Subject: ​Correct The Record Monday February 2, 2015 Morning Roundup
From: Burns Strider <[email-masked]>
To: CTRFriendsFamily <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2015 08:07:48 -0500
List-Id: <CTRFriendsFamily.americanbridge.org>

*​**Correct The Record Monday February 2, 2015 Morning Roundup:*

*Articles:*

*Washington Post: “GOP presidential contenders travel the globe in
preparation to take on Clinton”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-presidential-contenders-travel-the-globe-in-preparation-to-take-on-clinton/2015/02/01/4dd3bd54-aa19-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html?tid=HP_more?tid=HP_more>*

“GOP leaders and strategists consider foreign policy a weakness of
President Obama’s tenure and therefore a potential vulnerability for
Clinton, the likely Democratic candidate who helped carry out Obama’s
first-term foreign policy as secretary of state. Many contenders have been
attacking Clinton.”

*Wall Street Journal: “Clinton Consults to Define Economic Pitch”
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-consults-experts-to-define-economic-pitch-1422837490>*

“Hillary Clinton has been consulting with an array of economists and
academics—including liberal Joseph Stiglitz, former Fed chairman Paul
Volcker and new faces outside the traditional orbit of Democratic policy
experts—as she prepares for a likely presidential campaign that would make
sluggish wage growth and middle-class prosperity a central focus.”

*CNN: “Clinton advisers are split on when Hillary Clinton should launch her
campaign”
<http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/02/politics/hillary-clinton-2016-internal-debate-summer/>*

“The liberal superPAC American Bridge has been countering Republican
attacks on Clinton's behalf but many Democrats think it's no substitute for
a campaign messaging operation. ‘They're doing terrific research,’ said
one, ‘but they don't know what her specific policy agenda is going to be.
She should get in and start putting together a substantive policy agenda so
the attacks that are going to begin to come from every single republican
who is jumping in to the race can be answered.’”

*New Republic: “Elizabeth Warren Supporters: Hillary Clinton Is ‘Republican
Lite’ and ‘Completely Unacceptable’”
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120928/run-warren-run-meeting-dc-hillary-clinton-republican-lite>*

“Though the organizers asked participants to avoid trash-talking Clinton,
Carl opened the meeting by calling for more than ‘a coronation’ in the
Democratic primary.”

*New York Times: “U.S. Considers Supplying Arms to Ukraine Forces,
Officials Say”
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/02/world/us-taking-a-fresh-look-at-arming-kiev-forces.html>*

“Michèle A. Flournoy, a former senior Pentagon official who is a leading
candidate to serve as defense secretary if Hillary Rodham Clinton is
elected president, joined in preparing the report.”

*Bloomberg: “Obama’s $4 Trillion Budget Sets Up Fight with Congress”
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-02/obama-s-4-trillion-budget-sets-up-fight-with-congress>*

“Addressing income inequality has become a mantra for Democrats from Obama
to 2016 presidential nomination front-runner Hillary Clinton, and some of
the Republican contenders have taken up the issue as well.”

*Articles:*

*Washington Post: “GOP presidential contenders travel the globe in
preparation to take on Clinton”
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/gop-presidential-contenders-travel-the-globe-in-preparation-to-take-on-clinton/2015/02/01/4dd3bd54-aa19-11e4-ad71-7b9eba0f87d6_story.html?tid=HP_more?tid=HP_more>*

By Philip Rucker and Anne Gearan

February 1, 2015, 3:35 p.m. EST

LONDON — New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie is here in the United Kingdom,
where he said he looks forward to getting reacquainted with Prime Minister
David Cameron on Monday. Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal recently returned from
a European tour during which he assailed Hillary Rodham Clinton for her
“mindless naivete.” And next week, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is due in
London for an overseas trip of his own.

Republican presidential hopefuls are busy auditioning on the world stage
ahead of the 2016 campaign, trying to bolster their résumés and develop
expertise as their party seizes on foreign affairs as a key theme in its
effort to reclaim the White House.

GOP leaders and strategists consider foreign policy a weakness of President
Obama’s tenure and therefore a potential vulnerability for Clinton, the
likely Democratic candidate who helped carry out Obama’s first-term foreign
policy as secretary of state. Many contenders have been attacking Clinton.
Before bowing out last week, Mitt Romney called the Obama administration
“timid” and accused Clinton of acting “cluelessly.”

Yet many of the Republican Party’s rising stars — like Romney, its 2012
nominee — are governors with scant international exposure, so they are
acting quickly to try to gain credibility.

Enter Christie, whose London visit is his fourth foreign trip as governor,
following tours of Canada, Israel and Mexico. Ahead of official meetings
that begin here Monday, Christie took in a soccer match Sunday afternoon.
As he exited the gleaming Emirates Stadium, bundled up on a frigid
afternoon with Arsenal’s red-and-white team scarf, Christie said he was
excited about nurturing relationships with British officials.

Michael E. O’Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said
talking about foreign affairs reveals a presidential candidate’s character,
communications skills and decision-making style. While domestic issues
“concern budgets, detailed lawmaking, cooperation with Congress and
technical matters,” he said, “foreign affairs are in some ways simpler.
It’s about how to handle bad guys, how to protect the country, and how to
convey confidence and purpose.”

Like Christie, most of the other Republican White House hopefuls have
articulated hawkish views in line with their party’s traditional orthodoxy,
though a divergent and more isolationist view has emerged within the
party’s libertarian wing represented by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.).

Any Republican candidate would face an unusual challenge in drafting
national security platforms in opposition to Clinton. As a senator and 2008
presidential candidate, Clinton developed a record and reputation as a
foreign policy hawk that would complicate or head off the traditional GOP
argument about Democratic weakness on security issues.

Nearly two years out from the next presidential election, the contenders
have yet to present specifics beyond sketching out their worldviews. It
also is unclear how much foreign affairs will shape the campaign. If the
economy continues to improve, the public’s attention could turn beyond the
U.S.’s borders. And as always, world events that may not be foreseen, such
as a terrorist attack, could set the agenda.

“Foreign policy could end up playing a minimal role on both sides, or it
could end up playing a fairly large role, and I think the honest answer is
nobody knows at this point,” said Richard Haass, president of the Council
on Foreign Relations, whom several presidential candidates have consulted.

Regardless, he said, it is important for candidates to “kick some tires
around the world.” He added: “You don’t want to make a mistake which would
raise questions about your readiness for the job.”

So it is that would-be Republican candidates have been traveling the globe
— many of them under the guise of trade missions to promote economic
development for their states on trips paid with public funds.

The visits usually include meetings with foreign government and business
officials as well as cultural stops. In England, Christie is sitting down
with Cameron but also will see a rehearsal of William Shakespeare’s “Henry
V” at Shakespeare’s historic Globe Theatre.

Former Texas governor Rick Perry has traveled overseas repeatedly since his
failed 2012 presidential campaign, including visits last year to the World
Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and to China, Japan and several
Eastern European nations.

Israel is a popular spot for many prospective candidates. Indiana Gov. Mike
Pence spent Christmas in Jerusalem, where he met with Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu, while former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee is leading
a tour there later this month. For $5,250 a person, guests can join
Huckabee for meetings with senior Israeli officials and tours of Holy Land
sites, including swimming in the Dead Sea.

Other presidential hopefuls have a more natural footing in such areas. Sen.
Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), through his service on the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee, has made many trips abroad and has been at the center of U.S.
foreign policy debates, recently over Obama’s move to normalize diplomatic
relations with Cuba.

Although many Republicans say their party should turn to a governor as its
standard-bearer, Rubio argues that his national-security experience in the
Senate is a more valuable commodity than an executive background.

“You can’t have middle-class prosperity if your national security is
threatened,” Rubio told reporters in January. “So the next president needs
to be someone that has a clear view of what’s happening in the world, a
clear strategic vision of America’s role in it, and a clear tactical plan
for how to engage America in global affairs.”

It could be difficult for Republicans to cast Clinton as too weak on
foreign policy, considering she earned the vocal admiration of many hawkish
senators when she served alongside them.

As the county’s top diplomat, Clinton carried out an Obama foreign policy
that Republicans attacked as overly deliberative, but as a candidate to
succeed him, she can show evidence that she would have taken tougher
positions.

One example is Syria, where Clinton favored earlier and stronger military
help for beleaguered rebels. She also holds a deeply skeptical view of
Russian power, and despite the failure of the policy “reset” with Moscow,
it will be difficult for Republicans to paint her as naive.

Clinton would have a harder time showing how she would have made different
choices in other areas, including in the current struggle to counter
Islamic State rebels. Harder still for Clinton may be the lingering taint
of the deadly assaults on two U.S. compounds in Benghazi, Libya, in her
final months at the State Department.

Clinton has said she bears ultimate responsibility for Benghazi and has
called it the greatest regret of her tenure. But she has denied any
knowledge of the circumstances leading up to the armed attacks by
extremists or any direct role in responding to them.

Multiple investigations have revealed bureaucratic and safety problems but
no high-level malfeasance. Still, the deaths of four Americans on her watch
is a political vulnerability that undermines Clinton’s image as an
industrious and efficient executive.

With unrest across the world, Republicans believe foreign policy could be a
winning campaign theme.

“Republicans want this to be an issue,” said Kori Schake, a fellow at
Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and an official in George W.
Bush’s administration. “If Hillary Clinton is a candidate, she will argue
she’s a steady set of hands — you know, the 3 a.m. phone call — so
Republicans will need to be strong on foreign policy.”

*Wall Street Journal: “Clinton Consults to Define Economic Pitch”
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-consults-experts-to-define-economic-pitch-1422837490>*

By Peter Nicholas

February 1, 2015, 7:38 p.m. EST

[Subtitle:] Lineup of Experts and Topics Discussed Offer Hints About a
Focus on the Middle Class in a Possible Presidential Campaign

Hillary Clinton has been consulting with an array of economists and
academics—including liberal Joseph Stiglitz, former Fed chairman Paul
Volcker and new faces outside the traditional orbit of Democratic policy
experts—as she prepares for a likely presidential campaign that would make
sluggish wage growth and middle-class prosperity a central focus.

One of Mrs. Clinton’s broader goals is to develop ways to address economic
anxiety without sounding like a combative populist or demonizing
high-income groups, said a person familiar with her thinking. It isn’t
clear whether that particular question has come up in the meetings she has
been having with various policy experts.

She has been using the meetings to prepare herself for a possible campaign,
ground herself in the issues and tease out fresh approaches to stubborn
domestic and foreign policy problems, people familiar with the matter said.

As the former secretary of state keeps a low public profile ahead of
announcing her near-certain candidacy, the meetings offer clues to which
issues she believes merit attention and whose advice she values. Many, but
not all, participants served in Bill Clinton ’s administration; others are
distinguished primarily by expertise in subjects that are certain to be
front-and-center in the 2016 presidential race.

Some of the meetings had the feeling of a high-octane faculty symposium and
lasted for hours, say people familiar with the sessions. Pen and pad in
hand, Mrs. Clinton typically has gone around the room to ask for ideas,
offering comments now and then and inviting participants to make
suggestions down the road.

In December, Mrs. Clinton presided over a meeting at a midtown Manhattan
hotel that focused on middle-class Americans feeling pinched by slow wage
growth.

Among those attending: Mr. Volcker, the architect of the “Volcker Rule,” a
regulatory measure barring banks from making risky bets with their own
money; Jonathan Cowan, co-founder of the centrist think tank Third Way,
which has been critical of some of the populist rhetoric coming from the
Democrats’ liberal wing; and Alan Blinder , a Princeton professor and
former Fed vice chairman and economics adviser to Mr. Clinton.

Also at the meeting, according to people familiar with it, were Robert
Hormats, who worked in the State Department during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure
and was a former vice chairman of Goldman Sachs; Richard Ravitch , a former
Democratic lieutenant governor in New York, who helped New York City avert
bankruptcy during a fiscal crisis in the 1970s; and Teresa Ghilarducci, a
labor economist and proponent of ideas to shore up Americans’ retirement
savings. The Clinton team has asked her to help evaluate various policy
ideas.

The participants examined a range of ideas to boost economic security, such
as tax cuts for the middle class, expanded access to prekindergarten
education and new ways to pay for improvements to roads and tunnels, said
people familiar with the session.

“One major focus of the meeting was the miserable recent performance of
wages in general and middle-class wages in particular, and what if anything
the government can do about that,” said Mr. Blinder.

Bernard Schwartz, a longtime Democratic donor and contributor to the
Clinton Foundation, was among those who helped arrange the meeting, said
people familiar with the session. Mr. Schwartz is a former chairman of
Loral Space & Communications Ltd. Mrs. Clinton also has consulted with Mr.
Stiglitz, a former economic adviser to Bill Clinton and author of a book
about the perils of economic inequality.

The policy interests of some participants point to the issues Mrs. Clinton
is likely to prioritize, notably the financial pressures faced by
middle-class families. Prospective Republican presidential candidates also
are talking about shoring up the middle class and, in some cases, narrowing
the wage gap in America—a sign that those topics will be flashpoints in the
general election.

Mrs. Clinton is the overwhelming front-runner for the Democratic
nomination, but some liberals would like to see her challenged by U.S. Sen.
Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.), a populist firebrand who has described the
American economic system as “rigged” in favor of the wealthy. Ms. Warren
has said she won’t run. In targeting income inequality, Mrs. Clinton would
address a substantive issue facing the country while also making inroads
with Ms. Warren’s liberal followers.

Mrs. Clinton also has held foreign policy meetings in New York and
Washington. A New York meeting in the summer was a “tour” of global hot
spots, among them the war in Syria and Russia’s incursions into Ukraine,
according to people familiar with what took place.

Mrs. Clinton asked for a diagnosis of the problem and a “strategic” view of
how the U.S. should act, one person familiar with the meeting said.

Those who attended included Richard Haass, president of the Council on
Foreign Relations, who worked under both Republican presidents George H.W.
Bush and George W. Bush; David Rothkopf, author of a new book on foreign
policy-making in the George W. Bush and Obama administrations; and Dennis
Ross, a diplomat with many years of experience in the Middle East peace
negotiations.

More informally, Mrs. Clinton has also spoken to trusted Democratic
confidants about appointments to high-level positions in her campaign,
should she decide to run.

A campaign apparatus is already taking shape. John Podesta, a senior
adviser to President Barack Obama, is likely to become a senior adviser to
the campaign, while two Obama campaign veterans, pollster Joel Benenson and
media adviser Jim Margolis, are expected to take top positions on Mrs.
Clinton’s campaign team, people familiar with the matter said.

“She’s casting a wide net, talking to a wide range of people on a wide
range of specific topics” said Nick Merrill, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton.
“Make no mistake, if she runs, she will present solutions to our toughest
challenges, she will take nothing for granted, and she will fight for every
vote.”

*CNN: “Clinton advisers are split on when Hillary Clinton should launch her
campaign”
<http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/02/politics/hillary-clinton-2016-internal-debate-summer/>*

By Brianna Keilar

February 2, 2015

This time eight years ago, when she first ran for president, Hillary
Clinton was already officially a candidate.

"I'm in it to win it," she said in a YouTube video posted on January 21,
2007.

But even though a second Hillary Clinton for president campaign is all but
certain, she and those close to her are debating when she should jump in
the race, potentially delaying her entry by months.

There is no waiting for Republicans, who are engaged in a furious
behind-the-scenes scramble for advisers and donors. Mitt Romney,
Republicans' nominee in 2012, announced Friday he would bow out after just
three weeks on the presidential speculation treadmill. Three Republican
senators, two current governors and one former governor have all made
active moves toward campaigns.

There could be ten or more Republican candidates by this summer. That might
be when Hillary Clinton gets around to officially moving toward a campaign,
if she heeds some confidantes, who are privately arguing for an
announcement in July to coincide with the start of the third fundraising
quarter. Delaying until the summer is an idea that is said to be gaining
momentum against those who want to stick to the plan for an April start
date.

The possibility of the delay is very real but still unsettled.

"I would say it's 40 percent," in the direction of those arguing for a
delay, said one Democrat who supports a spring debut for Clinton's
presidential campaign. Another Democrat who saw merits in both time lines
put the odds of a delay at 50 percent.

Democrats on both sides of the debate spoke to CNN on the condition of
anonymity so they could make their case without upsetting Clinton or those
close to her for talking openly about internal deliberations.

Some Clinton loyalists worry that as the increasingly crowded Republican
race heats up, the attacks on her could begin to stick without an apparatus
in place to answer them.

The liberal superPAC American Bridge has been countering Republican attacks
on Clinton's behalf but many Democrats think it's no substitute for a
campaign messaging operation.

"They're doing terrific research," said one, "but they don't know what her
specific policy agenda is going to be. She should get in and start putting
together a substantive policy agenda so the attacks that are going to begin
to come from every single republican who is jumping in to the race can be
answered."

The Democratic National Committee is beginning to take on a larger role in
an effort to protect Clinton and the party brand but many Democrats are
concerned even that won't be enough.

Other supporters want Clinton to lay low as the Republican field heats up,
convinced Clinton will avoid some fire if she's undeclared and GOP
candidates will take aim at each other instead.

"Never interrupt your opponent when it's destroying itself. That event in
Iowa - nobody hated that more than [RNC chairman] Reince Priebus," said one
Democrat, referring to the recent Iowa Freedom Summit, the first GOP cattle
call for prospective candidates of many Republican presidential hopefuls
(though noticeably neither Jeb Bush, Mitt Romney nor Rand Paul) attended.
"Let's get Sarah Palin out there, let's get Donald Trump out there - the
whole clown car."

Some Democrats believe it's also in Clinton's best interest to wait until
President Obama, whose approval ratings have begun to rebound, becomes more
popular, since a campaign by his former secretary of state will undoubtedly
be seen as an extension of his presidency. It's a view shared by many at
the White House who eye the entry of Clinton into the 2016 contest as the
beginning of Obama's lame duck phase.

But if Clinton waits, could run the risk of looking like she's taking the
Democratic nomination for granted.

"The American people don't like to see a candidate assume that something is
theirs for the taking," warned one Clinton supporter.

"If [Hillary Clinton] is trying to avoid a coronation it really is a
terrible way to go about it. It sends a message that we don't have to
campaign in the primaries." said a Democratic operative in Iowa, who warned
it leaves an opening. "It really does require another candidate to fill
that void"

And so far, no one has.

Vice President Joe Biden, former Maryland governor Martin O'Malley, former
Virginia Senator Jim Webb and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders have all made
the trek to Iowa in the last year, but none are being particularly
agressive in recruiting staff or taking on Clinton.

"O'Malley hired one staff member the other day and that's all anyone is
talking about," said the Iowa operative of the unusually quiet political
scene in the early state. "It's kinda weird."

In 2008, Clinton's air of inevitability was off putting to many voters.
Clinton and her advisers have been looking to avoid it this time around.

But without an insurgent, Obama-like candidate waiting in the wings
(Clinton insiders are now pretty much convinced that populist darling and
Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren won't run, despite initial concerns she
could mount a serious challenge from the left), many loyalists argue
Clinton is safe to wait.

"If she's out there working hard, making her case, speaking to voters,
that's what's going to matter," said a Washington-based Clinton backer who
thinks a delayed campaign launch could benefit her.

It won't benefit her campaign coffers, however.

"Money will not flow until she's actually running," said one Democrat who
cited powerful donor support for a Clinton run but acknowledged, "People
don't give that kind of money on speculation."

The numerous Clinton loyalists interviewed for this piece admit there are
arguments for both timelines. But perhaps the most important factor in
deciding when to jump in the race is Hillary Clinton's personal inclination
to put off campaigning.

The last time she ran for president, she entered the race in January 2006,
almost two years before the election. The Democratic primary contest turned
into a bruising slog that she is not eager to repeat.

"You can't dance in that spotlight for two years," a Clinton loyalist said.
"She's not Rand Paul, she's the most famous woman on earth and every move
is scrutinized."

*New Republic: “Elizabeth Warren Supporters: Hillary Clinton Is ‘Republican
Lite’ and ‘Completely Unacceptable’”
<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120928/run-warren-run-meeting-dc-hillary-clinton-republican-lite>*

By Claire Groden

February 1, 2015

Elizabeth Warren wants you to know that she really isn’t planning to run
for president. She said so in an interview with NPR’s Steve Inskeep last
month, when she repeated at least four times, “I am not running for
president.” She told the same thing to The Washington Post’s Ruth Marcus:
“I am not running. I think I am being definitive.” And when Fortune asked
her in January: “No.”

Her supporters are not convinced. In a promotional video for Run Warren
Run, a group dedicated to getting Warren on the 2016 presidential ballot,
the senator is shown being asked the same question—but the scene cuts
before she can answer the usual no. This Sunday, just hours before the
Super Bowl, more than 20 people trickled into a windowless basement room of
Washington, D.C.’s Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Library. Like more than
200 other meetings that convened across the country through Run Warren Run,
the group strategized how to convince the Massachusetts senator to say yes.

“I’ve heard questions before, like, ‘I heard that she’s not running,’” one
of the organizers, who asked to go only by his first name, Carl, said. “But
they all say they’re not going to run before they run.” For many in the
room, it’s Warren’s hesitance to self-promote that has won her so much
respect.

Though the organizers asked participants to avoid trash-talking Clinton,
Carl opened the meeting by calling for more than “a coronation” in the
Democratic primary. Participants said that the sense of Clinton’s
inevitability was a threat to the democratic process, and described Clinton
as “Republican lite,” “in the pocket of big business,” and “completely
unacceptable.” Zephyr Williams, a graduate student at American University,
explained her wariness with establishment politicians. “I can imagine it’s
difficult to avoid selling out when you’ve been in politics for as long as
Hillary has,” she said, underlining what many in the group saw as Warren’s
key strength as an outsider to politics. Others criticized Clinton for her
hawkish foreign policy and support amongst Wall Street bankers.

Participants praised Warren as a “fighter” for the middle class, waging war
against Wall Street even at the expense of her own party. Many progressives
cheered for Warren when she scuttled President Obama's renomination of
former Lazard banker Antonio Weiss to a top Treasury Department post.
Warren's bill to help students refinance their loans, which was blocked in
the Senate in September, also placed her on the radar screens of many young
Democrats. Part of the Run Warren Run's strategy is to raise awareness of
the senator, since many voters aren't as familiar with Warren as they are
with Clinton. "To know Elizabeth Warren is to love her," said one meeting
attendee.

So far, polls have shown Clinton far outpacing any other Democratic
challengers in the polls, and Politico reported that the frontrunner is
considering delaying her campaign, since her campaign sees no serious
contender in the ranks. But in September, a WSJ/NBC poll found that only 43
percent of voters viewed Clinton favorably, compared to 41 percent who had
negative views. In the Run Warren Run meeting, a retired teacher named
Jeanne Castro said that she felt torn between voting for Clinton and Obama
in the 2008 presidential primary. Castro wanted to vote for Clinton because
she wanted to see a woman in the White House, but “Hillary never moved me,”
she said. “Warren, she touched me.”

In a November poll conducted by the progressive organization Democracy for
America, Warren emerged as the favored candidate with 42 percent, beating
out Clinton by 19 percentage points. But among those who showed up for the
Run Warren Run event, a few said they still expected Clinton to win. Would
they vote for Clinton if Warren doesn’t run? Tom Hunter, a 59-year-old on
long-term disability, chuckled. “Yeah, of course I would vote for Hillary.”

*New York Times: “U.S. Considers Supplying Arms to Ukraine Forces,
Officials Say”
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/02/world/us-taking-a-fresh-look-at-arming-kiev-forces.html>*

By Michael R. Gordon and Eric Schmitt

February 1, 2015

WASHINGTON — With Russian-backed separatists pressing their attacks in
Ukraine, NATO’s military commander, Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, now supports
providing defensive weapons and equipment to Kiev’s beleaguered forces, and
an array of administration and military officials appear to be edging
toward that position, American officials said Sunday.

President Obama has made no decisions on providing such lethal assistance.
But after a series of striking reversals that Ukraine’s forces have
suffered in recent weeks, the Obama administration is taking a fresh look
at the question of military aid.

Secretary of State John Kerry, who plans to visit Kiev on Thursday, is open
to new discussions about providing lethal assistance, as is Gen. Martin E.
Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, officials said. Defense
Secretary Chuck Hagel, who is leaving his post soon, backs sending
defensive weapons to the Ukrainian forces.

In recent months, Susan E. Rice, Mr. Obama’s national security adviser, has
resisted proposals to provide lethal assistance, several officials said.
But one official who is familiar with her views insisted that Ms. Rice was
now prepared to reconsider the issue.

Fearing that the provision of defensive weapons might tempt President
Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to raise the stakes, the White House has
limited American aid to “non-lethal” items, including body armor,
night-vision goggles, first aid kits and engineering equipment.

But the failure of economic sanctions to dissuade Russia from sending heavy
weapons and military personnel to eastern Ukraine is pushing the issue of
defensive weapons back into discussion.

“Although our focus remains on pursuing a solution through diplomatic
means, we are always evaluating other options that will help create space
for a negotiated solution to the crisis,” said Bernadette Meehan, a
spokeswoman for the National Security Council.

Fueling the broader debate over policy is an independent report to be
issued Monday by eight former senior American officials, who urge the
United States to send $3 billion in defensive arms and equipment to
Ukraine, including anti-armor missiles, reconnaissance drones, armored
Humvees and radars that can determine the location of enemy rocket and
artillery fire.

Michèle A. Flournoy, a former senior Pentagon official who is a leading
candidate to serve as defense secretary if Hillary Rodham Clinton is
elected president, joined in preparing the report. Others include James G.
Stavridis, a retired admiral who served as the top NATO military commander,
and Ivo Daalder, the ambassador to NATO during Mr. Obama’s first term.

“The West needs to bolster deterrence in Ukraine by raising the risks and
costs to Russia of any renewed major offensive,” the report says. “That
requires providing direct military assistance — in far larger amounts than
provided to date and including lethal defensive arms.”

In his State of the Union address last month, Mr. Obama noted that the
sanctions imposed by the United States and its allies had hurt the Russian
economy.

But American officials acknowledge that Russia has repeatedly violated an
agreement, reached in Minsk in September. The agreement called for an
immediate cease-fire in Ukraine, the removal of foreign forces and the
establishment of monitoring arrangements to ensure that the border between
Ukraine and Russia would be respected.

In recent weeks, Russia has shipped a large number of heavy weapons to
support the separatists’ offensive in eastern Ukraine, including T-80 and
T-72 tanks, multiple-launch rocket systems, artillery and armored personnel
carriers, Western officials say.

Some of the weapons are too sophisticated to be used by hastily trained
separatists, a Western official said. NATO officials estimate that about
1,000 Russian military and intelligence personnel are supporting the
separatist offensive while Ukrainian officials insist that the number is
much higher.

Supported by the Russians, the separatists have captured the airport at
Donetsk and are pressing to take Debaltseve, a town that sits aside a
critical rail junction.

All told, the separatists have captured 500 square kilometers — about 193
square miles — of additional territory in the past four months, NATO says.
The assessment of some senior Western officials is that the Kremlin’s goal
is to replace the Minsk agreement with an accord that would be more
favorable to the Kremlin’s interests and would leave the separatists with a
more economically viable enclave.

The administration’s deliberations were described by a range of senior
Pentagon, administration and Western officials, who spoke on the condition
of anonymity because they were talking about internal discussions.

A spokesman for General Breedlove declined to comment on his view on
providing defensive weapons, which was disclosed by United States officials
privy to confidential discussions.

“General Breedlove has repeatedly stated he supports the pursuit of a
diplomatic solution as well as considering practical means of support to
the government of Ukraine in its struggle against Russian-backed
separatists,” the spokesman, Capt. Gregory L. Hicks of the Navy, said. But
a Pentagon official familiar with the views of General Dempsey and Adm.
James A. Winnefeld Jr., the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
said they believed the issue of defensive weapons should be reconsidered.

“A comprehensive approach is warranted, and we agree that defensive
equipment and weapons should be part of that discussion.” the Pentagon
official said.

Russian casualties remain an unusually delicate political issue for Mr.
Putin, who has denied that Russian troops have been ordered to fight in
Ukraine.

The report by Ms. Flournoy and the other former officials argues that the
United States and its allies should capitalize on this fact to dissuade the
Russians and the separatists from expanding their offensive.

“One of the best ways to deter Russia from supporting the rebels in taking
more territory and stepping up the conflict is to increase the cost that
the Russians or their surrogates would incur,” Ms. Flournoy said in an
interview.

The current stock of Ukrainian anti-armor missiles, the report notes, is at
least two decades old, and most of them are out of commission. So the
report recommends that the United States provide the Ukrainian military
with light anti-armor missiles, which might include Javelin antitank
missiles.

”Providing the Ukrainians with something that can stop an armored assault
and that puts at risk Russian or Russian-backed forces that are in armored
vehicles, I think, is the most important aspect of this,” she added.

The Obama administration has provided radars that can locate the source of
mortars. But the report urges the United States to also provide radars that
can pinpoint the location of longer-range rocket and artillery fire. Enemy
rocket and artillery attacks account for 70 percent of the Ukrainian
military’s casualties, the report says.

Ukraine, the report notes, also needs reconnaissance drones, especially
since the Ukrainian military has stopped all flights over eastern Ukraine
because of the separatists’ use of antiaircraft missiles supplied by Russia.

The report also urged the United States to provide military communications
equipment that cannot be intercepted by Russian intelligence.

Poland, the Baltic States, Canada and Britain, the report says, might also
provide defensive weapons if the United States takes the lead.

The report was issued jointly by the Atlantic Council, the Brookings
Institution and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs. The other officials
who prepared it are Strobe Talbott, who served as deputy secretary of state
in the Clinton administration; Charles F. Wald, a retired Air Force general
who served as deputy commander of the United States European Command; Jan
M. Lodal, a former Pentagon official; and two former ambassadors to
Ukraine, John Herbst and Steven Pifer.

*Bloomberg: “Obama’s $4 Trillion Budget Sets Up Fight with Congress”
<http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-02/obama-s-4-trillion-budget-sets-up-fight-with-congress>*

By Jonathan Allen

February 2, 2015, 6:00 a.m. EST

President Barack Obama will send a $4 trillion budget blueprint to Congress
today that would raise taxes on corporations and the nation’s top earners,
fund major investments in infrastructure and education and stabilize, but
not eliminate, the annual U.S. budget deficit.

The plan challenges Republicans to make politically thorny choices between
defending current tax rates for the wealthy and Obama’s proposals to boost
spending for the middle class, the Pentagon and companies that build
domestic infrastructure.

That’s exactly the ground Democrats want to fight on heading into the 2016
elections. Addressing income inequality has become a mantra for Democrats
from Obama to 2016 presidential nomination front-runner Hillary Clinton,
and some of the Republican contenders have taken up the issue as well.

The budget plan for the fiscal year starting Oct. 1 backs up Obama’s recent
talk about directing assistance to the middle class with tax breaks and
programs for education, job training and child care, administration
officials said. Rather than dialing back his goals after Republicans
expanded their House majority and took control of the Senate in November’s
midterm elections, the president is pursuing a more aggressive strategy.

Republicans were out with criticism even before the budget documents
arrived at the Capitol.

‘Envy Economics’

“What I think the president is trying to do here is to, again, exploit envy
economics. This top-down redistribution doesn’t work,” Representative Paul
Ryan of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, said on
NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. “It may make for good politics. It
doesn’t make for good economic growth.”

Congress is under no obligation to follow Obama’s budget plan, and most of
his major proposals will be ignored by House and Senate Republicans as they
form their own blueprint for spending and taxes.

Obama’s plans to assist lower- and middle-income taxpayers include
underwriting the cost of community college for most students, tripling the
child tax credit for families with kids under 5 years old, and creating a
$500 “second earner” tax credit for families in which both spouses work. He
had more room to do that without adding to the deficit as job creation
brings in more tax revenue and the economy keeps expanding.

Democratic Support

“His emphasis is on growing jobs and boosting paychecks, but doing it in a
fiscally responsible way,” Representative Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the
top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said in an interview Sunday.
“He’ll have broad and deep support from Democrats.”

The president’s fiscal plan would result in a 2016 deficit of $474 billion,
according to administration officials. The shortfall would represent 2.5
percent of gross domestic product, a level that many economists regard as
sustainable, down from a projected 3.2 percent in fiscal 2015. It wouldn’t
rise above 2.6 percent of GDP in any year for the next decade under the
president’s budget, even as the absolute numbers rise.

Those figures are substantially less that the record $1.4 trillion deficit
in 2009, the year Obama took office and the U.S. began pulling out of the
worst recession since the Great Depression. The administration projects
economic growth for the current year will average 3.1 percent, which is in
line with private forecasts.

On the tax front, Obama wants to raise the top rate on capital gains and
dividends to 28 percent from 23.8 percent and impose levies on asset
transfers at death, closing what the White House calls the “largest capital
gains loophole” in the tax code.

Overseas Profits

The president’s plan pits drug and technology companies that keep earnings
overseas out of reach of U.S. taxes against firms that build roads, bridges
and mass transit systems. He wants to fund $478 billion in infrastructure
work over six years in part by applying a 14 percent tax to profits that
are parked outside the country.

Obama’s corporate tax plan, which creates a narrow opening to talk about a
business tax overhaul with Republicans, includes a 19 percent levy on
future foreign earnings for U.S. companies. The administration is no longer
insisting that overseas profits be taxed at the 35 percent top U.S.
corporate rate.

He’s also setting up a confrontation between Republican defense hawks and
spending hawks by offering a $38 billion increase for national security
programs over current budget caps in exchange for $37 billion more in
discretionary spending for domestic programs. His proposal to relax those
spending limits, known as sequestration, would put discretionary spending
for fiscal 2016 at $1.091 trillion, which is $74 billion above the limits.

Discretionary Spending

Those discretionary appropriations, both the total amount and the details
of how to allocate the money among federal agencies, are what Obama and
Congress must agree on to keep the government running past the start of the
fiscal year on Oct. 1.

On education, Obama is proposing to make community college free for
students who keep their grades up and make progress toward graduation, a
plan that’s estimated to cost $60 billion over 10 years.

His budget would also aim at the other end of the educational spectrum,
putting an additional $1 billion into Head Start, setting aside $750
million for universal pre-school and expanding access to child care for 1.1
million more children under the age of 4 by 2025, according to a fact sheet
released by the White House.

One area that figures to get attention from Congress this year is
cybersecurity. In the wake of hacks against banks, Sony and the U.S. postal
service, the White House and lawmakers in both parties have been searching
for ways to deter attacks, respond to them when they happen, and, in some
cases, retaliate.

Obama would spend $14 billion, spread across government agencies, to
bolster cybersecurity.

*Calendar:*

*Sec. Clinton's upcoming appearances as reported online. Not an official
schedule.*

·  February 24 – Santa Clara, CA: Sec. Clinton to Keynote Address at
Inaugural Watermark Conference for Women (PR Newswire
<http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/hillary-rodham-clinton-to-deliver-keynote-address-at-inaugural-watermark-conference-for-women-283200361.html>
)

·  March 4 – New York, NY: Sec. Clinton to fundraise for the Clinton
Foundation (WSJ
<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/01/15/carole-king-hillary-clinton-live-top-tickets-100000/>
)

·  March 19 – Atlantic City, NJ: Sec. Clinton keynotes American Camp
Association conference (PR Newswire <http://www.sys-con.com/node/3254649>)

·  March 23 – Washington, DC: Sec. Clinton to keynote award ceremony for
the Toner Prize for Excellence in Political Reporting (Syracuse
<http://newhouse.syr.edu/news-events/news/former-secretary-state-hillary-rodham-clinton-deliver-keynote-newhouse-school-s>
)