Go Ahead & #GoBigObama

What a way to make an impression with one's constituents. For some reason, Georgia Governor Nathan Deal (R) thought it would be a great idea to insult a group of undocumented immigrants confronting him over his inhumane anti-immigrant policies, including a rule that bars DREAMers from attending public colleges in Georgia.

Here's what Nathan Deal got wrong: He clearly wasn't expecting this good of a comeback. Oh, and the students he claimed were undocumented immigrants were actually US citizens. Whoops.



And this isn't the only recent example of G-O-TEA politicians encountering hot water when trying to spin away anything & everything immigration related. Earlier this month, Senator (& likely 2016 Presidential Candidate) Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) ran away when confronted by DREAMers. And earlier this week, Rep. (& fellow likely 2016 Presidential Candidate) Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) refused to answer questions from DREAMers on why he voted to deport them along with Central American refugee children.



And then, there's Senator (& another possible 2016 Presidential Candidate) Marco Rubio (R-Florida). Once upon a time, Rubio was a lead sponsor of S 744, the comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) bill that handily passed the Senate last year. But as of late, Rubio has been trying to catch up with Rand Paul in the anti-immigrant department. And now, Senator Rubio is condemning the very CIR legislation he once sponsored.



The devolution is now complete. Republican politicians who once supported CIR are now running away from it as fast as they can. And once respected "conservative think tanks" are now advocating public funding for anti-immigrant/anti-government militia groups.

So why are they doing this? Why are they flip-flopping so wildly? And why are they now embracing the extreme anti-immigrant militia movement?

Simple answer: Short term politics. Longer answer: They're so frightened of their 21st Century Know Nothing base that they're willing to sacrifice sound policy (and smart political strategy) to grovel to G-O-TEA Culture Warriors' darkest desires.

This is why CIR now lies dead in some House committee room. And this is why President Obama must take executive action to address what the lower House of Congress refuses to fix. While DACA does provide some relief for DREAMers, their family, friends, colleagues, and neighbors are still being deported en masse. Even though they committed no crimes and have made many positive contributions to our communities, they're still being deported. In fact, President Obama has presided over more deportations than any other US President.

Since the lower House of Congress refuses to act, President Obama must. Since House Republicans (cough- Joe Heck -cough) insist on playing petty politics with real people's lives, President Obama must look past the petty politics and focus on good policy. Since the lower House of Congress declined to "go big", the President must.

Borderline Grandstanding

And just like that, she's back. What? You thought she'd pass up another opportunity to grab some more cringe worthy headlines?

Ann Coulter has never been one to shy away from flame wars. Rather, she revels in starting them. So today, she decided to cap off her xenophobic campaign against soccer with a Twitter tirade against newly minted MSNBC daytime host Jose Diaz Balart.

But wait, what exactly did Jose Diaz Balart do? Oh, he just did a live interview on his debut show with Maria, a teenage girl from Honduras who recently came to the US to escape the living hell that her former home had become.



This morning, Jose Diaz Balart dared to expose the real life human tragedy that's fueling the Central American refugee crisis. That's why the usual G-O-TEA suspects are fuming. It's so much easier to stage an ammosexual orgy a "Border visit" photo-op.



Once upon a time, Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) made a big splash in helping pass S 744. But when the 21st Century Know Nothings demanded an end to any kind of comprehensive immigration reform (CIR), Senator Rubio turned around to kill his own bill.

But now, all of a sudden, Senator Marco Rubio wants his own CIR bill brought back to life... After he helped kill it in such a brutal manner. We can only wonder what inspired Senator Rubio's latest flip-flop change of heart.

Is it the tremendous backlog of cases in immigration courts? Is it the discovery that his G-O-TEA colleagues on Capitol Hill passed up $900 billion in federal budget dedicit reduction to wage a fight over a mere $4 billion to address this immediate issue? Is it the sight of all these refugees coming here to escape the suffering they've endured in Central America? Or is it just the realization that most of his fellow Congressional Republicans once again failed to solve the crisis they created?

As we've discussed before, these refugees are real people. They are coming here to escape the real life horror story that Guatemala, Honduras, and El Salvador have become. Pointless "borderline grandstanding" will do nothing to solve this problem.

It's always easier to attack a theoretical construct than it is to denigrate real people escaping real suffering. Right now, many Congressional Republicans think they can stir up some "borderline grandstanding" and use it to their advantage this fall and in 2016. They may want to think twice before they proceed any further down this road.

Hot Scandal

Ready for some hot, hot, hot #Benghazi action? House Speaker John Boehner (R-Benghazi) most certainly is. And he doesn't care whether or not Democrats come along for the ride. He just wants to get his Benghazi on, baby!

Yet while he and the rest of his G-O-TEA acolytes (cough- Joe Heck -cough) prepare to take their Benghazimania to the next level, the rest of the nation keeps wondering why they're losing their s**t over this.



And why are they losing their s**t over this and not the greatest global security threat of our time? Why is it "overreaching" to talk about the very real threats posed by climate change?



While House Republicans are losing their s**t over a hashtag and some half-baked conspiracy theories, the rest of us are being scared s**tless by real life. And by real life, we mean the West Antarctic Ice Sheet. We've known for some time that the ice in Antarctica is melting faster than we're accustomed to. But now, we have confirmation that s**t is about to get awfully real far sooner than we had expected.

And no, we're not talking about "abstract models". We're talking about real life. We're talking about what we're already experiencing now. We're talking about our own future.

While G-O-TEA politicians obsess over their new favorite haute faux scandal, a very real scandal is unfolding before our eyes. This scandal is so real that the US Defense Department is now preparing for future climate relayed national security threats. What else do G-O-TEA politicians need to realize the actual hot scandal emerging just outside their front door?

For us here in Nevada, the Great Western Drought is already taking its toll. And for many other parts of the nation, this scandal has already reached a furious boiling point. So why can't Congress start investigating (and more importantly, acting upon) this very real & very hot scandal?

It's Their Choice

And it's happened again. Is anyone surprised? Late last month, Former Lt. Governor Sue Wagner caused a political earthquake here in Nevada by announcing she's no longer a registered Republican. And when Neena Laxalt soon followed, we got quite the aftershock.

And this week, we have another prominent Republican quitting the party. But this time, it's in Florida. And Former Florida State Rep. Ana Rivas Logan made waves by switching her registration from Republican to Democratic. But why?

"The GOP of today is not the party I joined," said Rivas Logan, who also served on the Miami-Dade School Board. "It's not the party of my parents. It's a party that has been radicalized and held hostage by a group of extremists."

Rivas Logan was welcomed to the party by another Republican-turned-Democrat: gubernatorial candidate Charlie Crist. 

"Bienvenida @anarivaslogan to the Democratic Party!" Crist wrote on Twitter. "Glad you are here my friend." [...]

On Monday, Rivas Logan called the Republican Party "a party that attacks women and minorities — and one that asked me, and my former Hispanic Republican colleagues in the Florida legislature, to turn on their own people by supporting extreme anti-immigrant policies."

What else can we say? They can't say we didn't warn them. When we said that Republicans' stealth campaign to kill comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) would come back to bite them, we envisioned this happening.

After all, who would feel welcome in a party that rewards politicians who try to use xenophobia and hatred for political advantage? And sadly for those Republicans who share the same worries as Ana Rivas Logan, this trend shows no signs of letting up. Instead, (current federal Rep. and) "King of Crazy" Steve King (R-Iowa) is running victory laps around the rotting corpse of CIR on Capitol Hill.

"It's the right position and makes sense and is consistent with a majority of our conference -- a significant majority of our conference," Rep. Steve King (R-IA) told TPM in a brief interview on Monday evening.

He claimed House Republicans oppose bringing up immigration reform by "a three or four to one" margin.

The Iowa congressman said reform opponents must keep the heat on Republican leaders so that they don't change their minds.

"We still have to man the watchtowers because things could change," he said.

Wait, what?! What does Rep. King mean by "manning the watchtowers"? Perhaps he's referring to this. The House voted yesterday to raise the debt ceiling in order for the nation to pay its bills. The final tally was 221-201, with 28 Republicans joining 193 Democrats to pass it. (For the record, Reps. Mark Amodei [R-Carson City] & Joe Heck [R-Henderson] voted against paying the nation's bills, while Reps. Dina Titus [D-Paradise] & Steven Horsford [D-North Las Vegas] both voted in favor of doing so.)

So what does the latest debt ceiling vote have to do with CIR? Think two letters and a number: HR 15. It already has bipartisan support, and it's modeled after the bipartisan Senate CIR bill that easily passed that chamber last summer. Since House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) has now demonstrated that bills can pass the lower house of Congress without the "TEA Powered Total Obstruction Caucus", why can't he bring to the floor legislation that achieves what several of his backbenchers (cough- Joe Heck- cough) have said they want to accomplish?

Right now, Steve King is running victory laps on Capitol Hill because he believes Speaker Boehner is too afraid of him and his fellow 21st Century Know Nothings to actually cross them & let CIR pass. But if Speaker Boehner & other Republican "leaders" want to prove they're serious about offering America a realistic option for sound governance, then they must drop the "rebranding" nonsense and actually start governing for real. And that means they must pass long awaited & sorely needed legislation that has clear bipartisan support, even if it's legislation that the 'baggers don't like.

Either Republicans can finally let CIR pass, or they can let more members like Ana Rivas Logan leave their sorry excuse for a party. It's ultimately their choice.

Making the Cut

Last week, we couldn't help but notice an "important speech on poverty and the role of government" by none other than Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida). Why is he so "concerned about poverty" now? And why is he advocating policies that would actually worsen economic inequality in this nation?

And it's not just Senator Rubio any more. House G-O-TEA "leaders" Paul Ryan (R-Wisconsin) and Eric Cantor (R-Virginia) piled on last week with their prescriptions for escalating austerity "fighting poverty". And like Rubio's "great ideas", their "great ideas" would likely only worsen economic inequality.

So why are these G-O-TEA politicians suddenly feigning interest in "fighting poverty"? Their sacred policies point in the other direction. Are they just trying to put a more compassionate face on their austere policies? Is this yet another reincarnation of Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy"? Might it be a rather sordid combination of the two?

It seems all too politically convenient that this new campaign of "conservative solutions to poverty" is happening just as an extension of unemployment insurance (UI) is increasingly at risk of dying on the vine in Congress. Already, 1.3 million Americans are suffering because their UI expired. And if the UI extension remains expired this year, we can expect to lose at least 0.2% of GDP growth in 2014.

Once again, Republican infighting and "TEA" flavored chaos have thrown a monkey wrench into the US economic machine. This time, it's causing unnecessary pain & suffering for the jobless... And it risks spreading the pain to the entire economy. Even as Senator Dean Heller (R) and a few other Congressional Republicans are calling for UI extension, the Puri-TEA Brigade won't accept anything less than another round of economy-crippling austerity simply for the ideology behind it while others will only accept UI extension if it's tied to a few austerity laced "pay-for's". Needless to say, the Republican Party's ongoing political identity crisis has succeeded in manufacturing another unnecessary crisis.

But since (surprise, surprise) this latest & greatest manufactured crisis isn't polling well, Republican strategists are looking to ways to change the media narrative. So voilà, Marco Rubio & Paul Ryan & other top G-O-TEA "leaders" take to the stage to proclaim their "conservative" solutions to poverty!

Unfortunately for them, the Golden Globes were last night. And Academy Award nominations are probably being finalized as we speak. So they probably won't make the cut (even as they keep trying to cut further into America's social safety net).

Marco's Masquerade

Here he goes again. Earlier today, we discussed Senator Marco Rubio's (R-Thirsty for TEA) "true conservative plan to fight poverty". Apparently, there was something we missed this morning.

Believe it or not, Senator Rubio believes he has the ultimate solution to poverty in America: Marriage! Who knew getting hitched could magically solve women's economic problems? But wait, there's a rather large problem with Marco Rubio's great marriage solution: It doesn't actually work that way.

But you know what works? Ding, ding, ding: A functioning social safety net!

[Ohio State University sociology professor Kristi] Williams points to greater access to “comprehensive and early sex education and expansive and affordable access to birth control and family planning services” to help women avoid unwanted or mistimed births. Contraception can be a potent tool in helping women achieve a higher economic status. In one study, the majority of women reported that contraception allowed them to support themselves financially, complete their education, and either keep or get a job. And family planning doesn’t just benefit mothers: it benefits their future children. Research has found that it can increase their children’s likelihood of completing college and getting a job while boosting their wages decades later. But it can also be costly, which can limit access. One in three women have struggled to afford prescription birth control at some point, and more than half of young women experienced a time when they couldn’t afford to take it consistently.

But even with greater access to contraception, some women will still be single mothers. So what can we do to help them stay out of poverty? It turns out that while marriage may not offer much help, better policies could. American single mothers are worse off than their counterparts in 16 other high-income peer countries thanks to a thin social safety net. Single moms in this country have the highest rates of lacking health insurance, put up with the stingiest income support programs, have to wait longer than in other countries for early childhood education to begin, aren’t guaranteed paid time off of work for a new child or if they or their kids fall sick, and have a low rate of receiving child support. They also are much more likely to be employed in low wage work.

There are ways to solve the problems they face: universal preschool and more support for childcare could help them get to jobs and know their children have somewhere to be; raising the minimum wage would lift many out of poverty; guaranteed paid sick days would give them the ability to care for a child when he or she falls ill without losing wages or risking a job; paid family leave would mean they wouldn’t have to quit, go into debt, or go on public assistance when a new child arrives; welfare, or the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, could be updated so that it reaches more families and the benefits could be enhanced so that they are worth more than in 1996.

You know what also works? Contraception. And access to other critical family planning services. And education.

You know what doesn't work? This ridiculous War on Women! Seriously, Rubio and other G-O-TEA politicians don't know what's best for America's women. Many sisters can easily do it for themselves. And for those who need a helping hand, it's much easier and more cost effective to simply provide that helping hand rather than try to take control of their lives.

But yet again, some House G-O-TEA yahoos are embarking on another battle to take away women’s access to reproductive health care. How does that reduce poverty? Here's a helpful hint: It doesn't.

Oh, and it's funny that Senator Rubio is suddenly encouraging people to get married. He must really like the thought of families coming together... Or perhaps not. It wasn't that long ago when he was threatening to quash comprehensive immigration reform if it meant help for LGBTQ families trying to reunite.

For all their talk of "celebrating marriage & family" and "cutting waste", Senator Rubio and other top DC Republicans haven't said a peep about the State of Utah wasting $2 million on its legal campaign to deny LGBTQ families civil marriage rights. How does anti-LGBTQ discrimination reduce poverty? Here's a helpful hint: It doesn't. (If anything, the opposite is true.)

It looks to us like Senator Rubio invited us to a masquerade ball. He's wearing a new mask of "poverty fighter", but beneath that mask is the same old Culture Warrior. Color us unimpressed. If we want a good ball, we already know damned well where to find one. And if Marco Rubio wants effective policies to reduce poverty, we already know damned well where to find those.

What Works

Remember him? Once upon a time, he was supposed to deliver comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). Instead, he ended up abandoning his own bill. And since he let CIR die on the vine on Capitol Hill, Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) has tried hard to win back the 21st Century Know Nothing support he lost when he showed actual interest in advancing CIR.

So now, Senator Rubio is trying to win back the hearts & minds of the G-O-TEA base by advocating "conservative solutions to poverty". So what are his preferred "conservative solutions to poverty"? Oh, he just wants to move the jobless around and dissolve the national social safety net. Say what?!

Because Senator Rubio and a few other Congressional Republicans wanted to "look compassionate" while opposing a badly needed extension of longer term unemployment insurance (UI), they're now claiming they just want "more effective policies to actually put people back to work". Here's the problem with their claim: their preferred policies don't actually work. By simply cutting off people and need and hoping "someone else" steps in to rescue them, we only risk drowning them in a sea of poverty & despair.

You know what does work in reducing poverty and helping people get back to work? That's right, the social safety net does. Oh, and so do unions. So there's also that. (Sorry, anti-worker "TEA" drinking politicians.)

Funny enough, most Americans get this. Even Senator Dean Heller (R) seems to get the UI part of this equation. (Keep in mind that broken non-digital clocks are correct twice a day.) So why not just stick to what works?

That's what we'd really like to ask "TEA" sipping politicians on Capitol Hill today. If Marco Rubio and his Republican "leaders" truly care about ending poverty and putting people back to work, they must first recognize what works. And then, they actually need to implement policies that work.

Finish the Job

Last Thursday, President Obama (once again) asked Congress to finish the job on comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). And he wasn't alone. There's (still) widespread support in Nevada and across the nation for CIR.

So why can't we count on Congress to finish the job? Once again, the usual G-O-TEA suspects just don't want to budge... On this, or on anything else, really. And now, they're receiving an assist from the very Republican who was supposed to deliver his party (and their votes) for CIR!

The senator's change of heart is an ominous sign for reform because there is no bipartisan consensus on immigration reform without a path to citizenship for the 11 million people living in the country illegally. The House Republican majority opposes such a provision. Proponents had hoped the House would approve smaller, piecemeal bills and move to initiate a conference committee to reconcile the chambers' differences -- the normal legislative process. Conservatives quickly saw the strategy as a ploy to enact "amnesty" and moved to close the door on conference.

Now, they have Rubio's support.

"[E]arlier this year, Senator [Marco] Rubio [R-Florida] put aside his personal preference for a piecemeal approach and reached across the aisle to craft a bipartisan solution in the Senate. And unlike many of the proponents of reform in the Democratic party, he did so despite strong opposition within his own party and at a significant and well documented political price," [spokesman Alex] Conant said. "But sufficient support for that approach simply does not exist at this time. And in fact it has only eroded further as evidenced by the fact that virtually every House Republican working on a bipartisan comprehensive bill has since abandoned that effort."

The ambitious Florida senator saw his standing diminish among conservative voters after he supported the Senate bill. Opposing conference on the Senate bill leaves little, if any, room to pass reform through a divided Congress as the broad coalitions that hold together the Senate legislation would splinter if any major components are excluded. House Republicans have resisted President Barack Obama's repeated calls for reviving the stalled effort, and lack an internal consensus on how to proceed on an incremental basis.

So now, the devolution is complete. Marco Rubio has been reduced to opposing his own bill. And he's doing so in a last ditch effort to win back the love and adoration of the 21st Century Know Nothings who call the shots in today's G-O-TEA.

But wait, Senator Rubio said something can still happen. Congress just has to do it "step by step". Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) said the same thing at a Summerlin area town hall in August. Yet so far, we've seen nothing emerge from the G-O-TEA run House.

And that's for a reason. Despite Heck's and Rubio's assurance that the House Republican Caucus is open to piecemeal immigration bills, House Republican "leaders" have basically conceded that they can't accomplish anything because they can't get their own caucus to quit its manufactured crisis habit.

So is it all over now? Not so fast. None other than Joe Heck is now condemning House Republican "leaders" for dropping CIR like some unwanted hot potato. And in a major surprise, Rep. Jeff Denham (R-California) announced over the weekend that he's the first Republican cosponsor for the House Democratic CIR bill (modeled after the bipartisan Senate bill)... And he expects more Republicans to come on board.

So immigration reform isn't dead yet... But its survival and ultimate success now depends on House Republicans joining with Democrats to pass what alrwady passed the Senate in June. Rep. Heck is now talking a good game in chastising his own party for being so willing to give up. But in order to finish the job, Joe Heck needs to follow Jeff Denham's lead and match those words with real action.

The Real Tragedy

So Congress is preparing for August recess. That's why the House G-O-TEA all-stars are busy demanding even more economically harmful austerity and death to comprehensive immigration reform. But in case this isn't crazy enough for you, get a load of this.

"If someone else would like to do it instead of me, I'm more than happy to consider it. But I'd like to be the lead sponsor," the Florida Republican said. "I feel very strongly about this issue. And I'd like to be the lead sponsor on it if we can find language that we can unify people behind." [...]

There's no shortage of relevant angles here. For example, [Senator Marco] Rubio [R-Florida], a long-time culture warrior and proponent of social conservatism, desperately wants to make the right like him again after his work on comprehensive immigration reform. Because the right places a high priority of abortion restrictions like these, it's likely the senator sees this as a way to get back into their good graces as he moves closer towards a national campaign.

There's also the larger effect on the Republican Party's "rebranding" initiative. In recent years, as the GOP has become more extreme on issues like these, the party has exacerbated the existing gender gap thanks to the "war on women." Instead of learning the right lessons, the U.S. House approved a 20-week ban championed by Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) last month, and even though it has no realistic chance of success, and now Rubio hopes to follow suit in the U.S. Senate.

Oh, yes. That's right. The War on Women is back in full force! And it's happening because Marco Rubio fears his falling 2016 poll numbers and diminishing standing among the 21st Century Know Nothings.



This is what Rep. Dina Titus (D-Paradise) was decrying last month. And now, Marco Rubio wants the Senate to partake in the House's insani-TEA. Apparently for Senator Rubio and other DC G-O-TEA politicians, women aren't harrassed enough over their health care decisions.

[... In] the 40 years since, [Dr. John J.] Sciarra has been surprised to see the state of reproductive rights moving backward instead of forward. “We did not anticipate the backlash that has turned abortion into an ideological battleground,” the retired doctor writes in a op-edpublished in the Chicago Tribune on Friday. “So I have again joined 99 of my fellow professors of obstetrics and gynecology in another statement on the issue, published earlier this year, in the very same American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.”

In the new statement, Sciarra and 99 of his colleagues point out that even though abortion has been legalized and medical practice has evolved to accommodate a new range of reproductive care, the politicization of the issue still threatens to derail women’s reproductive rights. When Sciarra first advocated for abortion rights back in the 1970s, he and his fellow OB-GYNs imagined that the “increasingly liberal course of events” in the U.S. would create a rising demand for abortion care. They thought the biggest problem facing the country would be a shortage of doctors available to perform abortions. It turns out they were wrong — the biggest problem is actually the web of state-level abortion restrictions that come between women and their doctors.

“We have had 40 years of medical progress but have witnessed political regression that the 100 professors did not anticipate,” their official statement noted. “Forty years later, the change is not liberal. Its effects will threaten, not improve, women’s health and already obstruct physicians’ evidence-based and patient-centered practices.”

Already, state abortion restrictions are causing problems for women across the country. And now, Senator Rubio wants to back those up with anti-scientic, anti-productive, anti-Constitution, and anti-sane anti-choice federal legislation. Because of course, his political career matters more than real women's lives.

This is the real tragedy here. Women's lives are truly at stake here. And these G-O-TEA politicians don't seem to care about the consequences of their actions. Believe it or not, there are more important things than the political future of Marco Rubio, Dean Heller, and Joe Heck.

The "Sexy", Salacious, & Scandalous Demise of #cir?

Oh, yes. That's right. "Scandal-mania" continues. And yet again, "The I Word" is being bandied about.



And already, we're seeing shades of 1998 emerge as 21st Century Know Nothings lick their chops to "IMPEACH!!!" President Clinton Obama over a stained blue dress their own damned failures.

Yesterday, we wondered aloud whether the latest Beltway distractions du jour will help or harm the latest push on Capitol Hill to do something on comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). The more we know about "Scandal-mania", the less it seems like anything but a very thinly veiled political vendetta. So does this mean the Washington Glitterati will finally give it up and attempt some kind of thoughtful governing?



Not so fast. House & Senate Republicans are still demanding more hearings on the latest & greatest distractions du jour. In addition, they're also demanding yet another opportunity to waste Congress' time and taxpayer's money with yet another Obamacare repeal vote. And now, a leading Senate Gang of 8 Republican may actually be sabotaging his own bill by signaling acceptance to unfriendly amendments meant to derail the nascent CIR grand bargain.

Democrats say Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) is overplaying his hand on immigration reform and warn he could kill the bill if he tries to steer it to the right.

The angst among prominent Democrats is a sign that immigration reform has hit a rough patch and the first indication of cracks in the Senate’s Gang of Eight.

Rubio caught fellow members of the Senate’s gang off guard Tuesday when he voiced support for an amendment sponsored by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), the bill’s most outspoken opponent, to dramatically strengthen the system for tracking entry and exit visas. The Sessions measure was defeated by the Judiciary Committee on Tuesday. Rubio does not sit on the panel.

“He needs this bill to succeed as much as Democrats do. If this bill goes down, he goes down with it,” warned a senior Democratic aide. “Rubio is overplaying his hand if he thinks we’ll go along with anything.”

Democrats found Rubio’s support for the proposal egregious because Sessions is an avowed opponent of the bipartisan measure. The amendment would have required the implementation of a system to track biometric data, which Democratic senators on the Gang of Eight say could add as much as $25 billion to the bill’s price tag.

I've been trying hard to remain optimistic about the future of CIR in this Congress. But at this point, it's becoming incredibly difficult to remain so. We've already been detailing the growing list of excuses various House & Senate Republicans are using to oppose the Gang of 8 CIR bill. And now, Senator Marco Rubio is rushing to accept poison pills to his own bill... And do so just as the rest of his party is fixated on overblown & overhyped "OBAMA SCANDALZZZ!!!"

And then, there's this. For four months, we've been awaiting an answer from Senator Dean Heller (R-46%) on where he stands on the Gang of 8 bill. He's still refused to give a direct answer. And now, immigrant rights activists are having no more of it. They're demanding an answer.

You have to love the first of the five reasons a group of activists listed today to explain why Sen. Dean Heller should support immigration reform:

"The number of Latino and Asian voters is growing rapidly in Nevada."

I see they get right to the policy, eh? [...]

The other four reasons given for Heller to do what he likley will do anyhow:

"Latinos and Asian-Americans in Nevada care deeply about immigration reform."

"Nevada has the most to gain from immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants."

"Nevadans across the political spectrum support reform with a path to citizenship."

"Senate Republicans who oppose immigration reform are among the party’s most extreme members – a position that won’t fly in Nevada."

Yes, this is the sledgehammer approach, in case you didn't pick up on it. And these are all things that I am sure Heller did not know, too.

Of course, Ralston viewed this sarcastically. Because of course, Senator Heller is now so "post-partisan"... Except that he truly is not. Gun safety advocates experienced firsthand Senator Heller rushing to the 21st Century Know Nothings' side when push came to shove on a policy sporting 86% (??!!) public support.

Senator Heller has yet to declare his position on the Gang of 8 CIR bill. But of course, his Twitter feed is overflowing in "OBAMA SCANDAL!!!" nonsense. Coincidence? I think not. How easy would it be to bury the unraveling of the Republican Party's attempt to moderate "modernize" with sexy, salacious new "SCANDALZZZ!!!"?

¿Reforma Ahora?

This week has been shaping up to be a critical one in Congress. Several important hot-button issues finally seem to be getting bills and getting action. And soon, we may be getting a big announcement on another major bill.

Apparently within a week, the long awaited "Gang of 8" comprehensive immigration reform (CIR) bill will finally be unveiled completely. Apparently, it will include a 10 year border security plan that must be completed before the estimated 11,000,000 undocumented immigrants currently in America will be allowed to apply for permanent legal residency (and ultimately citizenship). So does this mean a deal?

For many, yes. However, the "tea party" lockstep opposition to CIR continues. They're even trying to fudge numbers to make it seem like CIR is "too expensive". They're pulling out all stops (literally!) to try to stop CIR.

And funny enough, "Gang of 8" Senate Republicans are now rising up to try to knock down the new "tea party" obstruction campaign for CIR.

A group of Republican senators has called on the Judiciary Committee to take its time in reviewing the bill, with some members going so far as to suggest scheduling several months of hearings. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) has expressed some sympathy for their concerns and has called for multiple hearings on his legislation once it’s released — much to the chagrin of immigration activists.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said on Tuesday he was “optimistic” an immigration deal would be reached soon. And he didn’t sound very interested in the prospect of a drawn out set of hearings to review it before moving on to the amendment process and utimately a vote.

“We did [one hearing] in 2006,” Graham said, referring to past efforts at passing a bill. “It was good enough for us in 2006.”

McCain also sounded skeptical of additional hearings in an appearance on CBS’ Face The Nation over the weekend.

“Some are saying, wow, we’re not having enough hearings,” McCain said. “First of all, we know the issue. But second of all, the Judiciary Committee will act. There will be amendments. There will be debate. Then it will go to the floor of the Senate. There will be plenty of time for discussion and debate so I reject this notion that something is being railroaded through.”

What's complicated this has been another "Gang of 8" Republican, Marco Rubio (R-Florida), expressing sympathy for "tea party" efforts to slow down his own bill (with the clear intent to kill it!). Clearly, Rubio has other things in mind. (Hint: 2016.)

Yet despite Rubio's willingness to drink some "TEA", McCain & Graham don't want any (more) of it. They just want their bill to move. And they want to exorcise the political ghosts of Mitt Romney, Sharron Angle, Kris Kobach, and Joe Arpaio from the Republican Party.

So who's with them? That will be the key to CIR's success going forward. As we've discussed before, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) likely has at least 50 Senate Democrats on board for CIR. There seems to be more than enough Senate Republicans open to CIR to create a plausible path to a filibuster-proof 60 vote supermajority. Senator Dean Heller (R) has been one of those winnable Republicans. Will he remain open, even in the face of mounting "tea party" opposition?

Going forward, the challenges for CIR quite clearly lie within the Republican Party. Will there be enough Republicans in Congress willing to do the right thing policy wise? Will there be enough willing to do what may be politically necessary for the long term? And will there be enough willing to do so even if they must pay an immediate political price in Republican primaries next year and/or in 2016?

Stay tuned. This show is about to get even more interesting.

The Evolution Will Not Be Televised?

Today offered a breakthrough of sorts. Another prominent Republican endorsed marriage equality. This time, he's a current elected official. And this time, he's a sitting US Senator. And this time, he's someone who even made Mitt Romney's VP short list.

So what compelled Senator Rob Portman's (R-Ohio) change of heart? His son came out.

"I'm announcing today a change of heart on an issue that a lot of people feel strongly about," Portman said. "It has to do with gay couples' opportunity to marry. And during my career in the House and also last couple years here in the Senate, you know, I've taken a position against gay marriage, rooted in part in my faith and my faith tradition. And had a very personal experience, which is my son came to Jane, my wife, and I, told us that he was gay and that it was not a choice and that, you know he, that's just part of who he is, and he'd been that way ever since he could remember."

Portman said his son's revelation led him to drop his opposition to same-sex marriage. "And that launched an interesting process for me, which was kind of rethinking my position," he said. "You know, talking to my pastor and other religious leaders and going through a process of, at the end, changing my position on the issue. I now believe people ought to have the right to get married."

Certainly, this comes during an already exciting month on the LGBTQ equality front. The Prop 8 and DOMA law suits are scheduled for oral arguments in The US Supreme Court later this month. Many prominent Republicans who had previously served in elected office, as White House staff, and/or in the last 4 Republican Presidential Campaigns recently filed amicus briefs to the Court urging pro-equality rulings in both cases. And now, we have this.

So are Republicans finally evolving on LGBTQ equality? Frank Bruni seems to think so. And he seems to think today's big announcement can help in expediting the process.

Rather than quibble with it, I’d prefer to note how profoundly emblematic his announcement is. Coming right after the widely publicized amicus brief in favor of gay marriage that dozens of prominent Republicans signed, Portman’s remarks illustrate a rapid movement by, and rising tension within, a party that has largely allied itself with social conservatives and is bit by bit breaking with them on this issue.

Seeing how this plays out over the next few years is going to be fascinating, though there’s no doubt how it will play out over the long haul. The majority of Republicans will be forced to publicly embrace same-sex marriage, because a huge majority of young Americans already do. There’s only one trajectory here—toward acceptance and equality—and to ignore that is to risk political marginalization and irrelevance.

In any case, my question for and about Portman, a decent and thoughtful man I’ve known for many years, isn’t why it took a gay son to move him to his current stance, but whether it really took a gay son to do that, and whether he was here or almost here a while back, but just didn’t say so.

What’s too infrequently noted or written is how many Republicans who aren’t on the party’s far right have privately, silently accepted and supported gays and lesbians but have stayed publicly mum, and articulated contrary positions, in the interests of political survival. A big part of what’s changing now isn’t their hearts. It’s their belief that they can be true to their hearts without committing political suicide, because America has made extraordinary progress, and because there’s no turning back.

Steve Benen, however, was not in such a generous mood. He couldn't help but ask some tough questions on today's big announcement.

[I]f Portman learned about his son's sexual orientation in 2011, why did it take the senator so long to come around? And why was he still endorsing discriminatory policies in 2012?

While we're at it, the Cleveland Plain Dealer noted that Portman could support legislation to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, but the senator said he hasn't done this because he says "economic policy issues are his specialty." First, senators are required to tackle a variety of issues. Second, I've seen Portman's positions on economic issues, and if they're his "specialty," he's in trouble.

But even putting all of that aside, there's also a larger consideration to keep in mind about the nature of societal change.

To be sure, I'm genuinely glad Portman has done the right thing, and can only hope it encourages other Republicans to do the same. What I find discouraging, though, is that the Republican senator was content to support discriminatory policies until they affected someone he personally cares about.

What about everyone else's sons and daughters? Why must empathy among conservatives be tied so directly to their own personal interactions?

We've seen this a few too many times. A Republican will support Medicaid cuts right up until he sees the program up close, with his own eyes. Republicans will be skeptical about federal disaster relief right up until it's their community that sees devastation. Republicans are prepared to deny basic rights based on sexual orientation, right up until it's their loved one who's gay.

It seems the key to American social progress in the 21st century is simple: more conservatives having more life experiences.

Yes, that was harsh. But on the other hand, there may be a whole lot of truth to what Benen says. As of late, it seems like the bulk of the Republicans "coming out" for equality are the ones with the most to gain and/or least to lose by "coming out".

Meanwhile in the heart of the G-O-TEA, strong resistance to equality remains. In fact, current G-O-TEA darling & Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida) just boasted of his continuing strident opposition to marriage equality yesterday at CPAC! And of course, CPAC itself lists pro-homophobia/transphobia organizations as its co-sponsors while limiting the involvement of pro-equality Republican outfits.

Even here in Nevada, where one would think "libertarian" attitudes on "personal freedom" would influence Republicans otherwise, evolution has been incredibly difficult. None of the Nevada Republicans in Congress has endorsed marriage equality. Governor Brian Sandoval (R-Scared?) continues to fight equality in court. And even a certain (in)famous Nevada Republican legislator has introduced a "Trojan Horse Bill" meant to strip even the basic defenses from wrongful discrimination from LGBTQ Nevadans!

So Rob Portman's big announcement today is certainly a major step forward. It's now just a matter of whether his fellow Republicans will start moving alongside him. That question looks to be up in the air at the moment.

El Problema con el Té

As of late, media attention in Washington has been swirling around the latest manufactured crisis that's causing unnecessary economic headaches. However, there are still other topics being debated on Capitol Hill. One is comprehensive immigration reform (CIR).

Until this week, it looked like there was a strong bipartisan consensus to finally act on CIR. But all of a sudden, there's a major crack in that consensus. And his name is Jeb Bush.

The reaction to former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s seeming flip-flop-flip on immigration has left many observers with the same reaction: What is he thinking? [...]

Needless to say, people are confused. “Wow,” Marshall Fitz, director of immigration policy at the liberal Center for American Progress, told TPM. Like other reform advocates, he was surprised that Bush,a longtime ally across the aisle, would shift on this.

As recently as Jan. 24, Bush favored a pathway to citizenship. “A practicable system of work-based immigration for both high-skilled and low-skilled immigrants —a system that will include a path to citizenship —will help us meet workforce needs, prevent exportation of jobs to foreign countries and protect against the exploitation of workers,” he wrote in an Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal.

“Where the hell was this Jeb Bush during the campaign?” an unnamed Romney advisor told the Miami Herald. “He spent all this time criticizing Romney and it turns out he has basically the same position. So he wants people to go back to their country and apply for citizenship? Well, that’s self-deportation. We got creamed for talking about that. And now Jeb is saying the same thing.”

And the G-O-TEA base strikes again! Some think Jeb Bush flip-flopped in hopes of regaining lost viability in the 2016 Republican Presidential Primary. Others think this is just a ploy to sell books. Whatever the case, Bush is going against his own family in pandering to the xenophobic "tea party".

So far, lead pro-CIR Republican Senators John McCain (R-Arizona) and Marco Rubio (R-Florida) have been trying to spin away the implications of what just happened. However, another "Gang of 8" Republican is starting to worry.

That Rubio now must convince Bush to swing left on immigration represents an ironic role reversal for the two Florida politicians. Just a few months ago, it was Rubio who publicly opposed a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and Bush who explicitly favored the idea.

“I thought about that issue a lot and [went] back and forth on it before I signed on to my principles and I just concluded that it’s not good for the country in the long term to have millions and millions of people who are forever prohibited from becoming citizens,” Rubio told reporters on his way to a Senate vote. “That hasn’t worked out well for Europe.”

Responding to a question from TPM, Rubio said he did not think Bush’s surprise move would make it harder to convince conservatives to accept an eventual path to citizenship.

“I don’t think so — we have what we have,” Rubio said.

But Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), another member of the bipartisan Senate group working on a bill, expressed serious concern Tuesday about Bush’s rightward turn —especially given his prominent reputation as an immigration reformer.

“He has been a great voice on immigration, he’s been a good governor who understands the Hispanic community,” Graham told reporters. “I just think this proposal caught me off guard and it undercuts what we’re trying to do. I mean I can assure you the Hispanic community has always assumed that for the tradeoffs I’m seeking there will be a pathway to citizenship.”

All along, I figured CIR's biggest obstacle would come from recalcitrant House Republicans. Rubio, McCain, & Graham were hoping that leading conservatives like Bush would step in to guide enough to the "Gang of 8" deal to insure its passage. Yet instead, House G-O-TEA acolytes must be reveling in Bush joining them for the "tea party".

So does this mean Alex Pareene's prediction of CIR's brutal death in the House is starting to come to fruition? We don't know just yet. But at this point, the forecast is looking cloudy.

So far, Senator Dean Heller (R), Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson), and Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Carson City) have all signaled at least initial support for the "Gang of 8" plan. So we'll have to watch Nevada's own Republican Congresscritters to see what happens next to CIR on Capitol Hill. Will they stick with the likes of McCain & Rubio in hopes of rehabilitating the Nevada Republican Party's image among Latin@ voters while also finally achieving an unfulfilled promise to their big business supporters? Or will they cave to the teabaggers and flip-flop like Jeb Bush just did?

The fate of immigration reform may now lie in their hands.

More #SOTU

7:40 PM: Shorter Marco Rubio: "OBAMA SUCKS!!!"

So that's the Republican response. Oh, that and putting "middle class" in front of policies meant to destroy the middle class. And this is supposed to be "Republicans' rising star". Oh, and he also apparently is OK with violence against women.

7:59 PM: Here's Ed Kilgore on what we just witnessed.

I thought speech clever in how he handled challenge to GOP; very Clintonian in policy offerings (and better than past SOTUs); and pretty good at taking advantage of areas where public opinion pretty much already on his side. Minimum wage increase good example: Republican pols and business leaders hate it, public loves it. [...]

But while Obama’s speech probably won’t move public opinion mountains, and he may have been a mite subtle in calling out the GOP, it was a strong performance that left Republicans looking either clueless (Rubio) or uncomfortable (Boehner). On the big issues, Obama and Democrats were already playing from a stronger hand, and he strengthened it on a pretty broad front tonight.

President Obama's speech clocked in at exactly one hour. And in that hour, he addressed the very issues on the top of most Americans' minds. He evoked the broad consensus among the American people on gun safety, immigration reform, economic justice, climate change, civil rights, and more.

In a funny way, Marco Rubio served as the perfect foil. He just seemed to throw a temper tantrum because Republicans lost last November. And he attacked essentially an artificial straw man of the President. And he used occasionally pretty language to conceal some ugly and unpopular policies, like gutting Medicare and protecting "billionaire bailouts".

Need I say more? Well, I will tomorrow morning.

8:18 PM: Meanwhile in Southern California, an update on Christopher Dorner.

A body was found inside the burned-out cabin Tuesday night where Christopher Jordan Dorner was believed to have kept law enforcement authorities at bay before officers fired tear gas into the structure, a source told The Times.

The body, which was found in the charred rubble of the mountainside cabin, was not positively identified, the source said. The process of determining whether the body is that of the former Los Angeles Police Department officer could take hours or even days, the source said.

As authorities moved into the cabin earlier Tuesday, they heard a single gunshot.

It will likely take days to definitively identify this body, but there are clearly already strong suspicions as to what happened.

Again, it was so jarring to see this story unfold just as President Obama was about to enter Congress. Yet it reinforced what President Obama had to say on gun safety. Dorner may have accumulated his weapons here in Nevada. At the very least, there's evidence suggesting he purchased dangerous accessories like suppressors at Lock N' Load here in Henderson.

However Dorner got his assault weapons, he used them to kill four people and injure three more. The entire nation was reminded again of what happens when dangerous and deadly weapons fall into the wrong hands. And this comes on the heels of the Newtown tragedy where Adam Lanza killed 20 children and 6 adults with an AR-15 assault weapon in December. And yet, the Assault Weapons Ban is "controversial" on Capitol Hill? President Obama clearly wants to change this calculus.

And perhaps tonight can change that. It rests on Congress. And it ultimately rests on the people. What will the people do to make their Members of Congress act on gun violence prevention?

Dean Heller's "Moderate" Baloney

All of a sudden, Dean Heller wants Nevada voters to forget his real record. All of a sudden, Heller now says he's "open" to Marco Rubio's "Kill the DREAM Act" that would permanently make millions of immigrant kids second-class citizens.

Rubio’s suggestion for a DREAM Act would mean that potentially millions of kids who grew up in the United States without the right papers would be forced to be non-voting residents of their home country. Rubio may be using the rhetoric of defending Latinos against right-wing attacks, but the Republican policies don’t play out well for Latinos, specifically on the DREAM Act. The Republican presidential candidates are running on extreme immigration policies, and it would take a lot for Latinos to regain trust in the party. Offering a path to second-class citizenship is not exactly the olive branch Latinos are looking for.

And this is what Dean Heller is "open" to. Second-class citizenship? Mitt Romnney and Kris Kobach may still think it's "amnesty", but this is really nothing more than pointless pandering.

And then, there's this. All of a sudden, Heller wants us to think he opposes Paul Ryan's Medicare busting budget. So now we're supposed to forget Heller's real record? And we're supposed to forget his unbalanced nonsense plan that would destroy Medicare & Social Security if enacted?

Heller is even trying to have it both ways on marriage equality. He claims he "doesn't want to talk about it", but he still managed to (again) state his support for marriage discrimination against LGBTQ Nevadans. So he "doesn't want to talk about it", except when he wants to reassure the radical religious right that he's still "one of them". Lovely.

I can see right through Heller's BS. He's trying to make us forget his real record. He wants us to forget his history of bowing to extreme "tea party" madness. But in today's era of online vote archives & YouTube, Dean Heller will have to find out the hard way that it's not as easy to erase away his own record as he thinks.