lindsey Graham took to the floor of the Senate on Wednesday to comment on
the mass murder that took place on June 17 at a historically black church
in Charleston. The suspect in the case is Dylann Roof, a 21-year-old white
American who appeared in photos with the Confederate flag and appears to
have written a white-supremacist manifesto.

One particularly shocking detail that has emerged about the massacre is
that Roof allegedly joined the Bible-study group that was at the Emanuel
A.M.E. church for an hour before opening fire and killing nine people.
Here’s how Graham relayed that detail on the floor of the Senate: “I don’t
know how you can sit with someone in an hour in a church and pray with
them, and [then] get up and shoot them. That’s Mideast hate. I didn’t think
we had that here, but apparently we do.”

Graham doubled down when NBC’s Frank Thorp asked him about the comment
after the senator left the floor. “The kind of hate that [the shooter]
exhibited I've only seen in the Mideast,” he said. “It’s kind of that hard
heart, that, you know, heart that has been hardened after generations of
hate.”

Mid-East hate? Is there no antecedent for the type of white-on-black act of
terror that occurred in Charleston last Tuesday? Did the senator forget
about the nearly 4,000 lynchings that researchers have identified took
place between 1877 and 1950? Did the Oklahoma City bombing, which took
place well into Graham’s adult years, slip his mind?

Did Graham forget that the first anti-terror law in the United States, the
Ku Klux Klan Act—also known as the Enforcement Act of 1871—was passed to
combat white acts of terror against freed black southerners?

Also confusing is why the senator, when looking for a word to describe a
mass shooting, looked toward a different region in the world. Mass
shootings, as President Barack Obama noted in the immediate aftermath of
the Charleston massacre, are all too common in the United States—much more
so than in any developed country. The majority of those mass shootings—from
Aurora to Sandy Hook to Tucson—sure seem to be committed by white males.

Graham’s offensive comment is the latest in what can charitably be
described as an inconsistent response to the murders. “I just think he was
one of these whacked-out kids,” Graham first said, noting that he did not
believe racism was a primary motivating factor in the shooting. “I don’t
think it’s anything broader than that. . . . It’s about a young man who is
obviously twisted.”

He then attempted to clarify in an appearance on The View, but appeared to
focus more heavily on the religion of the victims than their race: “This
guy’s got tons of problems and to kill people in a church after sitting
with them for an hour shows you, tells you how whacked out this kid is. . .
. There are real people who are organized out there to kill people in
religion and based on race, this guy’s just whacked out. But it’s 2015.
There are people out there looking for Christians to kill them.”

As for the use of the Confederate battle flag on the grounds of the South
Carolina statehouse? Graham was again caught off-guard when the political
climate shifted around him. “It works here, that’s what the statehouse
agreed to do,” Graham said last week. On Monday, he joined South Carolina
governor Nikki Haley as she demanded the state legislature take up the
issue of removing the flag from the grounds.

Lindsey Graham is a man who is running for president of the United States.
If he wants to be a credible candidate, he should be able to form a
reasonably coherent and consistent response to a mass killing that happened
because an apparent racist walked into a church in the state Graham
represents and picked off nine people on the sole basis of their skin
color. He shouldn’t need to look to the Middle East for an explanation.

*Lindsey Graham Criticizes Hillary Clinton on Equal Pay
<http://freebeacon.com/politics/gop-candidate-criticizes-hillary-clinton-on-equal-pay/>
// Free Beacon // Joe Schoffstall - June 25, 2015 *

'About creating lawsuit opportunities, it’s not about equality’

Republican presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.) criticized
Hillary Clinton’s support for equal pay laws as little more than a handout
to the trial lawyer lobby.

Despite having a history of paying the female staffers in her Senate office
far less than their male counterparts, Clinton has claimed to be in favor
of laws that would mandate equal pay between the sexes.

Graham said in an interview Wednesday that her stated proposal would never
work and is purely politics. He also questioned how many people would want
the federal government to set salaries throughout the nation.

“Equal pay is about creating lawsuit opportunities, it’s not about
equality. It’s about creating more opportunities for a company to be
sued—it is a talking point. It is a concept and it is a shallow concept. It
is designed to make people aggrieved with no solution at hand other than
more lawsuits,” Graham said.

The senator questioned whether such efforts are the proper role of the
federal government.

“Is it the government’s job to set salaries for people in this country? I
would say the construct she’s proposing would never work; it’s all
politics,” Graham said. “How many Americans want the federal government to
inventory salaries throughout the country. There are already laws on the
books where you could sue somebody if you are being paid less because of
your gender.”

Clinton is “toying” with people by giving them hope when there is none,
Graham said.

“The worst thing about this is you’re creating—you’re giving people
hope—when there is none, you’re toying with people. Those who feel like, ‘I
should be paid more,’ well the federal government is not going to come in
there and give you more money but there is a process for you to sue if you
feel you’re being aggrieved as an individual. Her solution is just to
increase more lawsuits. When she talks about equal play and you flush it
out, she’s toying with people.”

The Washington Free Beacon previously reported that Clinton’s current equal
pay rhetoric doesn’t quite match up to the history of what she paid
employees while in the Senate.

While Clinton was a senator, she paid females in her office just 72 cents
for each dollar paid to men.

“During those years, the median annual salary for a woman working in
Clinton’s office was $15,708.38 less than the median salary for a man,” the
Free Beacon found in its analysis of data compiled from official Senate
expenditure reports.

Clinton continues to champion equal pay on the campaign trail despite the
discrepancy.

*CARSON*

*Carson: Maryland neighbor flew, then took down Confederate flag
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/24/politics/ben-carson-neighbor-confederate-flag/>
// CNN // Tom LoBianco and Jeremy Diamond – June 24, 2015 *

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson recounted Wednesday how one of
his Maryland neighbors was coaxed into taking down a Confederate flag.

Carson said Tuesday on CNN's "New Day" that when he moved to a new home in
rural Maryland one of his neighbors put up a Confederate flag – "I guess as
a message to us," he said.

The other neighbors responded by flying American flags, which Carson said
"shamed" the neighbor into taking down the Confederate one, Carson said.

"We are social beings. Let's send the right messages to each other and I
think that will take care of a lot of our problems," Carson said.

Carson is the only black candidate running in the wide open field of
Republican candidates this election. He often stands out for telling
personal stories -- his biography of rising out of poverty to become a
world-famous neurosurgeon was documented in the movie "Gifted Hands". But
he also often stumbles when taking on specific issues, like same-sex
marriage.

South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, a Republican, called Monday on state
lawmakers to take down the Confederate flag from the Statehouse grounds.
South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, also a presidential candidate, joined
Haley in making the call and the other Republican contenders who had been
hedging on the issue later joined in the call.

Carson stressed the importance of calling things out at face value –
whether that is radical Islam or what the Confederate flag represents.

"I think that what we as Americans once again have to keep in mind is that
this is a pluralistic society and we have to live together, and that means
we have to identify things that are wrong," Carson said. "We have to call
them what they are. Because you'll never be able to deal with them unless
you call them what they are."

The South Carolina General Assembly is now debating the issue of the
Confederate flag on its Statehouse grounds.

*Ben Carson: “Political Correctness” Could Destroy U.S. Like It Did Ancient
Rome
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/christophermassie/ben-carson-political-correctness-could-destroy-us-like-it-di#.jh1NBp35b>
// Buzzfeed // Christopher Massie – June 24, 2015 *

Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson once said that America could
“go the same route as Ancient Rome” because of “political correctness.”

In an interview with host Soul Watson uploaded to SoundCloud three years
ago, Carson talked about advice he offered young people on the importance
“of having values and principles that govern your life.”

He said that “no society” “can long survive without values and principles,”
and argued that “political correctness” was eroding the values of America.

“You know, there is no society that can long survive without values and
principles,” he said. “And if we get so caught up in political correctness,
that nothing is right and nothing is wrong, then we go the same route as
Ancient Rome. They did exactly the same thing. And they forgot who they
were. They stood for nothing and they fell for everything and they went
right down the tubes.”

*TRUMP*

*Is Donald Trump the honey badger of American politics?*
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/24/is-donald-trump-the-honey-badger-of-american-politics/>*
// WaPo // June 24, 2015*

If Donald Trump was a YouTube sensation, he'd be the honey badger. He talks
like he just don't care, people laugh, and none of it seems to hurt him.

The notoriously brash real-estate mogul and reality-television star did
little to soften his image for a recently announced presidential run as he
headlined the Maryland GOP's annual Red, White and Blue fundraiser Tuesday
night.

Not surprisingly, Trump attacked President Obama and Republican opponent
Jeb Bush with harsh rhetoric during a speech lasting more than 50 minutes.
But he also delivered a bit of a slight to the audience, telling the crowd
of about 600 paying guests at the BWI Marriott in Linthicum that he hadn't
initially wanted to come, but had done so anyway as a favor.

Perhaps it was fitting, then, that he meticulously scrubbed his hands with
a sanitary wipe after finishing grip-and-grin photos in a VIP line, as
though he were cleansing himself of lowly, fawning supporters.

Trump also did himself no favors among Hispanic voters as he tried to
explain the controversial comments he made about Mexican immigrants during
his campaign announcement last week, when he suggested that most border
crossers are rapists and narco-criminals. "Some, I assume, are good
people," he said at the time.

On Tuesday, Trump backed up his assertions with an anecdote about two U.S.
border agents who told him that people who cross the border illegally are
not good for the country. "They said, 'They're killers, they're rapists,
they're drug dealers,'" he recalled.

Trump also suggested that reporters have misconstrued his true feelings
about the immigration issue. "I love Mexico," he said. "I love the Mexican
people. But I said we need a strong border."

The audience, predominantly white, didn't seem to mind the candidate's
tone. Nor did they seem particularly inclined to vote for him.

"He's a little bit of a lightning rod and entertaining, but very
intelligent," said Barbara Nye, an accountant from Elkridge, Md. "He's
probably not somebody who needs to be president, but he does have some good
ideas that are worth listening to and worth talking about."

Similarly, FedEx driver Ken Collins, of Glen Burnie, Md., said he
appreciates Trump's approach.

"I like somebody who's not afraid to say what he thinks," Collins said
before the speech. "But I don't know much more about him, as far as his
politics."

Trump's appearance in Maryland, where registered Democrats outnumber
Republicans more than 2 to 1, came one day after he finished second among
Republicans in an independent New Hampshire poll. Bush finished first.

"I can't believe Bush is in first place," Trump said. "This guy can't
negotiate his way out of a paper bag. So I'm in second place to Bush. I
hate it."

Trump focused much of his speech on Obama's job performance, saying the
president and his administration appear "stupid" and "incompetent" in
general, not to mention "desperate" in nuclear negotiations with Iran.

When asked about the recent civil unrest in Baltimore, Trump said Obama has
done little to uplift inner-city Americans, adding that African Americans
in particular have "never done more poorly."

Trump insisted that he would help the city by bringing back manufacturing
if elected president.

"You have to create spirit," he said. "You have to create jobs. You have to
get people working, and they have to want to work."

Trump showed hints of a softer side with considerate words for Maryland
Gov. Larry Hogan (R), who announced this week that he is battling advanced
non-Hodgkins lymphoma.

"I've met your governor, I respect your governor, and he is going to beat
this," Trump said. "Give him my regards."

*Donald Trump, the Edsel Ford Fung of Candidates, Tells Baltimore It’s ‘Got
No Spirit, None’
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/donald-trump-the-edsel-ford-fung-of-candidates-tells-baltimore-it-s-got-no-spirit-none->
// Bloomberg // Melinda Henneberger – June 24, 2015 *

There used to be this restaurant in San Francisco called Sam Wo’s, a
Chinese place constantly packed with both locals and tourists, not because
the food was so great, though it was OK, but because it supposedly had the
world’s rudest waiter, one Edsel Ford Fung, who’d insult your looks,
manner, and menu choices as he took your order, if he deigned to do so at
all. People couldn’t get enough of it, and the worse he behaved, the harder
everyone laughed.

Mr. Fung, may he rest in peace, came to mind Tuesday night amid the
political stylings of Donald J. Trump at the Maryland Republican Party's
annual Red, White & Blue fundraising dinner, because like the waiter who
wouldn’t wait, he's a presidential hopeful who doesn’t, it seems, really
hope to govern.

As he arrived at the dinner, held at the B.W.I. Marriott near the airport,
three young men in shorts moved in to have their photos taken with him.
“Make it fast,” he told each of them, posing for just a second and then
moving on to the next. Only, he either didn’t notice that it was the same
guys, over and over, or he did notice and didn’t care. When he strode past
the lobby bar and threw a hand in the air in greeting, everybody grinned as
big as if he’d called, “Drinks on me!” Then, during a V.I.P. reception
photo line, one Marylander after another got to smile, shake hands, and
tell him, “You’re fired!”

“That’s a good one,” he told one man. “That’s the first time I’ve heard
that tonight.”

In a brief question-and-answer session with reporters, he was asked about
the rioting in nearby Baltimore that followed the April death of
25-year-old Freddie Gray, whose spine snapped while in police custody. (At
the time, Trump tweeted a series of degrading messages: “Our great African
American President hasn't exactly had a positive impact on the thugs who
are so happily and openly destroying Baltimore!” He also slammed the
Baltimore cops, though not on Gray's behalf: “Now that the ineffective
Baltimore Police have allowed the city to be destroyed, are the U.S.
taxpayers expected to rebuild it (again)?” And, he misquoted the city's
mayor: “The Mayor of Baltimore said she wanted to give the rioters 'space
to destroy'—another real genius!”)

So what would he do as president to address the city's problems? He'd bring
back manufacturing, he said, and blamed President Barack Obama for failing
to do that and more:

“Baltimore is a very, very special case, and it's a very sad thing that's
happening there. And I know Baltimore...and I love Baltimore, and I love
what it represents, and where it's gone, and now you look at what happened
in one night, just in one night. I mean, other nights were a disaster but
one night was catastrophic for Baltimore. You have to create spirit, you
have to create jobs, you have to get people working, they have to want to
work. And the other thing is, when President Obama got elected, I said
look, one thing he's going to be a cheerleader for the country...and in
actuality, he's just the opposite. And if you look at black and African—you
just take a look—and if you look at black and African-American youth, I
mean to a point where they've just about never done more poorly; there's no
spirit, there's killings on an hourly basis, virtually, in places like
Baltimore and Chicago, certain sections of Chicago, and many other
places...Baltimore needs jobs, and it needs spirit. It's got no spirit,
none.”

Then, he had dinner—chicken, rice, and green beans—and told the audience
that “all due respect,” he hadn’t really wanted to come, but had done so as
a favor. That didn’t keep him from speaking for 52 minutes—a State of the
Union-length talk, but not so much a political speech as a score-settling
march through a list of those against whom he has grievances, including
Neil Young, Karl Rove, Cher, Chuck Todd, someone with the Club for Growth
whose name he can’t remember—“David something; I’m falling asleep and he’s
talking about growth.” He accused former George W. Bush spokeswoman Dana
Perino of sucking up to him to get him to tweet something favorable about
her book, then turning on him on Fox News: “And her book did OK. I wouldn’t
say it’s exactly Gone with the Wind.” But then, what is?

His recent comments about Mexico were actually far more favorable than
reported, he said: “I love Mexico. I love the Mexican people, but I said we
need a strong border. We need a wall.” Here's why: “So I'm at a wedding at
one of my clubs, and I always try to go by and say what a beautiful bride,
and they're happy as they pay me $600 or $700 a head, and after about two
minutes I'm bored stiff, and I met two border guards, and I said, 'What
border? We have a border?'” And what they told him, he said, is that the
people crossing the border, not just from Mexico, aren't people we want
here. “They said, 'They're killers, they're rapists, they're drug
dealers.'” Yet somehow, he said, the part about how much he loves Mexico
never gets quoted: “I said I love Mexico, and they said I don't love
Mexico.”

He also, he said, had a love-hate reaction to a new Suffolk University poll
that has him running second, behind former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, in
New Hampshire: “And I can't believe Bush is in first place. This guy can't
negotiate his way out of a paper bag. So, I'm in second place to Bush. I
hate it!”

After his remarks, some Republicans left not just laughing but thinking of
voting for him. “He's had his ups and downs and bankruptcies,” said Oxon
Hill realtor Gloria Farrar, “but he knows how to make things work.” Her
friend Francine Speaker mostly “found him amusing,” she said. But “a
non-politician politician might be fun for once.”

*Trump jokes about being behind Bush in New Hampshire poll
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/23/politics/donald-trump-second-place-new-hampshire-poll/index.html>
// CNN // Theodore Schleifer – June 24, 2015 *

Donald Trump is outpolling all other Republican candidates in New Hampshire
except for Jeb Bush, according to a new survey released Tuesday, though if
you ask the real estate mogul himself, he thinks he should be in first.

In a poll fielded immediately after their presidential announcements last
week, Bush earned 14% of the vote in the crowded GOP field, followed by
Trump with 11%. Nearly a third of respondents said they were undecided.

The results from Suffolk University are the clearest indication yet that
Trump, the billionaire with a penchant for bombastic rhetoric and
unorthodox claims, is catching on with Republican voters early on in the
cycle.

Trump referenced the poll Tuesday night while speaking to the Maryland GOP,
saying he can't believe he's behind Bush.

"I'm not thrilled, cause how could Bush be in first place?" Trump said.
"This guy can't negotiate his way out of a paper bag!"

Pollsters tend to caution that surveys more than six months before any
votes are cast may simply be registering each contender's name recognition
-- of which Trump has plenty. Trump also joins a crowded GOP field in which
none of the candidates — including Bush — have been able to break out of
the pack.

In the 2012 cycle, several candidates with a penchant for making headlines
with their controversial claims -- such as businessman Herman Cain and
former Rep. Michele Bachmann and even Trump himself (though not an official
candidate) -- also garnered top spots in early polls only to crash to Earth
as the campaign dragged on.

Trump, as well, is a deeply polarizing figure in the Granite State -- 49%
of respondents said they had an unfavorable opinion of him, while only 37%
viewed him positively.

Despite New Hampshire Republicans' negative impressions of Trump, few want
to see him left off the debate stage in August. The poll found 60% thought
Trump should make the cut for the debates, more than wanted to see George
Pataki, John Kasich, Bobby Jindal or Lindsey Graham on the stage. Overall,
35% said Trump should be left out of the debates.

"Trump's controversial candidacy is being constructed in a way that gives
him visibility and exposure in the short term but may also limit his growth
in the long run, like a glass ceiling," David Paleologos, who directed the
poll, said in a statement.

New Hampshire, with its first-in-the-nation primary, is a key battleground
for 2016 hopefuls. Trump has made five visits to the Granite State this
year, according to p2016, a website that tracks candidate visits to the
early states.

Trailing Bush and Trump were Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker at 8%, Florida
Sen. Marco Rubio at 7%, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 6% and New
Jersey Gov. Chris Christie at 5%. No other candidates earned more than 5%
in the Suffolk survey.

When asked for their second choice candidate, 14% of likely GOP voters
named Bush, 13% selected Rubio, 10% picked Walker, 7% said Trump and 6%
said businesswoman Carly Fiorina.

Suffolk surveyed 500 likely New Hampshire Republican voters between June 18
and June 22, yielding a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage
points.

*Donald Trump responds to Neil Young’s diss
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/24/politics/trump-responds-to-neil-young-on-twitter/index.html>
// CNN // Sophie Tatum – June 24, 2015 *

If presidential candidate and businessman Donald Trump has proven anything
during his first week of campaigning, it's that he's not afraid to take on
the haters.

And so the saga between Trump and rock singer Neil Young continues.

When "The Donald" originally announced his run for president, he used
Young's song "Rockin' in the Free World" twice during his campaign rally,
which backfired when the singer came out criticizing Trump's use of his
song while endorsing a different candidate.

"Donald Trump was not authorized to use 'Rockin' In The Free World' in his
presidential candidacy announcement," a statement from Young management
company said. "Neil Young, a Canadian citizen, is a supporter of Bernie
Sanders for President of the United States of America."

Clearly Trump was not pleased with this statement as the
real-estate-tycoon-turned-reality-TV-star took to Twitter Wednesday night.
Trump published a series of tweets calling the artist a "total hypocrite"
because according to Trump, Young visited Trump's office requesting money
for an audio deal and invited Trump to his show just last week.

And don't worry, if you are a "nonbeliever," Trump even included pictures
of the two shaking hands and the money request with the singer's signature
just for you.

Trump then goes on to say that "Rockin In The Free World" was just
background music at the rally among 10 other songs and that he, "Didn't
love it anyway."

So, we can now add Neil Young to the list of individuals Trump has publicly
dissed, which include fellow 2016 hopefuls like Jeb Bush and Hillary
Clinton, as well as stars like Cher and Russell Brand and even CNN's very
own Chris Moody.

Keep on rockin', Mr. Trump.

*Does Donald Trump Put His Money Where His Mouth Is? Campaign Contributions
Say, ‘He’s Fired.’
<http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/does-donald-trump-put-his-money-where-his-mouth-is-campaign-contributions-say-hes-fired/>
// The Blaze // Jennifer Kerns – June 24, 2015 *

Billionaire businessman Donald Trump has a long history of raising capital
and doing deals.

Even before throwing his fancy top hat into the ring for the 2016
presidential race, he became a media darling on conservative news outlets
attacking far-left President Barack Obama and Congress.

But has Donald Trump put his money where his mouth is, politically?

A review of more than a decade of campaign contribution data illustrates
that Trump is a bipartisan giver at best and in fact, leans toward the left.

Data compiled by CrowdPAC - a new leading resource for objective data on
U.S. political campaigns – reveals that Trump’s donation lean just as much
to the left, as to the right.

A 30-year analysis of Trump’s campaign donation history shows that
beginning in the 1980s, Trump gave big to the Democratic Congressional
Campaign Committee ($22,000), to the Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee
of New York ($25,00) and to the DCCC’s “Building Fund” in 1993, 1994 and
1997 (at least $10,000). He also contributed to the Democratic Senatorial
Campaign Committee in 2002 ($25,000), the New York State Democratic Party
($5,000) and the New York State Democratic Committee also in 2002 ($5,000).
Public records show he contributed again to the DCCC in 2006 ($35,000) and
with a whopping donation to the Democratic Campaign Committee of New York
State in 2008 ($50,000).

In addition to his institutional donations, Trump has also supported
longtime Democrat politicians Ted Kennedy, Chuck Shumer, Joseph Kennedy,
Eliot Spitzer, Charlie Rangel, the Cuomo family and Daniel Patrick Moynihan
with numerous donations. He even gave his now-opponent Hillary Clinton
several donations, although in smaller amounts of $1,000 each.

Campaign finance data from CrowdPAC reveals that Donald Trump gave big to
the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, along with Andrew Cuomo,
Hillary Clinton, Sen. Dick Durbin, and California Governor Jerry Brown.
(Jennifer Kerns)

Campaign finance data from CrowdPAC reveals that Donald Trump gave big to
the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, along with Andrew Cuomo,
Hillary Clinton, Sen. Dick Durbin, and California Governor Jerry Brown.
(Jennifer Kerns)

That is not to say Donald Trump hasn’t contributed to Republicans.

He has.

Trump has contributed to the Republican National Committee ($75,000),
Senate Republican Campaign Committee of New York ($30,000), New York State
Senate Republican Campaign Committee ($55,000), the California Republican
Party during Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger’s administration in 2005
($25,000). He’s also contributed to the Republican Governor’s Association
($25,000), the National Republican Senatorial Committee ($90,000), and
Republican Parties in key states.

Closer to home, he’s also been a team player to Republican causes such as
the New York State Senate Republican Campaign Committee ($10,000), Friends
of Pataki ($10,000), and to GOP darlings such as Rudy Giuliani.

Campaign finance data from CrowdPAC shows that Donald Trump increased his
GOP donations after a critical 2011 Washington Post article. (Jennifer
Kerns)

Campaign finance data from CrowdPAC shows that Donald Trump increased his
GOP donations after a critical 2011 Washington Post article. (Jennifer
Kerns)

However, it seems that Trump accelerated his GOP giving after a critical
Washington Post article in 2011 slammed him for being a larger contributor
to Democrat Party causes and candidates. It was only after the Post article
was published that Trump made larger contributions to the RNC, the NRSC and
the RGA.

As Trump grew increasingly frustrated with President Obama’s foreign and
domestic policies – suggesting that Obama “kisses everyone’s ass” and that
domestically, Obama’s policies are a “disaster” – it is possible that Trump
genuinely turned the tide on donations.

Conventional wisdom suggests it’s more likely that Trump knew he would run
in 2016 and knew that conservative voters don’t take kindly to big Democrat
contributors.

What voters will think of Trump’s history has yet to be seen.

On the one hand, conservatives may be so hungry for a White House win they
may turn a blind eye to the Donald’s Democrat dollars in exchange for his
tough talk against Obama.

On the other hand, if conservatives value a candidate who puts his money
where his mouth is and dig deep enough into the campaign finance data,
voters just might say to the left-leaning, big-spending Trump this primary
season: “You’re fired.”

*UNDECLARED*

*WALKER*

*Scott Walker to sign legislation expanding gun rights in Wisconsin*
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/24/scott-walker-to-sign-legislation-expanding-gun-rights-in-wisconsin/>*
// WaPo // Jenna Johnson – June 24, 2015*

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) plans to sign two new laws on Wednesday
that expand the rights of gun owners by removing a 48-hour waiting period
for those looking to purchase a firearm and allowing off-duty or retired
police officers to carry concealed weapons at public schools. This action
will come one week after a suspected gunman shot and killed nine people in
an African American church in South Carolina, yet again prompting a
national discussion about gun laws in the U.S.

Walker plans to sign the two pieces of legislation — Senate bills 35 and 70
— at a ceremony at the Milwaukee County Sheriff's Office on Wednesday
afternoon, according to a Tuesday evening press release from the governor's
office. Laurel Patrick, a spokeswoman for the governor, said this
bill-signing was scheduled and announced about two weeks ago, several days
before the shooting occurred in South Carolina.

Walker, who is expected to announce in mid-July that he will run for
president, has overseen the expansion of gun-owner rights in Wisconsin. He
often brags in early-primary states like Iowa that his state now allows
most of its residents to carry concealed firearms. Wisconsin has also
enacted a so-called "castle doctrine" that provides some protections to
homeowners who shoot intruders to their property.

Walker has an A-plus rating from the National Rifle Association. In
endorsing Walker during his reelection campaign last year, NRA Political
Victory Fund Chairman Chris W. Cox said in a statement: "Scott Walker is a
battle-tested leader in the fight to preserve Second Amendment rights in
Wisconsin. He's never wavered, never backed down and never stood still in
the fight to protect our freedoms."

Months ago, Walker said he supported getting rid of Wisconsin's 48-hour
waiting period for those looking to purchase a handgun. Walker has said
that a waiting period is not needed, especially now that firearm dealers
can perform instant background checks on their buyers.

“That’s one of those where with new technology, we want to make sure the
bad guys don’t get firearms, and the good guys do,” Walker told the NRA’s
news network during an interview in late February, according to the
Wisconsin State Journal.

Some Democrats in Wisconsin have argued that this waiting period is also a
cooling-off period for those contemplating suicide or who might shoot
another person in a fit of passion, especially in cases of domestic abuse.
The legislation was passed by the Republican-dominated legislature earlier
this month.

At the same time, lawmakers passed legislation that allows off-duty and
retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons on public
school grounds. Current law only allows on-duty officers to do so.

*Scott Walker signs two pro-gun bills
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/scott-walker-two-gun-bills-119380.html?hp=l4_4>
// Politico // Daniel Strauss – June 24, 2015 *

Scott Walker expanded gun rights in Wisconsin on Wednesday by signing into
law two bills that, respectively, get rid of the state’s 48-hour waiting
period and let retired or off-duty law enforcement officials carry
concealed firearms into public schools.

Walker’s move was long in the making — Milwaukee County Sheriff David
Clarke announced on June 11 that the Wisconsin governor would sign the
48-hour waiting period bill into law.

But it also comes a week after a gunman killed nine people at an historic
African-American church in Charleston, South Carolina, setting off a
national debate over race and gun control.

“This bill signing has been long planned with law enforcement,” Walker
Press Secretary Laurel Patrick wrote in an email.

Walker, who is expected to jump into the 2016 presidential race in the next
few weeks, often touts his efforts to roll back gun laws in the state. He
also has an A-plus rating from the National Rifle Association.

During an April 10 speech at the NRA’s annual meeting in Nashville,
Tennessee, the Wisconsin governor bashed President Barack Obama on gun
control.

“Sometimes I think that the current occupant in the White House forgets
that when the president is sworn in he takes an oath to ‘preserve, protect
and defend the Constitution of the United States,’” Walker said. “Well Mr.
President, the Second Amendment is part of the constitution. You don’t get
to pick and choose which part of the constitution you support. Preserving,
protecting and defending it is not optional. It’s mandatory.”

*Walker says Obama, federal government must fix subsidies
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/9396cc6af2134857a1a18d5a4f29bdc8/walker-says-obama-federal-government-must-fix-subsidies>
// AP // Scott Bauer – June 24, 2015 *

If the U.S. Supreme Court strikes down health care subsidies available
under federal law, it's up to President Barack Obama and Congress to fix it
— not the states, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker said Wednesday.

Walker, who is expected to launch his run for president in mid-July, wrote
an opinion piece and answered questions about the issue following a bill
signing ceremony in Milwaukee. The Supreme Court is expected to rule this
month on whether subsidies under the 2010 law can continue to go to
Wisconsin and 33 other states that use the federal HealthCare.gov website
and don't run their own insurance exchanges.

Walker, who has called for a repeal of the health care law, was asked what
his contingency plan was if the subsidies are struck down.

"President Obama created the problem, the previous Congress created the
problem, they should fix it. As usual, they're going to want to kick the
problem to the states and we're not going to take it," Walker said.

About 183,000 people in Wisconsin purchase their insurance through the
exchange and nine out of 10 of them are receiving a federal subsidy,
according to an analysis of state data by Wisconsin Children and Families.
The average tax credit they receive is $315 a month.

Health care advocates who have been critical of Walker for not taking
federal money to pay for expanding Medicaid coverage have also called on
the Republican second-term governor to prepare for the subsidies to be
taken away.

"It's Scott Walker's moral responsibility as governor to protect the people
from a foreseeable disaster, like tens of thousands being cut off from
health coverage," said Robert Kraig, executive director of Citizen Action
of Wisconsin. "By passing the buck to Congress, Walker is putting at risk
the lives and fundamental freedoms of people in every corner of Wisconsin."

Research director Jon Peacock and policy analyst Sashi Gregory said in a
report released last week that Wisconsin should quickly accept the federal
money to expand Medicaid coverage and more to create a state-run
marketplace that qualifies for subsidies, they said.

Walker said anyone concerned about losing coverage should contact Obama and
their federal representatives.

"They should contact their member of Congress and say, 'Stop blaming people
that didn't create the problem,'" Walker said. "'You're at the federal
government, step up, start leading, fix the problem you created.'"

Republicans in Congress have been divided over what their response to the
lawsuit should be. Some conservatives say the statute's subsidies should be
completely ended and the law dismantled. Many Republicans say a complete
overhaul would have to await the 2016 elections, when the GOP hopes to
capture the White House and retain congressional control.

*Gov. Scott Walker Signs Bills to Loosen Wisconsin Gun Laws
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB11154342288815824014704581068651914952310>
// AP // June 24, 2015 *

After signing two bills that loosen Wisconsin’s gun laws, Gov. Scott Walker
defended the timing of his public event Wednesday, saying it had been
scheduled before nine people were shot and killed last week in a South
Carolina church.

With his signature, the all-but-certain Republican presidential candidate
eliminated the state’s 48-hour waiting period for handgun purchases and
allowed off-duty, retired and out-of-state police officers to carry
firearms on school grounds. Both measures passed earlier this month in the
GOP-majority Legislature with bipartisan support.

The timing of the bill signing comes amid a renewed debate over gun control
and race relations after the fatal shootings at a Charleston, S.C., black
church on June 17. A white man faces multiple murder charges.

Mr. Walker said the bill-signing event was scheduled on June 11. After June
30, the measures would have become law without his signature.

“If we had pulled back on this, I think it would have given people the
erroneous opinion that what we signed into law today had anything to do
with what happened in Charleston,” Mr. Walker said at the ceremony, held at
the Milwaukee County Sheriff’s office.

The governor said the country’s focus should be on the families affected by
the shooting and on condemning the shooter.

“We need to denounce not just the acts, but to denounce the beliefs that he
had. This was a racist, evil man who needs to be called out…this should be
unacceptable in America,” Mr. Walker said.

The governor, who was joined Wednesday by Republican lawmakers and families
who supported the measures, has been an outspoken supporter of gun rights.
Mr. Walker previously made Wisconsin the 49th state to legalize concealed
carry—even in state buildings—and signed a “castle doctrine” bill giving
homeowners more legal protections if they shoot an intruder.

He also has a 100% rating from the National Rifle Association and spoke at
the NRA’s annual meeting in April. The NRA in a statement Wednesday called
the bills’ signing a “victory for gun rights in Wisconsin.”

Ten states and the District of Columbia impose some form of waiting period
for buying handguns, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence.
Wisconsin’s 48-hour period has been in effect since 1976.

Supporters of eliminating the waiting period said it would better allow
people to protect themselves, while opponents said it would lead to people
caught up in fits of rage or depression to obtain weapons quickly.
Supporters also say it inconveniences law-abiding citizens, that background
checks can be completed in hours and women would be able to get guns faster
to protect themselves and their families from abusers.

Backers of allowing off-duty and retired police officers to carry concealed
weapons at schools said it would create another line of defense for
students and teachers if a shooter attacks. Opponents said allowing
nonuniformed officers to carry guns at schools could scare students.

The new laws will take effect Friday.

*Scott Walker Ensnared by Wisconsin Budget as White House Run Beckons
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/walker-ensnared-by-wisconsin-budget-as-white-house-run-beckons>
// Bloomberg // John McCormick – June 24, 2015 *

Division among Wisconsin Republicans over how to pay for roads and a sports
arena threatens to muddy Governor Scott Walker’s message that he’s a
get-it-done manager and complicate his presidential campaign announcement.

The governor has repeatedly pledged not to reveal his plans until after he
signs a two-year budget. He’d anticipated that happening in late June, but
fellow party members who control his legislature aren’t cooperating.

“The chances of a budget by July 1 are getting pretty slim,” said Todd
Berry, president of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a nonpartisan group
that since 1932 has studied government finance.

The timing matters most to Walker. Without a budget, the state would
function, but the governor could be mired in Madison as competitors travel
the country raising money and name recognition. He would have to decide
whether to break the promise he’s made to take care of state business
before addressing the nation’s.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel has reported that Walker is considering July
13 for a formal announcement. On that date, he would be among the last to
enter the race.

“Governor Walker continues to meet and talk regularly with legislative
leaders,” Laurel Patrick, his spokeswoman, said Tuesday in a statement. “We
have been and will continue working with them on a budget that best serves
the citizens of Wisconsin.”

Internecine Conflict

When Walker delivered his spending plan in February, he used the $70
billion proposal to highlight policies popular with his party’s base,
including reduced funding for a university known for Democratic leanings,
drug screening of welfare recipients and enlarging a private-school voucher
program. The budget was roughly the same size as the one he signed June 30,
2013.

But in a move that upset some supporters, Walker proposed using taxpayer
money to pay for half of a new $500 million arena for the Milwaukee Bucks,
a professional basketball team that’s threatened to leave the state
otherwise. He says the subsidy is more economical than losing tax revenue.

His support for public money has drawn criticism from conservative groups
including Americans for Prosperity, which played a key role in his election.

“Government shouldn’t be in the business of financing a private sports
stadium,” David Fladeboe, AFP’s Wisconsin director, said in a June 4
statement. “The current deal is based on fuzzy math, complicated accounting
and millions of taxpayer dollars.”

Walker has sought to keep the arena in the budget bill. Patrick declined to
say whether he’d allow a separate vote, as some Republicans have suggested .

“Governor Walker will continue working with legislators to protect
taxpayers from the financial impact of losing the Bucks,” she said.

Funding for roads is equally fraught, with divisions between suburban and
rural interests within the Republican caucus. Walker has opposed any
increase in gas taxes or vehicle registration fees. Instead, he’s proposed
issuing $1.3 billion in debt.

The Assembly’s speaker, Republican Robin Vos, is among those who have been
critical of Walker’s proposed borrowing.

“At some point, your credit card is maxed out and you can’t do anymore,” he
told WISN-TV in Milwaukee. “So, when Governor Walker proposed $1.3 billion
in borrowing, I just think that is irresponsible.”

The debt in Walker’s proposed budget is less than half that of his
predecessor’s last spending plan and at the lowest level in a decade,
according to Wisconsin’s nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

Wisconsin has about $10 billion in tax-supported debt, 15th among states
and the 13th-highest per capita, according to Moody’s Investors Service.

Governor’s Dilemma

There are no immediate dire effects if the state misses the June 30 end of
the fiscal year, something that has happened in other budget cycles.
Spending would continue at current levels.

Democrats are in no hurry to help.

“There are some significant issues that still remain and it could very
easily spill over to mid-July or later,” said Representative Peter Barca,
the minority leader of the Assembly.

Senator Duey Stroebel, a Republican, said Walker would be free of the
debate’s complexities soon.

“We’re getting closer every day,” he said. “I would be shocked if this
wasn’t done by July 13.”

*JINDAL*

*Bobby Jindal Announces Bid for President
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/politics/bobby-jindal-announces-bid-for-president.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news>
// NYT // Manny Pernandez – June 24, 2015 *

Gov. Bobby Jindal, who became Louisiana’s first nonwhite governor since
Reconstruction but whose popularity has plummeted as the state struggled
with a $1.6 billion shortfall, announced on Wednesday that he is running
for president in 2016.

Mr. Jindal, 44, who became the nation’s first Indian-American governor when
he took office in 2008, joins the crowded field of Republican contenders in
what even his supporters call a long-shot candidacy in which he faces
several disadvantages.

The announcement was made online, and Mr. Jindal plans a late-afternoon
announcement speech outside New Orleans.

Mr. Jindal has kept a low profile on the national stage compared with Jeb
Bush, Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin and other Republican candidates and
likely candidates being closely watched by analysts and the news media. And
his poll numbers have fallen sharply in his home state as he nears the end
of his eight-year tenure, amid criticism that he has been more focused on
laying the groundwork for a presidential run than on Louisiana’s fiscal
troubles.

Mr. Jindal’s announcement address, here in the New Orleans suburb of
Kenner, comes two days after the latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll
found him sharing the bottom of a list of 16 candidates. In the telephone
survey, zero percent of Republican primary voters said Mr. Jindal was their
top pick to be the nominee, compared with Mr. Bush, who earned 22 percent.

Low support in national polls may have especially dire consequences for
lesser-known Republicans: Fox News and CNN are limiting the first two major
debates to candidates who rank in the top 10 in national polls, meaning Mr.
Jindal could be excluded from crucial nationally televised face-offs with
his rivals.

“I don’t think anybody in Louisiana thinks he can win,” said Roy Fletcher,
a Republican political consultant in Baton Rouge who was deputy campaign
manager for Senator John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2000. “It’s a
real, real long shot.”

If there is an opening for Mr. Jindal to rise to the top tier of
candidates, it probably likely have to do with whether he can rally and
inspire social conservatives and evangelical Christians on a national scale.

Last month, Mr. Jindal issued an executive order to protect those who do
not support same-sex marriage after the Louisiana Legislature effectively
killed a similarly worded bill.

Mr. Jindal, who was raised by Hindu parents but converted to Roman
Catholicism, supports abortion restrictions, has raised doubts about
evolution and signed the Louisiana Science Education Act, which critics say
opened a back door to teaching creationism in public schools. Last week, at
an annual gathering of Christian conservatives in Washington called the
Faith and Freedom Coalition’s Road to Majority Conference, Mr. Jindal’s
speech earned enthusiastic praise.

“Jindal’s poll numbers in Louisiana right now are atrocious, and most
Louisianians don’t think he has much chance of winning the presidency, but
anybody who writes off Bobby Jindal could end up with egg on his face,”
said Quin Hillyer, a longtime conservative columnist who served as press
secretary for former Representative Bob Livingston of Louisiana. “I am not
predicting a Jindal win. I’m just saying it’s crazy to rule it out.”

His campaign strategists acknowledge his poor showing in national polls and
lack of name recognition, but they expressed confidence that he had both a
message and a path to victory, casting him as the youngest candidate with
the longest resume in a wide open Republican race. They said that in such a
crowded field, all it takes to win Iowa — and alter the dynamics of the
race — is 26,000 votes.

“Anybody would like to be ahead by 30 points, but there’s never been a
nomination this wide open in our lifetimes,” said Curt Anderson, Mr.
Jindal’s chief strategist. “You don’t have a leader sitting at the top. We
start from nowhere, and we’re completely fine with that.”

Mr. Jindal’s drop in popularity in Louisiana is a reversal of fortune of
sorts. He was elected in October 2007 largely in reaction to the failures
of his Democratic predecessor in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina,
Kathleen Babineaux Blanco.

And he had the reputation of a kind of wonky boy genius. At age 24 in 1996,
he was appointed secretary of the state Department of Health and Hospitals,
the biggest department in state government, and he quickly went to work
cutting jobs and slashing its budget.

In 2004, at 33, he was elected to Congress from the New Orleans suburbs
after losing to Ms. Blanco one year earlier in his first bid for governor.
At age 36 in 2007, he ran for governor again and won, becoming the nation’s
youngest governor.

Yet over two terms, Mr. Jindal’s approval ratings have dipped after his
handling of the state’s budget woes. Policy experts and lawmakers blamed
the budget shortfall, the state’s worst in decades, in part on the downturn
in oil prices that hurt Louisiana and other energy-producing states and in
part on the Jindal administration’s fiscal policies.

The shortfall caused the state’s public colleges and universities, which
already sustained deep cuts, to consider mass layoffs and shutting
departments. But this month, at the end of the legislative session,
lawmakers reached an agreement to close the $1.6 billion shortfall that,
because of a complex arrangement of tax credits, allows Mr. Jindal to
technically claim that the state passed a balanced budget without raising
new tax revenue.

Mr. Jindal and his aides defended his record and his tax credit plan,
saying the budget that was passed protected higher education and health
care but was in line with his philosophy of reducing the scale of
government.

“Nobody has a record like he does of actually shrinking the size of the
government,” Mr. Anderson said. “The budget is 26 percent smaller than when
he first took office.”

Others are more blunt, and less flattering.

“He’s a lame-duck governor and the state’s broke,” said Bernie Pinsonat, a
Louisiana pollster who works for both Democrats and Republicans. “He’s worn
out his welcome with the voters.”

*Bobby Jindal Expected to Enter Fray Near the Bottom of the Pile
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/24/today-in-politics-bobby-jindal-expected-to-enter-fray-near-the-bottom-of-the-pile/>
// NYT // Manny Fernandez – June 24, 2015 *

Days after landing near the bottom of a nationwide poll of Republican
primary voters, Mr. Jindal is expected on Wednesday to announce that he is
running for president, joining the crowded field of Republican contenders
in what even his supporters call a long-shot candidacy.

Mr. Jindal, 44, was elected as the nation’s first Indian-American governor
in 2007 and quickly earned a reputation as a technocrat and a darling of
Christian conservatives. Mr. Jindal, who was raised by Hindu parents and
converted to Roman Catholicism, has since watched his approval ratings
plummet. Criticized for focusing on laying the groundwork for his
presidential run instead of running the state, Mr. Jindal lately has been
almost as unpopular with some Republicans as he has been with Democrats.

“I don’t think anybody in Louisiana thinks he can win,” said Roy Fletcher,
a Republican political consultant in Baton Rouge who was deputy campaign
manager for John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2000.

His low approval ratings are based in part on his handling of the state’s
budget and its $1.6 billion shortfall. Lawmakers on both sides publicly
denounced, but ultimately approved, the governor’s complex tax credit plan
that helped close the budget gap. Republicans called the plan “nonsense.”

At his announcement on Wednesday, Mr. Jindal is likely to embrace and
appeal to his strongest base: social conservatives and evangelical
Christians. Mr. Jindal is an outspoken proponent of “religious liberty,”
issuing an executive order recently to protect those who, on religious
grounds, do not support same-sex marriage. He issued the order after a
similar bill died in the Legislature.

“It is crazy to underestimate his doggedness or his political skills,” said
Quin Hillyer, a conservative columnist and Louisiana native.

*Bobby Jindal Enters Crowded GOP Presidential Race
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/bobby-jindal-announces-bid-for-gop-presidential-nomination-1435165678>
// WSJ // Reid J. Epstein – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal launched a long-shot bid for the Republican
nomination for president Wednesday, an effort that will rely on wooing the
socially conservative voters who dominate states with early contests.

Mr. Jindal—a 44-year-old former Rhodes Scholar who is barred by term limits
from seeking a third term in Baton Rouge—told a crowd in suburban New
Orleans that he’s the only Republican candidate who won’t compromise
conservative principles.

Unusual for a Republican presidential announcement speech, Mr. Jindal
directly attacked a rival by name—Jeb Bush, one of the front-runners for
the nomination.

“You’ve heard Jeb Bush say that we need to be willing to lose the primary
in order to win the general election,” Mr. Jindal said. “Let me translate
that for you...He is saying that we need to hide our conservative ideals.”

Mr. Jindal is the first of four sitting GOP governors poised to enter the
crowded race. In the on-deck circle are New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, and possibly Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Mr. Jindal was appointed secretary of Louisiana’s state Department of
Health and Hospitals at age 24. By 28, he was president of the University
of Louisiana system. By 30, he was confirmed a deputy secretary in the
George W. Bush administration.

He lost a race for governor and was elected to Congress twice before
winning election to become governor on his second try, at age 36.

Now a distinct underdog, Mr. Jindal speaks about a viable path to the GOP
nomination: performing well among Iowa’s evangelical Christians and
impressing New Hampshire town-hall audiences.

“When the front-runners are still clumped together around 10%, what that
tells me there is a path wide open for folks,” Mr. Jindal said in an
interview last week. “I get the sense that voters are saying this isn’t
about just one good impression.”

The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll found just one Republican
primary voter out of 236 polled who said Mr. Jindal was his or her choice
for president. A Suffolk University poll of New Hampshire Republicans
released Tuesday found two of 500 people who like the Louisiana governor
best. He hasn’t been above 1% in an Iowa poll since February, when he
received 2% support.

Mr. Jindal’s approval rating in Louisiana is hovering around 30%, which he
attributes to the difficult choices he has made as governor, including
cutting the state payroll by 30,000 employees and the state’s budget by
26%. He said per-capita income had grown significantly over the past seven
years and that the state’s economic growth had outpaced the national rate.

Any plausible path to the nomination for Mr. Jindal begins in Iowa, where
the state’s last two caucus winners—former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in
2008 and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum in 2012—catapulted
themselves into the national conversation by winning over the state’s
socially conservative voters.

This year’s crowded primary means Mr. Jindal, who is opposed to gay
marriage and abortion rights has to compete with more than Iowa’s last two
winners. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and retired
neurosurgeon Ben Carson are also targeting the same slice of voters.

“He has made an excellent impression with traditional Christian
conservative evangelical caucus goers,” said Matt Strawn, a former chairman
of the Republican Party of Iowa. “The bad news is there are about six other
candidates, two of whom are former Iowa caucus winners who are competing
for those exact same voters.”

Mr. Jindal argues that early-state voters haven’t gotten to know him yet.
He has made 12 Iowa visits since 2013—more than Messrs. Bush and Walker and
Sen. Marco Rubio. Already this year, Mr. Jindal has released policy white
papers laying out his proposals for health care and education.

Judd Saul, a filmmaker from Cedar Falls, Iowa, who is the founder of the
Cedar Valley Patriots for Christ, said he left a meeting with Mr. Jindal
last week enthused about his positions on social issues and foreign policy.
Mr. Jindal said he wouldn’t rule out sending U.S. troops to Iraq to combat
Islamic State.

*Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal Set to Enter Republican Race for President
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10323975786436414884004581066651313277890>
// WSJ // Reid J. Epstein – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is set to announce Wednesday that he is running
for the Republican nomination for president, in a long shot bid that will
rely on wooing the socially conservative voters who dominate early primary
states.

Mr. Jindal, a 44-year-old former Rhodes Scholar who is barred by term
limits from seeking a third term in Baton Rouge, is the first of four
sitting Republican governors poised to enter the already crowded race.

Mr. Jindal’s path to the nomination looks steep. The latest Wall Street
Journal/NBC News poll found just one likely Republican primary voter out of
236 polled—not 1%—who said Mr. Jindal is his or her choice for president. A
Suffolk University poll of New Hampshire Republicans released Tuesday found
two of 500 people who like the Louisiana governor best. He hasn’t been
above 1% in an Iowa poll since February, when he received 2% support.

Mr. Jindal doesn’t talk like an underdog. He talks about a viable path to
the GOP nomination, performing well among Iowa’s evangelical Christians and
impressing New Hampshire town-hall audiences.

“When the front-runners are still clumped together around 10%, what that
tells me there is a path wide open for folks,” Mr. Jindal said in an
interview last week in Washington. “I get the sense that voters are saying
this isn’t about just one good impression.”

Mr. Jindal has also struggled with voters in his home state. His approval
rating in Louisiana is hovering around 30%. His unpopularity, Mr. Jindal
said, stems from the difficult choices he has made as governor. His record,
he says, includes clipping 30,000 employees from the state payroll,
reducing the state’s budget by 26% and stemming an outflow of Louisiana’s
residents to other states.

Mr. Jindal is the first in a series of Republican governors who are
expected to officially enter the race. Also in the on-deck circle are New
Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, and possibly
Ohio Gov. John Kasich.

Any plausible path to the nomination for Mr. Jindal begins in Iowa, where
the state’s last two caucus winners—former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee in
2008 and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum in 2012—catapulted
themselves into the national conversation by winning over the state’s
social conservative voters.

This year’s historically crowded primary means Mr. Jindal, who is opposed
to gay marriage and abortion and sought to implement “religious freedom”
legislation like the controversial measure Indiana passed, and then watered
down, earlier this year, has to compete not just with Iowa’s last two
winners. Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and retired
neurosurgeon Ben Carson, are all targeting the same slice of voters.

“He has made an excellent impression with traditional Christian
conservative evangelical caucus goers,” said Matt Strawn, a former chairman
of the Republican Party of Iowa. “The bad news is there are about six other
candidates, two of whom are former Iowa caucus winners who are competing
for those exact same voters.”

Mr. Jindal argues that early-state voters haven’t got to know him yet. He
has made 12 Iowa visits since 2013—more than front-runners such as Jeb
Bush, Mr. Walker and Marco Rubio, but fewer than Messrs. Cruz, Huckabee,
Santorum and Perry. Already this year Mr. Jindal has released policy white
papers laying out his proposals for health care and education, though
neither received much notice.

Judd Saul, a filmmaker from Cedar Falls, Iowa, who is the founder of the
Cedar Valley Patriots for Christ, said he left a meeting with Mr. Jindal
last week enthused about his positions on social issues and foreign policy.
Mr. Jindal said he wouldn’t rule out sending U.S. troops to Iraq to combat
Islamic State.

“He’s definitely a good contender,” Mr. Saul said. “What I’d be concerned
with is, is he really a serious contender? The other guys seem to be
showing a little more interest in actually running.”

Mr. Jindal, who waited until he could sign a state budget before
formalizing his presidential aspiration, would be the 13th major Republican
presidential candidate. His focus on state issues, he said, have kept him
from all but the perfunctory appearances at events at which a parade of
presidential contenders speak to activists.

“You can go to Iowa and give a speech—that’s different from spending a lot
of time on the ground in front of town halls, answering people’s questions,
taking hours to do that, we haven’t been able to do that,” Mr. Jindal said.
“I’m confident that as we spend the time talking directly to voters it will
pay off.”

*Bobby Jindal might be Republicans’ Obama. But not in the good ways.
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/24/bobby-jindal-has-always-been-a-man-in-a-hurry-thats-his-problem/>
// WaPo // Chris Cillizza – June 24, 2015 *

I first met Bobby Jindal in early 2003. He was running to be governor of
Louisiana. He was 32. And he was, literally, the single most accomplished
and impressive young person I had ever met.

Ivy League grad with degrees in biology and public policy. Rhodes Scholar.
Head of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals at 24. By 27, the
executive director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of
Medicare. President of the Louisiana state university system. It was an
absolutely remarkable resume -- the ambitious, in-a-hurry high achiever
personified. (I was 27 at the time of that interview and, um, slightly less
accomplished.)

Jindal lost that first race, which in retrospect was telling. He then
quickly ran and won the open 1st District congressional seat in 2004 and
bided his time in Washington until he could run again for governor, which
he did in 2007 -- easily winning an open-seat race.

He immediately became a nationally known figure as the country's first
Indian American governor -- and a Republican to boot. By the end of 2008,
Jindal fever was everywhere. Steve Schmidt, who oversaw John McCain's
presidential bid that year, told The Post this about Jindal: "The question
is not whether he'll be president, but when he'll be president, because he
will be elected someday." (That Schmidt quote appeared in a story
headlined: "GOP Looks to Young Louisiana Gov. Jindal as Its Own Version of
Obama." And others made the same comparison.)

It made perfect sense then that Jindal would be asked to deliver the 2009
Republican response to President Obama's address to a joint session of
Congress. Then this happened:

Jindal looked and sounded totally out of his depth. His delivery was widely
mocked -- Jon Stewart delivered a particularly brutal takedown -- and
Jindal drew unfavorable comparisons to "Kenneth the Page," the hopelessly
naive country bumpkin played by Jack McBrayer on NBC's "30 Rock."

The Jindal team -- and Republicans more generally -- dismissed the
performance as meaningless. No, he wasn't great, they acknowledged. But who
cares? And I generally agreed. After all, lots and lots of up-and-coming
politicians delivered poorly reviewed big speeches (and even responses to
the State of the Union like Jindal), and it wound up not mattering at all
to their future.

Yet, looking back with six years of hindsight, that speech was telling and
important to all that would come after it for Jindal. Why? It was the first
tangible sign that his fast-moving and quick-climbing approach to politics
had a downside. He just wasn't ready for a stage that big. It engulfed him.

Time and again over the intervening years, that narrative played itself
out. He is widely disliked in Louisiana -- by Democrats and Republicans.
Even as Jindal's personal approval rating has sunk to levels at times lower
than Obama's in his own, heavily conservative state, he spent almost half
of 2014 outside the state in pursuit of his presidential ambitions.

A May poll showed that just 31 percent of Louisianans approved of the job
Jindal was doing. "There’s a solid argument to make that no state is in
worse shape than Louisiana," said Bob Mann, a former top aide to Louisiana
Democratic Sen. John Breaux and now a professor at Louisiana State
University. "And I can't see any reasonable argument for the proposition
that Republicans would anoint the least-popular governor of the
least-successful state to carry their banner into the 2016 election against
Hillary Clinton who, according to one recent poll, might beat him in
Louisiana."

There's little evidence that Republican voters are longing for the
candidacy Jindal will formally announce later Wednesday in his home state.
Jindal is currently in 15th place (out of 15) in the 2016 Republican
sweepstakes, according to the polling averages compiled by Real Clear
Politics. Jindal is averaging 0.8 percent of the vote in the national
surveys conducted on the race and at this point is in serious jeopardy of
not qualifying for the first debate, which is just six weeks away.

None of that matters, according to Jindal allies. He's a small-state
governor, they say. Very few people knew him nationally in 2008. Very few
people know him nationally today. "He’s lost nothing ... except in the
minds of a few of the irrelevant chatterers in D.C.," said one Jindal
insider.

Point taken. After all, if Rick Santorum can go from punchline to the
winner of 11 states in the space of one election cycle, who's to say Jindal
can't make a more serious run for the nomination than people think he will
today?

The problem, of course, is that presidential primary races are often won
long before any voter starts paying attention -- in the raising of money
and construction of organizations that are the spine of any winning
campaign. And that process is heavily driven by buzz and perception, which
usually -- though not always -- originates from Washington. Jindal once
benefited from that buzz machine. Today, he's hurt by it -- badly.

If Jindal never becomes the serious contender that his team believes he
will be, there will rightly be second-guessing of whether Jindal's tendency
to always be pushing to the next big achievement, which served him well for
his first 30-plus years on earth, wound up as his ultimate weakness,
politically speaking. Never able to simply occupy an office or a job
without looking to see where the next rung on the ladder might be. Never
realizing that sometimes the best way to gain experience is to simply,
well, gain it.

In the end, the long-ago comparison of Jindal to Obama might be oddly apt
to Republicans looking at Jindal through the 2016 lens: Both men rose fast,
racing through the paths to power that politicians take, and both, when
they got what they wanted, weren't ready for it.

*In launching long-shot bid, Bobby Jindal vows to be a ‘doer’ as president
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-launching-long-shot-bid-bobby-jindal-vows-to-be-a-doer-as-president/2015/06/24/5c98a3d2-1a93-11e5-bd7f-4611a60dd8e5_story.html>
// WaPo // David A. Fahrenthold – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal — a onetime Republican rising star seeking to
become one again — announced Wednesday evening that he will run for
president in 2016.

“We have a bunch of great talkers running for president,” Jindal said at
the Pontchartrain Center here in this New Orleans suburb as supporters
waved “Geaux Bobby” signs. “We’ve had enough of talkers. It is time for a
doer.”

The 44-year-old son of immigrants was the first Indian American to become a
U.S. governor and, now, to become a serious presidential candidate. He
sought to play up his long-shot status as a strength, casting himself as a
man with nothing to lose, who owes nothing to the Republican establishment.

“I will do the things you cannot do in Washington,” he told a crowd of
about 500. “I will say the things you cannot say.”

Following a new trend in U.S. campaigns, Jindal announced his intention at
least three times on Wednesday. First he tweeted it, and then he said it
into a microphone at this conference center in Kenner.

And in a novel move, he released a hidden-camera video earlier in the day
showing how he and his wife had announced the news to their three children.

“We have decided we are going to be running for president this year,”
Jindal said in the tone of a father saying they were expecting another
baby. “That’s good? So was that a surprise?” the governor asked.

“Maybe you’ll get a chance, if you behave, to go back to Iowa,” Jindal told
his children in the video. He also promised them a puppy if he became
president.

It’s looking very unlikely that Jindal’s children will get that puppy.

That’s because Jindal is the 13th Republican to enter the 2016 presidential
race, and several more are expected. And at the moment, he is at the back
of that large pack. In a Fox News poll released Wednesday, Jindal received
just 2 percent of the vote — putting him in a tie for 11th place. “None of
the Above” got 3 percent.

On Wednesday, Jindal’s event included a playing of “Louisiana Saturday
Night,” a fiddle-heavy country standard, which may have been the first time
the words “Belly full of beer and a possum in a sack” had been played at a
presidential bid announcement.

In campaign videos, and in an introductory speech by his wife, Jindal was
cast as unafraid to take on long-shot fights. Beginning with this campaign.

“The key to Bobby Jindal is that he is absolutely fearless,” Supriya Jindal
said, adding that she had turned Jindal down in high school the first time
he asked her out.

When Jindal took the stage (to Garth Brooks’s “Callin’ Baton Rouge”), he
said he would try to slash the size of the federal government, show
strength to American enemies overseas, secure the U.S. border, and try to
reform Medicare and Social Security.

Jindal also said — in a portion familiar from his pre-announcement stump
speeches — that he would make sure new immigrants assimilated to U.S.
culture to try to prevent enclaves of immigrants who reject American ways.

“I’m sick and tired of people dividing Americans,” he said. “And I am done
with all this talk about hyphenated Americans. We are not Indian Americans,
Irish Americans, African Americans, rich Americans or poor Americans. We
are all Americans.”

Jindal also singled out former Florida governor Jeb Bush by name as
insufficiently conservative. He concluded his speech by saying that for
Republicans to have a chance at winning the presidency, they need to take a
chance on a purist long shot.

“Republicans must stop being afraid to lose. If we try to hide who we are
again, we will lose again,” he said.

Just eight years ago, Jindal’s political future looked far brighter than it
does now.

A native of Baton Rouge, he was born Piyush Jindal in 1971 but renamed
himself “Bobby” after the youngest son on the “Brady Bunch” sitcom. He
became a Rhodes Scholar, a McKinsey consultant and — still in his early 20s
— the head of the massive Louisiana health department.

Jindal ran for governor and lost, then ran for Congress and won. He was
elected governor on his second try, in 2007, at age 36.

Back then, he seemed to offer an attractive new vision of what a
conservative could be: an Ivy League-educated son of immigrants, who had a
relentless focus on making the government run faster, smarter and cleaner.
It wasn’t whether he’d be president, one prominent strategist said at the
time, it was when.

“We’ve laughed at our politicians and the ones that have gone to jail and
made the funny jokes,” Jindal said in 2007. “But it’s not funny anymore.”

During his first years, he impressed people in Louisiana as a data-driven,
hard-charging governor. He was great in hurricanes. He thrived amid the
hyper-complex problems of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.

It was politics that he had trouble with. Indeed, as Jindal pondered a run
for national office, he seemed to fall into a vicious negative-feedback
loop.

To address doubts among national conservatives, he repeatedly embraced
harder-line conservative positions — both in terms of Louisiana’s budget
and in terms of social issues. But each time, he moved further away from
the wonky, pragmatic persona that had made him famous in the first place.

So the doubts grew. And Jindal tried to be more hard-line. And so on.

His problems on the national stage began in 2009, when he was selected to
give the GOP response to President Obama’s first address to Congress. The
response wound up being more memorable than the speech — but not in a good
way. Jindal seemed overly slow and overly earnest, like a man explaining
the government to toddlers. People compared him to Kenneth the Page, the
childlike character on the NBC comedy “30 Rock.”

Since then, Jindal has tried to rebuild his reputation among those with
rigid socialconservative positions in Louisiana. He issued an executive
order to protect “religious freedom” for Christians, wading into an angry
debate over same-sex marriage and religion just as other states were trying
to wade out. Earlier this month, IBM canceled a ribbon-cutting at a new
facility in Baton Rouge, citing Jindal’s order, according to media reports.

As other state governors sought to remove Confederate symbols from state
property and license plates this week, Jindal said he would not push to get
rid of Louisiana’s Confederate plates.

The governor has frequently feuded with fellow Republicans over budget
problems caused at least in part by his aggressive tax cuts. Those fights,
along with his frequent trips out of Louisiana, caused his home-state
popularity to plummet from 77 percent in his first year as governor to 32
percent this spring.

After Wednesday’s event, electrician Jimmy Nowlin, 54, said he admired
Jindal’s efforts to bring businesses back to the state, including the
poultry operation where Nowlin works. Also, Nowlin said, “he’s got the
right ideas, as far as I’m concerned, about God, guns and gays.”

So can he win?

“You never know,” said Nowlin’s wife, Denise.

“You never know,” Nowlin repeated. “It’s up to God.”

No other major Republicans appeared to speak onstage with Jindal on
Wednesday. When supporters returned to their cars, they got a hint why:
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), who is running to succeed Jindal, sent someone
to stick fliers on vehicles saying that he would be different from Jindal.

“Governor will be David’s last political job . . . period,” the flier said.
“He wants to take on Louisiana’s most important challenges, not play
politics with them.”

*How Bobby Jindal lost his way
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-bobby-jindal-lost-his-way/2015/06/24/74827cb2-1ab0-11e5-93b7-5eddc056ad8a_story.html>
// WaPo // Editorial Board – June 24, 2015 *

LOUISIANA GOV. Bobby Jindal entered the GOP presidential race on Wednesday,
attacking Republicans who fail to “endorse our own principles” and
promising to “boldly speak the truth without fear.” Conventional Beltway
wisdom states that governors are better presidential candidates than
legislators are; they not only make policy, they also execute it, and they
often have a record of concrete successes that they can feature to voters.
Mr. Jindal’s record, however, is less of an achievement to advertise than a
cautionary tale of how political ambition can triumph over pragmatism.

Mr. Jindal entered the Louisiana governor’s mansion a political star on the
rise. The Rhodes Scholar had previously headed the state’s health
department at the age of 24, before leading its university system and
serving in Congress. To a party seen as too white and too reactionary, Mr.
Jindal seemed to promise policy expertise and serious intellectual power.
The result, however, has been a shambolic state budget.

Louisiana’s leaders have had to scramble to fill a $1.6 billion shortfall.
Lower oil prices haven’t helped the energy-producing state keep its
accounts in order. But a major underlying driver has been Mr. Jindal’s deep
tax cuts and unwillingness to raise enough revenue to pay for state
spending needs. He has raided various parts of the budget — hospitals,
universities, rainy-day funds — to shore things up, but that’s neither
sustainable nor prudent. Unsurprisingly, his home-state approval ratings
are lousy.

Mr. Jindal seems to have done this to market himself to tax-averse GOP
presidential primary voters. Indeed, Mr. Jindal has done a lot to play the
part of conservative firebrand. He flipped against the Common Core
education standards and refused to take Medicaid money to cover low-income
Louisianans. He pressed for a “religious freedom” bill in reaction to the
advance of same-sex marriage, over the objections of Louisiana’s business
community. When the legislature rejected it, he issued an executive order
attempting to achieve many of the same ends.

None of this, however, seems to be working for him. Despite Mr. Jindal
spending lots of time in early primary and caucus states, polls find that
almost no one prefers him to other GOP primary candidates. Perhaps he has
yet to recover from his disastrous performance responding to President
Obama’s 2009 State of the Union address. But it will be hard for him to
advance from here. Mr. Jindal will have a tough time beating Ted Cruz for
the tea party vote, and he has stiff competition in Mike Huckabee for
conservative Christians.

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal talked the importance of conservatism and
faith as he joined the crowded Republican field for the U.S. presidency in
2016. (Reuters)

Republican primary voters looking for a candidate who can win in the
general election, meanwhile, will be more interested in a governor with a
stronger record. Mr. Jindal would be in much better shape if he had made
good on his original promise — to serve as the savvy Republican policy wonk
he was known to be years ago.

*Bobby Jindal to announce presidential plans Wednesday
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/24/bobby-jindal-to-announce-presidential-plans-wednesday/>
// WaPo // David A. Fahrenthold and James Hohmann – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, a one-time rising star in the Republican Party
now struggling to become one again, will announce Wednesday afternoon
whether he intends to run for president in 2016.

Jindal's appearance -- to be held in the New Orleans suburb of Kenner at 5
p.m. Eastern time -- does not seem much of a mystery. The 44-year-old
two-term governor has given every indication that he will run.

He has already traveled multiple times to early-primary states -- spending
45 percent of his days outside of Louisiana last year. And this year, some
of Jindal's top state-government aides have already left to join his
presidential "exploratory committee."

If Jindal does get into the race as expected, he will be the first
Indian-American to ever be a serious candidate for president. But at this
point, his chances of winning the GOP nomination seem extraordinarily low.

There are already 12 other major Republican candidates in the race, with
several more expected to enter soon. And Jindal is running behind nearly
all of them: Several recent polls have shown him at just 1 percent support
among GOP voters, either last or tied for last.

In the most recent Fox News poll, the news was even worse. Jindal wasn't
just behind all the other candidates, he was also behind "None of the
Above," which got 2 percent.

Jindal aides and advisers say that a central part of the governor’s pitch
will be that he is “fearless.” His recently declared opposition to gay
marriage and an executive order on religious freedoms will be data points
to show that he’s willing to take on the corporate wing of the party in
ways that no one else is.

“He’s not afraid to talk about things that normal politicians are nervous
to talk about,” one aide said, previewing the announcement anonymously
because Jindal has not formally announced his candidacy.

In the months leading up to an announcement, Jindal has tried to stand out
from his GOP rivals by playing up his Catholic faith, being unusually
hawkish on defense issues, and being unusually tough on fellow Republicans
in Washington.

Jindal has said that Congressional Republicans frequently surrender to
President Obama on issues like immigration and health-care reform, and
"need a spine."

Jindal, the Louisiana-born son of Indian immigrants, has also been strident
about the need for immigrants to assimilate quickly into American culture.
Jindal has derided the idea of "hyphenated Americans," saying that people
who call themselves Indian Americans and African Americans should think of
themselves as simply Americans first.

Jindal has also called for barring people who believe in "radical Islam"
from coming to the United States at all.

“So in other words we shouldn’t tolerate those who want to come and try to
impose some variant of, some version of Sharia law,” Jindal told a
conservative think tank in March, according to The Guardian newspaper. “I
fear if we don’t insist on assimilation,” he said, “we then go the way of
Europe.”

Just eight years ago, Jindal's future looked far brighter than it does now.

The former Rhodes Scholar and McKinsey consultant was elected governor at
age 36, the first Indian American ever to govern a state. “The question is
not whether he’ll be president,” Republican strategist Steve Schmidt said
in 2008, “but when he’ll be president.”

Jindal seemed to offer a new vision of what a Republican could be: an Ivy
League-educated son of immigrants, who had a relentless focus on making
government run faster, smarter and cleaner.

“We’ve laughed at our politicians and the ones that have gone to jail and
made the funny jokes,” Jindal said in 2007, after he was elected governor
on the second try. “But it’s not funny anymore.”

But, as Jindal pondered higher office, he seemed to fall into a strange and
vicious negative-feedback loop.

To address doubts among national conservatives, Jindal repeatedly embraced
harder-line conservative positions -- both in terms of Louisiana's budget
and in terms of social issues. But each time, he moved further away from
the wonky, pragmatic persona that had made him famous in the first place.

So the doubts grew. And Jindal tried to be more hard-line. And so on.

Jindal's problems on the national stage began in 2009, when he was selected
to give the GOP response to President Obama's first address to Congress.
The response wound up being more memorable than the speech -- but not in a
good way. Jindal seemed overly slow and over-earnest, like a man explaining
the government to toddlers. People compared him to Kenneth the Page, the
child-like character on NBC's comedy "30 Rock."

Since then, Jindal has tried to re-build his reputation among conservatives
with a rigid anti-tax stance in Louisiana. In fact, legislators say, Jindal
has often allowed the Washington-based group Americans for Tax Reform to
dictate the details of his own budget policies.

The results was repeated blowups with the GOP-led state legislature, and
threats of devastating cuts in the state budget. By the end of this year's
session, legislators were so unhappy with Jindal that they tried to stop
paying for his security detail at presidential campaign events.

That fighting over the budget -- and Jindal's frequent trips out of state
-- also caused his in-state popularity to plummet. In his first year as
governor, 77 percent of Louisianans thought he was doing a good job. By
last month, the figure had fallen to 32 percent, an all-time low.

Jindal's advisors are hoping that the only place to go now is up.

"Nobody knows who he is," as one aide put it. They believe most voters
still only remember the governor from his botched response speech, and that
-- if the bar is set that low -- voters will be pleasantly surprised to
hear a more polished, experienced Jindal speak now.

He will spend this Thursday and Friday in New Hampshire and Iowa, with more
travel scheduled after that. Aides think he’s an excellent retail
politician, and that his up-from-the-bootstraps story will resonate in a
contest with former Florida governor Jeb Bush, the heir to a presidential
dynasty.

In preparation for this run, Jindal's supporters launched a super PAC
called "Believe Again." That motto echoed one from Jindal's first inaugural
address as governor: "I'm asking you to once again believe in Louisiana."

But, in this crowded field, Jindal doesn't even have a full claim on his
own slogan. BuzzFeed reported this week that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), was
also using "Believe Again" as a slogan for his own, better-polling
presidential campaign.

*Bobby Jindal hits Jeb Bush, hard, as he announces White House Run
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bobby-jindal-2016-presidential-announcement-119378.html?hp=t4_r>
// Politico // Eli Stokols – June 24, 2015 *

Bobby Jindal went there. As the 13th Republican candidate to enter the
presidential race, the Louisiana governor tried to grab attention by going
negative with his announcement speech, smacking down his rivals as
“selfish” politicians who are nothing more than “talkers,” and calling out
Jeb Bush as a mushy conservative.

“You’ve heard Jeb Bush saying we need to be able to lose the primary to win
the general election. We’re going to help him do that,” Jindal said,
kicking off his long-shot bid for the GOP presidential nomination.

Presenting himself as an unapologetically religious, small-government
conservative, Jindal told several hundred supporters inside a musty event
hall here that his rivals may talk a good game but that he plans to punch
his way back into the race by telling the truth.

“Here’s the truth about most politicians – They are selfish, and they are
followers not leaders,” said Jindal, who promised to cut spending and wear
his religious beliefs on his sleeves, even if he runs afoul of Washington’s
“in crowd” by doing so.

Polling at just under 1 percent nationally, Jindal has little choice but to
run as an insurgent, anti-establishment firebrand.

While he delivered some pretty nasty attacks on Democratic frontrunner
Hillary Clinton — “Hillary Clinton is already trying to divide us by
ethnicity, by gender, and by economic status” — he reserved his most
vicious firepower for Bush, the current GOP

frontrunner.

Jindal warned that Bush is putting the whole Republican party in danger by
appeasing the left and masking conservative views.

“He is saying that we need to hide our conservative ideals,” he said. “But
the truth is, if we go down that road again, we will lose again.”

The two-term governor, who is also a former congressman, is not just
running on heated rhetoric, though. He’s hoping that his executive
experience, coupled with his policy credentials, will help him break
through the crowded field as campaign season picks up.

He has spent the last year rolling out proposals on issues ranging from
national security to health care, and his advisers say his policy chops
will help him stand out on debate stages — if he qualifies to participate —
and in town hall meetings.

But during his speech Wednesday, Jindal focused less on policy points,
playing up the politics of grievance that he hopes will fire up social
conservatives.

“I know that some believe that I talk too much about my faith,” said
Jindal, who was born Hindu but converted to Catholicism. “But I will not be
silenced in order to meet their expectations of political correctness. They
don’t accept the idea that you can be both intellectual and Christian. They
can’t fathom the notion that you can be both smart and conservative. But,
they need to get out more.”

Jindal’s speech came several hours after he broke the suspense of his
announcement, declaring his candidacy on his website earlier Wednesday
afternoon.

The online announcement was accompanied by several videos of Jindal and his
wife discussing a presidential bid with his three young children. He
prompted them to discuss what they remembered about Iowa (“the popcorn”)
and warned them that “things are going to change a little bit.”

Before he took the stage Wednesday evening, supporters watched videos from
former Saints quarterback Archie Manning and former Louisiana Gov. Mike
Foster. Another video featured Louisiana residents praising Jindal for
helping the state recover after Hurricane Katrina a decade ago, obscuring
that the governor’s approval numbers in the state have plummeted over a
prolonged budget battle.

Following the speech, Jindal basked in the cheers from the 800 or so
supporters waving “Geaux Bobby” signs before darting onto the press riser
in the back of the room to do an interview with Fox News Channel’s Sean
Hannity.

But the ubiquitous conservative cable host, who has traveled to other
cities to interview Marco Rubio, Rick Perry, Bush and other contenders in
person, wasn’t there to greet Jindal, who put in an earpiece and did the
interview remotely.

From Louisiana, he flies on to New Hampshire, where he’ll campaign
Thursday. Currently, he’s polling at 1 percent in the Granite State, behind
13 other candidates.

*Louisana long-shot
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/bobby-jindal-louisiana-gop-2016-longshot-campaign-119390.html?hp=c2_3>
// Politico // Katie Glueck and Eli Stokols – June 24, 2015 *

Bobby Jindal is used to being the smartest guy in the room. A less familiar
feeling: Being written off as an afterthought before his next campaign even
begins.

But that’s the reality now for Jindal, who was once considered one of his
party’s most promising and upwardly mobile officeholders.

As he kicks off his presidential run, Jindal is widely viewed as the
longest of long-shots, a candidate with a glittering resume but almost no
chance of winning the GOP nomination in 2016.

It’s a long way from where he was at the beginning of the Obama era in
early 2009, when the president was just settling into office. At the time,
the young governor of Louisiana was thought to be the Republican Party’s
next rising star, a blazing talent on a trajectory to be a presidential
contender.

The child of immigrants from India, Jindal had become the head of
Louisiana’s Department of Health and Hospitals at the age of 24. By his
40th birthday, he had already served in Congress and won election to a
second term as governor. Then he stepped in front of a camera to give the
party’s official response to Obama’s first State of the Union; people who
thought they were watching a coming out party instead bore witness to a
political train-wreck — a tin-eared speech immediately derided as
“childish” and “a disaster for the party.”

Jindal now enters a far more competitive and crowded presidential field,
not as a wunderkind but as an asterisk who barely registers in national
polls. He is running as a reform-minded, social conservative armed with
detailed policy proposals — and betting that his wonky approach will enable
him to break through — but many question whether it’s too late to gain a
foothold in the 2016 race.

“Bobby Jindal is a young man with an enormous record of accomplishment. He
was a member of Congress, a senior person at HHS and he’s a two-term
governor. If he really wants it, his political future is still ahead of
him,” said Steve Schmidt, a former senior advisor to John McCain’s 2008
campaign. “But timing is an under appreciated virtue in American politics.
It’s difficult to see a scenario in which Bobby Jindal becomes the nominee
in the 2016 cycle. He’s running from the back of the pack; he’s getting in
comparatively late. But he is one of the most intelligent people in the
race and he could very well wind up on someone’s VP shortlist, in a cabinet
post or in a position to run again in the future.”

Jindal is polling at about 1 percent nationally now — when he shows up in
the polls at all. But the two-term governor, who has rolled out policy
proposals on everything from energy to health care through his nonprofit,
America Next, argues that his “solutions-oriented” approach as governor
will capture the attention of voters who don’t want Republicans to be the
“party of no.”

“The great temptation for Republicans, for our candidates, is to simply be
anti-Obama, and I think that’s a mistake,” said Jindal in a recent
interview with POLITICO. “It gets great applause lines in many Republican
gatherings, simply standing up and criticizing the president. The harder
work, what we’ve got to do, is provide a positive, specific vision on the
path going forward. [Voters] don’t want to hear we don’t agree [with Obama]
on Iran or Obamacare —and we don’t —they want to hear, ‘But OK, what do we
do differently? How do you get our country going again?…What’s the
alternative?”

While Jindal — who once admonished the GOP to stop being “the stupid party”
— is as well-positioned as any Republican in the field to run as a
policy-oriented candidate, he has drawn more national attention for his
tendency to generate controversy, whether it’s by skewering Rand Paul from
his official government website or blasting out an unsolicited defense of
Rudy Giuliani after the former New York City mayor made a controversial
comment about President Barack Obama.

His attraction to the national spotlight has hurt him back home where, amid
budget woes and political infighting, Jindal’s approval ratings have
plummeted.

“Many in Louisiana feel that Bobby Jindal abandoned them,” said Brad
Whitesides, a longtime North Louisiana strategist. “At some point,
[anti-tax activist] Grover Norquist became more important to him than they
were and they knew it.”

Early voting state political operatives have expressed surprise that they
haven’t seen a more aggressive approach from Jindal. The governor has only
made only a handful of visits to Iowa this year and has sat out some big
Republican events there — in a state where his views are likely to gain
traction with the socially conservative GOP base — while Mike Huckabee,
Rick Perry and others are approaching 20.

“I’m a little baffled at the approach Jindal’s taken to the state this
year,” said Craig Robinson, a longtime GOP operative who now runs the Iowa
Republican blog. “He’s been well received when he’s here but, for one
reason or another, he’s chosen not to participate in some of the big cattle
call events so far; and I don’t get it, because if anyone needed that kind
of large audience to break through and introduce himself, it’s Bobby
Jindal.”

Jindal and his advisers say he will be able to campaign much harder now
that the contentious legislative session is over and a balanced budget has
passed. They express confidence that Jindal’s retail politicking skills and
ability to field questions in town hall settings will allow him to impress
in Iowa and in New Hampshire, a more moderate state that is a less likely
fit.

“Retail politics is very important, just like in the South, and these early
state voters are only going to vote for somebody if they like them,” Jindal
said, when asked how he would catch up to other candidates who, free of
gubernatorial duties, have been making the rounds in Iowa on a regular
basis for months. “And that involves spending a lot of time, talking and
listening to people directly and taking whatever questions…they may not
agree with you 100 percent, but I think they can detect whether you’re
being authentic with them or not.”

Jindal has seized on one particular issue that animates Christian
conservatives — religious liberty, which he’s been championing since a
February 2014 speech at the Ronald Reagan Library. He has been perhaps the
most vocal supporter of laws designed to protect religious freedoms, and
was an ardent defender of Indiana’s controversial legislation despite
widespread criticism that the measure was anti-gay. At socially
conservative gatherings, like last weekend’s Faith and Freedom Coalition
conference in Washington, it’s been an effective message for him at a time
when many Christian conservatives have felt under attack. The governor, who
was raised Hindu but converted to Catholicism, is comfortable with
religious language and sees social conservatives as his natural base.

His efforts are aided by a team of experienced advisers, including Gail
Gitcho, Mitt Romney’s 2012 communications director; a team from the
prominent GOP firm OnMessage Inc. that includes veteran GOP operatives Curt
Anderson, and, on the super PAC side, Brad Todd; and a host of longtime
Jindal loyalists who have helped with previous successful campaigns.

“He’d be the only guy in the field who has actually written detailed policy
proposals for how to repeal Obamacare, on national security, on energy,”
Todd said, dismissing the value of early polls. “No one else has done
that…It’s a little puzzling to him why no one else has done that. He can’t
imagine running for president without having a pretty strong idea of what
to do. Lots of politicians are very articulate with the soundbite, but no
one can matching being as strong on policy as he is.”

*Now Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is in the Republican race*
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/78933264270441df89ec7aa0cd06bc60/louisiana-gov-jindal-looks-ready-jump-2016-race>*
// AP // Melinda Deslatte – June 24, 2015*

Pitching himself as a "doer" in a field of talkers, Louisiana Gov. Bobby
Jindal declared his candidacy for the 2016 Republican presidential
nomination Wednesday and set about trying to distinguish himself from
better known rivals.

It's a long-shot effort for an accomplished but overshadowed governor, and
his prospects will depend in large measure on his continued courtship of
evangelical voters. But several other contenders also are determined to win
over that group.

"We have a bunch of great talkers running for president," Jindal said at
his opening rally. "We've had enough of talkers. It's time for a doer. I'm
not running for president to be somebody. I'm running for president to do
something."

An Oxford-educated son of Indian immigrants, Jindal can point to a
political career filled with many achievements in a short time: a position
as state health secretary when he was merely age 24, election to Congress
at 32 and election as governor four years later.

But the GOP lineup does not lack seasoned politicians, some with much more
star power. Jindal quickly struck at one of them, accusing former Florida
Gov. Jeb Bush of wanting Republicans to "hide our conservative ideals."

"But the truth is if we go down that road again, we will lose again,"
Jindal said.

Jindal announced his campaign online earlier Wednesday. Video clips on his
website showed Jindal and his wife, Supriya, talking to their three
children about the campaign to come.

Aides discussed Jindal's plans to focus on social conservatives, as he has
done for months in extensive travels, and highlight his reputation as a
leader steeped in policy.

Jindal intends to present himself as "the youngest candidate with the
longest resume," citing an extensive background in public policy and
government, strategist Curt Anderson said.

In his speech, the Louisiana governor sought to position himself as an
outsider: "I am running for president without permission from headquarters
in Washington, D.C."

Unpopular at home, Jindal waited until the state legislative session had
ended and lawmakers found a way to close a $1.6 billion budget gap before
he scheduled his presidential announcement. But he has been building his
campaign for months with trips to key presidential voting states,
particularly Iowa, where he has focused on Christian conservatives.

Raised a Hindu but a convert to Catholicism as a teenager, Jindal is
competing for the evangelical vote with several contenders, including Texas
Sen. Ted Cruz and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

While Jindal will continue to focus on "religious liberty," Anderson said,
he aims to prove a candidate can be "both smart and Christian." And in
recent weeks, Jindal has worked to showcase more of the policy wonk
reputation that got him elected governor, rather than just focusing on
cultural issues.

He has drawn distinctions from other GOP contenders by noting he has
published "detailed plans" on health care, defense, education and energy
policy.

He has suggested governors are better equipped to become president because
they have run state governments, balanced budgets and implemented policy.
That's an argument, however, that other White House hopefuls are making or
can: Govs. Scott Walker of Wisconsin, Chris Christie of New Jersey and John
Kasich of Ohio.

And Jindal doesn't get glowing reviews of his governance at home, as both
Republicans and Democrats blame the governor's financial policies for
causing repeated budget crises and suggest those policies are driven by
political ambitions.

As the governor spoke inside, anti-Jindal protesters amassed outside.

Christopher Williams, a University of New Orleans student who called for
the protest on a Facebook page, said participants had a variety of beefs
with Jindal, such as his tax policy, education cuts and opposition to gay
marriage.

"One thing that the governor has been able to do is unite people against
him," Williams said.

A path to a GOP primary victory remains difficult for Jindal. Republican
candidate debates begin in August and it's unclear if he will make the cut
if based on standing in national polls.

Campaign manager Timmy Teepell, a former chief of staff who ran Jindal's
two races for governor, said Jindal will focus on the states that vote
early in the presidential race, not a "national campaign." Jindal has trips
planned to New Hampshire and Iowa later this week.

*Louisiana Gov. Jindal looks ready to jump into 2016 race
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/78933264270441df89ec7aa0cd06bc60/louisiana-gov-jindal-looks-ready-jump-2016-race>
// AP // Melinda Deslatte – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal appears ready to launch a long-shot campaign
for the Republican presidential nomination that rests on courtship of
evangelical voters and his reputation as a man of ideas.

The 44-year-old, two-term governor begins without the national prominence
of rivals such as Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and former Florida Gov. Jeb
Bush, who are among a dozen contenders for the nomination in a highly
competitive pack.

But Jindal, an Oxford-educated son of Indian immigrants, points to a long
political career filled with many unexpected achievements. He talked a
governor into appointing him health secretary at age 24 with little
background in either health management or government, won election to
Congress at 32 and became governor four years later.

"If I were to become a candidate, I would certainly run to win and I would
do it based on presenting detailed ideas about how to move our country
forward," Jindal told reporters recently.

His expected campaign launch was scheduled Wednesday afternoon in the New
Orleans suburb of Kenner, where Jindal lived as a congressman.

Unpopular at home, the Louisiana governor waited until the state
legislative session had ended and lawmakers found a way to close a $1.6
billion budget gap before scheduling the announcement. But he has been
building his campaign for months with frequent trips to key presidential
voting states, particularly Iowa, where he's focused heavily on Christian
conservatives.

Raised a Hindu but a convert to Catholicism as a teenager, Jindal has
talked of his religious faith in small churches across Louisiana. As he
readied his presidential campaign, the governor held a prayer rally in
Baton Rouge, met pastors across several states and put out an executive
order to grant special "religious freedom" protections to people in
Louisiana who oppose same-sex marriage.

He's competing, however, with several contenders trying to appeal to the
same pool of evangelical voters, including Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and former
Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee.

As he approached his announcement, Jindal also showcased more of the policy
wonk reputation that got him elected governor, rather than focusing solely
on the culture wars.

He's drawn distinctions from other GOP contenders by noting he's published
"detailed plans" on health care, defense, education and energy policy. He's
suggested governors are better equipped to become president because they've
run state bureaucracies, balanced budgets and implemented policy. That's an
argument, however, that other White House hopefuls are making or can: Govs.
Scott Walker of Wisconsin, Chris Christie of New Jersey and John Kasich of
Ohio, as well as Bush.

"We need somebody who will go to D.C. and rescue the American Dream from
becoming the European nightmare," Jindal says.

All told, a path to victory remains difficult for Jindal. GOP debates begin
in August and it's unclear if he will make the cut if based on standing in
national polls.

What is certain is that the term-limited governor has worn out his welcome
back home as his tenure approaches its end in January.

Jindal's approval ratings in Louisiana have dropped into the low 30s due to
repeated budget cuts to public colleges, near-constant state financial
problems and a sense that he's crafted state policy based on his national
political ambitions.

The governor dismisses the low state poll numbers as a sign he's tackled
difficult problems, with large shifts in education policy, dramatic
reductions to the public sector workforce and the right-sizing of
government.

"Making changes is tough," he said in a recent interview. "It's easy to be
a popular politician. If you want to be a popular politician, you kiss
babies, you cut ribbons, you don't make tough choices. That's not what I
got elected to do."

*Bobby Jindal Teases Cute Kid Videos Ahead of Announcement
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/bobby-jindal-teases-cute-kid-videos-ahead-of-announcement>
// Bloomberg // Ali Elkin – June 24, 2015 *

In the lead-up to his presidential campaign announcement Wednesday,
Republican Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal is releasing hidden-camera style
videos of himself talking about the decision with his wife and children.

"You know, there are going to be people watching you, so you have to
behave," he says. "No bunny ears behind your brother or anything."

Jindal's announcement is scheduled for Wenesday evening, and will be held
outside New Orleans. The first video went up on Facebook on Tuesday night
with a message saying that there would be several more.

Jindal's children are Selia Jindal, 13; Shaan Jindal, 11; and Slade Jindal,
8. In the quick snippet, the Jindal kids ask if they are going to have to
dress up. The kids do not have microphones in the video, but Jindal answers
a question about what will happen if he were to decide at the last minute
not to run, after all.

"It'd be a short speech," he said. "You'd get up there and say, 'Thank you
all for coming, I just want to tell you that I've decided not to run. Have
a good night.'"

*Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal Vows to be a Doer in Race Full of Talkers
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/bobby-jindal-poised-to-join-republican-presidential-race>
// Bloomberg // Margaret Newkirk – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal promised a crowd of supporters he would
shake up the Republican presidential race by telling the truth about his
record of cutting government spending and his Christian faith.

Announcing his campaign at a rally in Kenner, Louisiana, outside New
Orleans, Jindal said he was running as a leader who gets things done in a
field full of people who would rather talk than act. He will address issues
that his fellow Republicans won't, he said.

“The guy in the White House today is a great talker, and we have a bunch of
great talkers running for President,''  Jindal said. “We've had enough of
talkers, it's time for a doer. I'm not running for president to be
somebody, I'm running for President to do something.”

“I'm not running for president to be somebody, I'm running for President to
do something.”

Governor Bobby Jindal

Jindal, the first Indian-American governor in the U.S., is a 44-year-old
evangelical Catholic conservative and Rhodes scholar policy wonk who his
advisers say appeals to a broad swath of the electorate.

“Unlike a lot of candidates who excel with social conservatives, he has
multiple gears,” said Brad Todd, a consultant for Jindal. “He is the
youngest candidate with the longest résumé.”

Jindal is the 13th Republican to enter the race. He is polling near the
back of the pack: A May Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll
found him tied in second-to-last place behind former New York Governor
George Pataki with 1 percent of the vote.

Jindal said he would fight to destroy ISIS, cut government, defend
religious liberty, get rid of Obamacare and require immigrants to
assimilate into the wider society.

“It is not unreasonable to demand that if you immigrate to America, you
must do so legally, and you must be ready and willing to embrace our
values, learn English, and roll up your sleeves and get to work,” he said.

The son of Indian immigrants, Piyush Jindal nicknamed himself Bobby as a
child, after a character on The Brady Bunch. He converted to Catholicism as
a teenager; in 1994, he described an exorcism he had witnessed for the
Catholic journal New Oxford Review.

Jindal earned his bachelor’s degree from Brown University and a master’s
degree from New College, Oxford, specializing in health policy. He turned
down offers to attend medical schools at both Harvard and Yale to pursue
public service.

He became Louisiana’s secretary of Health and Hospitals at age 24. He
served as director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of
Medicare in Washington, as president of the Louisiana State University
system, and as President George W. Bush’s assistant health and human
services secretary before making his first run for governor in 2003.

Jindal seemed an unlikely candidate, said Curt Anderson, now his chief
presidential strategist, who vetted Jindal for Republican power broker
Haley Barbour after Jindal approached Barbour about running for governor of
Louisiana. Anderson said he initially thought the skinny young man was an
intern: “I thought it was a Haley prank. This guy looks like he’s 12 and he
doesn’t look anything like he’s from Louisiana.”

Anderson has been a Jindal adviser ever since.

Jindal lost in 2003. He won a Congressional seat the next year and the
governor’s office in 2007, at age 36.

As a non-white Southerner, a son of immigrants, an evangelical, and a
data-driven technocrat, Jindal was seen as a rising party star.

His image suffered after he stumbled in his first high-profile role: the
Republican response to President Barack Obama’s first State of the Union
speech. Critics said Jindal’s sing-song delivery sounded like children’s
story time.

Since then, Jindal put himself forward as a national thinker with opinion
pieces in major newspapers and speeches, and founded a policy think tank
called American Next.

He released a plan for replacing Obamacare, advocated a strong response to
Islamic State militants, and claimed there are European “no-go zones” ruled
by Muslims, a contention dismissed by London Mayor Boris Johnson as
“complete nonsense.”

He also reinforced his religious credentials.

Jindal issued an anti-gay “religious freedom” order over the wishes of
Republican legislators. He also supported national groups of home-schooling
parents, which could help him against other social conservatives in Iowa
and South Carolina, said Tim Echols, the Georgia founder of one of the
groups.

“No one has been more supportive than Jindal, no one,” he said.

Jindal was initially popular as governor. He tackled ethics reform in a
state known for corruption, won kudos for handling the BP Plc oil spill,
and delivered on a promise to shrink government. He privatized charity
hospitals, cut 30,000 jobs, and reduced the budget by $10 billion. He won
his 2011 re-election with about 66 percent of the vote.

He presided over a series of budget crises, caused by the loss of federal
help for Hurricane Katrina recovery, the recession, statutory protections
for spending, the cumulative effect of one-time budget fixes, and Jindal’s
hard line against raising taxes.

By early this year, even Republican legislators were accusing him of
spending too much time in Iowa testing the presidential waters and of using
gimmicks to protect his tax-averse reputation.

Erick Erickson, a former Louisianan who runs the Red State blog, said
Jindal was the governor Louisiana needed, but that his path to nomination
is narrow. He predicted Jindal will shine in Iowa and then struggle for
money and recognition.

Jindal will surprise people, said Anderson.

“He’s engaging,” Anderson said. “He seems real. People don’t realize, every
time he goes to Iowa, people love him.”

Jindal left the rally to head to New Hampshire.

*Louisiana Governor Jindal announces run for president in 2016
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/24/us-usa-election-jindal-idUSKBN0P425E20150624>
// Reuters // Emily Stephenson and Alistair Bell – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announced on Wednesday he was running for
the U.S. presidency in 2016, giving himself a mountain to climb from the
bottom of a full pack of Republican candidates.

"My name is Bobby Jindal and I am running for President of the United
States of America," Jindal, who became the first person of Indian-American
heritage to run for U.S. president, said on his website.

Jindal, 44, is scheduled to appear later on Wednesday in the New Orleans
suburb of Kenner to formally announce his decision. His website featured
videos of Jindal and his wife, Supriya, telling their three children that
he was going to be a candidate and promising his daughter they would get a
puppy if they moved to the White House.

Once seen as a rising Republican star, Jindal has struggled with a fiscal
crisis and a slump in popularity in his home state and usually ranks near
the bottom in polls of Republicans seeking the nomination for the November
2016 presidential election.

Jindal, a two-term governor who also represented Louisiana in the U.S.
House of Representatives, joins 12 other Republicans in the race, including
former Florida Governor Jeb Bush. Others, including Wisconsin Governor
Scott Walker, are expected to join soon.

Jindal is popular with social conservatives and evangelical Christians, but
his home state appeal faded as he tried to close a $1.6 billion shortfall
in the state's budget, caused in part by falling oil prices, without
breaking a promise not to raise taxes.

The MarblePort/Hayride poll in Louisiana released last week was especially
embarrassing for Jindal, showing more Louisianans back Democratic
front-runner Hillary Clinton for president than Jindal by 44.5 percent to
42 percent.

Republicans in the state complain Jindal spent too much time trying to
court national attention while his state floundered.

Jindal is in last place in a Reuters/Ipsos online poll of 15 Republicans,
drawing less than 1 percent. It could be difficult for him to be among the
top 10 Republican candidates in national polling who will join the party's
first debate in Ohio in August.

Jindal, a Christian who converted from Hinduism as a teenager, jumped into
a fight in May over religion and gay rights.

He signed an executive order to allow businesses to refuse service for
same-sex weddings, even though Louisiana's House of Representatives had
rejected a similar measure.

Jindal also annoyed business leaders by proposing the elimination of more
than $500 million worth of corporate tax rebates this year as part of his
effort to balance the budget.

In 2009, Jindal delivered the Republican response to the President Barack
Obama's first State of the Union address, and many in the party hoped he
could be a young counterweight to the new president. But his speech was
mocked as amateurish and awkward.

*Bobby Jindal faces an uphill fight in the crowded 2016 field
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/24/politics/bobby-jindal-2016-election-announcement/index.html>
// CNN // Rebekah Metzler and Ashley Killough – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, once a Republican rising star who passed on an
opportunity to seek the White House in 2012, announced his candidacy on
Wednesday under much more trying circumstances.

Jindal announced his bid over social media, just hours before hosting a
kickoff rally.

"I'm running for President of the United States of America. Join me,"
Jindal tweeted, with a link to his website's announcement page.

At his rally in Kenner, Louisiana, Jindal sought to promote himself as a
bold leader who not only talked the talk but walked the walk as governor of
Louisiana.

"The big government crowd -- they hate what I have done," Jindal said to
the crowd of about 500. "I am guilty as charged, and our state is better
off for it today. We have had enough of talkers, it's time for doers. I'm
not running for president to be somebody, I'm running for president to do
something."

But if he wants to compete in the expansive Republican field, he'll have to
resurrect a reputation that has fallen significantly in recent years.
Jindal is now polling toward the bottom of the field, registering at just
1% in the latest CNN/ORC poll.

Jindal's popularity in his own state has suffered -- a recent poll has his
approval at 32% -- thanks to budget troubles and perhaps a preoccupation
with playing to a national audience. His refusal to raise taxes to help
balance the state's books has resulted in deep cuts to popular programs and
areas of government spending such as health care and education.

His wife introduced him on stage, the only speaker before he took to the
podium. The roll out also featured a couple of biographical videos.

Jindal, the country's first Indian-American governor, is likely best-known
nationally for his flip-flop on Common Core educational standards -- from
support to opposition, a move many saw as opportunistic as he marches
toward a presidential bid.

In 2010, his state implemented the standards. By 2014, he was blasting
them. In the interim, many conservatives fearful of government takeover of
schools had begun to protest the standards across the country, pushing
Republican politicians to rethink their support.

Jindal's reversal marked a watershed moment for the politician, who
following Romney's 2012 loss, pushed for the GOP to represent something
other than being the "party of no."

The Brown University graduate and Rhodes scholar went even further,
chastising his peers for verbal gaffes and unforced errors when politicking
leading up to the presidential election.

"It's not going to be the last time anyone says something stupid within our
party, but it can't be tolerated within our party," he said. "We've also
had enough of this dumbed-down conservatism. We need to stop being
simplistic, we need to trust the intelligence of the American people and we
need to stop insulting the intelligence of the voters."

But his flip on Common Core marked Jindal as a man willing to play to his
base -- similar to those pols he had condemned in 2012.

America may also recall the 44-year-old for his Republican response to
Obama's first joint address to Congress in 2009 -- a performance most
remembered for Jindal's awkward delivery than anything else.

Though initial polling shows Jindal is a longshot, he has carved out a
niche of vibrant support among evangelical Christians and the anti-Common
Core activists.

He's also positioned himself as a top opponent of "political correctness"
and has at times led his party's charge in railing against radical Islam,
while also straying into the controversial territory.

In an hour-long briefing with reporters Wednesday in New Orleans, Jindal's
soon-to-be presidential campaign advisers stressed that the Louisiana
governor will highlight his record as an executive as he focuses on an
early state strategy.

"We're going to hunt where the ducks are," said chief strategist Curt
Anderson, a Jindal adviser since 2003 and former Republican National
Committee political director.

Jindal's four main objectives as president would be securing the border,
replacing Obamacare, growing the private sector and increasing defense, his
aides said. He will also be "aggressive" on calling for the destruction of
radical Islam and that containment is a strategy for losers.

The Louisiana governor will likely fight for space on the right of the
so-far 13 person GOP field, alongside Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Arkansas
Gov. Mike Huckabee, neurosurgeon Ben Carson and former Pennsylvania Sen.
Rick Santorum.

Aides argue that Jindal hasn't been on the trail like other candidates, so
naturally his name recognition will be low.

"Half these people don't know who their own damn governor is, let alone the
governor of Louisiana," Anderson said, referring to voters nationwide who
aren't plugged into presidential politics as much as reporters and
operatives.

Jindal was a political wunderkind when he first burst onto the scene
helping shape health care policy. In 1996, at the age of just 24, Jindal
was appointed as head of Louisiana's department of health policies.

Later, he served under President George W. Bush in the Department of Health
and Human Services as a top adviser to then-HHS Secretary Tommy Thompson.

Raised in a Hindu household, Jindal converted to Catholicism in high school.

He first cut his own political teeth in 2003, surprising many to force a
run-off election in the Louisiana gubernatorial race. Though he lost, he
set himself up for a successful congressional run in 2004, serving until
finally winning the governor's mansion in 2008.

Jindal's first stop after his speech Wednesday night will be New Hampshire
on Thursday, followed by Iowa on Friday. He holds a fundraising event in
Baton Rouge on Saturday — the only fundraising event that will appear on
their financial reports for the period that ends on June 30, they say.

*Bobby Jindal’s kids were unaware of announcement video taping
<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/24/politics/bobby-jindal-video-kids-announcement/index.html>
// CNN // Theodore Schleifer – June 24, 2015 *

Bobby Jindal aimed for creative -- and likely hoped for buzz -- when he
announced his presidential campaign via video on Wednesday.

He may have gotten more than what he wished for.

The Louisiana governor became the 13th Republican presidential candidate,
unveiling footage recorded by a hidden camera seemingly lodged in a tree
that showed how his three young children reacted after hearing he planned
on running for the White House.

"Mommy and Daddy have been thinking and talking a lot about this, and we
have decided we are going to be running for president this year," Jindal
said, to decidedly muted reaction from his kids, as shown by the video,
which Jindal subsequently placed on Facebook.

The homemade film, with shaky audio quality and Jindal himself obscured by
a tree branch, was largely mocked on social media as a smart idea that
didn't quite land.

A Jindal spokeswoman, Shannon Dirmann, later confirmed what appeared to be
the case: Jindal's children weren't aware they were being taped at the time.

The footage was shot over the weekend at the governor's mansion and the
kids were eventually shown the video before it was made public. The intent
was to get their "natural" reaction. Dirmann said the children were fine
with the tape and added that criticism of the video came largely from
"liberals."

Those tactics may be necessary for Jindal, who sits at the rearguard of the
Republican field and has low name identification nationwide.

Many Republican candidates have announced their plans to run first on
social media, followed shortly thereafter by rally-type events ranging from
Ted Cruz's preacher-like sermon at Liberty University to Jeb Bush's lengthy
roster of surrogates in Florida who testified to his record.

Jindal gave his own speech hours after releasing the film online.

"The big government crowd -- they hate what I have done," Jindal said to
the crowd of about 500 gathered in Kenner, Louisiana.

"I am guilty as charged, and our state is better off for it today. We have
had enough of talkers, it's time for doers. I'm not running for president
to be somebody, I'm running for president to do something," he said.

Gail Montelaro, a woman from New Roads, Louisiana, who has known the new
presidential candidate for 21 years, watched the two-minute video at his
announcement rally just outside of New Orleans. She said that the unusual
video concept of the video was characteristic of Jindal's way of thinking.

"That's Bobby," Montelaro said. "He thinks outside of the box. And he cares
about his children and likes doing things with them and their future in
mind. That is not unusual about him."

*5 Things You Should Know About Bobby Jindal
<http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/06/24/416990332/5-things-you-should-know-about-bobby-jindal>
// NPR // Jessica Taylor – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal is expected Wednesday evening to become the
13th major Republican candidate to enter the race for president.

Once seen as a rising star in the GOP, the 44-year-old Indian-American now
faces long odds in a crowded primary. He's mired at the bottom of most
polls, a situation that threatens to keep him off the main debate stage in
first GOp presidential primary debates in August.

That wasn't always the outlook for the former congressman. Seen as a policy
wunderkind, who quickly moved up the ranks from state and federal
administrations to lead his state, he was mentioned as a 2012 presidential
candidate, but eventually passed on the race. Though his approval ratings
in the Bayou State have dropped dramatically amid budget fights, he has
still tried to keep a high national profile by hitting the cattle-call
circuit to build up his White House chances.

Jindal's best shot at catching fire in 2016 is to appeal to religious
conservatives, especially in the early states of Iowa and South Carolina.
But that's a crowded space this time around. Though he's a Roman Catholic,
he has said he considers himself an "evangelical Catholic." At last week's
Faith and Freedom Coalition gathering in Washington, he got a good
reception from the crowd as he shared his personal journey to Christianity,
and Iowa GOP observers have also said he's gotten positive marks on the
trail there, too.

Here are five things to know about Bobby Jindal:

1. His real name isn't Bobby — it's a nickname inspired by "The Brady Bunch"

Jindal was born Piyush Jindal in Baton Rouge in 1971 to parents who had
immigrated just months earlier from India. When he was 4, he asked to be
called "Bobby" after one of the brothers on the popular family sitcom.

Raised Hindu, Jindal converted to Christianity in high school after a
friend shared his faith with him. He would read his Bible with a flashlight
in his closet, hiding his conversion from his parents.

"I read the words of Jesus Christ, and I realized that they were true,"
Jindal said in a 2014 commencement address at Liberty University. "I used
to think that I had found God, but I believe it is more accurate to say
that He found me."

2. He's a Rhodes Scholar — and had a young start in government and public
policy

Jindal graduated at just 20 from Brown University with degrees in both
biology and public policy. He was admitted to both Harvard Medical School
and Yale Law School, but would turn both down to attend Oxford University
as a Rhodes Scholar.

There, he studied health policy and eventually returned to his native state
to serve as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals —
all at the young age of 24. Four years later, at just 28, he was appointed
the youngest-ever president of the University of Louisiana system.

In 2001, President George W. Bush appointed him to be Assistant Secretary
for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, acting as the chief
policy adviser to the director of HHS.

3. Jindal lost his first run for elective office, but has won every one
since

Jindal left his role with HHS in 2003 to run for governor. Louisiana has an
open primary system where all candidates are on the ballot regardless of
party. In that first vote, Jindal topped the field, easily besting the
second-place finisher, Democratic Lt. Gov. Kathleen Blanco. But in that
November's runoff, Blanco narrowly prevailed despite Jindal getting some
Democratic support, including an endorsement from then-New Orleans Mayor
Ray Nagin. Some believed racism was to blame for his close loss.

Jindal went on to be elected to Congress the following year, though, and
was reelected in 2006. Under fire for her handling of 2005's devastating
Hurricane Katrina, Blanco decided not to run for reelection. Jindal ran
again and, this time, he easily beat state Sen. Walter Boasso, who had
switched from the GOP just that April to run for governor. In 2011, Jindal
won outright in the primary, winning with more than 65 percent of the vote.

4. One of Jindal's biggest moments instead drew comparison to "Kenneth, the
Page"

In 2009, the young Louisiana governor was tapped to deliver the GOP
response to newly elected President Obama's first address to a joint
session of Congress. The plum post was supposed to launch him onto the
national stage — and showcase a Republican Party badly in need of diversity.

But following Obama, Jindal, normally fast-talking, looked halting and
timid, as he awkwardly delivered an attempt at a folksy speech. Both
Republicans and Democrats panned the address, and many unflatteringly
compared him to 30 Rock's bumpkin "Kenneth the Page."

5. He has the "Duck Dynasty" seal of approval

One TV comparison Jindal is happy to feed is his relationship with the
Robertson family, stars of the popular A&E series "Duck Dynasty." The show
chronicles the camo-clad, bearded family that runs a booming duck-call
business. It is popular among conservatives and those in the Bible Belt,
where family members are seen praying each episode and talking openly about
their faith.

But that hasn't been without controversy. The family patriarch, Phil
Robertson, came under fire for comments he made about people who are gay.
Jindal, though, stood behind him and criticized Robertson's suspension from
the network. And when Jindal began to explore a White House run, the
Robertson family had his back as well.

"I'm the kind of guy who really likes smart people...and that guy's one of
the smartest people I've ever met in my life," son Willie Robertson said on
Fox News earlier this year, throwing his support behind Jindal. "He's
young, but he's got the values; he's got the intelligence to do it."

*Bobby Jindal’s Plan To Stop Being A Punchline And Actually Win
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/mckaycoppins/bobby-jindals-plan-to-stop-being-a-punchline-and-actually-wi#.jgW1VK5D2>
// Buzzfeed // McKay Coppins – June 24, 2015 *

The most viral headline this year with the Louisiana governor’s name in it
was published in The Onion: “Bobby Jindal Not Sure He Willing To Put Family
Through 2-Month Presidential Campaign.”

The article on the satirical news site — which included fictional quotes
from Jindal fretting about how his young kids would cope with having a dad
“spend dozens of days running for president” — was perfectly tuned to the
sniggers and skepticism that pervade the political world when it comes to
Jindal’s 2016 prospects. When the article was published in January, several
reporters (including this one) forwarded the link to the governor’s
advisers in hopes of goading them into responding. The strategists laughed
it off at the time, joking that at least expectations were low.

Now, Jindal’s small team of campaign aides and operatives is embarking on a
plan to confound those expectations and transform their candidate from a
punchline into a president. When he officially announces his bid for the
Republican nomination here Wednesday evening, Jindal will be launching a
campaign with little money, virtually no grassroots organization, and a
principal who sits at around 1% in national polls. The most generous
pundits call him an “underdog.” The less generous ones call him a
“dumbed-down” self-parody who “will never catch fire.”

In multiple conversations with BuzzFeed News — as well as a candid,
on-the-record briefing with reporters ahead of the announcement Wednesday,
complete with a PowerPoint presentation and an expansive Q&A — Jindal’s top
strategists laid out their theory of the race and what they view as their
candidate’s most plausible path to victory.

Camp out in Iowa

Jindal’s team conceded that their campaign is not starting out with the
sort of war chest that will enable rivals like Jeb Bush and Scott Walker to
crisscross the country and launch national ad campaigns.

“It wouldn’t be bad to have $100 million dollars,” said Curt Anderson,
Jindal’s chief campaign strategist. “I’ll be honest about that.”

But for now, he said, all they really need is enough cash to buy roundtrip
plane tickets from Des Moines to Manchester. Jindal’s advisers repeatedly
stressed that they’re running an “early-state campaign,” and that the first
“signs of life” for the Jindal candidacy will likely register with improved
polling in Iowa.

Anderson pointed to the last two Republican victors in Iowa — grassroots
favorites Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum — as proof that the
first-in-the-nation caucuses “can’t be bought” by well-funded establishment
frontrunners. And he said in this election’s crowded field of 14 candidates
and counting, the winner of the Hawkeye State will probably only need about
20% of caucus-goers, or 26,000 votes. Jindal will spend the bulk of the
next six months trying to win those voters over one handshake at a time in
diners and county fairs across the state.

Of course, it’s been 15 years since the winner of the Iowa caucuses in a
contested race went on to be the Republican presidential nominee. But as
Anderson put it, “If you win Iowa, you’re a serious contender for the
nomination.”

Harness the power of Duck Dynasty

Jindal will hardly be the only Republican candidate pinning his hopes on a
strong showing in Iowa. Ted Cruz, Rick Perry, Carly Fiorina, Ben Carson,
and Huckabee will all likely be pursuing similar strategies, and they will
have to compete for attention with Donald Trump’s high-profile political
torch-juggling act. But one Jindal adviser noted that their candidate has
something none of his rivals have: the Duck Dynasty endorsement.

Indeed, Jindal was perhaps the most outspoken defender of the Robertsons —
the bearded, duck-hunting stars of A&E’s hit reality TV show — when the
family patriarch came under fire in 2013 for crude anti-gay remarks he made
in a magazine interview. Jindal has known the family of Louisiana natives
for years, and he used the flare-up in the culture wars to warn of a
triumphalist secularism in American society that aims to bully conservative
Christians like the Robertsons out of the public square.

The family rewarded Jindal’s loyalty by featuring him in the most recent
season premiere of their show, and Willie Robertson has said he would
support the governor if he ran for president. The background photo on
Jindal’s Twitter feed shows him and his family posing with the Robertsons.

To many in the political class, Jindal’s close alliance with a cast of
goofy reality TV stars scans as pandering. But a senior adviser to the
candidate pointed out that the show has been tremendously popular with the
sort of religious conservatives who dominate the Iowa caucuses, and that
Willie’s endorsement could be a real selling point.

“The governor and Willie have been good buddies for a long time,” he said.
“And having somebody who folks know and trust, who can say, ‘Hey look, I
know this guy and he’s a good man, and a great governor’ — that’s a big
deal.”

More substantively, Jindal’s campaign says he has been out front on the
debate over religious freedom dating back to a speech he gave in early 2014
at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, when he prophesied of a “silent
war” between people of faith and their antagonists in government and media.
With the Supreme Court now poised to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide,
they predict the issues he’s been discussing could be central to the 2016
race. Helping him shape that message and take it to grassroots Christian
voters is Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, a key
power-broker on the religious right who has been informally advising the
Louisiana governor.

Jindal, who was raised Hindu before converting to Catholicism, refers to
himself in his 2009 book as an “evangelical Catholic.” According to
Anderson, “He’s going to talk a lot about his faith on the campaign trail,
and he’s not going to apologize for it.”

Straddle the line between culture warrior and policy wonk

At the same time, Jindal’s aides said they wouldn’t pigeonhole him as the
social conservative candidate. Anderson argued one reason Huckabee and
Santorum ultimately flamed out after winning in Iowa was because they “had
only one gear and were stuck in the evangelical lane.”

Jindal, by contrast, is a Rhodes scholar who is well-versed in public
policy. One slide in their presentation called Jindal “the sharpest knife
in the Republican drawer.”

“You hear this stuff about, ‘Oh, so-and-so has assembled a team of experts
— he’s got Henry Kissinger who he had lunch with,’” Anderson said. “But
Jindal actually is a policy expert. It might not be a bad idea to have the
head guy be a policy guy.”

Anderson also rejected the premise that a governor is automatically less
qualified to handle foreign policy than a member of Congress. “This is one
of the things that makes me laugh the most, when reporters or somebody says
we have some freshman senators who have great foreign policy experience,”
he said. “Yeah, the government paid them to take a few trips. It’s just a
joke. I don’t know that we have anybody [in the GOP field] who’s a foreign
policy [expert.].. I don’t see a former secretary of state.”

Win the trolling primary

Jindal’s penchant for hurling barbed, intentionally provocative one-liners
at Democrats is often derided by pundits, who note that this is the same
politician who not long ago called for the GOP to “stop being the stupid
party” and talk to voters like “adults.”

But Jindal’s campaign suggested the charged rhetoric won’t let up anytime
soon, arguing that early-state voters are eager to support candidates who
are “truth-tellers.”

“He’s not gonna sugar-coat anything,” Anderson said, as a PowerPoint slide
appeared on a projector screen that read, in part, “Clinton and Obama are
leading America toward socialism.”

While Jindal’s trolling does little to earn the respect of political
elites, it does earn him media headlines — and with TV networks using
national polls to select the candidates who will participate in their
debates, Jindal needs all the national attention he can get.

Own his polarizing Louisiana record

The campaign pointed to polls that show the vast majority of the Republican
electorate would prefer to nominate a governor instead of a member of
Congress. Jindal’s own record in Louisiana, though, has been the subject of
much debate recently.

According to the campaign’s talking points, Jindal has cut the state budget
by 26% while in office; reduced the number of government workers by 30,000;
pushed through bold ethics reforms; reversed the decades-long trend of
out-migration in the state; and done it all without raising taxes.

But Jindal’s critics argue he is leaving out some key facts. The reduction
in the government payroll, for example, was largely made possible by
privatizing nine hospitals in the state — and it’s unclear how much money
Louisiana is actually saving with the overhaul. Timmy Teepell, a longtime
Jindal adviser who will serve as his campaign manager, countered these
claims by saying credit agencies have shown their approval of his
administration’s handling of the budget with several rating upgrades for
Louisiana.

Anderson griped about the “rash of national reporters who knew nothing
about what’s going on in Louisiana” but nonetheless wrote stories saying
Jindal’s polarizing record and low approval ratings would ultimately sink
his presidential aspirations. He said Jindal would eagerly tout his record
on the campaign trail as a way of contrasting his competence with his
rivals’ lack of executive experience.

“We have a stunning crop of great talkers in the race right now,” Anderson
said. “But very few doers.”

Take advantage of Jindal’s low name recognition

At one point in their presentation Wednesday, the Jindal campaign presented
a chart with two axes: one that mapped the Republican presidential
contenders ideologically from “moderate” to “conservative,” and the other
from “insider” to “insurgent.”

“This will really offend the other candidates, so we’re not handing it
out,” Anderson said.

Nonetheless, he argued that the best positioned candidates in this race
were those in the conservative/insurgent quadrant. According to the Jindal
campaign’s chart — which didn’t appear to be based on any scientific data,
but rather their own perception of the field — those candidates included
Perry, Walker, Marco Rubio, and Jindal. (Huckabee, who seems like a logical
rival for Jindal was placed on the “moderate” end of the ideological axis,
presumably because of his stances on fiscal issues like entitlement reform.)

The Jindal campaign also eagerly pointed to a poll that showed 62% of the
primary electorate said they had “no opinion” of Jindal. At this point in
the cycle, Anderson argued, most poll respondents are basing their answers
on name recognition, which explains why “a reality TV star” is currently
polling in second place in New Hampshire.

They attributed Jindal’s low standing in the polls to the fact that he has
been busy with his “day job.” Because he isn’t part of a political dynasty
and hasn’t spent as much time as other candidates appearing on cable news,
many voters simply don’t know what to make of him, they said. “Half these
people don’t even know who their own damn governor is,” Anderson said. He
said at this point the popular perception of Jindal is largely colored by
stereotypes, joking that because Jindal is Indian-American, people probably
think he’s “good at math.”

Teepell said they plan to take advantage of voters’ lack of familiarity
with Jindal by defining him as “the youngest candidate with the longest
resume” — a line several of the candidate’s strategists have been using in
recent days.

Anderson said at this point in the cycle, he would rather have a blank
canvas to draw on than a widely unpopular caricature to erase — as in
Bush’s case. As he put it, “You don’t want to have 100% name ID and 11% in
the polls.”

*Bobby Jindal Is Running For President
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/kyleblaine/bobby-jindal-is-running-for-president#.ecMkzn16A>
// Buzzfeed // Kyle Blaine – June 24, 2015 *

Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal announced Wednesday that he will seek the
Republican nomination for president in 2016.

A video posted on Facebook shows Jindal telling his his wife and children
“we have decided we are going to be running for president this year.”

Once a rising star in the Republican party, Jindal is now struggling to
stand out in a crowded primary field. Jindal is the 13th Republican to
enter the race so far, and other candidates are expected to announce in the
coming weeks.

The first Indian-American governor, Jindal has a strong appeal with social
conservatives. He issued an executive order earlier this year protecting
those who opposes same-sex marriage for religious reasons.

*KASICH*

*John Kasich Appeals to Iowa as He Ponders White House Bid
<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/24/john-kasich-appeals-to-iowa-as-he-ponders-white-house-bid/?_r=0>
// NYT // Trip Gabriel – June 24, 2015 *

“Does anybody remember me?’’ John Kasich asked Iowans on his first visit to
the state since an inglorious presidential bid in 1999, when he barely made
an impression before dropping out.

Throughout Wednesday, as he hop-scotched between events, Mr. Kasich, the
two-term Ohio governor, sought to disarm skeptics of his late-to-the-party
exploration of a second White House run.

“I was giant television star. Do you remember that?’’ he asked a roomful of
under-40 professionals from the Bull Moose Club. There were many blank
looks. “I was only at Fox News for 10 years,’’ he said, breaking into a
grin.

In an interview with The Des Moines Register that ran Wednesday morning,
Mr. Kasich even tutored Iowans on how to say his name. “It rhymes with
basic,” he said.

But with blunt talk about his policy departures from conservative
orthodoxy, Mr. Kasich appeared to make new friends in Iowa.

“I was taken aback by how straight a shooter he was,’’ said Tyler De Hahn,
chairman of the Dallas County Republican Party, who heard him at the Bull
Moose luncheon. “He’s kind of like a Christie lite.’’

A moment earlier, Mr. Kasich had been pushed about why Ohio was not a
right-to-work state. “Because we don’t have a reason to be one,’’ he said.

Like all candidates who come to Iowa, Mr. Kasich, 63, recounted
well-rehearsed chapters of his biography and trumpeted his successes:

* Working with President Clinton while a member of the House to craft “the
first balanced budget since man walked on the moon.’’

* His decade in the private sector. “I just loved it,’’ he said, skipping
over the role his employer, Lehman Brothers, played in contributing to the
financial crisis.

* His election as Ohio governor “at exactly the right time,” in 2010, when
“things couldn’t have been much worse.’’

“I took a lot of the lessons I had learned in Washington to Ohio,’’ Mr.
Kasic said, a line no other Republican candidate is likely to utter this
cycle.

Mr. Kasich, who said he was still weighing whether to enter the race, is
barely registering in Iowa polls. His formidable hurdles in the state
include a lack of time visiting it, and a list of center-right policies he
has supported that conservative caucusgoers are likely to reject, from
expanding Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act to voting for an assault
weapons ban while in Congress.

“The hurdle he’d have to get over is the strong religious right,’’ said
James Gilson, a retired stockbroker who heard Mr. Kasich address the
Greater Des Moines Partnership, a business and civic group.

But balancing out those negatives is the potential appeal of the
straight-shooting, even gnarly, Kasich persona. Despite the state’s
reputation for Iowa Nice, its voters welcome a candidate who can cut
through the political catchphrases.

“He tells it like it is, and I think that’s going to be huge,” said Mike
McInerney, the Bull Moose president. “Iowans really respect that.’’

*GOP’s Kasich opposes deporting millions in US illegally
<http://bigstory.ap.org/article/89318eb55162434eb22ce23277054370/gops-kasich-opposes-deporting-millions-us-illegally>
// AP // Thomas Beaumont – June 24, 2015 *

Ohio Gov. John Kasich says it's not practical or humane to deport the
millions of immigrants who are in the United States illegally.

"I'm not for putting them on a school bus, driving them to the border,
opening the door and just telling them to get out," Kasich told reporters.

The governor was on his first trip to early-voting Iowa as a potential
Republican presidential candidate, and tried to draw distinctions with his
would-be rivals on immigration and more. He favors fines for those here
illegally but said Republicans need to show more compassion toward
immigrants and minorities, as well as more sensitivity on the environment.

Plain-spoken, but with deadpan wit, Kasich drew applause and timely laughs
from an audience of about 200 during a question-and-answer session in Des
Moines.

"People are looking for someone to really speak plainly and openly to
them," said Iowa state Rep. Mary Ann Hanusa, who said she is considering
supporting Kasich, among others, in the Iowa caucuses in February.

Kasich also said he is open to sending U.S. fighting forces into direct
combat in Iraq against the Islamic State group, which has overtaken cities
that U.S. troops fought to seize from insurgents after the 2003 U.S.-led
Iraq invasion.

"We should have a coalition and, if we have to, put boots on the ground and
start destroying these people," Kasich later told a group of about 50
Republican professionals in Des Moines. "I think we have to be careful
about where we go. But when we go, we have to mean business."

Among other GOP presidential prospects, South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham,
former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum
have called for sending combat troops to Iraq.

Kasich says he'll decide soon whether to enter the 2016 race. Three other
governors and four ex-governors either have joined the contest or are
expected to soon.

Among them, Kasich also has extensive experience in Congress, with 18 years
in the House, including time on the Armed Services Committee. He argues
that background gives him an expertise few in the field share.

*The challenge of being a Wall Street candidate*
<http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-challenge-being-wall-street-candidate>*
// MSNBC // Steve Benen – June 24, 2015*

There was a point late last year in which Mitt Romney clearly wanted to run
once again for president. Romney and his aides kept telling reporters about
his interest, and just as importantly, they told Republican donors to wait
before rallying behind a 2016 favorite.

Team Romney realized that Jeb Bush was well positioned to be the GOP
establishment’s candidate of choice, but Romney and his staff also saw Bush
as vulnerable. “You saw what they did to me with Bain [Capital],” Romney
reportedly told allies behind closed doors. “What do you think they’ll do
to [Bush] over Barclays?”

The argument may have lacked self-awareness, but it raised a legitimate
point. Jeb Bush’s his work with the investment banks Lehman Brothers and
Barclays would likely be a problem if he wins the Republican nomination.

But perhaps no candidate would be as closely associated with Wall Street as
Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R). The Democratic National Committee circulated
this clip today of the Ohio Republican talking about his private-sector
background.

“My military reform activities were basically completed, so I decided to
leave Washington [in 2001]. So, I went out and spent 10 years in the
private sector and I just loved it. I never thought that I would be back in
politics.”

Kasich made similar comments to Time magazine just last week. Asked whether
he has any regrets from his time in the private sector, the Ohio Republican
was incredulous.

“It was fantastic,” Kasich told Time. “Are you kidding? Regrets? I thought
it was a fantastic time. I traveled all over the country. I got an
incredible education. I worked my tail off. It was great.”

As much as I appreciate the governor’s enthusiasm, there’s a small problem
with his “fantastic” experiences in the private sector.

After leaving Congress, Kasich went to work at Lehman Brothers. In fact, he
was there in 2007 and 2008 – which you may recall was a particularly
unpleasant time for Lehman and the global economy that was falling off a
cliff.

I’m not prepared to say working at Lehman is necessarily a disqualifier,
but Kasich makes it sound as if he was at summer camp – he “just loved” his
time at the firm. It was “fantastic.” It was “great.”

Asked about possible regrets – remember, he was there when Lehman made the
biggest bankruptcy filing in the history of the United States – Kasich
responded as if the question itself was ridiculous.

We’ll learn soon enough whether Kasich runs for president, whether he’ll be
competitive, and what kind of message he’ll present to voters. But my
suggestion for any former managing director at Lehman seeking national
office is simple: try a little contrition. Don’t make it sound like working
at imploding Wall Street firm was a barrel of laughs.

*John Kasich: George W. Bush was a ‘steamroller’ in 2000
<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/john-kasich-george-w-bush-was-steamroller-2000/>
// Washington Times // David Sherfinski – June 24, 2015 *

Ohio Gov. John Kasich, who is scheduled to be in the early caucus state of
Iowa Wednesday, says former President George W. Bush was a “steamroller”
during the 2000 presidential election cycle, when Mr. Kasich ran briefly
but dropped out.

Asked by the Des Moines Register what made him drop out early in 2000, Mr.
Kasich said: “Because I couldn’t win. I didn’t have any money, and I was
just a young congressman at that point. George Bush was a steamroller, and
he steamrolled all the way through. And I didn’t want to be pursuing
something that I didn’t think I could win.”

Mr. Kasich said a few weeks ago in New Hampshire that he didn’t think he
was going to be back up there again because of former Florida Gov. Jeb
Bush, “the brother of the 43rd president,” who officially entered the
presidential race last week and is expected to be a formidable fundraiser.

“I didn’t think I was going to be back up here again because frankly, I
thought Jeb was just going to suck all the air out of the room, and it just
hasn’t happened,” Mr. Kasichtold a group of business leaders before quickly
adding “no hit on you, Jeb!”

Mr. Kasich, who is laying the groundwork for another possible White House
run, told the Register it’s yet to be decided how much he’ll put into Iowa.

“But I’m coming to Iowa because I want to show respect to the people of
Iowa,” he said.

*OTHER*

*Univision, Washingto Post to host Republican candidates forum
<http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/06/univision-washington-post-to-hold-republican-forum-209406.html?ml=tl_2>
// Politico // Hadas Gold – June 24, 2015 *

Univision News and The Washington Post are teaming up to sponsor a
Republican candidates' forum as well as a series of polls, the two
companies announced on Wednesday.

The move is significant since Univision wasn't given the opportunity to
host an official Republican debate. Telemundo, Univision's main competitor
in the Spanish-speaking American market, is hosting one in February.

“This important alliance with The Washington Post brings together two media
giants with tremendous audience reach, leveraging Univision News’
undisputed leadership among the Spanish-speaking population and The Post’s
unmatched political reporting and expertise,” Isaac Lee, president of News
and Digital, UCI, and CEO of Fusion said in a statement. “The collaboration
will allow us to enhance and expand our coverage of the 2016 presidential
elections and provide both our audiences with the most comprehensive and
reliable profile of the U.S. Hispanic electorate available to date.”

The candidates' forum will take place some time in March, after the four
early states have completed their contests. The exact date and location
will be determined based on the state of the race.

In addition to the forum, the two organizations will collaborate on a
series of polls and reporting efforts focusing on Hispanic and minority
populations. Spanish-speaking Washington Post reporters will also begin to
appear more frequently on Univision networks.

“Hispanics are the fastest-growing electorate in America today and will be
crucial in deciding the next U.S. president,” Washington Post Managing
Editor Kevin Merida said in a statement. “We are thrilled to partner with
Univision. Our goal is to produce together the most authoritative,
innovative coverage of Hispanic voters ever seen during a presidential
campaign cycle. We will delve into their lives, how they relate to the
candidates and how the candidates relate to them.”

The Post/Univision forum is the second such event announced in the last few
weeks. Earlier this month, the New Hampshire Union Leader announced that it
would host its own Republican primary forum on C-SPAN on Aug. 6, in order
to combat what its publisher described as Fox's "threat to the
first-in-the-nation primary." Fox News, which is hosting the first primary
debate is also hosting a candidates forum for those candidates who don't
make the cut for their debate stage. Candidates can participate in forums
without being disqualified from sanctioned RNC debates as long as the forum
follows a certain format, candidates taking turns speaking to an audience,
rather than engaging with one another.

*Mitt Romney seeks role as Republican kingmaker
<http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/246089-mitt-romney-seeks-role-as-republican-kingmaker>
// The Hill // Jonathan Easley – June 25, 2015*

Mitt Romney is asserting himself as a leader of the Republican Party at a
time when the GOP lacks a true standard-bearer.

As the huge field of Republican contenders begins the long slog to the
party’s 2016 nomination, Romney is working to connect select candidates
with his vast political network, urging the party to learn from his past
mistakes, attacking Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton and taking
forceful stances on controversial issues.

Last week, the former Massachusetts governor was the first major Republican
to call for the removal of the Confederate flag from the grounds of the
South Carolina Capitol after the shooting deaths of nine African-Americans
at a black church in Charleston.

GOP presidential contenders were far more cautious about entering the
debate. Now, many of the candidates face criticism for their hesitancy.

“You’re going to see more of this unvarnished Mitt than the Mitt that
seemed so calculated when he was running for president,” said Tom Rath, a
GOP strategist in New Hampshire and senior adviser to Romney’s 2012
campaign.

“He’ll pick his fights carefully, but he won’t be reluctant to speak up
when he believes an issue needs to be framed a certain way, or to provide
cover to the candidates,” Rath said. “He might step on some toes, but
you’ll see him be more aggressive.”

While past presidential losers have tended to fade into the background,
Romney went about the business of repairing his political image after his
humbling defeat at the hands of President Obama in 2012.

It’s a renaissance that first came to fruition in 2014, when Romney
crisscrossed the country in support of Republican candidates. He endorsed
early in the primaries and quickly earned a reputation for backing rising
stars, such as now-Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), who fought through a crowded
primary field with Romney’s help.

The former Massachusetts governor ended the cycle, which saw big Republican
gains in the House and Senate, as the most sought-after GOP surrogate — a
position that had seemed nearly unthinkable just two years before.

“I think a lot of people questioned what his role was going to be going
forward, but he proved to be critical to Republican efforts in 2014,
raising millions of dollars and helping electable conservatives win in the
primaries,” said Ryan Williams, a former Romney spokesman who now works for
a firm that does consulting work for Jeb Bush.

“Our party has not had a national leader for some time. We haven’t been in
the White House since 2008,” Williams said. “Gov. Romney has stepped up.”

There had been some speculation Romney would make a third bid for the
presidency in 2016, but that faded with his announcement in January that he
had “decided it is best to give other leaders in the party the opportunity
to become our next nominee.”

Those who know him best say he’s not likely to endorse a GOP candidate
during the primaries. But they expect him to steer resources and attention
to those candidates he believes best represent the party’s interests.

In an appearance on “Meet the Press” this month, Romney said there are
about a half-dozen GOP candidates he believes could be effective
presidents. He mentioned former Florida Gov. Bush, Wisconsin Gov. Scott
Walker, Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Ohio Gov. John Kasich by name.

In June, Romney hosted all of those candidates except for Bush, who was
traveling in Europe at the time, at a retreat in Park City, Utah. Various
GOP donors and power players were also in attendance.

“He sees an opportunity to shape the debate and be somebody the donors look
to for wisdom and guidance on who they should support,” said Katie Packer
Gage, Romney’s deputy campaign manager in 2012.

“I don’t think he’s looking to give any specific candidate a leg up, but
he’ll point it out when he thinks candidates are showing strength and
leadership,” she said. “He also may call people out when he thinks they’re
being petty, in an effort to elevate the debate.”

Romney hasn’t shied away from addressing his own campaign missteps in an
effort to make sure the next nominee doesn’t repeat them.

On the same “Meet the Press” appearance, Romney said the biggest mistake he
made in 2012 was not focusing enough on the plight of minorities. Romney
urged Republicans to reach out to impoverished minority groups to make the
argument that conservative principles will help elevate their condition.

“He definitely has an eye on making sure the eventual nominee is
well-positioned in the general election to beat Hillary,” said Williams.

Republicans expect Romney will emerge in the general election as a top
surrogate for whoever ultimately wins the nomination. In particular, they
see an opening for him to go on the attack against Clinton on the issue of
foreign policy.

Many Republicans believe Romney has been proven right on a host of
international issues that were a drag on him in 2012.  During one debate,
Romney called Russia the U.S.’s primary geopolitical foe, a declaration
that was met with derision by Democrats.

But with Russian President Vladimir Putin challenging U.S. leadership at
every turn, some Republicans believe Romney is the perfect messenger to
highlight what they see as Clinton’s failures as secretary of State.

“Our job is to defeat Secretary Clinton, and part of doing that is making
sure we discredit her time as secretary of State,” said Colin Reed, the
head of the GOP opposition research group America Rising. “Given what
Romney has said on Russia, he could be the best person speaking out on
those issues.”

Influential conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt is pushing Romney for vice
president, and other Republicans say Romney would be a natural fit for a
prominent Cabinet position, such as secretary of Treasury.

But Romney’s supporters don’t see it. They say he’s content at this point
in his life to play loyal foot soldier for the GOP, while remaining free to
pursue other challenges that might catch his interest.

“I talked to him a few weeks ago, and it’s very clear that my prayers won’t
be answered, and he won’t be running for president,” said Rath. “But this
is a great role for him to play. He’s contributing and bringing reason and
perspective to the party. He’ll always find something to do.”

*Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush: How the Presidential Campaign Is Testing a
Friendship
<http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/marco-rubio-jeb-bush-presidential-campaign-testing-friendship/story?id=31809071>
// ABC // Veronica Stracqualursi – June 24, 2015 *

Now that they've both announced they are running for president, Jeb Bush
and Marco Rubio have officially turned a 15-year friendship into a rivalry.

Bush, the former Florida governor, and Rubio, the junior U.S. senator from
the Sunshine State, share a number of similarities besides both being
interested in moving into the White House. They both got their start in
Florida politics. They own homes in Florida less than three miles away from
one another. And they both have ties to Latin America: Rubio is Cuban
American, and Bush lived in Venezuela, speaks Spanish fluently and married
a Mexican woman.

But they have their differences, too.

Bush, 62, is 18 years older than Rubio, 44. One is a self-made man who
comes from humble beginnings, the other is from a well-known political
dynasty that boasts two previous presidents. One is still in office, the
other hasn't been in office since 2007 and hasn't run for political office
in more than a decade.

Their friendship will surely be tested by the rigors of the presidential
election, and here’s a look back at the two Florida politicians' history
together:

Jeb Bush Announces 2016 Presidential Campaign: 'I Will Run To Win'

Why Jeb Bush Isn't Keeping Marco Rubio Out Of 2016 Presidential Race

Marco Rubio Running For President in 2016: 'I Can Lead This Country'
(EXCLUSIVE)

1998 - First Encounters

While Jeb Bush was running for governor, he wrote a $50 campaign check for
Rubio’s first campaign for West Miami city commissioner. It was a winning
year for both men; Bush won the governor’s seat and he called Rubio to say
congratulations when Rubio had clinched the election.

2004 - The Golden Years

Bush won a second term as Florida’s governor in 2002 and Rubio won election
into Florida's House of Representatives in 2002. Gov. Bush had a GOP-led
legislature to work with, including Rep. Rubio, and to help push his
policies.

Rubio had worked his way from majority whip up to Florida’s house speaker.
On Sept. 13, Bush decided to commemorate this special moment in a rather
unusual way.

"I rely on Chang with great regularity in my public life. He has been by my
side and sometimes I let him down. But Chang, this mystical warrior, has
never let me down," Bush said, referring to a sword with a name derived
from a Bush family saying. "I'm going to bestow to you the sword of a great
conservative warrior," Bush said to Rubio.

Rubio began flirting with the idea of running for U.S. Senate in 2009, but
said he wouldn’t run if Bush decided to. Things turned out to Rubio’s
liking -- Bush didn’t want to be senator, encouraged Rubio to run and ended
up playing a behind-the-scenes booster to Rubio throughout his campaign.
Bush was at Rubio’s election watch party as they were waiting for the
election to be called.

Jeb was turning 59 years old and so Rubio wrote his friend a birthday
tribute, revealing a tactic of his: "Often in the Senate when faced with a
tough choice, I ask myself: WWJD. What would Jeb do?"

Rubio also wrote that when he first sought the Senate seat, "'The Gov' was
one of the only ones who actually thought I could win. He has been a huge
influence on me."

2012 - Bush Believes in a Romney-Rubio Ticket

GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney was in need of a running mate, and
before he chose Rep. Paul Ryan, R-Wisconsin, Romney was being coaxed by
Bush into picking Rubio. "Marco Rubio is my favorite [choice], because we
have a close relationship," Bush said in an interview with PBS. "I admire
him greatly.”

In an interview with NPR, Rubio said the old friends chatted about
everything from the Masters, to the Paleo diet (Jeb Bush is on it), the
Miami Dolphins and about the presidential campaign, though “not in great
detail.”

April 2015 - Rubio Announces

Just before announcing his candidacy in April, Rubio told ABC News' George
Stephanopoulos that this would not have any effect on their relationship.

"Jeb is my friend. He's still my friend. ... We’ll still continue to be
friends. I have tremendous admiration for him,” Sen. Rubio said. Rubio went
on to explain: “I think it's important to understand I'm not running
against Jeb Bush. And I hope he's not running against me. We are competing
for the same job.”

June 2015 - Bush Announces

Shortly after throwing his hat into the presidential ring in early June,
Bush called Marco Rubio a "good friend" and "real talent." But he added
that he's definitely more prepared than Rubio to become President of the
United States.

"There's no question of that at all," Bush told ABC News' David Muir when
asked if he's more experienced than Rubio. "And that's not disparaging my
good friend, who I think is a real talent."

*Fox News Poll: Bush, Trump score post-announcement bumps
<http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/24/fox-news-poll-bush-trump-score-post-announcement-bumps/>
// Fox // Dana Blanton – June 24, 2015 *

There’s been a lineup change in the race for the GOP nomination, as
businessman Donald Trump moves up after declaring his candidacy. He’s now
second in the order after former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who also got an
uptick in support after his formal announcement.

For Democrats, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is still -- by far
-- the team leader, according to a new Fox News national poll on the 2016
presidential election.

Bush tops the list of GOP contenders with 15 percent support among
Republican primary voters.  That’s up from 12 percent last month and his
best showing yet.  Support for Trump more than doubled since his
announcement and that catapults him into the top tier at 11 percent. He’s
followed by retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 10 percent.  No one else
receives double-digit backing.

Bush officially kicked off his campaign June 15 and Trump launched June 16.
It’s common for candidates to see a bump in their numbers in the days
following their formal announcement and the media coverage that comes with
that.

The bad news for Trump is that only 29 percent of GOP primary voters
consider him a serious candidate.  More than twice that many -- 64 percent
-- think he’s a side show.  Among all registered voters, nearly 8 in 10 say
Trump is a side show (77 percent).

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who has not announced whether he will run,
comes in at nine percent.  That’s down from 12 percent a month ago and the
first time Walker has been in single digits since January.

The poll finds support for Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (9 percent), Florida
Sen. Marco Rubio (8 percent) and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee (6
percent) holding steady among GOP primary voters.

Texas Sen. Ted Cruz receives 4 percent, and businesswoman Carly Fiorina and
former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum get 3 percent apiece.

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who announced his candidacy June 24, gets 2
percent.

Clinton remains in command on the Democratic side, with 61 percent of
Democratic primary voters backing her compared to 15 percent supporting
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.  Another 11 percent go for Vice President Joe
Biden and three percent for New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo -- both of whom are
undeclared.

Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley garners one percent and former Rhode
Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee gets less than one percent support.  Former
Virginia Sen. Jim Webb, who has announced an exploratory committee but is
still undeclared, gets two percent.

(Note to political junkies:  Previous Fox News polls included Massachusetts
Sen. Elizabeth Warren as an option, so compare these results to the
previous results at your peril.)

Part of Clinton’s appeal among Democratic primary voters is that 81 percent
believe she really would be a fighter for the middle class.  Overall, 44
percent of voters think she would fight for the middle class, while a
51-percent majority sees that as just a campaign slogan.

Honest and Trustworthy

What do Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have in common?  (No, not hair
spray.)  Majorities don’t trust them.

More than twice as many say Trump is not honest and trustworthy as think he
is (64 percent vs. 30 percent). That gives him an honesty score of negative
34.

Clinton’s honesty score is negative seven.  Less than half of voters -- 45
percent -- rate her as honest.  That’s unchanged from earlier this year,
but down from a record 54 percent who said she was honest in 2014.  A
52-percent majority says Clinton is not honest.

Bush’s honesty score is negative two (45 percent honest vs. 47 percent
not).  In April it was 46 percent honest vs. 42 percent not.

Fully 79 percent of Democrats think Clinton is honest, while just 63
percent of Republicans say the same of Bush.

Rubio’s honesty score is a positive four, although nearly a third of voters
are unable to rate him.  Over half of Republicans, 57 percent, think Rubio
is honest.

Hypothetical Head-to-Heads

Clinton tops each of the GOP candidates tested in 2016 presidential
match-ups -- except Bush.

The two dynasty candidates tie with 43 percent apiece.  Bush had a
one-point edge in May and also tied Clinton in March.

Clinton bests Rubio by just one point, Paul by four, Carson by five and
Cruz, Fiorina and Walker by six points each.  In each of these match-ups
the results are within the margin of sampling error.

Despite Trump’s recent jump into the top tier in the GOP nomination
preference, Clinton fares best against him -- winning by 17 points.

Clinton’s edge over Fiorina (45-39) is just half the 12-point edge she had
in May (49-37).  Among women, Clinton led by 23-points in May.  That’s down
to a 14-point advantage today.

Despite Clinton’s current advantage in almost all of the potential
match-ups, most Republicans like their odds of winning in 2016 if she’s the
Democratic nominee:  22 percent think they have an “excellent” chance and
another 58 percent say a “good” chance.

Many Democrats see Clinton as vulnerable as well.  Just under half, 46
percent, think the GOP has a chance of defeating her (49 percent disagree).

By a 67-28 percent margin, independents think Republicans have at least a
good chance of winning in 2016 if Clinton is their opponent.

Three GOP candidates have never held public office (Carson, Fiorina and
Trump). So what experience do you need before going to the White House?
Overall, voters give roughly equal weight to a president having a business
background (48 percent “very” important) as they do to having previously
held elected office (49 percent “very” important).

Partisans prioritize in the opposite direction. A 55-percent majority of
Democrats says having experience in public office is “very” important,
while a 58-percent majority of Republicans feels that way about having a
proven track record of working in business.

Pollpourri

Most voters think Hillary Clinton is her own person.  By a wide 72-21
percent margin, voters say if Clinton wins the White House they would see
it as her first term rather than another term for her husband, former
President Bill Clinton.  In addition, a 54-percent majority would see her
win as a fresh start and not a continuation of Obama’s policies (38
percent).

Majorities of Democrats and Republicans agree that a Clinton win would be
her first term instead of a third term for Bill.  But most Republicans
think it would be a continuation of Obama’s administration, while most
Democrats say it would be a fresh start.

The Fox News poll is based on landline and cell phone interviews with 1,005
randomly chosen registered voters nationwide and was conducted under the
joint direction of Anderson Robbins Research (D) and Shaw & Company
Research (R) from June 21-23, 2015. The full poll has a margin of sampling
error of plus or minus three percentage points. The margin of error is
higher among the subgroups of Democratic and Republican primary voters
(+/-5%).

*Univision Is Going To Hold A Republican Presidential Candidates’ Forum
After All
<http://www.buzzfeed.com/adriancarrasquillo/univision-is-going-to-hold-a-republican-presidential-candida#.io8Jr6LWP>
// Buzzfeed // Adrian Carrasquillo – June 24, 2015 *

Univision News is poised to announce a Republican presidential candidates’
forum ahead of “crucial” March 2016 primaries in partnership with The
Washington Post, after missing out on the initial batch of debates
sanctioned by the Republican National Committee.

According to a draft of a press release obtained by BuzzFeed News, the
Spanish-language giant will co-host the forum after the four early states
have completed their contests and during the run-up to March primaries in
Texas, Florida, Ohio, Virginia and Michigan.

The Republican Party has had a complex, at times painful, relationship with
Univision — knowing it needs to be represented on one of the largest
networks in the country and a critical connection to Hispanic homes in the
U.S., but also a place it often feels slighted by.

In January, RNC chairman Reince Priebus told BuzzFeed News, “It’s highly
questionable whether we’re treated fairly on Univision.”

And the RNC was criticized in January when its initial slate of debates
didn’t include Univision. New York City council speaker Melissa
Mark-Viverito, said the RNC was likely “scared to debate” on the
most-watched Spanish-language network, calling the decision “shameful.”

But a Republican source with knowledge of the issue told BuzzFeed News that
Univision never submitted a request to hold a debate, something that was
not reported at the time.

The RNC says it sought to limit the number of debates so that candidates
could focus on engaging voters instead of preparing and traveling for
debates. But now Univision is moving forward with its own forum, which
doesn’t violate RNC rules but is not sanctioned by them, either.

“We encourage our candidates to engage with all voters and to share their
vision for the future. We hope this forum complies with RNC rules,” said
Ruth Guerra, RNC director of Hispanic media.

The state of the race will determine the date and location of the
candidates’ forum, according to the release, and invitations to the leading
candidates will be extended then. It is unclear what the structure would be
and the exact date still has not been decided.

The release says the forum would happen once the field of candidates has
been “winnowed down by the early contests and as party rules begin to allow
state-by-state distribution of delegates on a winner-take-all basis.”

The announcement also serves as the beginning of a partnership between the
two news organizations, which will include a series of polls and joint
reporting efforts.

“The collaboration will allow us to enhance and expand our coverage of the
2016 presidential elections and provide both our audiences with the most
comprehensive and reliable profile of the U.S. Hispanic electorate
available to date,” said Isaac Lee, the president of Univision News,
according to the release.

The first Republican debate is slated for August 6 in Cleveland, Ohio.

Spanish-language networks Telemundo and CNN en Español were both included
in the announced debates. Telemundo’s debate will be done with sister
organization NBC News, along with National Review, in Houston, Texas on
Feb. 26.

In March, Priebus spoke about the debates on Spanish-language networks at
an event held by the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, making it sound
like he was OK with Univision not being part of the initial slate of
debates.

“I’m proud to say that one of our partners is Telemundo,” he said. “With
NBC, they will host a debate, which is important, because together, NBC and
Telemundo reach 91 percent of Hispanic households. In addition to that,
every debate that airs on CNN will also air on CNN Español.”

*OTHER 2016 NEWS*

*Campaign swag and "Made in America" in the 2016 election
<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/campaign-swag-and-made-in-america-in-the-2016-election/>
// CBS News // Jenna Sakwa - June 25, 2015*

The selling of presidential campaign swag is a fundamental part of nearly
every major political campaign. It helps bring in money, build donor
databases, and swag also makes a statement about the candidate.

One question some campaigns wrestle with is whether every piece of
merchandise sold with their names writ large needs to be stamped "Made in
America." For many, the answer is, in essence, not necessarily.

"All of our products are either made in America, or printed in America," a
spokesman for the Paul campaign said. "The [campaign] store was built and
is run in the heartland of America. Unfortunately, not all products sold in
the US are American made, but we are continually looking for products to
offer that are."

Bella + Canvas, the company who manufactures the t-shirt says it does, in
fact, have a "Made in the USA" collection as part of its full line.
However, the shirt sold on Paul's website is not part of it.

Candidates on both sides of the aisle are pledging American-made products
this cycle. Democrat Hillary Clinton's store advertises that her campaign's
items are both American-made and union-made.

And spokespeople for the campaigns of Republicans Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio
tell CBS News all of their merchandise is made in the USA.

In 2012 both Mitt Romney and President Obama's presidential campaigns sold
exclusively made-in-America swag.

Romney's former digital director Zac Moffatt, who oversaw the campaign's
e-commerce store, explained that sourcing all of a campaign's products in
the U.S. can present some challenges.

"You would be surprised how hard that can be," Moffatt said. "We were often
running out of inventory."

Meaghan Burdick, who was in charge of marketing and merchandising for
Obama's 2008 and 2012 campaigns, said American-made goods can also be more
expensive, but the campaign products set the tone.

"You're running for President of the United States, so I think it should be
made in the U.S.," Burdick said of the products she ordered. "We felt
extremely strongly about it. We tried to have everything union-made, so it
was made in the U.S. and union printed."

Many of the Republicans running are more flexible than Democrats on the
origins of their candidate bobble-heads or bumper stickers. They largely
support trade initiatives, as their congressional votes on trade suggest
(Democrats are divided), and they say that the wares on their websites
reflect this attitude.

"We live in a global society," explains Sean Spicer, communications
director for Republican National Committee. "We are a party that welcomes
and believes in free trade."

So, it depends on the message candidates want to send. The lengths to which
campaigns will go to ensure every product is made in America, Spicer says,
are the decisions of each individual candidate.

*TOP NEWS*

*DOMESTIC*

*Federal Hate Crime Charges Likely in South Carolina Church Shooting
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/campaign-to-remove-confederate-symbols-from-public-lands-builds.html?smid=tw-share&_r=1>
// NYT // Matt Apuzzo, Michael S. Schmidt and Richard Pérez-Peña – June 24,
2015 *

The Justice Department will likely file federal hate crime charges against
the man suspected of carrying out a massacre at a storied black church in
South Carolina, federal law enforcement officials said Wednesday.

Dylann Roof, 21, already faces nine counts of murder and could receive the
death penalty in state court. But there is widespread agreement among
officials at the Justice Department and Federal Bureau of Investigation
that the shooting at Emanuel A.M.E. Church in Charleston was so horrific
and racially motivated that the federal government was obligated to address
it, law enforcement officials said.

F.B.I. analysts have also concluded “with a high degree of certainty” that
Mr. Roof posted a racist manifesto online, which could be a key to any
federal charges, a law enforcement official said. The website was
registered in February under Mr. Roof’s name, but the name was made
anonymous the following day.

In cases involving violations of both state and federal law, the Justice
Department often refrains from bringing federal charges, particularly when
suspects face long state prison sentences. But South Carolina does not have
a hate crimes law, and federal investigators believe that a murder case
alone would leave the racial component of the shooting unaddressed.

“This directly fits the hate crime statute. This is exactly what it was
created for,” one law enforcement official said.

The law enforcement officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they
were not authorized to speak publicly about the investigation. They said no
decision had been made on the timing of the charges because many details
remained unresolved, such as how federal charges would supplement the state
case.

Emily Pierce, a Justice Department spokeswoman, said the federal
investigation was continuing. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch said last
week that, “We will do everything in our power to help heal this community
and make it whole again.”

Two federal public defenders in South Carolina have also been assigned to
defend Mr. Roof, a sign that federal charges are expected. That development
was first reported by The Post and Courier.

“I have no choice,” read a portion of the 2,500-word manifesto posted
online. “I am not in the position to, alone, go into the ghetto and fight.
I chose Charleston because it is most historic city in my state, and at one
time had the highest ratio of blacks to Whites in the country. We have no
skinheads, no real KKK, no one doing anything but talking on the internet.
Well someone has to have the bravery to take it to the real world, and I
guess that has to be me.”

State workers removed a Confederate battle flag Wednesday from the grounds
of the Alabama State Capitol in Montgomery. Credit Martin Swant/Associated
Press

The site also showed 60 photographs, including one of Mr. Roof holding a
Confederate flag in one hand and a handgun in the other. Other photos of
Mr. Roof appeared to have been taken at Confederate heritage sites and
slavery museums.

Analysts at the F.B.I. laboratory in Quantico, Va., are also analyzing a
computer and phone that Mr. Roof had used, officials said. The agents and
analysts are piecing together Mr. Roof’s communications and uncovering any
information that may have been deleted.

When federal and state prosecutors each bring charges, they typically
coordinate their cases so one does not undermine the other. The death
penalty could be a factor. South Carolina’s murder law carries a possible
death sentence, while a violation of the federal hate crime law carries up
to life in prison. Nikki Haley, the governor of South Carolina, has called
for Mr. Roof to face the death penalty.

Historically black churches have long been targets for racial violence. One
of the most notorious examples was the 1963 bombing of the 16th Street
Baptist Church in Birmingham, Ala. The Ku Klux Klan set off a bomb under
the steps of the church, which was a center of the African-American
community at the time. Four young girls were killed and more than 20 other
people were injured.

With memorial services beginning Wednesday for victims of last week’s
massacre, the campaign to remove long-venerated Confederate symbols from
public grounds in the South picked up momentum on Wednesday.

Gov. Robert Bentley of Alabama ordered four Confederate flags taken down
from a monument to Confederate soldiers outside the state Capitol in
Montgomery.

“He does not want the flags to be a distraction from other state issues so
he ordered them removed,” said Yasamie R. August, the governor’s press
secretary.

Senator Roger Wicker of Mississippi joined other officials in urging a
redesign of his state’s flag, the last to still include the Confederate
battle flag,an image many see as a symbol of slavery and oppression.

“As the descendant of several brave Americans who fought for the
Confederacy, I have not viewed Mississippi’s current state flag as
offensive,” he said. “However, it is clearer and clearer to me that many of
my fellow citizens feel differently and that our state flag increasingly
portrays a false impression of our state to others.”

Crowds began gathering at the South Carolina State House in Columbia to pay
respects to one victim of the Charleston shootings, the Rev. Clementa C.
Pinckney, a state senator, who will lie in state there beginning Wednesday.
The first of the funeral services, for Sharonda Coleman-Singleton and Ethel
Lance, will be Thursday.

The memorial to Senator Pinckney came two days after Governor Haley called
on lawmakers to remove the battle flag from the Capitol grounds, and a day
after both houses of the state’s General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to
take up the matter. Alabama’s governor concluded that he could remove the
flags there on his own authority, but in South Carolina, the battle flag’s
position near a Confederate monument was enshrined in law in 2000, so a new
law would be needed to remove it.

In past generations, while blacks and liberal whites have objected to
government displays of Confederate pride, particularly a battle flag that
has been embraced by white supremacists, southern conservatives have often
defended them as symbols of heritage, not bigotry.

But in recent days, many Republicans like Mr. Bentley, Mr. Wicker and Ms.
Haley have joined the sudden groundswell of officials calling for removal
of Confederate flags and statues, and the rechristening of places named for
Confederate heroes. Some conservatives have said that the Charleston
shooting had changed their views.

*Trade battle ends as Dems wills supports workers aid bill
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/fast-track-trade-bill-democrats-119371.html>
// Politico // Lauren French and John Bresnahan – June 24, 2015 *

The trade battle is over.

Democrats have labored for weeks to stop President Barack Obama’s request
for expedited authority to negotiate trade deals but now that a fast track
is all-but-ready to become law, even the most ardent trade critics are
reversing course and backing a bill designed to help workers who lose their
jobs because of globalization.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced Wednesday that she
planned to vote in favor of the bill. Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) and
Vice Chairman of the Democratic Caucus Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.) also announced
their support — signaling that the aid bill will pass, despite weeks of
drama within the Democratic caucus over trade.

The legislation, called Trade Adjustment Assistance, got jammed up in the
legislative process as Democrats tried to stop fast track earlier this
month — even though progressives have long supported the aid bill.

But that opposition appears to be clearing. At a closed-door Democratic
meeting on Wednesday, lawmakers that led the opposition movement against
fast track pledged to support TAA, which has been attached to a bill
focused on trade in Africa.

Rep. Sandy Levin (D-Mich.), the top Democrat on the Ways and Means
Committee, told reporters after the caucus meeting that it makes no sense
to oppose TAA now that pro-trade Democrats and Republicans are on the verge
of sending fast track to Obama’s desk.

“The vast majority of Democrats are going to vote for TAA and I think so
because TAA was being used as a bargaining chip for TPA and that’s why we
very much resisted but now TPA is going to become law,” Levin said. He
added that Democratic opposition to trade will now turn to the
Trans-Pacific Partnership, a massive 12-country trade deal between the U.S.
and Pacific Rim countries.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who led the charge against fast track in the
House, also announced that she planned to support the aid bill, which is
expected to come to the House for a vote Thursday after the Senate passes
the measure this week.

*In reversal, Wicker calls for removal of Mississippi Confederate flag
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/roger-wicker-mississippi-state-flag-confederate-removal-119369.html?hp=l3_4>
// Politico // Burgess Everett – June 24, 2015 *

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) reversed himself on Wednesday and called for
the removal of the Mississippi’s state flag, which contains a depiction of
the Confederate flag.

As of Monday, Wicker, who leads the GOP’s Senate campaign arm, was
deferring to his state’s legislature and citizens on the matter. But on
Wednesday he issued now says that the “stage flag should be put in a museum
and replaced by one that is more unifying to all Mississippians.”

“As the descendant of several brave Americans who fought for the
Confederacy, I have not viewed Mississippi’s current state flag as
offensive. However, it is clearer and clearer to me that many of my fellow
citizens feel differently and that our state flag increasingly portrays a
false impression of our state to others,” Wicker said. “The flag should be
removed since it causes offense to so many of my brothers and sisters,
creating dissention rather than unity.”

Conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh speaks during a secretive ceremony
inducting him into the Hall of Famous Missourians on Monday, May 14, 2012,
in the

Wicker joins a swelling bipartisan chorus of officials now calling from
removal of the Confederate flag from statehouses and license plates after
nine black people were shot and killed in South Carolina. However, the GOP
senator also said Wednesday that the ultimate decision is up to the state
legislature, not officials in Washington. Mississippi’s state House Speaker
Phillip Gunn said flag needs to be removed and urged the state to debate
the matter.

Mississippi’s senior senator, Republican Thad Cochran, hasn’t joined the
burgeoning effort to remove the flag. Cochran said in an interview this
week that the flag shouldn’t be changed “just because it’s creating
controversy in other states.”

“It’s up to the state legislature to decide which flags adorn the state
capitols. So I’m not trying tell them what to do or how to do it,” Cochran,
who was recently reelected in a divisive primary against a conservative
state senator who removing the flag, said on Monday. His office did not
immediately say whether he agreed with Wicker’s change of position.

*Conservative Groups Bracing Republicans for Obamacare Ruling
<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-24/conservative-groups-bracing-republicans-for-obamacare-ruling>
// Bloomberg // Sahil Kapur – June 24, 2015 *

Republican tensions over Obamacare rose Tuesday after Heritage Foundation
President Jim DeMint ramped up pressure on the party not to extend health
insurance subsidies—even temporarily—that the Supreme Court could erase
within days.

In an op-ed titled "Let the subsidies die," the former senator and
conservative kingmaker took aim at Republicans who are eyeing a backup plan
that temporarily preserves the subsidies to avoid massive disruptions and
loss of coverage for millions of Americans.

"It would be uncaring and unfair for Congress to force taxpayers to
continue funding Obamacare's subsidies," DeMint wrote in the Washington
Examiner. "Extending the subsidies would be political malpractice, not just
a mere Band-Aid upon an infected wound." He argued that it would be "far
better" to simply repeal the entire law.

The essay throws an intriguing wrinkle into the congressional politics
surrounding the imminent Supreme Court decision, which recently has seen
Republican opponents of the health care law scrambling to come up with
answers for an estimated 6 million Americans likely to lose health
insurance tax credits if the justices rule against the Obama
administration. A decision in the much-watched case, King v. Burwell, is
expected in the next few days.

DeMint's missive could give some of them pause. The outspoken South
Carolinian occupies a bully pulpit as the head of the Heritage Foundation,
a conservative brain trust with an active political arm, Heritage Action
For America.

Dan Holler, a spokesman for Heritage Action, dropped a broad hint that
there could be political consequences for Republican lawmakers who try to
create a subsidy patch. "It will be difficult for a Republican to go home
and explain how saving a key plank of Obamacare helps ensure Obamacare is
repealed in 2017," Holler said.

In addition, a DeMint-founded super-PAC has specialized in taking aim at
Republicans it deems insufficiently conservative. In the 2014 election
cycle, the Senate Conservatives Fund spent more than $7 million helping
favored candidates—and torpedoing those out of favor, according to figures
compiled by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Ken Cuccinelli, the president of Senate Conservatives Fund, was blunt about
threatening to support primary challenges against Republican lawmakers who
back an extension of Obamacare subsidies.

A Not-So-Veiled Threat

"If the Supreme Court strikes down the Obamacare subsidies and mandates,
Republicans in Congress should not extend them," Cuccinelli told Bloomberg
in a statement. "Republicans should fight for full repeal, as they promised
time and time again. SCF supports conservative candidates and a lawmaker's
position on Obamacare is one of the most important issues we will examine
when deciding whether to support a primary challenger."

But the potential political consequences of not backing subsidies also are
worrying to Republicans, who don't want to be blamed for millions of
Americans losing their coverage. At issue in King v. Burwell is whether the
text of the Affordable Care Act restricts premium tax credits to Americans
enrolled through state-run insurance exchanges, rather than those in
three-quarters of states who use the federal exchange. Many Republicans
have called on the Supreme Court to void the subsidies; the White House and
Democrats say the law clearly makes those subsidies available in all 50
states.

Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who faces a tough reelection
fight next year, is the author of a bill with 31 cosponsors that would
extend the subsidies if the Supreme Court overturns them.

"Obviously I disagree with Senator DeMint's position on that," Johnson said
in an interview Tuesday. "My main goal is to make sure no Americans are
further harmed by this sloppily written—and what would be then unlawfully
implemented—law. And I think we have a responsibility to do that."

A Tricky Rhetorical Balance

Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, the leader of the Republican effort to
craft a contingency plan, responded to the criticisms Tuesday. "We are not
going to protect the law," he said. "We are going to protect people."

Republican senators in blue and purple states—Susan Collins of Maine, Kelly
Ayotte of New Hampshire, and Rob Portman of Ohio—told Bloomberg they
support a temporary subsidy extension. Like Johnson, Ayotte and Portman
face potentially difficult reelection races in 2016.

"I do support taking care of those people, including almost 200,000 people
in Ohio who are getting subsidies under our federal exchange," Portman
said, adding that "there's different views on the length of time" to keep
the subsidies.

Presidential Candidates

Standing against a subsidy extension are two senators running for
president. Both, like DeMint, are ideological purists. Senator Ted Cruz of
Texas told Politico this month that the "best legislative option is to
allow states to opt out" of Obamacare. Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky told
the paper he wants a new law that would "legalize inexpensive insurance
policies."

Of the two other presidential candidates, Senator Lindsey Graham of South
Carolina has signaled support for a subsidy extension by signing on to
Johnson's bill. Senator Marco Rubio of Florida has been mum on the
subsidies, calling for a "transition to a replacement" for Obamacare; his
office referred Bloomberg to a recent op-ed in which he sketched out
broader health care changes he wants to see.

Other Republican senators—including Cory Gardner of Colorado and Thad
Cochran of Mississippi—declined to say if they would support a subsidy
extension.

"I'm not that closely involved in the minutiae that you are," Cochran, the
chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, told Bloomberg. He added,
"I'll consider my vote very carefully before I cast it." Last year, Cochran
narrowly beat back a Republican primary challenge from Chris McDaniel, a
candidate endorsed and underwritten by the Senate Conservatives Fund.

There are competing proposals—one by Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska and
another Bill Cassidy of Louisiana—to offer fallback options for those who
lose their subsidies.

Republican leaders in the House and Senate last week presented a
contingency plan to members, based on Johnson's bill, to ease disruptions
if the Supreme Court grants them their wish and guts the Affordable Care
Act.

Unravelling Obamacare

According to a senior House Republican aide, it would allow the law's
subsidies to continue through 2015, while repealing the individual mandate
to buy insurance and the requirement that large employers provide it. In
2016, the proposal would let states opt out of Obamacare's regulations and
instead receive a "block grant" equal to the amount of subsidies coming in
their direction. It would also push the next president to take on the task
of replacing Obamacare in 2017. The aide said the plan wasn't final.

It's far from clear Republicans will be able to pass such a plan, and
DeMint's new push further complicates that task. Outside conservative
activists are working to portray any extension of subsidies as a vote in
favor of Obamacare, which further dims the prospects in the House, where
many Republicans are already cold to the idea.

To that end, Representative Paul Gosar of Arizona last week introduced a
bill ahead of the Obamacare ruling that would eliminate insurance
regulations—including mandates on benefit coverage mandates and premium
levels—in states that might lose their subsidies. The bill, which currently
has six co-sponsors, was hailed by DeMint on Tuesday as preferable to
extending the subsidies.

"With the verdict of King v. Burwell looming, the healthcare reform
conversation has focused on the fate of federal subsidies for insurance
premiums initiated by the Affordable Care Act," Gosar said in a statement.
"However, this puts the focus on the symptoms of our ailing healthcare
system and ignores the root cause."

Unlikely to Become Law

Even if the Republican-led Congress were able to pass its emerging
proposal, President Barack Obama has made clear he will veto any bill that
undermines core components of Obamacare, such as a repeal of the individual
mandate. In other words, it's extremely unlikely to become law, and serves
mostly as a political vehicle to spread blame for the chaos that could
result from a Supreme Court decision.

Privately, some Republican aides who work on health policy confess that
they'd prefer to see the subsidies upheld, seeing few, if any, options to
get a health care bill past Obama's desk and fearful their party will be
blamed for the fallout.

The Supreme Court is set to deliver the final decisions of its term on
Thursday, Friday and Monday—it's unclear which day the Obamacare decision
will come, or how the justices will rule. The House has canceled votes on
Friday and Congress is scheduled to be out of session next week for July 4
recess.

*INTERNATIONAL*

*The Many Miseries of Yemeni Families
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/world/middleeast/yemen-families-humanitarian-crisis.html>
// NYT // Hanna Ingber - June 24, 2015*

As the civil war in Yemen continues, many families say they are living in
constant fear. Parents say that their older children have been wetting
their beds at night, and that younger ones are so traumatized that they are
sent running for cover by the sound of a door slamming.

The fighting between Houthi rebels and Saudi-backed government forces has
displaced a million people, destroyed cultural heritage sites and
terrorized the population. The situation has worsened since a Saudi-led
bombing campaign began in March, and a de facto blockade has caused
shortages of food and fuel for many of the nation’s 26 million people.

The New York Times asked Yemenis and their relatives abroad how their
families have been affected by the worsening conflict. Close to 350 people
submitted responses in English and Arabic. Most said they needed food,
fuel, electricity — and an end to the fighting. Many wrote that it has been
civilians who have suffered.

“The airstrikes target civilian places, and so there is nowhere safe now,”
wrote Hani Yahya who lives in Sana, the capital, with his extended family.
“We basically might die any day, and if we don’t, we will just suffer.”

They described destruction to cities they love and their own homes,
airstrikes shattering their windows and blowing out doors. Some have tried
to make repairs. Others said the damage to their houses and the continuous
fear of bombings had forced them to leave.

Uprooted, Yemenis wrote that they had moved in with extended family members
or friends. One man described how all the young cousins hide in the
basement of their house. And even the safer areas, they wrote, still face
shortages.

Families have also been divided, with some members fleeing the country.
Others have tried to flee, but have been stopped. A young woman said she
and her husband had taken their baby boy and made two trips to the border.
Once they were turned away by the Saudis, and once by the Houthis.

Yemenis said they felt ignored, and they pleaded for those outside of the
country to pay attention.

The following is a selection of the responses, expanded in additional
interviews, and edited and condensed for clarity.

Helmi al-Hamadi, 39, originally from Taiz in southern Yemen, has been
living in Sana since 1997. He has three children, and his wife is seven
months pregnant.

My 6-year-old daughter is the most affected person in the family. She can’t
sleep, always alert to any sounds; even the sound of a door closing
terrifies her. If a door slams, she thinks it’s an attack on us or an
airstrike. She is losing weight. If anyone wants to go outside, if I have
to go get groceries, she says: “I don’t want to lose you, father. I don’t
want you to die.”

They have been out of school since March 26. When the airstrikes started,
everything kind of stopped here. None of the residents of Sana can go to
school.

My pregnant wife is in a bad condition, especially, because she is diabetic
and at risk that we could run out of insulin at anytime. She can’t receive
proper medical care.

My children wish that they could go back to school; my pregnant wife dreams
of a peaceful night to sleep without one of our children screaming in their
sleep every time there is an airstrike. I pray every day that when I go to
the markets I can still find food for my family; this is decreasing on a
daily basis.

Arwa Naaman Saiid, 23, is a teacher and information technology student. Her
family fled a rented house in Sana and moved to Taiz and then to the
village of Moaser.

The children in our family are terrified even by the sound of thunder,
thinking it is from airplanes coming to bomb them. Their fear and continued
crying forced us to leave our house. We paid $50 per person to leave Sana.
I sold my jewelry just to escape.

We have been affected materially, morally and psychologically because of
airstrikes and earthshaking explosions that prevent us from sleeping.

We are six members in the same house, including my sick mother who broke
her back more than two months ago. We couldn’t afford paying her treatment
expenses. Now she’s home and can’t move. We have no food, no potable water,
no electricity. We are denied the most basic rights.

We need to put an end to this flagrant aggression. We need the blockade to
be lifted. Leave us alone! We are not associated with any political party.
We are just Yemeni citizens. We need to be able to sleep, to eat and to
drink what God bestowed upon us, without blockade and without killings.

Maali Jamil, 25, moved to Michigan as a young child before returning to
Yemen as a teenager. She and her husband, who were both working as English
teachers in Sana before the airstrikes began in March, have a 2-month-old
son, Yusuf.

My husband and I let our apartment go because all the windows shattered in
the Faj Attan bombing. And since we are now both unemployed, rent was too
high, so we’re living with family. My 9-year-old cousin vomits when the
explosions are too loud.

With the problems and everything, nobody is working. Everybody is at home.
Who is going to pay for classes? It’s not important right now. People need
to eat.

My father has heart disease and is very ill. Every few days, he needs to
run some blood work so the doctor can adjust his dose. When there is no
fuel, he cannot go. If there is fuel, but no power, the labs don’t operate.
When he doesn’t get the blood work done, the doctor can’t adjust the dose,
so my mom is usually at a loss and ends up guessing what he needs.

We tried to leave and were stranded at the Yemeni-Saudi border near Haradh
twice, once for five days and once for two days.

The Yemeni people are barely breathing. My family and I are doing really
well compared with most Yemenis.

My mom is from Aden, and the horror stories we hear are heartbreaking. One
of my mother’s cousins says all they have to eat is cookies. Her children
keep asking her when are they are going to have real food, and she just
broke down and cried.

Hussam Alshami, 37, lives in Sana with his wife, their daughter and his
extended family.

My 2-year-old daughter is oversensitive to any sound now, running to hug
anyone in front of her when hearing even a door knock. Some other children
in my family now urinate while sleeping.

Despite almost every glass in our house having broken, we stay and will
stay. We have no other choice. We’ve been raised in Sana. We don’t know
another place to live. And moving would cost money that’s not available at
this time. But more than money, we love Sana very, very much!

We have only one hour of electricity every three to five days. On the other
hand, airstrikes are horrible, indiscriminate. More painful is that the
world keeps silent.

Feel our pain, because Saudi Arabia cannot do this to us unless you, the
United States, allow it. The blockade must be lifted. Airstrikes must be
stopped.

Tarad Abdul Aziz Ahmad al-Samawy lives in Sana in a house with 29 other
people, including 15 children ages 2 to 10.

Our children are overwhelmed with fear when they hear airplanes. They cry
continuously when they hear the sounds of antiaircraft guns. Sometimes we
convince them that there is a wedding outside.

The war is choking us financially at the individual level and for all
Yemenis. Our neighbors can’t find food. We offer them some from time to
time. All of Yemen is living under siege.

Lift the Saudi sea blockade of Yemen because trade is the source of income
for many Yemenis.

Rawan S. al-Aghbari, 22, was born in Yemen and raised in London. An
explosion in Sana in mid-April badly injured her brother and destroyed
their home. She returned to Yemen last month to help him get out of the
country for treatment.

During the explosion he was inside the house trying to repair a window. The
explosion ripped off the top half of the house, and parts of the window cut
through his neck. There were shards everywhere; he was bleeding
extensively. He basically flew from one side of the room to the other, and
he had a concussion. He couldn’t form proper sentences. He wasn’t in good
health, so we wanted to get him out.

At the time there was no electricity and barely any generators running for
the hospitals. Generators need fuel, and there was practically none at that
time. There were fuel lines that would extend for kilometers.

Yemen is suffering from a myriad of problems. At the front line are
ordinary civilians, who are paying the price for this unforgiving war.

Hani Yahya lives in Sana with his extended family. He was working for an
international democracy-building organization, but the fighting forced it
to shut down. He is now unemployed.

We live in fear all the time. There is no electricity. No fuel. Food is
becoming scarce, and prices are increasing.

I managed to get my wife and two children out to Egypt after the Faj Attan
attack. But my nephews and nieces are still here, and all of them are
affected.

They keep asking: “When will this end? Why do they want to kill us?” They
are wetting their beds at night; they are depressed all the time and want
to leave the country.

I speak to my daughter every day in Egypt. She wants to go back home. When
she is in Egypt, she keeps asking, “When will this end?” They just don’t
understanding why this is happening. We just tell them: “We pray it will
end soon. We pray to God that it will be over.”

Mahdy Abdul Hakeem Mahdy Saleh al-Mutairy is from the western coastal city
of Al Hudaydah.

We are terrified and suffered the tragic loss of life of members of our
family. My cousin was 23 years old when he died; he was a student. He was
walking in the street when jets bombed the area. Dozens of bodies were
found on that day.

We don’t have electricity because of the siege, but the hospital is still
functioning and receiving patients, especially those suffering from
dialysis, from other provinces. But I’m concerned that the only hospital
here might close soon if this siege and blackout continue.

What we need is for the bombing to stop and the blockade to be lifted so
that shipments of food, medicine and petrol products could be brought into
the country.

Fuad Shaif Ali al-Kadas runs a tour company in Sana. He lost thousands of
dollars in plane tickets after a tourist group canceled an April trip.
After the area near his home was bombed, he moved in with his extended
family in another area of Sana.

Even if the war ends soon, and if tourists come back, I don’t know if we
can refund this large sum. So my business is defunct. One brother works in
the airport — he’s lost his job. Another brother works in an area
constantly bombed by the Saudis — Faj Attan — and he now has lost his job.
So while my family is alive and well, thank God, we, like most people, are
struggling and out of work.

Imagine if this continues and we’ll have an entirely uneducated generation.
Plus when the planes fly overhead, or children hear the airstrikes, they
cry, and they can’t sleep at night. Now, if a father wants his kids to do
something, he says, “Go or I’ll call the planes,” and they move right away.

Assaad Lutf Albarty and his family, who live in Sana, have been affected by
the shortages of food, fuel and medicine. His father has not been able to
secure his blood pressure medication or get the treatment he needs. He is
hoping to travel to Jordan for heart surgery.

Many times we live without electricity for days or weeks. There is a lack
of gasoline, which is used for transportation, and diesel, which is used to
transport goods and operate factories. We have returned to the Stone Ages
by using firewood and charcoal to cook at home. I’m not exaggerating —
we’re doing this on a daily basis.

We can’t get water without electricity or diesel, and we can’t get the
basic things such as flour and wheat, because of the inability to
distribute them to consumers and our inability to go to distribution
centers. Also because of the blockade, no merchants can import any new
food, fuel or medicines.

Bakil Muttee Ghundol had been taking a course in teaching English in Aden,
but he moved to Ibb, where his family lives, shortly before the airstrikes
began.

Hundreds of displaced families from different cities come to Ibb because
it’s considered a safe place as there are no airstrikes as there are in
Aden, Sana or Taiz. But all the people here in Ibb are suffering as there
is a huge lack of fuel, water and food. In addition, the electricity has
been cut off for months. Only rich people have generators. Sometimes we go
to their homes to charge our phones, our laptops.

My family is all safe, but some neighbors were killed in an airstrike. One
was a close friend of my brother.

Hanan Ahmed al-Mansor, 23, attends Jinan University in China. Her immediate
family is still in Sana, but her extended family managed to escape to Egypt.

Far from everything, I am still affected as badly as my family. I’ve had
sleepless nights, nightmares, continuous anxiety and multiple visits to the
doctor. My academic level has dropped, and every day, I am either crying or
senseless.

My mother is my superhero. She has worked her way through a couple of
failed businesses, but she finally was able to stand on her own two feet in
her mid-50s and created a successful restaurant in Yemen. This restaurant
was recently completely damaged after an airstrike hit a building in front
of it. Our dream and our only way to eat and live with dignity was
shattered. All I can think of now is, how am I going to finish university?

The children in my family sleep covering their ears. They only speak of how
much they fear death, and one of them told his mom: “I want to die before
you. I don’t want to see you die.” And, “In heaven, can I ask for a TV to
watch you because I’m going to miss you?”

My cousin told me this about her kids. She was writing and crying at the
same time. It’s very hard for me to keep in touch with my family since they
usually only open the generator for emergencies, like to pump the water to
the pipes. However, I buy calling cards to call them in emergencies, and if
they have battery left, they respond.

I need to sleep knowing that I’ll wake up and my family is safe. I need
Saudi Arabia to leave Yemen alone.

*No bailout deal yet for Greece as meeting cut short
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/world/middleeast/yemen-families-humanitarian-crisis.html>
// AP // Derek Gatopoulos and Raf Casert - June 24, 2015*

BRUSSELS — Crucial talks between Greece and its creditors to keep the
country solvent and within the euro currency group became bogged down again
Wednesday amid differences over what kind of reforms the country should
make in exchange for loans.

The impasse forced euro-zone finance ministers to cut short a meeting,
which they plan to resume Thursday. Concern over the lack of progress
weighed on financial markets, with stock indexes falling in the United
States, where trading was still going on.

Earlier in the day, Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras held long talks
with key creditors, but the sides argued again over the nature of the
reforms Greece should undertake if it is to secure loans.

Greece has promised mainly tax increases to achieve budget savings, whereas
the International Monetary Fund would like more spending cuts. Tsipras
rejected the creditors’ new suggestions, saying they put both sides further
away from a deal.

“The Greek side is unable to agree on such a course,” a Greek government
official said after Tsipras assessed the proposals, which included fresh
cuts in public-sector payrolls and a timetable to scrap a pension
safety-net fund.

What you need to know about the Greek debt crisis

Greece may default on its debts if a deal for more funding in exchange for
fiscal reforms is not made. Here’s why that matters. (Jorge Ribas/The
Washington Post)

“These are very tough negotiations,” the official said. “But there is a
common will to get somewhere.” The official spoke on the condition of
anonymity because the talks were ongoing.

Wednesday’s meeting of finance ministers was meant to iron out the details
on the reforms in time for leaders from the European Union to approve them
at a summit they will hold Thursday. The finance ministers will meet again
only hours before the summit.

After the ministers broke up their meeting, Tsipras again went into
meetings with European and IMF top officials.

Greece has a $1.8 billion debt to pay Tuesday that it cannot afford unless
the creditors unfreeze $8.1 billion in bailout money.

A Greek exit from the euro would be painful for the country. Some experts
say it could be manageable for Europe and the world economy, but that
remains unclear.

Elected on an anti-bailout platform in January, Tsipras’s left-wing Syriza
party had promised to scrap all austerity measures and demand forgiveness
on a chunk of the country’s bailout debt. Tsipras has had to partially
backtrack on those pledges and now could have trouble persuading party
lawmakers to back a new deal, which would have to be approved by Monday
night.

Athens was forced into concessions by a punishing debt-repayment schedule
and an economy gripped by troubles including a return to mild recession,
ratings downgrades and a dramatic outflow of bank deposits that threatened
to crash the country’s financial system.

Greek Economy Minister Giorgos Stathakis said that so far, all sides had
made concessions.

He said Greece had persuaded creditors to lower their demands for a primary
surplus — the surplus when not counting interest payments on debt. As a
result, that should help the Greek economy grow between 1 percent and 1.5
percent this year.

Meanwhile, Greece’s banks remained under pressure as customers continued to
withdraw money amid concerns over the country’s financial future.

*OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS*

*Morning Plum: Hillary can’t run from the trade debate forever
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/06/24/morning-plum-hillary-cant-run-from-the-trade-debate-forever/>
// WaPo // Greg Sargent – June 24, 2015 *

Today the Senate is expected to cast the final vote granting President
Obama “Fast Track” authority to negotiate the massive Trans-Pacific
Partnership trade deal. With trade badly splitting Democrats, Hillary
Clinton had avoided taking a meaningful position on Fast Track, only
suggesting she might not support it if it didn’t also include worker
assistance (which may also move forward within days).

But if Clinton had hoped to leave the trade debate behind if Fast Track
failed, its success now means she may have to take a position on the trade
deal itself sooner or later.

Clinton’s campaign has said that any trade deal must “put us in a position
to protect American workers, raise wages and create more good jobs at
home,” and that the U.S. should “walk away from any outcome that falls
short” of that. Obviously, this leaves room for Clinton to either support
or oppose the deal later.

But if we do get a TPP, the debate will shift out of the process
netherworld in which the Fast Track fight unfolded, and present us with
specifics that can actually be evaluated in light of the test Clinton
herself has articulated. Obama has vowed that the TPP will boost labor
standards in participating countries like Vietnam, leveling the global
playing field for American workers. But we still don’t know what those
standards will look like, and we still don’t know how compliant with them
such countries will be required to be before participating in the TPP.

Meanwhile, we still don’t know what sort of “monopoly pricing power” the
deal will contain for biologics, which some critics worry will amount to a
giveaway to Big Pharma at the expense of global health. And we still have
yet to see the details of the deal’s mechanism for resolving disputes
between international investors and other participating countries — which
critics worry will give a special break to corporations that is denied to
workers.

Clinton’s camp is said to believe the trade debate will not create the
lasting divisions among Dems that attended the Iraq debate. And some
polling does indicate that there may not be rampant anger over it among Dem
base voters.

But the calender here is worth considering. If a TPP deal is reached this
summer, there will be months of debate over it until a Congressional vote
next winter, when the primaries will be getting underway. Even if the Fast
Track debate was a bitter defeat for the left, there may be another
protracted opportunity to rally opposition. Bernie Sanders has already
heaped scalding criticism on the deal in general, and he and other high
profile Dems — such as Elizabeth Warren — will refocus their opposition on
the deal’s specifics, which will finally allow us to evaluate the deal’s
actual priorities. Clinton may have to address these specifics and
priorities sooner or later.

Of course, if the deal is as good as Obama claims it will be, and the worst
fears of the left look overblown in light of its details, Clinton may
decide those specifics allow her to make a strong case for supporting it on
the grounds that it comports with the test she articulated. And then things
might get really interesting: we’d have a genuine Dem primary debate on our
hands.

*Hillary Clinton’s dodginess is overpowering her message*
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/questions-for-candidate-clinton/2015/06/24/9ba450d8-1a8b-11e5-bd7f-4611a60dd8e5_story.html>*
// WaPo // George F. Will – June 24, 2015*

Hillary Clinton’s reticence is drowning out her message, which is that she
is the cure for the many ailments that afflict the United States during a
second Democratic presidential term. Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has
called her “the most opaque person you’ll ever meet in your life,” but when
opacity yields to the necessity of answering questions, here are a few:

Your first leadership adventure was when your husband entrusted you with
health-care reform. Using a process as complex as it was secretive, you
produced a proposal so implausible that a Democratic-controlled Congress
would not even vote on it. Your legislation was one reason that in 1994
Democrats lost control of the House for the first time in 40 years. What
did you learn from this futility and repudiation?

Three times in your memoir “Hard Choices” you say that as secretary of
state you visited 112 countries. Do you think “peripatetic” is a synonym
for “effective”? You tell readers that at a 2009 meeting with Chinese
officials you said, “We need to build a resilient relationship that allows
both of us to thrive and meet our global responsibilities without unhealthy
competition, rivalry or conflict.” Does it trouble your environmental
conscience that trees died to produce the paper on which you recycled that
thought?

President George W. Bush said that when he looked into Vladimir Putin’s
eyes he saw a “very straightforward and trustworthy” man. You looked into
Putin’s regime and saw an opportunity for a cooperative policy “reset.”
Were you or was Bush more mistaken?

In March 2003, Bush launched a war of choice to accomplish regime change in
Iraq, mistakenly believing that it was developing weapons of mass
destruction. In March 2011, Barack Obama and you launched a war of choice
against Libya for the humanitarian purposes of preventing, it was said, as
many as 10,000 deaths at the hands of Moammar Gaddafi. Since March 2011, in
Syria, where the regime continues to use chemical weapons that it
supposedly agreed to surrender, the civil war has killed more than 320,000.
Why humanitarian intervention in Libya instead of Syria?

Bush sought, and you as a senator gave, approval for his war of choice.
Obama and you, arguing that the thousands of airstrikes that killed
thousands of Libyans did not constitute “hostilities,” never sought
approval for the Libyan war. Who was more lawful, Bush or Obama and you?
What criteria suggest that the world is safer than before you became
secretary?

In this month’s Wisconsin Democratic convention straw poll, you defeated
Bernie Sanders 49 percent to 41 percent. Sanders says he is a “socialist.”
Do you have fundamental differences with him? If not, are you a socialist?
He does not think a 90 percent top income tax rate is too high. Do you? He
says that “almost all of” the United States’ wealth “rests in the hands of
a handful of billionaires.” Forbes magazine says the combined net worth of
the United States’ 536 billionaires is $2.566 trillion. Is it a grave
problem that the 536 have 3 percent of the nation’s $84.9 trillion wealth?
Is it deplorable that the Waltons became a family of billionaires by
creating Wal-Mart, the nation’s largest private-sector employer? Do you
regret that Apple products made Steve Jobs a billionaire? Are any of your
however many phones iPhones?

Sanders vows “to make tuition in public colleges and universities free.” Do
you agree that the 68 percent of Americans without college degrees should
pay the tuition for those whose degrees will bring them lifetime earnings
significantly higher than the earnings of the noncollege graduates who will
have paid much of the cost of the “free” tuition?

Another progressive goal is “debt-free college.” The average amount owed by
the 69 percent of graduates with college debt is $28,400, which is $11,000
more than the difference between what a college graduate and a high school
graduate earn in one year of employment. So, what exactly is the student
debt “crisis”?

Sanders favors a $15 minimum wage. Do you? Why not $16? Democrats are — we
know because they say so — respectful of science, including, presumably,
economics. So, do you agree with Obama that ATMs and airport ticket kiosks
cause unemployment?

Finally: Having said, “It is tempting to dismiss [the Charleston shooting]
as an isolated incident,” you resisted that temptation and detected in the
incident large social symptoms. Do you believe, as Obama now says, that
racism is in America’s “DNA,” meaning it is encoded in our nation’s nature?

*The Insiders: Hillary Clinton’s failure of diplomacy
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/06/24/the-insiders-hillary-clintons-failure-of-diplomacy/>
// WaPo // Ed Rogers – June 24, 2015 *

The Pentagon’s announcement that the United States will be sending troops
to Europe – as well as additional stores of weapons and tanks – as part of
a “reorientation of a NATO alliance” is the culmination of a series of
foreign policy blunders.  This is what failure of diplomacy looks like –
and many of those failures can be laid at former secretary of state Hillary
Clinton’s feet.  She was the original architect of the Obama
administration’s failed diplomacy with Russia. What started as a goofy
botched photo-op declaring that U.S.-Russia relations would be “reset” has
ended with the United States prepositioning weapons as a response to the
growing possibility of war.

This isn’t a reorientation — this is a desperate move to try to impress
Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has so far been unimpressed. After
observing President Obama’s retreat from the “red line” he drew in Syria,
the loss of Iraq, the losing of Afghanistan, the non-assistance to Ukraine
and the quest to accommodate Iran’s nuclear program no matter what, Putin
must be chuckling at this latest move by the Obama administration. There is
no chance Putin believes any of the weapons being shipped overseas through
this directive will ever be used to stop his intimidation, harassment and
encroachment in Europe.

All the while, Americans have lost faith in our president’s ability to
conduct foreign policy in a way that will keep our nation safe.  An
Economist/YouGov poll from last week shows that 50 percent of Americans
disapprove of the president’s handling of foreign policy and only 35
percent approve.  That’s not an outlier poll.  Those numbers are about the
same as the RealClearPolitics average on this issue.

So does any of this matter for Clinton’s election prospects? Will she pay a
price for her failures as secretary of state or for the overall erosion of
America’s national security posture during her party’s tenure?

Whatever foreign policy problems Obama and Clinton inherited when they came
into office have obviously been made worse by their stewardship.  I could
be corrected, but our relationships appear worse everywhere. (Well, unless
throwing in the towel and giving Cuba what every other president for the
past 50-plus years refused to give the Castro regime counts as a success
for America.)

Anyway, what will Clinton offer voters on the foreign policy front?
Another reset? Will her defense of Obama and herself come with all manner
of qualifiers and obfuscation? I guess the plan is to hope that some
combination of Americans’ indifference and ignorance of foreign policy,
along with some measure of denial and blame of George W. Bush, will allow
her to skate.

But I hope she doesn’t get a free pass.  It will be unfortunate if the 2016
campaign doesn’t include a real debate about America’s role in the world
and an honest assessment of the problems that has grown in the last 6 1/2
years.

*Can Hillary Clinton step forward on race without leaving white voters
behind?*
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/24/can-clinton-step-forward-on-race-without-leaving-white-voters-behind/?postshare=3811435163096910>*
// WaPo // Jannell Ross – June 24, 2015*

When Hillary Clinton addressed an invitation-only group in Missouri on
Tuesday, she repeated her call for work on American race relations to go
far beyond a discussion about the future of the Confederate flag.

When she did, she affirmed what some of the nation’s leading political
prognosticators are beginning to say about Clinton's second bid for the
White House. Clinton 2008 may have been leery of speaking overtly about
gender, race or even the historic nature of her own campaign. But Clinton
2016 plans to put race and other issues of inequality front and center.

And with one group of strongly Democratic leaning voters -- African
Americans -- that could help to rebuild the Obama coalition for Clinton.
But Clinton, like every other candidate, also needs and wants white voters.
They might be a shrinking part of the electorate, but they are still a
strong majority of all voters and comprise many swing voters. So for
candidate Clinton circa 2016, the question becomes just how far can she go
on matters of race without running into the realpolitik of appealing to
white voters.

A series of recent polls offer us some valuable clues.

Collectively, they point to an America deeply divided on matters related to
race, such as faith that the police treat all Americans fairly and whether
discrimination exists at all in other arenas. Both the share of black and
white Americans concerned about the state of racial affairs in the United
States is climbing, but even here a sharp divide remains. And these same
polls indicate that Americans who lean left and have more education are far
more likely to see some level of ongoing discrimination against people of
color in American life than their more conservative, or less educated white
peers.

Let’s get down to the specifics.

Back in May -- four weeks but one apparently racially motivated mass
shooting ago -- a CBS News/New York Times poll found 62 percent of whites
feel that race relations are generally bad in this country and 65 percent
of black Americans agreed. That's up considerably from the 35 percent of
white Americans who said the same in in February.

So Americans agreed across racial lines that, when it comes to race, things
are bad. Of course, that poll took place in the weeks after some of the
details of Freddie Gray’s fatal spinal cord injury while in police custody
came to national attention, setting off protests and later riots in
Baltimore.

And lest you think Americans emerged from May uniformly concerned about
Gray and hundreds of others like him this year, consider this: In June, the
share of Americans who told Gallup pollsters that race relations were the
most important problem facing the country climbed from the sub-basement to
the first floor of political concerns -- if American politics were a
30-story building.

One of the critical reasons for the difference between the share of black
and white voters deeply concerned about race matters in the United States:
Different perceptions of risk and unfair treatment.

In a December Washington Post/ABC News poll, a survey that took place
before the events in Baltimore but after grand juries had refused to indict
police officers in Ferguson, Mo., and New York City who killed unarmed
black men, 63 percent of white Americans said they were somewhat or very
confident that blacks and whites are treated equally by police. Only 10
percent of African-American respondents agreed.

In that same poll, 42 percent of white Democrats and independents who lean
left had confidence that police treat everyone fairly. But a whopping 78
percent of white Republicans said the same. And a full 55 percent of white
Democrats who do not have college degrees told pollsters they were
confident about police treatment, while just 25 percent of white Democrats
with college degrees shared the same views.

The starkly different perceptions of discrimination do not stop there. In a
2013 Pew Research poll that asked respondents about discrimination in seven
major areas of life, such as the criminal justice system, on the job, in
schools, health care, voting and the experience of walking into a store or
restaurant, half of white Americans told pollsters they do not believe that
blacks face discrimination.

Half of white Americans do not see discrimination in health care despite a
2011 federal report that found significant differences in the quality of
care provided to white and non-white patients. Half of white Americans do
not believe that discrimination is a problem in voting despite studies
showing that in the nation’s two most recent federal elections black and
Latino voters waited significantly longer than white voters in polling
place lines because of the resources assigned to voting sites. Half of
white Americans do not see discrimination in the job market despite a
Princeton University study that suggests black applicants are less likely
to be called for an interview.

What the Clinton camp should really find instructive here is the sharp
difference in the way that Democrats and Republicans see race operating in
the United States. About one-third of all Democrats reported seeing no
discrimination in any area of American life, while a full 49 percent of
independents and 61 percent -- way more than a majority -- of Republicans
agreed.

So, what is Clinton 2016 to do?

If Clinton’s public talk about race focuses largely on the South, she might
not sacrifice much at all. That's because the South has been heavily
Republican for some time. And despite the Republican Party’s dominance in
the region, Obama won election in 2008 and 2012 with comfortable margins
after losing every Southern state except Florida.

And as we noted above, left-leaning white voters are more in-line with
minority voters on issues of race than the broader white population --
though not completely.

But we also haven't seen a candidate press issues of race in an environment
like the current one -- up to and including the first black president,
Barack Obama.

It's surely a question that will keep the Clinton campaign busy.

*Book Review – “The Hillary Doctrine: Sex & American Foreign Policy”*
<http://blogs.cfr.org/zenko/2015/06/24/book-review-the-hillary-doctrine-sex-american-foreign-policy/>*
// CFR // Micah Zenko – June 24, 2015*

During her confirmation hearing to become secretary of state, Hillary
Clinton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in no uncertain terms,
“I want to pledge to you that as secretary of state I view [women’s] issues
as central to our foreign policy, not as adjunct or auxiliary or in any way
lesser than all of the other issues that we have to confront.” A thoughtful
and nuanced new book by Valerie M. Hudson and Patricia Leidl, The Hillary
Doctrine: Sex & American Foreign Policy, evaluates to what extent Secretary
Clinton has fulfilled this pledge.

Unsurprisingly, they find many examples where Clinton’s rhetoric does not
meet U.S. foreign policy reality. Rather than simply denounce the former
secretary of state for this, they try to understand what explains this
reoccurring disconnect. For example, the authors contend that a component
of Clinton’s hawkish support for intervening in Afghanistan, Iraq, and
Libya was the belief that women’s lives would be markedly improved. Hudson
and Leidl disagree, noting, “Military action in and of itself against
regimes violating human rights will not protect women. If anything, it
unleashes new and usually even more vicious male-bonded groups intent on
stripping them of even the most basic human rights.” It is this sort of
refreshing analysis that makes this book so important, and one that I
highly recommend to anybody interested in elevating women’s voices in world
affairs, as well as the practicalities of day-to-day U.S. foreign
policymaking.

The “doctrine” comes from a proposition that Clinton made at the TEDWomen
Conference in December 2010: “The subjugation of women is, therefore, a
threat to the common security of our world and to the national security of
our country.” In countries where women are chronically mistreated, or
systematically excluded from leadership roles, there tends to be far
greater state fragility, outbreaks and reoccurrences of conflict, and
environments where extremists can flourish, including even terrorist
organizations.

The quantitative and anecdotal evidence supporting Clinton’s proposition
has grown stronger over the past five years. For example, we now know that
the participation of women’s groups in peace negotiations increases the
likelihood of reaching an agreement and implementing it, and the
probability that it will last longer. When women were included in peace
processes between 1989 and 2011, agreements were 20 percent more likely to
last as long as two years, and 35 percent more likely to last fifteen
years. Additionally, women’s leadership and political participation
enhances a community’s ability to resist violent extremism, and women play
the most critical family role in influencing young people who are
susceptible to radicalization.

The first part of the book—based on interviews with government officials
like Swanee Hunt, Andrew Natsios, Paula Dobriansky, and Melanne
Verveer—consists of a helpful history of how women’s issues became
prominent in U.S. foreign policymaking during the 1990s. This included
milestones like UN Security Council Resolution 1325, the first resolution
to address the disproportionate and unique impact of armed conflict on
women, as well as the role of women in conflict prevention and resolution;
the publication of the first U.S. National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and
Security; and the difficulties and haphazard manner that the military and
USAID have experienced in incorporating women’s issues into foreign
operations. This is crystallized in an anecdote from Charlotte Ponticelli,
the State Department’s senior coordinator for international women’s issues
in the era after Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was toppled. Ponticelli
received an email from an aide to Paul Bremer, director of the Coalition
Provisional Authority: “If I gave you 15 minutes to tell me how you would
spend $10 million on behalf of Iraqi women, could you send me an email in
that 15 minutes?” Ponticelli quickly drafted something, sent it to Bremer’s
aide, and later received the $10 million.

The authors later struggle to square Clinton’s “conspicuous silence” in the
face of the brutal treatment of women by Saudi Arabia, or China’s
perpetration of sex-selective abortions among Tibetans. The authors write,
“one possible interpretation is that the Hillary Doctrine is in fact merely
a rhetorical stance on the part of U.S. foreign policy makers, including,
apparently, Hillary Clinton herself—a position that may be jettisoned if
its tenants would undermine ‘real’ American national interests in any
particular case.” The authors offer several potential explanations,
including that Clinton expressing more public disapproval for the
mistreatment of women might be counterproductive, draw unwanted attention
to local NGOs, or result in current autocrats being replaced by worse and
more backward-thinking leaders. However, the more plausible explanation
comes from a quote provided by Verveer, who was Clinton’s chief of staff
and later led the development of the U.S. National Action Plan: “You know,
they are sovereign nations under their own.”

The authors later note that the most important and elusive ingredient for
implementing the Hillary Doctrine “can only come from the White House
itself.” If a President Hillary Clinton is sworn into office on January 20,
2017, then there will be no more bureaucratic hurdles preventing the fuller
implementation of the Hillary Doctrine. We would only learn if it is indeed
a rhetoric, or the basis upon which U.S. foreign policy is developed and
implemented.

*Presidential wannabees ought to embrace, not fear, Hispanic conference in
Kansas City
<http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/mary-sanchez/article25369885.html>
// Kansas City Star // Mary Sanchez – June 23, 2015 *

One would think that the Republican presidential candidates would clamor to
appear in Kansas City at the national convention of the largest civil
rights and advocacy organization for Latinos.

After all, the much ballyhooed Hispanic vote is the one to court, right?

That’s what the GOP said. Mitt Romney captured only 27 percent of Hispanic
voters in 2012. The statistical implosion caused Republicans to issue
introspective papers on how the party needs to regain the 40 percent of the
Latino vote totals that George W. Bush commanded in 2004.

But two weeks out from the July 11-14 National Council of La Raza’s
convention, former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley, a Democrat, is the
only presidential candidate who has confirmed he will attend.

Most of the declared candidates cited scheduling conflicts as the rationale
for saying no, although Hillary Clinton and Marco Rubio haven’t completely
shunned the possibility of showing up.

Here is the reason the Republicans will probably skip: The GOP candidates
have to get past ultra-right primary voters. There is a fear of tea
partiers, of being caught sounding reasonable on immigration.

What a pathetic, rudderless way to seek elected office. There is also the
demographic reality of not enough Latino voters in key states.

Candidates could burnish their credentials by attending, not lessen them.
Especially if they bear this in mind: As much as immigration dominates
political discussions, polling repeatedly shows that it is not the top
concern for Latinos. Education, jobs, health care and the economy are more
regularly cited.

Jeb Bush would have the most to gain. He has held moderate views on
immigration reform, he has a long history in Hispanic-heavy Texas and
Florida, he is fluent in Spanish and his wife is from Mexico. Likewise,
Rubio has had wide-ranging experiences outside his Cuban-American
background in Miami, including a brief college stint in northwest Missouri
and early school years in Las Vegas, a period that exposed him to
Mexican-Americans.

Contrary to popularly exploited images, the vast majority of Latinos in the
U.S. are native-born Americans. Nearly three in four are U.S. citizens.

“It’s a surprise to me that they are reluctant to come and engage directly
with the community,” said Janet Murguía, president and CEO of NCLR.

The NCLR conference usually draws 10,000 to 20,000 people, depending on the
city.

The presidential contenders’ invitations, Murguía said, are still open.

*Hillary Clinton, in a talk about race, hits a sour note
<http://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/steve-paul/article25418383.html>
// Kansas City Star // Steve Paul – June 24, 2015 *

Do black lives matter or do all lives matter?

That’s a question left hanging disturbingly in the air after Hillary
Clinton, the Democratic presidential contender, spoke at a Florissant, Mo.,
church on Tuesday. She made news by joining the call for removing the
Confederate battle flag from the grounds of the South Carolina capitol, and
for her sensitive and resonant reflection on the slaughter of nine innocent
black souls in a historic Charleston, S.C., church: “Let us be resolved to
make sure they did not die in vain — not to be overcome by evil, but to
overcome evil with good.”

But Clinton pushed some other buttons in a way that bears further
examination.

The site of Clinton’s speech, of course, is just down the road from
Ferguson, where the fatal shooting of a black teenager by a white police
officer erupted into street protests and launched a movement, linked by a
Twitter hashtag, #blacklivesmatter.

That movement led to a backlash, especially among those who challenged what
appeared to be a populist rush to judgment and who feared that white police
officers don’t get enough respect for putting themselves in harm’s way.
Thus: #alllivesmatter.

Here’s the problem. Many people might assume that “all lives” includes
“black lives.” But if you’re African American or have a real understanding
of the course of America’s shameful racial history, you know that for far
too long and far too often “black lives” do not fully fit within the Venn
diagram of “all lives.” The hashtag #blacklivesmatter is meant to emphasize
this point. It’s not meant to suggest that other people’s lives don’t
matter. It’s a cry of civil rights. It’s a chorus of “We Shall Overcome.”
It’s a voice to stand up against the ache that blows in the wind among
those Confederate flags.

So when Hillary Clinton faced a congregation of Florissant churchgoers, her
intention was to talk frankly and smartly about race in the age of
Ferguson, the era of Charleston and the nagging American struggle of
identity.

“I know this is a difficult topic to talk about,” she said. “I know that so
many of us hoped by electing our first black president, we had turned the
page on this chapter in our history. I know there are truths we do not like
to say out loud or discuss with our children. But we have to.”

So far so good. Then she made it personal.

“We should start by giving all of our children the tools and opportunities
to overcome legacies of discrimination to live up to their own God-given
potentials,” Clinton said. “I just saw some of the young people attending
camp here at church down in the basement. And I was thrilled to see that
because that is the kind of commitment we need more of, in every church, in
every place, until every child is reached. And I hope we can take that as a
cause for action.

“I learned this not from politics but from my mother who taught me that
everybody, everybody needs a chance and a champion. She knew what it was
like to have neither one. Her own parents abandoned her. By 14, she was out
on her own working as a house maid. Years later when I was old enough to
understand, I asked her. What kept you going? Her answer was very simple.
Kindness along the way from someone who believed she mattered. All lives
matter.”

There was faint applause. Then a Twitter storm. Clinton had stepped in it
big time. (“All lives matter? Hillary...sit down now. You're embarrassing
us” — this was one of the milder tweets by offended African Americans who
weighed in.)

You would think that Clinton and her speech writers would have known how to
parse the language of the moment. You would think they would have it down
by now, this far into her second campaign for the presidency. But a nagging
truth about Clinton lingers. She can come off as tone deaf. It’s a sign of
inauthenticity. And she needs to get a handle on it. A fleet-footed
politician would have recovered instantly and voiced what the mostly
African American audience before her would have expected to hear: Of
course, black lives matter.

Words do matter. All words matter, even when it seems like, in the age of
Twitter, words hardly matter any more at all.

When President Barack Obama voiced the N-word the other day, he knew
exactly what he was doing and it was highly effective.

The conversation on race must continue. And it needs to take place in an
atmosphere of respect and at decibel levels conducive to conversation. And
people need to listen to one another and understand the meaning of their
words and the meaning behind their words.

In a time of instant response, politicians are swiftly pilloried for slips
of the tongue and rhetorical missteps. I know I can be guilty of hastily
penning (old technology) the wrong word at the wrong time. But we expect
more of those who would be our president. And in the minefield of racial
politics, we can all agree that there is much work left to do, and many
more lessons to learn.