Online Political BlogYour source for politics

The Party of No is having a hard time figuring out how to appease the base they purposely riled up with outrageous claims about granny killing and government take overs in health reform. They didn’t have a plan B for if it passed, despite their best efforts, so now they’ve got a monster on their hands. It all boils down to repeal or not repeal, and neither choice seems to be a winning proposition.

WASHINGTON — Top Republicans are increasingly worried that GOP candidates this fall might be burned by a fire that’s roaring through the conservative base: demand for the repeal of President Barack Obama’s new health care law.

It’s fine to criticize the health law and the way Democrats pushed it through Congress without a single GOP vote, these party leaders say. But focusing on its outright repeal carries two big risks.

Repeal is politically and legally unlikely, and grass-roots activists may feel disillusioned by a failed crusade. More important, say strategists from both parties, a fiercely repeal-the-bill stance might prove far less popular in a general election than in a conservative-dominated GOP primary, especially in states such as Illinois and California….

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who chairs the committee responsible for electing GOP senators this fall, said in an interview, “The focus really should be on the misplaced priorities of the administration” and Congress’ Democratic leaders.

“The No. 1 concern of the public is jobs and people losing their homes,” he said. “The administration has been obsessing on this health care bill.”

Asked if he advises Republican Senate candidates to call for repealing the law, Cornyn said: “Candidates are going to test the winds in their own states. … In some places, the health care bill is more popular than others.”

….

Republican strategist Kevin Madden said the repeal message is “a call to action” that excites many conservative voters, who will be important in November. But the risk of talking only about repeal, he said, “is you only define your position by what you’re against.”

Madden said GOP candidates should advocate “repeal and reform,” which will let them discuss alternative ways to control health care expenses, quality and access. Because an actual repeal is unlikely, he said, candidates should not get bogged down in the mechanics of how it might work, and focus instead on issues such as costs.

That’ll solve the conundrum, talk about all the problems with the bill, but don’t get “bogged down” in messy details like what you would do to fix it. Might work for what’s left of moderate Republicans, but it won’t satisfy a rabid base and seems pretty darned unlikely to appeal to swing voters, who mostly just want to see government doing something.

AP – Telephone fundraisers who duped consumers about their donations to police and firefighters must pay a record fine worth .8 million, including surrender of pricey Picasso paintings, luxury cars and a guitar collection.

President Barack Obama is allowing oil drilling off Virginia’s shorelines and considering it for a large chunk of the Atlantic seaboard. He’s rejecting some new drilling sites in Alaska.

Where have we heard this before? “I couldn’t support the bill in its current form. I am absolutely not throwing in the towel. I have no plans to support the current legislation. I hope we’ll get back to the negotiating table.”

Let’s just get back to the negotiating table and spend more time talking about maybe eventually passing a financial reform bill, the kinder, gentler way of Republican obstructionism as practiced by Olympia Snowe for months, and months, and months in health insurance reform. It could have been different, as last week Corker broke ranks with his party, saying that Republicans had made “a very large strategic mistake” in not working in the Banking Committee toward a bipartisan deal. He’s now back in line after straying.

Last week Mr. Corker, of Tennessee, said he expected a bill would pass, infuriating Republicans and many bank executives who thought he was making it easier for Democrats to push the bill through.

No Republican has yet signaled support for the bill and Mr. Corker’s latest comments could reflect a new GOP resolve to oppose it unless changes are made.

For his part, Banking Committee chair Chris Dodd says he’s still open to a bipartisan deal, and the White House open, but not particularly optimistic:

Axelrod made clear that invitation exists from the Obama administration too, but he sounded far from optimistic about the chances of a bipartisan financial regulatory reform package.

“We’re certainly going to invite them to participate with us,” Axelrod said of the Republicans. “There’s enormous pressure from the financial industry, huge army of lobbyists on the Hill. The Republican Party has generally been very responsive to that lobby and one hopes that some of them will break loose here and say we can’t allow the country to get into the same situation we were in the last few years because of the reckless speculation on Wall Street,” he added.

The difficulty on financial reform is that Dems don’t have the same options for going it alone as they did in health insurance reform this year. Since the lesson of the need for Republicans to cooperate on major legislation hasn’t stuck with Corker, this will be a major test for the administration and Dodd.

Former first lady Barbara Bush was discharged from Methodist hospital in Houston Wednesday.

This brings to mind that old definition of insanity:

The Obama administration is proposing to open vast expanses of water along the Atlantic coastline, the eastern Gulf of Mexico and the north coast of Alaska to oil and natural gas drilling, much of it for the first time, officials said Tuesday.  [...]

The proposal is intended to reduce dependence on oil imports, generate revenue from the sale of offshore leases and help win political support for comprehensive energy and climate legislation.  [...]

The Senate is expected to take up a climate bill in the next few weeks — the last chance to enact such legislation before midterm election concerns take over. Mr. Obama and his allies in the Senate have already made significant concessions on coal and nuclear power to try to win votes from Republicans and moderate Democrats. The new plan now grants one of the biggest items on the oil industry’s wish list — access to vast areas of the Outer Continental Shelf for drilling.

To be fair, it should be pointed out that candidate Obama did say he’d be willing to compromise on this issue in the interest of getting “something done.” But after fourteen months of the Party of No, does he really think that the Republican party will have any interest in working with him on this?

For more discussion, see RLMiller’s diary.

Update: The first Republican response:

President Barack Obama’s plan to allow expanded offshore oil and gas exploration won rebuke from the top House Republican on Wednesday.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) dismissed the president’s plan as not going far enough in opening up U.S. waters for exploration.

Obama’s decision “continues to defy the will of the American people,” Boehner said in a statement, pointing to the president’s decision to open Atlantic and Gulf of Mexico waters, while leaving Pacific and many Alaskan waters largely closed to exploration.

Volunteers and staff members sort 20,000 letters and e-mails daily before an aide picks the 10 destined to provide the President with a glimpse beyond “the presidential bubble.”

Traditionally, we have used our fundraising efforts to help second- and third-tier candidates get some traction. it has always focused on challengers to Republican seats, with the ocasional primary campaign when warranted.

One thing we’ve never focused on was incumbents.

This year, we launched our Orange to Blue page with Bill Halter, but it’s getting to be time to start adding our first wave of candidates.

We’re exploring those possibilities now, and we’re happy to take suggestions in the comments of this post. Any candidate we add to the list has to be solid on immigration reform, EFCA, repeal of DADT, climate change, and the public option. House candidates have to pledge never to join the Blue Dog caucus, while Senate candidates have to pledge filibuster reform. Also, candidates have to have respectable fundraising for us to even consider a campaign. We’re not going to single-handedly carry any campaign financially.

But more pressing at this point, we’re curious as to whether you think we should expand our O2B list to incumbent Democrats, like, say, Alan Grayson and others like him?

In a nutshell, the argument for helping out incumbents: what better way to support candidates in tough districts who do the right thing? Argument against: incumbents already have a strong fundraising base to work from, so it’s better to help out challengers.

So let’s do a poll and get a sense of community sentiment. Should we start considering incumbent Democrats for inclusion into our O2B fundraising page? Vote below.

A couple of weeks ago, Illinois Senate Republican candidate Mark Kirk fired up his party loyalists at a private event by casting himself as a champion of his party’s teabagger fringe:

“I’m Mark Kirk, and I can’t wait to vote against health care reform next week.”

But that was enough:

If elected, U.S. Senate candidate Mark Kirk is promising he will “lead the effort” to repeal the health care reform package Democrats are working furiously to pass. The North Shore Republican made the statement at a New Trier GOP Corned Beef and Cabbage Dinner last Friday.

And beyond exuberance at his obstructionist vote on health care, and eagerness to fight for its repeal, he bragged about how GOP obstructionism was hurting Obama:

“We’re on the way to making this guy a one-termer.”

Now this might play in Kentucky, or Louisiana, or Alabama. But in Illinois?

The problem, of course, wasn’t that Kirk said it at the private event, but that someone got it on tape and leaked it to the press. And ever since then, Kirk has been nowhere to be found, refusing to answer the obvious questions about those statements. Kirk knows full well that he’s running in Illinois, Land of Obama, and one of the most Democratic states in the union. An agenda of Obama bashing and repeal won’t get him far.

Today, Kirk finally spoke on the issue.

Today he spoke about health care with far less bravado.

“I voted against it, but we lost,” Kirk said Tuesday. “My job is to explain how this will affect voters.”

Boy, not sounding so tough anymore, is he? And while reporters repeatedly asked him if he would “‘lead the effort” to repeal the reform law, he refused to directly answer the question. He knew that no matter how he answered, it would do little to help him with voters.

Bottom line, Kirk isn’t happy his words leaked out, he’s not happy his true agenda has been exposed, he’s not happy that Illinois voters have seen the real him. But they have. And no matter how much Kirk may try to make Alexi’s family’s troubled bank the issue, the bottom line of this race is this: voters will have a choice between a candidate who wants to lead the reform repeal effort and work for the defeat of Barack Obama, and one who is actually on the side of Illinois voters.

Now, while backing away from “repeal” might be smart politics (or at least, less idiotic), this is the GOP we’re talking about.

[T]he Club for Growth, the powerful, well-funded conservative group, is ripping into Kirk for his sudden indecision, and making it clear that they expect him to live up to his promise.

“He said that he’s going to do this,” Club for Growth spokesman Mike Connolly just said by phone. “We expect him to live up to his pledge.”

Kirk has signed on to the Club’s repeal pledge, which states: “I hereby pledge to the people of my state to sponsor and support legislation to repeal any federal health care takeover passed in 2010, and replace it with real reforms that lower health care costs without growing government.”

“He’s made a promise to the people of Illinois,” Connolly continued. Asked if failing to follow through could cost Kirk the Club’s support in a general election, Connolly said: “We’ll have to see.”

Update: Giannoulias’ website is here.

AP – President Barack Obama stepped carefully when talking for the first time about the conservative tea party movement, saying the core of the loose anti-government network is “on the fringe” but acknowledging others have legitimate concerns about federal reach and spending.