Trumponomics Is Killing The Economy Everywhere-- But Hitting Rural America Hardest Of All

The thriving economy Trump inherited from Obama was on autopilot. All he had ti do was not mess it up. The post-Bush recession Obama fixed and the economy he put in place kept chugging along for 2 years despite the trickledown ideology Team Trump started installing from day one. Too late to do anything to save it now. The trade war was meant to feel relatively painless 'til after the midterms. Mission accomplished. As David Lynch put it in the Washington Post , "According to the Atlanta Federal Reserve Bank's 'nowcast,' the picture is increasingly gloomy-- and most economists say the U.S. economy will slow in 2019... The adverse signs are enough for economists... to warn of a 'synchronized slowdown'... A global economy that until recently was humming has broken down, a sharp contrast to the picture just a year ago when the world was experiencing its best growth since 2010 and seemed poised to do even better... Although almost all economists expect the economy to continue growing through 2019, there is now a roughly 1-in-6 chance of a recession over the next 12 months, the highest likelihood since the recovery began in mid-2009, according to the New York Fed." How do we know?

Already, builders in the United States are erecting fewer single-family homes. German factories are sputtering, and in China, retail sales are growing at their slowest pace in 15 years.

The sudden slowing has fed into a global financial sell-off that has driven several U.S. stock indexes into or near bear market territory with losses of more than 20 percent.

Political turmoil at the highest level in the U.S. and other advanced economies-- epitomized by the partial shutdown of the U.S. government and street protests in France-- is further feeding investor anxiety.

Additional forces threaten to turn what had been a gradual global slowing into something more serious. Central banks that went to extraordinary lengths to boost growth after the global financial crisis have become less supportive-- with the Fed announcing another increase in its benchmark interest rate last week. And tensions over Trump's “America First” trade offensive are sapping business confidence on multiple continents.

“The theme coming into this year was everything was synchronized, everything was good everywhere,” said Torsten Slok, chief international economist for Deutsche Bank Securities. “Now everything is not good everywhere.”

...In the United States, despite nearly a decade of uninterrupted economic growth, almost 55 percent of Americans say the country is on the wrong track, according to the RealClearPolitics polling average. A sharp economic slowdown could short-circuit belated rewards for workers who are receiving average annual wage increases of 3.1 percent, the highest mark in nine years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“If that doesn't continue, you'll see continued domestic political polarization,” said Peter Harrell, a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. “Clearly, a slowing economy is a huge concern to the Trump administration.”

An economic slowdown-- coupled with tumbling stock prices-- could also make the president more amenable to a quick deal with China in the months-long tariff war, Harrell said.

“They are getting nervous about the markets and nervous about the slowing in the economy, and there's a similar reaction in Beijing,” he added.

Headlines like World Economy Is Set to Feel the Delayed Trade War Pain in 2019 at Bloomberg News indicate that although Tump's trade wars started in 2018, "2019 will be the year the global economy feels the pain. Bloomberg’s Global Trade Tracker is softening amid a fading rush to front-load export orders ahead of threatened tariffs. And volumes are tipped to slow further even as the U.S. and China seek to resolve their trade spat, with companies warning of ongoing disruption. Already there are casualties. Recent data underscore concerns that trade will be a drag on American growth next year. U.S. consumers are feeling the least optimistic about the future economy in a year, while small business optimism about economic improvement fell to a two-year low and companies expect smaller profit gains in 2019."

Trump's mucking up the economy was his bullying and bullshit-- overlain with failed tax cuts for the rich, paid for by the poor-- gives Democrats an opportunity to expand their 2018 inroads into red rural districts if the party and the candidates present a vision and policy agenda to reverse rural and small-town America’s declining living conditions, something promised by Trump with hollow, cynical words and no action. Savvy Democrats like Audrey Denney and Mike Siegel, expected to run in significantly rural districts like CA-01 and TX-10, appreciate how and why those conditions plummeted in the first place and why there have been few signs of improvement. Rural communities have not recovered the jobs they lost in the Bush recession and a Trump recession is already rearing its head threateningly.

Lillian Salerno, was Obama's undersecretary of rural development in the Agriculture Department from 2012-2017 before moving back to Dallas. She didn't win a 2018 primary bid against another Obama alum, but recently explained to us that "For years, rural and small-town America have fought an uphill battle for economic survival. Many in the halls of power viewed the shuttered storefronts and desolate downtowns as the inevitable consequence of globalization and technology, about which little can (or even should) be done. But one major force behind the steep economic decline is something that, until very recently, has received virtually no attention: the unprecedented level of corporate monopoly power that has been concentrated throughout the American economy. The consequences are wide-ranging and dramatic (one new research paper found that the increase in corporate consolidation effectively transfers $14,000 a year from workers’ wages to corporate profits). But nowhere are the effects more visible than in rural and small-town America. In these communities, corporations dominate local economies to such an extent that people are unable to start their own businesses or sell into markets. They are no longer free to take their labor elsewhere for better pay. Small town businesses and the communities they serve no longer have the power to shape their own economic destinies, which were once vigorously protected by federal antimonopoly laws. She continued:

Let’s look at just one indicator-- new business formation. From 2010 to 2014, 60 percent of counties nationwide saw more businesses close than open, compared with just 17 percent during the four years following the 1990s slowdown. During the 1990s recovery, smaller communities-- counties with less than half a million people-- generated 71 percent of all net new businesses, with counties under 100,000 people accounting for a full third. During the 2010 to 2014 recovery, however, the figure for counties with fewer than half a million people was 19 percent. For counties with less than 100,000 people, it was zero.

How did we get here? After the Great Depression, the government used antimonopoly laws to keep markets open and fair for smaller, independent businesses-- in other words, to keep mom-and-pop shops open and Main Street buzzing. These were businesses run by people who cared about and understood their communities, that kept wealth circulating locally, that created the vast majority of new jobs and that were often the source of game-changing innovation.

But in the 1980s, folks in power decided bigger was better, and conventional political wisdom followed suit. For the federal officials charged with protecting competition, that meant that cheap consumer prices trumped all other values, including the preservation of American jobs, open and competitive markets where innovation could flourish, and maintaining level playing fields for start-ups and small businesses. To this day, when government officials evaluate mergers, it’s considered a good thing when they result in job losses-- because that means, in the twisted reasoning we still use, gains in economic efficiency. The hard-working Americans turned out on the street corner to look for new jobs are the human sacrifices to the insatiable beast of corporate concentration.

This slow-rolling wave of corporate mergers has left almost all major markets-- airlines, telecommunications, health care, retail, milk, seeds for growing crops, hardware, even cowboy boots-- dominated by a cluster of mega-corporations, cloaked behind a plethora of brand names. These behemoths now hold unprecedented power over thousands of once-thriving community economies.

Corporate concentration has hit farmers, ranchers and agricultural workers especially hard. Many markets are entirely monopolized by a single company that dictates the terms of business to suppliers. Two decades ago, in the seed industry alone, 600 independent companies existed. Today there are six giants, several of which are pursuing high-profile mergers that will result in even more radical concentration. Similar levels of concentration exist for the beef, pork, chicken and dairy industries. The result is that the farmer’s share of each retail dollar of food has been collapsing, while consumers pay either the same or higher prices. Mega-corporations in the middle exploit their dominant market positions to reap all the profits.

It is a myth that the economic challenges that rural and small-town America face are caused by forces largely outside our control, like globalization or improvements in technology. We have the ability to help restore competition and economic vibrancy in rural America and beyond. The government has the authority to ensure markets are once again open and competitive so that communities have a chance to shape their own economic destinies. The question is whether we will recognize the error of our ways and put taking on monopolies high on the economic agenda-- for rural and small-town America, and for everyone who wants to ensure our country can once again be the land of opportunity.

Denney and Siegel, both of whom made significant inroads in their 2018 campaigns against entrenched Republicans are talking to rural voters about the rigged economy. Siegel has been explaining, for example, how the GreenNewDeal-- already endorsed by Texas' admired and respected Congressman Lloyd Doggett in a nearby district-- "will bring countless quality jobs to build renewable energy infrastructure, support energy efficiency, and promote local agriculture. Here in Texas, we have a tradition of economic populism going back a hundred years, and we can tap into that with a program that seeks both short-term and long-term change."

Former Iowa congressional candidate Austin Frerick has no plans to run again in 2020 but he's been working at the Open Markets Institute on solving uniquely rural problems facing districts like Siegel's and Denney's. Recently, he wrote that "At the root of rural America’s angst is a fairly simple story that many rural voters recognize. Over the course of a generation, major sectors of the rural economy have been rolled up and are now controlled by a handful of predatory, extractive multinational corporations. As a result, manufacturing and farming jobs have left the area, and opportunities-- to change jobs, start your own business, fund good schools, and build communities where your kids can thrive and start their own families-- are the exception, not the rule. It is no surprise that many of those who remain in these communities have lost any sense of respect, dignity, and self-determination."

He insists that to regain trust, Democrats "need to they are willing to take on the faraway monopoly bosses who are carving up rural communities, shutting down competition, and gaming international trade to get even farther ahead, while corrupting the political process with lobbyists and dark money all along the way. He makes the point that if Democrats want to "compete against Republicans in rural America, they can start by standing up for the right of rural Americans to compete against the corporate monopolies that have been left free to loot and plunder our communities." That should be easy for a Democrat like Audrey Denney in the rural northeast corner of California. Her mostly white (78%) district is 48% rural and growing up on a family farm, studying and then teaching agriculture at a local state university has prepared her well to represent her neighbors. She told us the rural communities up there are dying.

"People," she told me, "don’t have access to healthcare services-- in two of our 11 counties women can’t deliver babies in hospitals. Schools are closing. People are struggling to live paycheck to paycheck. We have a housing crisis and devasting fires like the Camp and Carr Fires continue to ravage my district. Our 2018 campaign cast a vision that our economy shouldn’t just work for the rich-- and every single person should be able to earn a living wage. We talked about bold progressive policies like single-payer healthcare in terms that resonated with rural voters. We cast a vision for how restoring our ecosystems to health could help mitigate climate change and protect us from the devastation of wildfires. We made real strides communicating a unifying message to voters in our vast, rural California district. In 2014, Rep. LaMalfa won by 22 points, in 2016 by 18, and we narrowed that gap to 9 points after only 10 months of campaigning. Another indicator that our message resonated with voters that normally vote conservative is that I earned about 15,000 more votes than governor-elect Newsom in the CA-01. We’ve created a strong base of support and have a roadmap for success in a traditionally conservative district."

How Toxic Would Trump Be Campaigning For House Republicans In Swing District?

Read any of that stuff about how most Democratic candidates don't want the Clintons campaigning for them? Reactionary Democrats like Andrew Cuomo (NY) and Dianne Feinstein (CA) are exceptions; they love the idea of Hillary. (New York scold Kirsten Gillibrand-- who had been proud to run racist advertising against Latinos when she was in the House, is telling the media that "Bill Clinton should have resigned the presidency after his inappropriate relationship with an intern came to light nearly 20 years ago." Democratic senators in tough campaigns Claire McCaskill (MO) and Heidi Heitkamp (ND) went out of their way to very publicly tell Hillary to stay away.

Democratic candidates would also appreciate Nancy Pelosi to not make any public appearances in their districts. Republicans-- especially Republicans in swing districts-- feel the same way about Paul Ryan. And when Ryan does show up to wrangle big checks out of multimillionaires and billionaires he does it quietly and away from the media. Same with McConnell. McConnell, in fact, is the most unpopular politician in America-- and not just among Democrats. Republican voters have him too.

Democrats want Bernie campaigning for them in their districts. And Elizabeth Warren. And Randy @IronStache Bryce. Others we hear Democrat candidates requesting are Keith Ellison and the members of Congress who are on MSNBC a lot, like Ted Lieu, Adam Schiff and Eric Swalwell.

What about Trump? Of course swing district Democrats would do anything to get him campaigning in their districts with their opponents. Yesterday Bryce's sassy campaign manager, David Keith told me that "We welcome the day Trump comes, as it'll greatly help us engage with those working families who have been left behind and are ready to stand up and fight. Bernie came to talk about hope and lift the working people up. Trump will come-- and while he'll argue he's doing the same-- and simply lie on behalf of the big corporations looking to ship jobs oversees. It's a slap in the face to working people on behalf of Ryan's job-exporting driver and/or Paul Nehlen, the Nazi... and the working people will know it."

Sunday, McClatchey ran a piece by Katie Glueck about how House Republicans are refusing to even answer questions about Trump coming to their districts. Of course, in deep red districts, filled with low-IQ Republicans and few normal people-- like districts represented by fascists Mo Brooks (AL), Matt Gaetz (FL), Louie Gohmert (TX), Jim Jordan (OH) and Liz Cheney (WY)-- they'd roll out the red carpet for Señor Trumpanzee-- and any of the cast of characters around him. One Republican in a deep red district that Trump won with nearly 70% told me-- obviously on condition of anonymity that it would make his skin crawl to do a rally with Trump but that his constituents like Trump more than they like him, so he'd do it in a second. "I'd have to take a hot shower afterwards, of course," he said, giggling.

DuWayne Gregory is in a tough Long Island district where Trump beat Hillary 53.0% to 43.9%. But he knows a Trump visit is going to motivate Democrats and independent voters in a way that isn't going to help incumbent Peter King. "The people of the 2nd Congressional District, he told me, "are still recovering from Donald Trump’s last visit when he encouraged police officers to rough up suspects. This community doesn’t need anymore of his division. We are a community united to fight against his bigotry against immigrants and Paul Ryan and Peter King’s lack of leadership in standing up for what is right." Right now DuWayne is putting together a rally with a respected-- even beloved-- Democrat in his district. It's a surprise though, so I can't tell yet. Trump also won in the Oklahoma district Tom Guild is running in. Guild told us he "would enthusiastically welcome Bernie coming to Oklahoma to support our campaign. I’ll leave it up to Mr. Russell to decide if he wants Mr. Trump to appear on his behalf in 2018." Levi Tillemann is the progressive Democrat running in the Denver suburbs against GOP stooge Mike Coffman. "According to the polling we’ve done," he told me, "Trump is actually more popular than Coffman in the district. So I guess Coffman would probably embrace the opportunity. If there’s one thing we learned over the years it’s that Mike Coffman flows like water towards political expediency."

The question of whether endangered GOP candidates want President Donald Trump to campaign with them sparked dodges, lengthy pauses and a cascade of caveats in interviews with about two dozen GOP House members who are facing varying degrees of competition in races this fall.

But the answer several Republicans from tough districts have settled on is, sure-- if Trump will campaign on their terms.


“It depends,” said Fitzpatrick, a Republican from a suburban Philadelphia district that Democrats are targeting. “On what issue is he campaigning for me? If he campaigns on term limits-- I just met with him on that. If he’s able to get public support behind it, absolutely.”

But would a campaign rally be helpful? “We’ll see, we’ll see what our schedule is looking like,” he said, getting into an elevator at the Capitol.

Rep. David Valadao of California, whose district Hillary Clinton won by nearly 16 percentage points, offered a similar calculation: “If it’s a topic like water or something positive on immigration that actually benefits us-- I think if the president of the United States wants to come to the district to highlight something that’s actually helpful to the district, I think it would make sense, but it depends on the topic.”

And Miami-area Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo, who represents the most Democratic-leaning district in the country held by a Republican running for reelection this year, suggested he would welcome Trump's help-- if he "supports my work."


"I’m not asking nor have I ever asked anyone to come down and campaign, I don’t need it from anyone,” said Curbelo, who is leading an effort to force votes on immigration-related bills, rankling House conservatives. “The conditions for anyone to support me, to campaign for me, is that they support my work and are helping me achieve it for the benefit of the country."

Midterm elections are often challenging for the president’s party, and the question of where polarizing presidents can campaign tends to be a fraught one. It’s a reality that has applied to a range of leaders including Presidents George W. Bush in 2006 and Barack Obama in 2010 and 2014, when beleaguered candidates from their respective parties were loathe to make joint appearances or offer public praise.


...“It might help get out the base who might not be as fervently for a candidate such as myself,” said retiring GOP Rep. Ryan Costello, who currently represents another Philadelphia-area suburban district Clinton won. “I think, though, it would be a reminder, negatively, to swing voters who view him unfavorably but who I would want to have respond to my message of being an independent check-and-balance.”


...Still, the majority of candidates McClatchy interviewed said they would be open to Trump on their trail-- though their enthusiasm in answering that question, and the level of detail they provided in their responses, swung wildly.

“Yeah, I've encouraged every president, every president, to come to my district,” Rep. Jeff Denham of California said after pausing for a few seconds. Like Valadao, who also represents the Central Valley, Denham then turned back to local issues, referencing a water controversy. “To have our president come to take a look at our water being shut off, at our communities being devastated, that is something I would definitely support."

Westside Congressman Ted Lieu, the regional vice chair of the DCCC-- and the only competent person working for the organization-- cut right to the chase when I asked him how he'd feel about Trump coming to Orange County or the Central Valley to campaign for the embattled and vulnerable Republican incumbents in those two areas. This is what he told me: "I sincerely hope Trump shows up in California to campaign for Republican congressional candidates here. The DCCC is going to spend a lot of money tying Trump to these candidates, and this would make the job that much easier. I would gladly pay the permit fee for Trump to show up in California to do one of his toxic rallies. It would be super awesome for Democrats if Californians can see Trump unleashed. It would be even better if Trump brought Scot Pruitt and Ted Nugent with him and went full MAGA. Trump's xenophobic and bigoted rallies will jack up Democratic turnout and horrify independents in California."


...Doug Heye, a former communications director for the Republican National Committee, said it was one thing for candidates in competitive seats to voice enthusiasm for a Trump visit. It’s another thing entirely to actually pursue one.

“They’ve got to take care of their base,” he said. “If you’re telling your base, ‘I don’t want Trump to come,’ you run the risk of being judged by that, and having people unhappy and everything that comes along with that. … I think it’s a different issue when it comes to actual campaigning. I think we’ll see Trump in really red places more than anywhere else.”

But Texas Rep. Pete Sessions, who represents a district Clinton won, beamed when asked if he would want Trump to show up in his suburban Dallas district. He answered in the affirmative before a reporter finished asking the question.

"Awesome, I welcome him with open arms," Sessions said. "Can you invite him for me?"

The progressive running for the Dallas-area seat, TX-32, Sessions is occupying, Lillian Salerno, told me yesterday that she "would not be surprised if the President campaigned for one of the most reliable yes men. After all, Congressman Sessions was instrumental in helping the President nearly get away with taking health care coverage from 22 million Americans. That's devotion. The reason I ran was precisely because we need to win this seat in order to help hold Trump accountable. Trump and the rigged  system know that they must remain in power to continue the fraud on the American people. This means control of Congress. I am in this race to make sure the corporate Democrat doesn’t win and I am on the ballot to beat Sessions."

Ron Brownstein, reporting for CNN, noted this morning that as Trump's daily "bombshells detonate, sometimes within hours of each other, congressional Republican leaders then react with little more than a shrug. Even more important, the vast majority of the Republican electoral coalition increasingly responds the same way... The elimination of any distance between Trump and the conventional Republican interests that controlled the party before him has happened so incrementally it can be difficult to discern from day to day. But it remains one of the central political dynamics of 2018. Over the long term, Trump's success at stamping his polarizing brand on the GOP remains a huge electoral gamble for the party because it risks alienating the young, well-educated and diverse groups growing, rather than shrinking, in the electorate. But in the near-term, the GOP's choice to ally so unequivocally with such a unique president may have the paradoxical effect of producing a much more conventional midterm election than seemed possible earlier this year."

Right-Wing Snowflakes

Laura and Milo

Ever hear of Milo Yiannopoulos? Don't worry, no one else has either... unless they watch Fox News commentators as a lifestyle. Last week Talia Lavin wrote a piece about Milo for the Village Voice (I've written about him too so I won't remark on what a waste of time it is.) The adventures of Milo-ism, she pointed out, include how he finds it "impossible... to go out for lunch in most major cities," which, she continued "speaks to an intellectual barrenness at the core of Trump-era conservatism. Having found themselves in political power, but nonetheless without complete cultural dominance, these conservatives must manufacture a sense of powerlessness."

Milo Yiannopoulos would like you to know that he is “Dangerous”-- that was the title of his abortive nonfiction debut. Milo Yiannopoulos is selling T-shirts that say, “Everyone who hates me is ugly,” and, “Guantanamo Bay Waterboard Instructor.” A Milo Yiannopoulos fan once shot a protestor at one of his speaking engagements in the stomach, causing a critical injury. Milo Yiannopoulos would like you to be very indignant that he was recently heckled at a Manhattan bar.

I'll bet even fewer people have ever heard of Kevin Williamson, although maybe they know another Kevin Williamson from elementary school. This one helps highlight "the hollow core of Trump-era conservatism" Talia is portraying. Early in April "Williamson lost a columnist gig at the Atlantic after less than two weeks on the job, when certain of his past inflammatory comments resurfaced. He’s managed to parlay this tribulation into thousands of published words about his own silencing. Thus far, by my calculation, his columns this week alone make up a substantial portion of the word count of the Book of Job. Right wing publicists Ross Douthat, Conor Friedersdorf, Erick Erickson, Noah Rothman, et al share "an insistent refrain: this is, if not authoritarianism, then its prelude; it is 'chilling'; it is a flexing of the muscles of a fledgling despotism; it is a Soviet-style censorship regime." Don't be sorry you've never heard of Williamson or his tempest in a teapot.

You could be forgiven, amid all this furor, for forgetting that Williamson was fired for stating-- publicly, repeatedly, and emphatically-- that women who have abortions should be punished by execution. That is, women who have had abortions-- fully one-quarter of American women-- are a criminal class, and some portion of them, after being convicted, should be publicly hung by the neck until dead.

There are, of course, a multiplicity of ironies here-- that a man so blithely willing to strip women of their rights is so avid in defense of his own; that the inventors of the terms snowflake and triggered overheat so easily at a professional slight; etc.-- but at its heart, what arises when one surveys a media landscape pitted with Williamson hot takes is an emptiness at the heart of conservative rhetoric, and an attendant need to create victimization where none, in fact, exists.

In the absence of material oppression of any kind, one wonders what motivates conservatives to cant toward martyrdom-- to seek, perpetually, a marginalization that cannot be measured. Recent research suggests that the Trump-era right suffers from “status anxiety”: to wit, a fear not of losing their ability to speak, but rather that their speech will become part of a chorus of equals. In expressing a groundless fear of being silenced, they reveal their true fear-- that of no longer being in a position to dominate the national conversation.

To an extent I empathize: It is difficult to maintain a sense of utter righteousness, difficult to feel the great maw of the white page, without a real claim to struggle. There are those who say that creative generation only comes through struggle; that forward momentum is possible only when obstacles arise to be smashed; that only a rough road can lengthen one’s stride, and straighten one’s back, and lead one forward to brighter lands. So it is not without some sympathy that I look to the nation’s conservatives who, finding themselves in possession of all three branches of government, and a plurality of state governments too, find themselves so bereft of struggle that they must invent it. What I cannot forgive is the laziness of the central metaphors, which return again and again to the well of twentieth-century authoritarianism, without ever pausing to consider how transparently ridiculous these metaphors become.

Thus we find Laura Ingraham called a Twitter boycott of her prime-time cable news show "Stalinist." One need not be a student of Russian history to recognize that Stalin's primary methods of punishment were not bitchy tweets, and the Soviet Union did not, historically speaking, have much of an advertising industry to boycott in the first place. Stalin tended to line his opponents up and shoot them. He tended to exile them to Siberia, or confiscate their grain, under the guise of “dekulakization,” until they starved to death. Laura Ingraham lives in what the Washington Post described as a “gated Northern Virginia mansion.” But it is entirely possible that she avoids eating grain (too many carbs).

There have been so many column inches in the New York Times and the Washington Post excoriating college students for protesting speakers that one might justifiably think this is the most pressing problem facing the United States educational system. (Never mind that many of these speakers were invited precisely to attract such a response, and the concomitant editorials, an ouroborous of specious victimization. And please, ignore the teachers’ strikes erupting in multiple states, and the fact that many public school students cannot even afford pencils.)

Talia reminds her gentle readers that there is no "lacuna of genuine problems to address in the United States of 2018. We are a country of patriarchal domination, of appalling racial injustice, of rising seas and falling wages. The problem with the Williamsons (and newspaper conservative columnists) of the world is that they have willingly chosen to turn a blind eye to what exists. Faced with the proverbial widow and orphan, conservative ideology posits stripping them of food aid. Faced with injustice in the courts, the conservative instinct is to embrace a status quo that perpetuates it. In an era in which conservatives find themselves winning-- with officials like Scott Pruitt and Betsy DeVos stripping this country of onerous regulations that do things like protect the air, or transgender students-- I am almost disappointed to find these would-be heralds unable to trumpet their success. It turns out that the rhetoric of celebration, of triumph, is too one-note for these wordsmiths. In service of obscuring the oppression they ignore, they must create one of their own.

And this is mirrored in right-wing members of Congress as well, of course. Katie Porter, who's running for the Orange County seat occupied by garden variety Republican Mimi Walters told us that "Rep. Walters is spending her millions of corporate PAC money dollars to convince her constituents that she is standing up for women in DC. Rep. Walters may claim to be standing up for women, but in her 20+ years in elected office, Mimi Walters has repeatedly stood with Paul Ryan and Donald Trump in their efforts to defund Planned Parenthood and ban a woman's right to choose."

Lillian Salerno has her runoff on May 22 before she'll have to face GOP robot Pete Sessions in Dallas. "And deep in the heart of Texas is a worst-case offender in Pete Sessions, operating with a seemingly mindless loyalty to party over constituents in a state that many argue is a non-voting blue state that presents as red when it's represented in DC. Arguably one of their most powerful representatives doesn't even reside in the state, only coming in and out to chastise its citizens for not knowing how to listen as he rubber stamps on behalf of special interests that prop up the systems of oppression that the state can't seem to maneuver its way out of with these cronies like these at the helm."

Paul Clements is the progressive opposition to Fred Upton in southwest Michigan this cycle. "The fundamental political issue for America," he offered, "is increasing economic inequality-- most of the benefits of our economic growth going to the wealthy, due to a corrupt political system creating a rigged economy. The second issue is we are moving in the wrong direction on rights-- to live without hunger, for fair pay, for women to control their bodies, to equal treatment under the law (not policemen shooting you) … voting rights, equality for LGBTQ persons, and immigrant rights. The third issue is care for the environment, particularly major action on climate change, but also against despoliation for profit, and so all can enjoy nature. While Trump avidly promotes backsliding, the standard conservative response, which Fred Upton exemplifies, is in public to narrow all issues to minor steps and bland sentiments, and then to vote to enable Trump, corporate donors, and more backsliding. As long as Republicans can divert attention from the big questions they can win. Let’s not let that happen."

Jenny Marshall is taking on Trump rubber stamp Virginia Foxx in northwest North Carolina. "Foxx," she said, "is the epitome of right wing conservatism. Her world view is so narrow and selfish that I am truly shocked that she gets re-elected over and over again. She has voted against every pro-environmental bill that has come up, vowed to abolish the Department of Education and wants to get rid of the free lunch program yet she claims her values are American values. I disagree. To truly live up to American values we must ensure that everyone has the opportunity for life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This means building equity into a system that lacks it, empowering communities that have been silenced and investing in our future now.

Tom Guild is running for the Oklahoma City centered 5th congressional district. He told us that "Steve Russell received word of the first two females qualifying as Army Rangers with a call for an investigation into whether the test requirements had been watered down to unfairly help the women pass the required tests to become Rangers. He remained silent when Donald Trump equated demonstrators in Charlottesville who protested the Nazis and White Supremacists and their taunts of 'no Jew will take my place' accompanied by many ugly virulent racists acts and rhetoric, with the Nazis and Klan members. We heard only the sound of crickets from Russell when Mr. Trump said there were “good people” in the group protesting racism and those promoting racism in the Nazi and KKK contingents in Virginia. He supports and votes for budget cuts for the SNAP program that feeds millions of children and low income single parents. His campaign scoops up hundreds of thousands of dollars in corporate, special interest, and PAC contributions. His only relevant audience are those with God’s unlisted phone number who can give big bucks to his campaign. He is in the pocket of fossil fuels companies who pollute our air and water, and do permanent continuous damage to our planet. He supports oil company puppet Scott Pruitt who has the ethics of a snake and never misses an opportunity to visit great damage on our planet. He follows a policy of benign neglect regarding public education, enabling Betsy DeVos to further her quest to make education available only to those born with a platinum spoon in their mouths. Clearly as Mark Twain quipped long ago, “No man’s life, liberty, or property is safe while the legislature is in session.” Certainly Twain hit the mark, particularly if Russell is a member of the legislature. The top .01% is coddled and catered to by Russell. His cut, cut, cut…no matter what philosophy regarding programs that help working people, the middle class, and those who need a hand up, is designed to favor the overlords at every juncture. Despite his claims of charitable Christianity, he missed the part of the Bible where Jesus said, as you do unto the least of these, you do unto me. His actions and rhetoric are tragic for the people of Oklahoma and our beloved America."

Kara Eastman is the progressive Democrat running for Congress in Omaha for the seat conservative Don Bacon is sitting in. "The current representative for the Nebraska Second," she told us with specificity, "has voted 97.1%  of the time with Trump. As a member of the climate caucus, he has said he does not believe that climate change is caused by humans. He is in favor of taking away healthcare from his constituents. He also supports big government regulations for women’s reproductive health. It is time for a leader in NE-02 who will stand up for the residents in the district. We need someone who has seen the positive impact that environmental protections have on children here. We deserve to have leaders who protect women, children and working families. We need someone who is listening to residents in the district and fighting for them."

Lisa Brown is the progressive Democrat running in eastern Washington in the district occupied by 4th highest-ranking Republican in the House, a Ryan rubber stamp. "She told its this morning that "so-called 'fiscal conservatives,' like Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers, vote for a 1.5 trillion dollar tax plan for the top 1% , then brazenly call for balanced budget amendments and cuts to food assistance and the social safety net programs. She lauds 'work requirements' for food stamps though 3 counties in her district have double digit rates of unemployment."

Six Minutes And Twenty Seconds

What you see in the video above is Emma Gonzalez reading the Parkland victims’ names, crying and taking a six minute and 20 second pause, the amount of time Nikolas Cruz was shooting in the school. Pennsylvania Avenue was completely silent, save for the shutter of cameras and distant sirens. Students on stage and in the crowd began chanting, “Never again.” And she persisted.

How compelling has the narrative been around the March For Our Lives weekend? Well, compelling enough for several career-long congressional Republican NRA allies to try to glom onto the energy that swept the whole country yesterday. Their hands dripping in innocents' blood, Rodney Davis (R-IL), Steve Knight (R-CA), Don Bacon (R-NE), Mike Bost (R-IL) and John Rutherford (R-FL) are trying to pretend that they're part of the solution rather than complicit in the problem. And who ever would have thought the Trumpanzee Regime and his twerpy little Attorney General would ever do anything right? This is the press release Sessions sent out Friday about banning bump stocks as people were descending on DC:

Today, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced that the Department of Justice is proposing to amend the regulations of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, clarifying that bump stocks fall within the definition of “machinegun” under federal law, as such devices allow a shooter of a semiautomatic firearm to initiate a continuous firing cycle with a single pull of the trigger.

In making the announcement, Attorney General Sessions made the following statement:

“Since the day he took office, President Trump has had no higher priority than the safety of each and every American,” said Attorney General Jeff Sessions. “That is why today the Department of Justice is publishing for public comment a proposed rulemaking that would define ‘machinegun’ to include bump stock-type devices under federal law-- effectively banning them.  After the senseless attack in Las Vegas, this proposed rule is a critical step in our effort to reduce the threat of gun violence that is in keeping with the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress.  I look forward to working with the President’s School Safety Commission to identify other ways to keep our country and our children safe, and I thank the President for his courageous leadership on this issue.”

On February 20, 2018, the President issued a memorandum instructing the Attorney General “to dedicate all available resources to… propose for notice and comment a rule banning all devices that turn legal weapons into machineguns.” This NPRM is in response to that direction, and would make clear that the term “machinegun” as used in the National Firearms Act (NFA), as amended, and Gun Control Act (GCA), as amended, includes all bump-stock-type devices that harness recoil energy to facilitate the continuous operation of a semiautomatic long gun after a single pull of the trigger. If the NPRM is made final, bump-stock-type devices would be effectively banned under federal law and current possessors of bump-stock-type devices would be required to surrender, destroy, or otherwise render the devices permanently inoperable. The comment period for the NPRM is 90 days from the date of publication in the Federal Register.

The kids behind the march know that ultimately it's going to take defeating NRA allies to end NRA dominance-- and yesterday there was a lot of pushing to voter registration aimed at ousting incumbents with records like Rodney Davis, Steve Knight, Don Bacon and Mike Bost. Hopefully they've figured out there are Democrats who are every bit as bad, from incumbents like Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN) and Henry Cuellar (Blue Dog-TX) to shit DCCC candidates like Jeff Van Drew (NJ), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ), Anthony Brindisi (NY) and Elaine Luria (VA). If a politician can't say that semi-automatic weapons shouldn't be manufactured or sold for civilian use, they should be defeated, regardless of party and regardless of "circumstances" and electoral calculations.

How many people showed up Saturday? Estimates ranged between half a million and over a million-- and there were 900 "sibling marches" around the country and in other countries as well. Paul Clements told us he was at one of the 30 rallies in Michigan alone, the one in Kalamazoo. "I am so proud of these brave students," he told us yesterday, "who have turned their personal tragedy into inspiration for the world. As a congressman, I pledge to work with this growing movement to renew the assault weapons ban, to expand background checks, and to reduce gun-related suicides. The students are pulling off the blinders we’ve collectively used to turn away from the suffering inflicted by gun violence in America-- no more."

In Dallas Lillian Salerno was marching in solidarity with the students in DC. "As a mom, my heart breaks for the victims and their families impacted by the epidemic of mass shootings and daily tragedy of gun violence in our country. I am sick to my stomach that this keeps happening, and is sure to keep happening until we put the lives of our children and families over the profits of the gun lobby. That’s why I am participating in the March for our Lives today in Dallas. I stand with our students who are raising up their voices in Dallas, Parkland, and across the country. Once again the children are leading the effort to improve their safety at school and our safety as a nation. Will we listen? I refuse to accept one penny from the NRA and the gun lobby. Pete Sessions, on the other hand, has an A+ rating from the NRA and has stocked his campaign war chest with their funds."

Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) told us he "marched in Tucson with students and teachers, parents and neighbors, and members of our community to declare enough is enough. We need to take action to stop the gun violence epidemic in our country. For too long, politicians in Washington and in state capitals across the country have been bought out by gun manufacturers and the NRA, putting the bank accounts of gun industry executives over the safety of our children. In the weeks since 17 students lost their lives at school in Parkland, there have been at least 10 school shootings. In 2018 alone, over 3,000 people have lost their lives to gun violence. But I am hopeful about our ability to challenge the gun lobby for the first time in a long time. The organizing by the students at Parkland and in schools across the country has inspired the nation to act. Big change in this country only happens when a whole lot of people come together to demand it. Today, we’re seeing what that kind of movement looks like. Change will not happen overnight. But if we persist, if we keep pushing and refusing to stop in the face of challenges from the NRA and the gun lobby, we will put an end to the gun violence in this country...This movement and this work is only just beginning. Together, we can make this country a better and safer place to live."

The Parkland students and teenagers nationwide, many of whom have just turned or are about to turn, old enough to vote, are vowing to remove from office all lawmakers who refuse to vote for gun control. This isn't a good time to be Marco Rubio. Amanda Petrusich wrote for the New Yorker that "many had orange price tags dangling from their wrists: $1.05, the amount the National Rifle Association donated to the Republican Senator Marco Rubio, divided by the number of students in Florida, the state he represents. A massive sound system broadcast pop songs: Kesha’s 'Tic-Toc,' Britney Spears’s 'Toxic,' the Killers’ 'Mr. Brightside.'” The mood was celebratory, but determined."

The DCCC Screwed Up A Primary In Houston But They Didn't Learn Their Lesson-- And Now They're Doing It In Dallas

Very much by design, the DCCC doesn't have a Regional Vice Chair for the area of the country that includes Texas rand Colorado. That gives the national headquarters and their incompetence staffers an opportunity to do whatever they want without adult supervision-- like the catastrophe they caused in Houston, a catastrophe they seem hellbent to repeat in Dallas now. TX-32 is a district held by a corrupt conservative Republican, Pete Sessions. The district, which has been gerrymandered again and again to keep it as white as it could be to make it "safe" to Sessions. Looks like demographics have finally caught top with the GOP on this one. This prosperous North Dallas area is surrounded by more diverse neighborhoods and even though the GOP cut out minority areas around Irving and Grand Prairie, dropping the Hispanic part of the population significantly, the district is just 50% white. The R+10 is now just R+5 and Romney's 57-41% win over Obama turned into a 2016 Hillary win over Trump (48.5% to 46.6%). Sessions is looked at as a vulnerable incumbent, especially in a wave cycle like the one we're experiencing.

Two Obama alumni, Colin Allred and Lillian Salerno came in at the top of the primary and will now face off in a May 22 primary. Yesterday the DCCC announced they were putting their fat fingers on the scale against Lillian-- the more progressive candidate-- and put Allred on their Red to Blue list. I might add that when the DCCC pulls shenanigans like this, they usually say the other candidate in not financially viable. In this case the two candidates are about even. As of the February 14 FEC reporting deadline Allred had raised $541,064 and had $74,821 in his war chest. Salerno had raised $430,783 and had $164,698 in her war chest.

Salerno responded with a press release that emphasized that "Folks here are sick and tired of a bunch of Washington insiders trying to make their decisions for them. But I’m not scared-- I’ve stood up to power and fought for what’s right my entire life. Our campaign is confident and remains focused on sharing our vision with voters: electing a fighter who will get results for working families. Texas hasn’t elected a new woman to Congress in twenty-two years, and we’re not taking it anymore. The DCCC would do well to remember: Don’t mess with Texas women."

Her campaign manager Jeanne Stuart, hit back at a DCCC on the rampage against progressives and against local democracy: "After the DCCC’s embarrassing stumble attacking candidate Laura Moser, they have not learned their lesson. Texas Democrats know better than some Washington D.C. committee that’s trying to tip the scales. 62% of primary voters did not vote for Colin, and we are confident we will win the run-off and that Lillian is the strongest candidate to beat Pete Sessions in November.

Progressive activist and former Texas Agriculture Commissioner, Jim Hightower went further yet: "The D-triple-C has gone d-triple-crazy, barging into local elections like clueless, antidemocratic potentates. Lillian is a strong Texas Democrat. She knows how to take-on Sessions and win-- despite what the party’s corporate establishment wants."

Two more powerful surrogates weighed in against the DCCC's interference. Betty Ritchie is the Chair of the DNC Rural Council and Secretary of the DNC Women’s Caucus. She knows the candidates and said that "Lillian is a fighter through and through. The voters of Congressional District 32 will see that Lillian has stood up for people her whole life. She’s the only candidate that can take on Pete Sessions, and is unafraid of going up against the powerful." Lenna Webb, President of North Dallas Texas Democratic Women, agreed wholeheartedly, "We’re witnessing an unprecedented surge of activism here in North Texas, with thousands of concerned citizens organizing in their communities to beat Pete Sessions. Voters are deeply engaged in evaluating Democratic candidates in CD-32, and deserve the opportunity to make this decision for themselves. The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee should step back and let voters decide."

This is what I can tell you as a person looking at this for over a decade: the DCCC has no idea how to win, especially in Texas. The harder Democrats run away from their failed machine, the better they do. Want to beat Pete Sessions? How about a hard-nosed, authentic, lifelong Texan who has battled big pharma, insurance companies, and big corporate Ag to help working families, nurses, and family farmers. That's Lillian Salerno. But the DCCC is so out-of-touch that they not only ignore Lillian, but they try to tip the scales to her opponent whose experience can be counted in months not years. It makes me want to scream, and Dallas Democrats shouldn't have to suffer two more years of Pete Sessions because of this stupidity. I got Lillian on the phone this morning and asked her directly what she thinks about the DCCC coming in and supporting her opponent? If you'd like to contribute to her campaign, please click on the Blue America 2018 congressional thermometer on the right. This is what she told me:

This move shows why we need new leadership in Congress. This is an attack on those of us in Texas who are trying to elect new leadership to Washington. Folks here are sick and tired of a bunch of DC insiders trying to make their decisions for them. Our campaign is confident and remains focused on sharing our vision with voters: electing a proven Texas Democrat who will get results for working families. Let the people of Texas decide."

Last night Abby Livingston wrote the controversy up for the Texas Tribune, noting that "In past cycles, the DCCC has named districts to its Red to Blue program, rather than specific candidates, to avoid these kinds of flare-ups." The DCCC also endorsed the less progressive candidate, retired Air Force Intelligence Officer Gina Ortiz Jones, over progressive Rick Treviño.

This morning Treviño told his supporters that "The DCCC has just announced they want to pick the winner of our primary-- and they don't want the progressive. They want to control our elections in West Texas because they want their consultant friends in Washington to get rich by running high-dollar candidates. They don't care what happens to us after they lose another race. It's disrespectful to the people who live here, and we don't have to take it. In today's Washington, the working class doesn't have a voice. That's just a fact. The Democratic Party has been losing up and down the ballot because the political establishment keeps forcing candidates on us that will pay big bucks to their consultants instead of fighting for the working class. If we want to win again, we can't let the DCCC keep derailing progressive change. When I travel around this district, from San Antonio to the colonias, I see the result of the DCCC's constant failure to win. People who live outside gated communities too often lack even the basic services that should be their right to expect in a rich country like the United States. Last year, they let Will Hurd get away with winning by one percent of the vote, and because of that, the one-percent keeps getting its way in Congress. It's time to win again for the working class. There are enough insiders on the ballot. We need a Member of Congress who has been fighting for the working folks here for their entire career, not another D.C. insider. The DCCC doesn't understand what life is like here, and they don't know how to win. But you and I do: we win by standing with working people and fighting for a progressive future."

Last Night In Texas

Democratic women did well in Texas yesterday: Veronica Escobar, Dayna Steele, Sylvia Garcia

Let's start with this: among Texas' 15 most populated counties, which are the only ones the Secretary of State announces, early voting in the Democratic primaries-- so in places like Dallas, Houston, Austin, San Antonio...-- spiked by 105% from the 2014 midterm. That means more than doubled. Over in crazytown, there was an increase as well-- 15%. That's called an enthusiasm gap.

The biggest self-funder in the state, Trump wanna-be Kathaleen Wall, in the open TX-02 seat... didn't even make it into the runoff. The Republican spent almost $6 million of her own and came in third with 27.1%. (The biggest Democratic self funder, Tahir Javed, also lost badly and didn't make it to the runoff.) Don't you love it when plutocrats trying to buy House seats go down in flames?

The weirdest congressional race decided last night was in west Houston (TX-07), where Laura Moser had been lagging in the absentee ballots. Then she was savagely attacked by the DCCC and everything turned around for her. People hate the DCCC and their vile tactics so much that she jumped ahead and wound up beating the other progressive candidate, Jason Westin, and the perceived DCCC fave Alex Triantaphyllis. So the runoff will be between Laura Moser and an anti-union EMILY's List corporate Dem named Lizzie Fletcher. Organized labor has made it clear that they will support Moser against Fletcher in the runoff and against Culberson in November.

• Lizzie Fletcher- 9,731 (29.3%)
• Laura Moser- 8,077 (24.3%)
• Jason Westin- 6,364 (19.2%)
• Alex Triantaphyllis- 5,219 (19.2%)
• Ivan Sanchez- 1,890 (5.7%)
• Joshua Butler- 1,245 (3.8%)
• James Cargas- 650 (2%)

Over in El Paso (TX-16), the progressive candidate, Veronica Escobar, beat a corporate Dem self-funder, Dori Fenenbock to replace Beto O'Rourke, who is taking on Ted Cruz for the U.S. Senate seat in November. Fenenbock put $350,030 of her own into the race and spent $743,041 to Escobar's $528,274. The district has a PVI of D+17 and there is no serious Republican challenge, which means that Texas has just elected to Congress, in effect, it's first Latina. Escobar got more votes-- 30,630-- than both the Republicans  (10,489) and Fenenbock (10,992) combined. So... there will be no runoff in this one.

Another district with no runoff is TX-36 (east of Houston), where progressive Dayna Steele trounced her Democratic opponent with over 70% of the vote and will face off against lunatic extremist Brian Babin in November. Please consider helping replenish Dayna's campaign war chest here.

In the Austin-San Antonio corridor district (TX-21), three progressives battled conservative "ex"-Republican Joseph Kopser. The runoff will include one of the progressives, Mary Wilson, who took first place with 15,669 votes (30.9%) and Kopser, who came in second with 14,684 votes (29%). Our candidate, Derrick Crowe, took 11,686 votes (23.1%).

The other essential race was in TX-23, which stretches from the San Antonio suburbs south along the Rio Grande to the suburbs east of El Paso. The DCCC candidate, a Blue Dog and New Dem pushed by the Castro Machine, Jay Hulings, came in third and failed to make the runoff, which will consist of Gina Jones and fierce Berniecrat, Rick Treviño. The winner of the runoff will face mainstream GOP incumbent Will Hurd.

Chris Perry will battle Julie Oliver for the Democratic nomination to take on Roger Williams in TX-25, a gerrymandered district that stretches from the suburbs south of Ft. Worth all the way into Central Austin.

Another heavily Democratic district, south Houston's 29th district, where Gene Green is retiring, in effect elected another Latina, Sylvia Garcia, who pulverized Tahir Javed, who spent $800,000 of his own money. There is no serious Republican challenger in this PVI D+19 district. So that's two Texas Latinas going to Congress in 2019. Garcia is more of a garden variety Democrat than Escobar but she'll probably be an upgrade over Green. Garcia took 11,659 votes (63.2%) to the self-funder's 3,817 (20.7%).

And the last race we were following, north of Dallas (TX-32) had 7 Democrats vying to challenge Pete Sessions in a district that gets a little less red by the day. Hillary narrowly beat Trump. The top 2 vote-getters are Colin Allred and Lillian Salerno, the Blue America-backed candidate. Both worked in the Obama administration, although Salerno is more the progressive and Allred more of a moderate. Like with Dayna, please consider helping replenish Lillians campaign war chest here. The heavily-funded establishment candidate, a Hillary Clinton person named Ed Meier, came in 4th with 5,474 votes (13.7%). The top 2 candidates of the 7 who ran, were Allred with 15,442 votes (38.5%) and Salerno with 7,343 (18.3%). The new and updated Turning Texas Blue ActBlue thermometer is on the right.


UPDATE: Derrick Crowe Endorses Mary Wilson

"For almost a year now, I have watched Mary Street Wilson run a tough, tenacious campaign that defied all establishment expectations. She fought for every last vote in every corner of this district and led with her progressive values. She faced with grit both a deep fundraising disadvantage and a dismissive attitude from the establishment. Last night, the Democratic voters in Texas’ 21st Congressional District responded by giving her more votes than any other candidate in the race.

"Though I am disappointed to not make the runoff, it’s impossible not to be inspired by Mary’s campaign. Last night’s result gives me deep hope that this year, our elections can’t be bought. She will make an excellent representative for the people of the 21st District of Texas. I am proud to endorse her."

Blue America has added Mary and Laura Moser to out Turning Texas Blue page as you can see by clicking on the thermometer above.

Hot Rumor: The Federal Trade Commission May Be Coming Back To Life

This week, the Open Markets Institute reported some good news, namely that the Federal Trade Commission may be about to "waken from it's anti-trust slumber." Hard to imagine.

For the last few years, the Federal Trade Commission all but vanished as a major player in anti-monopoly enforcement. In part, this was due to a lack of staff. For much of the last year, the FTC had only two sitting commissioners. Mainly, however, it was due to ideology.

Two of the most influential recent commissioners-- Maureen Ohlhausen and Josh Wright-- were strong proponents of libertarian competition philosophy, with its strong pro-monopoly bent. Further, even many recent Democratic appointments tended to take a highly permissive approach to economic power.

But a Senate Commerce Committee hearing on February 14 provided strong signals that the FTC may soon be back in the business of promoting competition in the United States. All five FTC commissioners are being replaced more or less at the same time, which means the character of the agency has the potential to change dramatically. And among both senators and nominees, the libertarian thinking that has long held sway in the Commission appeared to be decidedly out of fashion.

• Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), a former director of policy planning at the FTC, has in the past largely opposed government regulations, including net neutrality. But at the hearing last week, Sen. Cruz expressed deep concern about the immense power wielded by Google and Facebook, citing a cover story in Esquire that calls for the break-up of big tech. Sen. Cruz appeared especially concerned about the anti-competitive implications of Facebook and Google's dominance, saying that their "market power, size, and control of public discourse is unprecedented."

• Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) urged the nominees to use the "new populism…sweeping the country" as a mandate to invigorate enforcement and advocacy. "Going beyond the FTC being a resource, I'd also like you to be a champion," he said. "You have the bully pulpit. You can bring zeal and passion to consumer issues that no one else will do at the federal level." Sen. Blumenthal also submitted a statement from the Congressional Antitrust Committee into the hearing record.

• Joe Simons, nominated by President Trump to chair the agency, said he wants to scrutinize dominant firms that wield market power and review the Commission's enforcement record. “At a high level, I don’t believe that big is necessarily bad,” he said. But he added, “Companies that are already big and influential can sometimes use inappropriate means, anti-competitive means, to get big or to stay big.” In particular, Simons said he was "very concerned" about drug pricing and would explore convening a drug pricing monitoring task force to track anti-competitive price spikes and enable prompt investigations and enforcement actions.

• In discussing extreme consolidation in agriculture with Sen. John Tester (D-MT), Simons further explained that even when bad mergers cannot be easily unscrambled, the agency can investigate dominant industry players for anti-competitive conduct and target their power through injunctions. Coupled with his written comments, Simons’ remarks suggest he intends to target abusive actions by dominant companies.

• The only Democratic nominee at the hearing, Rohit Chopra, expressed interest in reviewing barriers to entry in monopolized markets. In particular, he noted that consolidated control over data creates hazards both for consumers and independent businesses. He said, "Data breaches impose great deals of costs on small enterprises. The Equifax data breach led to significant losses for community banks, credit unions, and other financial institutions."

• A fifth slot on the Commission, reserved for a Democrat, still lacks an official nominee. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) has recommended to the White House that it nominate his chief counsel, Rebecca Slaughter, for the position.

The founding members of the House AntiTrust Caucus are some of the House's most progressive members: Ro Khanna (CA), Mark Pocan (WI), Rick Nolan (MN), David Cicciline (RI), Keith Ellison (MN) and Pramila Jayapal (WA).

Austin Frerick has made fighting monopolies a key part of his platform, so it was no surprise when he told us that the Antitrust Caucus will be the "first caucus I will join. Also as an Iowa congressman, I plan to make antitrust a central requirement for my endorsement in the 2020 caucuses."

Derrick Crowe, the progressive running for the open seat in the Austin/San Antonio corridor told us he "would absolutely join the Congressional Anti-Trust Caucus. The rise of monopoly power threatens our bank accounts, worsens inequality, and undermines our political liberties. Busting trusts is defending democracy."

Lisa Brown, the economist who served as Chancellor of Washington State University, Spokane and is currently busy campaigning to replace Paul Ryan lieutenant Cathy McMorris Rodgers that us "it’s a basic tenet of Econ-101 that concentrated economic power in a market, in which only a few producers  dominate, has adverse outcomes for consumers. Higher prices and less consumer satisfaction generally result from oligopoly and monopoly power. Effective federal regulation can counter these results. It’s encouraging that some members of Congress are getting  more active in this arena and I would welcome the opportunity to join them."

And we'll leave the last word for Lillian Salerno, former Obama deputy secretary of Agriculture, who is running a vigorous campaign in north Dallas that takes on monopolization head on: "Concentrated corporate power is out of control," she often says, "and it's time for Congress to step up with a renewed focus on anti-monopoly rules and investigations. That's what I'll do when I get there."

Has Gun Control's Moment Come Again-- Despite Cowardly Politicians?

Cameron Kasky, one of the students who survived the shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School brought down the house at the CNN forum Wednesday night when he asked his senator, Marco Rubio, if he would stop taking NRA money. Rubio-- like every single blood-soaked member of Congress from either party who takes NRA bribes and votes for their sick, murderous agenda, said that the NRA buys into his agenda, not that he buys into theirs. Maybe Rubio even believes that. But the kids didn't. They boo-ed him loudly and repeatedly. Rubio's not up for reelection again until 2022. It was gracious and somewhat courageous of him to jump into the lion's den.

Trump immediately went for the most simple-minded and idiotic right-wing suggestion-- arm the teachers. Even Rubio said he wouldn't support that idea. I asked my friend who works at a public school in Compton. He said that it's a crazy idea that not only wouldn't work but that would result in more than half the teachers he knows retiring. "You think there's a teacher shortage now," he said, if Trump manages to push this through, the whole school system will collapse. Maybe that's just what DeVos wants to see happen." He also told me he's buying bulletproof clothing for school.

Rubio told the audience he's going to try-- an impossible task?-- to get unanimous consent to bring the background check bill-- FIX NICS-- to the floor. I can't see that happening... and even if it does, Ryan will stop it in the House by keeping it attached to the concealed carry reciprocity bill, an NRA strategy which will prevent Democrats from voting for it. Rubio said he favors raising the age for legal assault rifle purchases from 18 to 21-- a total non-started for the gun manufacturers lobbyists-- and says he will back mental health background checks gun violence restraining orders and limiting the size of magazine clips. When confronted by a student on his refusal to back limits on large capacity magazines in the past, he said he's "reconsidering that position... While it may not prevent an attack, it may save lives in an attack." That would be enough for the NRA to go to try to make an example of him for other Republicans.

This morning, Marc Caputo termed that "a striking turnabout for Rubio, who never met a gun-rights bill he didn’t vote for in the Florida legislature and in Congress."

Rubio said he would leave it to law enforcement to suggest what the right magazine size would be.

That wasn’t enough for the audience, even as Rubio chided them that politicians should be allowed to change their minds. And it wasn’t enough for the other people on stage.

“The time for talking in Washington about to do about guns is over. It’s over. We know what to do,” said Rep. Ted Deutch, who represents the district where the school is located, in the city of Parkland.

But Rubio steadfastly refused to consider banning semiautomatic rifles outright. And he said he would not refuse money from the National Rifle Association, which has steered $3.3 million in contributions to him over the course of his career and given him an A+ rating-- support he might not be able to count on after Wednesday night.

In June 2016, Rubio cited the mass shooting at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando as a major reason he leapt back into his Senate race, which he’d been weighing doing for months after failing in the presidential primaries. Rubio said that massacre had “impacted” him and made him feel he had to return to the Senate. He won, with NRA support. But in the nearly two years since, he has not championed any new gun legislation in Congress.

...The evening didn’t start particularly well for Rubio, either, when he was questioned by Fred Guttenberg, whose 14 year-old daughter, Jaime, was killed last week in school.

“Were guns the factor in the hunting of our kids?” Guttenberg asked.

“Of course they were,” Rubio replied. “Number one, Fred, I absolutely believe that in this country if you are 18 years of age you should not be able to buy a rifle and I will support a law that takes that right away.”

Rubio was met with applause and went on to say he supports banning “bump stocks,” which can make a semiautomatic fire like a machine gun. He also voiced his support for better background checks and mental health funding.

But when Rubio said an “assault weapons ban” would not have prevented last week’s murders, the boos rained down.

“It is too easy to get,” Guttenburg said. “It is a weapon of war. The fact that you can’t stand with everybody in this building and say that, I’m sorry.”

Yesterday we looked at Ron Brownstein's ideas about what kinds of districts the Democrats could win to build a House majority. This morning, writing for The Atlantic, he reiterated his analysis in the light of the reinvigorated national gun debate. Trump-hatred in the suburbs is going to help the Democrats and the gun issue is going to amplify that.

Despite the widespread Democratic defection from outside the major urban centers, the Brady and assault-ban bills passed because Clinton drew support from dozens of suburban Republicans inside those metropolitan areas. Fifty-four House Republicans backed the Brady bill in 1993, and 38 supported the assault ban the next year; the latter number grew to 46 when the ban was included in the final version of Clinton’s crime bill. Of those 46 Republicans backing the overall bill, most were from heavily suburban, Democratic-leaning states, including eight from New York; five from New Jersey; and three each from California, Connecticut, and Pennsylvania.

In the years since, the GOP’s geographic base has shifted away from major metropolitan areas and its demographic base has tilted further toward older, blue-collar, evangelical, and rural voters. Reflecting those changes, GOP congressional leaders have tightened their alliance with the NRA and hardened their opposition to gun control. The remaining Republicans from suburban districts, even in the bluest states, have bent compliantly to that current. Compared with their counterparts in the 1990s, suburban House Republicans now vote much more in lockstep with the NRA.

In December, all but 10 suburban House Republicans voted for legislation to override individual state gun laws and require every state to honor a concealed-carry handgun permit issued in any state. In February 2017, all but two House Republicans (New York’s Peter King and Dan Donovan) voted to overturn a regulation from former President Barack Obama that required the Social Security Administration to share information with the national background-check system about anyone deemed incapable of managing their benefits because of mental illness.

Many of the Republicans who voted with the NRA on both measures represent white-collar suburban seats atop the Democrats’ 2018 target list. That includes GOP legislators near Denver (Mike Coffman); Los Angeles (Dana Rohrabacher, Mimi Walters, and Steve Knight); Minneapolis (Erik Paulsen and Jason Lewis); New York (Lee Zeldin); Northern Virginia (Barbara Comstock); Omaha (Don Bacon); Des Moines (David Young); Houston (John Culberson); and Dallas (Pete Sessions). Except for King and Donovan, every other top-target metro Republican-- from Carlos Curbelo in Miami to Leonard Lance in New Jersey-- who voted against the concealed-carry reciprocity bill voted for the repeal of Obama’s Social Security regulation.

Among those Republican politicians Brownstein wrote are now vulnerable because of their unswerving support for the NRA is David Young, the pius hypocrite who Austin Frerick is taking on in Des Moines and southwest Iowa. Austin ripped into him this morning: "I’ve personally become even more driven to defeat Congressman Young knowing that’s he’s taken the 3rd most money from the NRA and continues to do their bidding tragedy after tragedy. He's just a do-nothing hollow man who does the bidding of his largest donors. After the Law Vegas massacres, Congressman Young said that he couldn't think of a good reason why bump stocks exist. His solution was to write a letter to the ATF, but the ATF doesn't think it can act. Did he do something after that ATF decision? No, but he did have time to visit a gun store whose owner was very concerned about his comments on bump stocks, and wanted to show him why they were fine."

Katie Porter is running for the Orange County seat NRA ally Mimi Walters claims to be representing-- although she doesn't live there. Katie told us she's "tired of seeing our elected officials like my opponent Mimi Walters offer her thoughts and prayers after every mass shooting, and then voting however the NRA wants-- regardless of our families’ safety.The gun lobby has spent decades perpetuating this idea that there’s nothing we can do to stop gun violence in this country. That is just ridiculous. To reduce deaths from lethal weapons, our leaders in Congress just need to find the courage to stand up to the NRA and its special interest money. Not only has my opponent received thousands of dollars of contributions from the NRA, but she is voting against the will of her constituents. 60% of CA-45 voters voted for Proposition 63, a common sense gun initiative, in 2016-- more proof that Mimi Walters votes with special interests, not her constituents."

Lillian Salerno, the progressive in the race to replace Pete Sessions in Dallas, has a similar perspective. "Pete Sessions," she told us today, "has been in the pocket of the NRA since his initial run for Congress twenty years ago, and there is no sign he will change course now. Even after hundreds of children have lost their lives to gun violence, the NRA knows they have an unwavering ally in Sessions. And what did it take to secure his allegiance? $150,000 in contributions and outside spending from the NRA. $150,000 is the price Sessions puts on the lives of children and families. And as a member of Congress, I will never, under any circumstance, take money from the NRA."

Another GOP incumbent Brownstein singled out: extremist Steve Knight (CA-25). And his progressive opponent, Katie Hill, has been reminding voters in Santa Clarita, the Antelope Valley and Simi Valley what a danger he is. "Steve Knight has prioritized special interests like the NRA over constituents since he joined Congress," she told us. "We need an elected official willing to stand up and do the right thing. I support the immediate ban of bump stocks, silencers, and assault weapons. There is no compelling reason for a civilian to own weapons of war and it is time that the law reflected it."

Now watch Derrick Crowe: