Nancy Pelosi-- The Tragic Decline

There was a time that being pro-Choice, for racial equality and LGBT equality and for gun control meant you were a progressive. That's a long long time ago and progressivism has evolved. To credibly call yourself progressive, you still need to be for all those things but you now have to be against big money in politics, for universal healthcare (preferably via Medicare-for-All), for dealing effectively with the Climate Crisis (preferably via the Green New Deal), for a living wage, against a free rein for Wall Street and for big corporations... In the old days, Pelosi (unlike Biden) was a progressive. No, really, she was; I shit you not. But as the movement went in one direction... she basically headed off in the other direction. She doesn't truly support-- except occasionally with platitudes-- any progressive goals that she didn't support before she left the CPC to pursue a party leadership position, first as Minority Leader and then as Speaker.

In very recent years, as her grasp on abstracts has begun to noticeably slip, she's compensated with a kind of imperious entitlement that was far less apparent during her first round as Speaker. This week, for example, she told the media "I have no regrets about anything. Regrets is not what I do." That's right... she and Trump both. And they're both screwing up the country royally. They both have to go.

This week Heather Caygle and Sarah Ferris reported for Politico on her closed-door meeting with the Democratic House caucus where she scolded progressives as as much as told them they're not as important as conservatives. "Pelosi’s comments, which were described as stern," they wrote, "came during the first full caucus meeting since a major blowup over emergency border funding last month between progressive and moderate lawmakers as well as a recent spat with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and her freshman allies."

"So, again, you got a complaint? You come and talk to me about it," Pelosi told Democrats, according to a source in the room. "But do not tweet about our members and expect us to think that that is just OK."

Democrats in the room said they interpreted that remark, in part, as a shot at Rep. Mark Pocan of Wisconsin and co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, who called moderate Democrats members of the “Child Abuse Caucus” in a tweet over their support for the Senate’s version of the emergency humanitarian package.

...Speaking behind closed-doors Wednesday morning, Pelosi also gave an emphatic defense of the moderates in the caucus, according to multiple sources, telling the room that they’re critical to holding the House majority. Pelosi told Democrats not to make the Blue Dog Coalition their targets, but criticize her publicly if they need to go after someone.

“I’m here to help the children when it’s easy and when it’s hard. Some of you are here to make a beautiful pâté but we’re making sausage most of the time,” Pelosi told the caucus.

The California Democrat added that when her members target her, it helps fundraising, eliciting a big laugh inside the room.

“We are a family, and every family has its moments,” the speaker said.

Pelosi also indirectly criticized Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, according to Democrats in the room, as she told members to tell their staffers to “think twice” before they tweet.

Saikat Chakrabarti, Ocasio-Cortez’s chief of staff, went after Pelosi in a series of tweets over the weekend, criticizing everything from her comments on the squad to her stance against impeachment. Chakrabarti also tweeted scathing criticism of the Blue Dogs, calling them the "New Southern Democrats."

"They certainly seem hell bent to do black and brown people today what the old Southern Democrats did in the 40s," Chakrabarti wrote on Twitter before deleting the post.

Her remarks also come after Pelosi dismissed Ocasio-Cortez and the other members of the progressive “squad” in an interview with the New York Times over the weekend.

Pelosi questioned the group's actual influence, given that its members were the only four Democrats who opposed the House’s original humanitarian package. Ocasio-Cortez and the other progressives-- Reps. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts-- quickly fired back, criticizing Pelosi’s remarks in a series of tweets.

Ocasio-Cortez didn’t address Pelosi’s speech as she left the caucus meeting, instead talking about the annual defense authorization bill that will be on the House floor this week.

But Omar defended her allies, saying she and other Democrats can vote however they want.

“I hope that leadership understands their role and understands what our role is,” Omar said.

Some of the moderates who felt targeted by Pocan’s tweet also spoke up in the caucus meeting, including Rep. Abigail Spanberger of Virginia, who belongs to the Problem Solvers Caucus that Pocan derided as child abusers. [She is also a vehemently anti-progressive Blue Dog who was one of the first freshmen to earn an "F" rating from ProgressivePunch and now has a horrifying 45.83 crucial vote score, indicating she isn't even really a Democrat at all.]

As a former federal law enforcement agent who focused on child trafficking, Spanberger said she was horrified that a fellow Democrat would compare members of his own party to child abusers, according to multiple people in the room. [Hard for garbage members like Spanberger to look in the mirror and realize what they are.]

Speaking to reporters later Wednesday, Pocan did not back away from his criticism of the bipartisan [right-wing members from both parties; not what bipartisan really means] Problem Solvers Caucus, which had taken credit for helping scrap the House’s more liberal version of a humanitarian border package last month.

Problem Solvers Caucus: Gottheimer (Blue Dog), Trump (Nazi), Reed (R)

“I know there are some people in the Problem Solvers Caucus that feel a little stung, because they got yelled at last weekend by constituents,” Pocan said, referring to recent town hall meetings held by moderates [wrong word, as usual-- conservatives are NOT moderates; they are conservatives] in their districts. “I understand why they’re upset, but they should be upset, because they got in trouble last week.”

Pelosi’s speech is part of an effort by Democratic leaders to knit the party back together after the bitter border funding fight last month.

Shortly before the July Fourth recess, moderate Democrats moved to block further consideration of the House border bill-- which had additional protections for migrant children-- after it became clear the GOP-controlled Senate would not take it up.

Pelosi bowed to centrists and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), agreeing to put the Senate bill on the floor and leaving progressives fuming.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) also delivered a forceful speech on Wednesday preaching unity within the caucus and urging members to speak directly with each other rather than publicly-- a sentiment that some lawmakers privately mused could also have been directed at Pelosi after her critique of the caucus' freshman firebrands. [Hoyer has a serious primary challenge.]

"If we have problems with each other, we ought to address each other," Rep. John Yarmuth (D-KY) said of Hoyer's message. [Yarmuth has a serious primary challenge.]

After Pelosi and Hoyer's remarks, another moderate, Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-TX), spoke up to complain that lawmakers shouldn't attack each other unless they're paying party dues. [Cuellar has a serious primary challenge.]

"If somebody has a problem, pay your dues before you start attacking other Democrats," according to a source in the room.

Some progressive members had privately discussed not paying dues to the caucus' fundraising arm earlier this year after officials announced contentious new policies that made it tougher for primary challengers to attract talented consultants.

"Privately discussed"-- but, par for the course, not acted on. Yesterday Rachel Bade and Mike DeBonis reported for the Washington Post how disrespectful Pelosi has become towards outspoken freshmen. As she increasingly loses her grasp and becomes more and more dependent on her aides, she has become more and more of a bully-- and finds it easy to express that side of her nature towards the freshmen she is so obviously jealous of: AOC (NY), Ilhan Omar (MN), Rashida Tlaib (MI) and Ayanna Pressley (MA). "The four," wrote Bade and DeBonis,"are struggling with the speaker’s moves to isolate them in recent weeks, according to interviews with the lawmakers, congressional aides and allies. Pelosi has made at least half a dozen remarks dismissing the group or their far-left proposals on the environment and health care. More recently she scorned their lonely opposition to the party’s emergency border bill last month." This drives Pelosi into a frenzy of uncontrollable recriminations, like some kind of wicked witch in Cinderella:

• @AOC- 4.7 million Twitter followers
• @SpeakerPelosi- 2.67 million Twitter followers
• @LeaderHoyer- 116K Twitter followers

"The speaker’s allies," wrote Bade and DeBonis, "say concerns about the next election is driving her moves to isolate these four women. “Sometimes a leader’s got to take positions to keep the team [united],” said Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (D-NY). “She knows what got us here and what’s going to keep us here.” Meeks is a corrupt bucket of slime who runs the Queens County Democratic Party machine-- ever since AOC defeated Joe Crowley, the last boss of the Queens County Democratic Party machine. Meeks is one of the most corrupt of the New Dems and his only reason for being in Congress is to enrich himself. He has a strong progressive primary opponent this cycle, Shaniyat Chowdhury. Please consider contributing to him-- and to the other progressives Pelosi and Cheri Bustos' DCCC are trying to undercut-- by clicking on the Blue America Primary A Blue Dog 2030 thermometer on the right. And. by the way, this is the iconic photograph of Pelosi's "ally," Rep. Gregory W. Meeks, disgracefully a member of the House Financial Services Committee who would have been removed long ago if Pelosi really gave a damn about ethics, which to her, is nothing but a cudgel to beat Republicans over the head with.

“When these comments first started, I kind of thought that she was keeping the progressive flank at more of an arm’s distance in order to protect more moderate members, which I understood,” Ocasio-Cortez told the Washington Post. “But the persistent singling out . . . it got to a point where it was just outright disrespectful . . . the explicit singling out of newly elected women of color.”

The four women are trying to figure out how to respond, texting one another and weighing whether to confront Pelosi to ask her to stop. But for now, they are focused on their congressional duties, even as they defend their votes in the House that have drawn Pelosi’s ire.

“Thank God my mother gave me broad shoulders and a strong back. I can handle it. I’m not worried about me,” said Pressley, who called Pelosi’s comments “demoralizing.” “I am worried about the signal that it sends to people I speak to and for, who sent me here with a mandate, and how it affects them.”

The tensions underscore the political and generational divide between the most powerful woman in American politics, who has led House Democrats for more than 16 years, and the new band of liberals clamoring for change and trying to push the party left. Pelosi has spent more than 30 years perfecting an inside game to secure wins for her party, most notably the Affordable Care Act in 2010. The four freshmen lawmakers, by contrast, have built a massive online following and leveraged their power on the outside, including in the 2020 presidential race.

Their ability to work together-- or refusal to-- will have major implications for Democrats as they seek to oust President Trump and retain their majority in next year’s election. Pelosi "knows" that the fate of her majority rests with the moderate Democrats who captured Republican-held seats in last year’s midterm elections.

“A majority is a fragile thing,” she said, according to two people present for the remarks, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the private meeting, adding that members should show “some level of respect and sensitivity” to more moderate colleagues: “You make me the target, but don’t make our [moderates] the target in all of this, because we have important fish to fry.”

...Pelosi suggested to New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd in an opinion piece published Saturday that “the Squad” had a limited following inside the House. She specifically pointed to the example of the House-passed Democratic border bill in late June, which the group opposed.

“All these people have their public whatever and their Twitter world,” Pelosi said in the New York Times interview. “But they didn’t have any following. They’re four people and that’s how many votes they got.”

Several in the caucus were uncomfortable with Pelosi’s comments. Congressional Progressive Caucus leaders are expected to talk to Pelosi about her comments, according to two officials familiar with the plan. Other women of color in the House have similarly expressed concerns.

“I can’t tell the speaker to apologize, but I was taken aback by it. Because we’re all here to work together,” said Rep. Jahana Hayes (D-CT), the first black woman to represent her state in Congress.

Notably, Hayes, Ocasio-Cortez and Omar appeared together with Pelosi smiling on the cover of Rolling Stone in a photo taken in January.

While some of the four enjoy more diplomatic relationships with Pelosi, Ocasio-Cortez’s relationship with the speaker has been chilly from the start. After she upset Rep. Joseph Crowley (NY) in the Democratic primary, Pelosi moved to immediately downplay her victory, saying it was a one-off event.

Still, Pelosi tried to create a bridge with the New Yorker: During their first face-to-face meeting just before the midterm elections, Pelosi spent nearly two hours trying to convince the liberal that she was just like her, touting her background. It was around that time that Ocasio-Cortez agreed to not only back Pelosi as speaker but also vocally defend her against rebels trying to keep her from the gavel.

Now, half a year later, virtually all communication between the two women has ceased. The two have not spoken one-on-one since February when Ocasio- Cortez declined Pelosi’s personal request that she join her select committee on climate change, according to individuals who know both lawmakers.

Just days after, during a private Progressive Caucus meeting, Pelosi singled out Ocasio-Cortez in front of her colleagues, calling her out for rejecting the select committee offer. Ocasio-Cortez had publicly criticized leadership for refusing to give the committee the power to directly draft legislation.

Since then, Pelosi has made several dismissive remarks about Ocasio-Cortez, calling her Green New Deal “the Green Dream or whatever,” and suggesting that a “glass of water” running as a Democrat could win in districts as liberal as hers.

“The third and fourth time [she insulted me], it was like, ‘This is unnecessary, but I’m not going to pick a fight over it. Whatever, I’ll be the punching bag if that’s what they want me to be,’ ” Ocasio-Cortez said. But now people are telling the freshman to talk to Pelosi. She doesn’t want to, however.

“There hasn’t really been a relationship, to be frank,” she said. “It’s difficult.”

Omar, according to people close to her, has been similarly disappointed. The  lawmaker from Minnesota looks up to Pelosi and has enjoyed a positive relationship with the speaker, despite her criticisms of Israel that caused a major stir in the party. Even then, however, Pelosi gave Omar a heads-up before chiding her publicly.

In one of her first conversations with Pelosi after she won her primary, Omar told Pelosi that she couldn’t vote on the floor because of a headwear ban in the House. Pelosi promised to change the rules so she could wear her hijab in the Capitol.

For Tlaib, Pelosi’s latest comment amounted to a mixed message-- one that seemed to contradict the advice Pelosi gave in a meeting early in her tenure. “Represent your district,” Tlaib recalled Pelosi telling her. “And that’s exactly what I’m doing.”

Hours after her primary win in August, Tlaib ruffled feathers by saying in a CNN interview that she would “probably not” support Pelosi for speaker. But Pelosi, directly and through intermediaries, worked through the ensuing months to keep her mind open, and Tlaib ultimately voted for her.

Tlaib then won a seat on the Financial Services Committee, a plum assignment for a freshman in a safely Democratic district. And even as she garnered outsize media attention, Pelosi appeared to have her back: When Tlaib was filmed telling a crowd of supporters in vulgar terms that lawmakers would impeach President Trump, Pelosi delivered only faint public criticism.

“Whatever is she saying is not going to impact my work,” Tlaib said of Pelosi’s comments over the weekend. “I’m going to continue to introduce legislation and policy.”

Yet some lawmakers and aides believe Pelosi’s treatment of the group is having a quiet effect on them. Many activists thought the group would band together to form a type of Freedom Caucus to deliver wins for the left, but they haven’t done so and appear almost on the defensive when Pelosi criticizes them.

They also have not tried to whip votes against a major leadership priority such as the border bill, nor muscled House support for impeachment, an idea Pelosi rejects. And they have declined to call Pelosi out by name as she sidelines liberal policy priorities such as Medicare-for-all and the Green New Deal, dismissing them publicly as “enthusiasms” and “exuberances” rather than viable policy prescriptions.

“She chooses her words carefully. She does not misspeak,” said Rep. Anna G. Eshoo (D-CA), a close friend of Pelosi. “There’s a big difference between being an advocate and being a legislator.”

Asked about why she hasn’t confronted Pelosi, Ocasio-Cortez said she wasn’t sure what to do.

“I do find it a little curious that leadership doesn’t want us to try to have any sort of conversation about even messaging-- but we’re just freshmen, right?” she said.

I spoke with the chief of staff of one of Pelosi's top lieutenants this morning who told me, strictly off the record, that the chance that Pelosi could win another term as Speaker-- if she's foolish enough to try for it-- is "exactly zero... She's not fit to lead the party any longer. Everyone knows that but her. Members don't want to talk about it but she's more of a detriment than anything else... If she really understood what she's done to the party she would retire as soon as she could without losing even more face than she already has... As you wrote last week, she's turned her beautiful legacy into a pile of crap."

Paul Ryan Is Extremely Vulnerable-- Despite A Massive War-Chest From Wall Street

Dave Weigel had observed for the Washington Post hours before Paul Ryan's fake CNN town hall-- in reality a deceitful infomercial gifted to his campaign with pre-screened questions and a pre-selected audience by CNN-- that the staged event had "turned into a marketing opportunity for progressives. Randy Bryce, Ryan’s likely Democratic opponent in 2018, has purchased time for two 30-second spots that will run during the broadcast in the Republican’s district. The first spot is designed like the sort of question-from-voters videos that are often used at town halls. Bryce fires off three questions, starting with one on the Congressional Budget Office’s coverage estimates for the American Health Care Act. Bryce then says: 'Donald Trump is clearly a racist. When will you censure him in Congress?'"



After the informercial ran, fake journalist and Ryan-booster Rachel Bade noted for Politico, an embarrassing lapdog, that Ryan, who is incredibly and increasingly unpopular back in the southeast Wisconsin district he abandoned "remains undeniably popular in his home state." She just gratuitously pulled that out of her ass-- as is her style of pseudo-journalism-- and it contradicts every single poll of WI-01 voters this year. A couple of paragraphs down, Bade was at it again, proving her devotion for the cardboard cutout congressman most Beltway types have now recognized as the fraud he's always been.

To be sure, Ryan is still extremely popular with Republicans here in the 1st District. All but one Republican interviewed for this story said he or she would vote for Ryan again, and others used adjectives such as “honest,” “tenacious” and “hard-working” to describe.

Some, like Franksville-native Bill Jaeck, even parroted Ryan’s talking points about House-passed bills stalling in the Senate.

But there’s a sinking feeling among some Ryan supporters that the man they’ve known and voted in for years is not the superman they’d hoped.

“Being speaker of the House has become a setback… It’s basically ruined his career for a while, because he’s forced to do many unpopular things,” said Marlene Lamberton of Caledonia, a longtime supporter.

The retired manufacturing employee said she’s worried that her fellow Republicans “blame him” for the lack of GOP accomplishments and that Ryan's popularity is declining. “He’s forced to make a lot of compromises," Lamberton said. "He’s trying to keep his promises but he’s bumping up against some wall.”

Ryan’s town hall at the Racine Theater Guild wasn’t like most GOP town halls. Jake Tapper moderated the talk, carried live on CNN. Some Ryan constituents who wanted to attend weren’t happy that they were locked out-- particularly since it was his first town hall since the fall of 2015.

“Why would you not hold a town hall for all of your constituents as opposed to this small, staged event where only a few are allowed in?” asked Kenosha resident Jeanne Lepp, a retired teacher and Democrat who wanted to attend the event but could not.

...As with most GOP town halls since Election Day, progressive groups came out in full force, gathering on the front lawn with signs that read “repeal and replace Ryan” and “your arrogance eclipses your duty.” Many protesters toted around pictures of Ryan’s head plastered on a “where’s Waldo?” outfit, with a sign that read: “Where’s Paul Ryan?”

Those signs tapped into a frustration even some Ryan supporters expressed: That the speaker has become less accessible as he’s risen through the ranks. Ryan's office denied that charge, arguing the speaker has reached more than 800,000 constituents through "tele-town halls" and taken questions during local tours of factories.

Those business tours, however, are closed to the public. And constituents said tele-townhalls offered little chance it mix it up with Ryan, since he does most of the talking.

"He may not like it, it may be contentious," said Ken Webber, a self-proclaimed Ryan voter from Pleasant Prairie, "but you have to have those town hall meetings.”

New polling released this morning

Most people in Wisconsin know who Charlie Sykes is. A popular conservative talk show radio host, he was widely credited with helping Ted Cruz defeat Trump in the 2016 primary. On the same April day Bernie beat Hillary, 570,192 (56.6%) to 433,739 (43.0%), Cruz defeated Trump 533,079 (48.2%) to 387,295 (35.0%). In the 8 counties where Sykes' WTMJ show dominated, Trump severely underperformed his statewide totals.

• Dodge Co.- 32.6%
• Jefferson Co.- 31.8%
• Milwaukee Co.- 26.2%
• Ozaukee- 20.5%
• Racine Co.- 32.1%
• Sheboygan Co.- 25.1%
• Washington Co.- 23.5%
• Waukesha Co.- 22.1%

Monday, Ana Marie Cox interviewed Sykes for the NY Times Magazine. He told her that he's "long admired Paul Ryan and thought of him as the future of the Republican Party. But he’s made a Faustian bargain. I keep thinking about that scene from A Man for All Seasons, where Thomas More says, 'What profit a man to gain the whole world if he loses his soul, but for Wales?' And I keep thinking, But for tax cuts, Paul?"

Even after Trump showed his racist/Nazi tendencies in the midst of the domestic terrorism debacle in Charlottesville, Sykes realized Ryan is just a lost cause. "I imagine," he told Cox, "that most of the elected officials are privately horrified in realizing that their bargain is increasingly untenable. But how that manifests itself, I don’t know. Ryan is not going to give up on tax reform because of this."

Cox asked him if the Republican Party is done for because of this dearth of leadership displayed by people like Ryan, McCarthy, McConnell and Cornyn. "It’s a moral, intellectual and political defining moment for the party. I just don’t see any long-term future if they don’t confront this. All this reveals something deeply troubling about the party itself but maybe also reveals something very troubling about what the electorate wants."

DC conventional wisdom says it's nigh impossible to beat a sitting Speaker of the House so Bryce is wasting his time. DC conventional wisdom says Ryan has tens of millions of dollars which he and his allies will use to pulverize Bryce so Bryce is wasting his time. DC conventional wisdom says people are used to voting for Ryan and they're not going to kick him out for some interloper who already lost 2 races, so Bryce is wasting his time. The DCCC may see it that way-- as do the DC insiders-- but we don't think so.

Polling shows registered voters in southeast Wisconsin are fed up with Ryan and his agenda and the way he has avoided them. Bryce is widely admired by working men and women who sense he's one of them, the polar opposite of "an interloper." He's running the best congressional campaign-- with no help from the DCCC-- in the entire country and has created a brand for himself that every political consultant is freaking out over because all their candidates are asking for the same thing. Even after the Republican legislature removed Beloit from the district and added in chunks of beet red Waukesha County to help Ryan, WI-01 is still a swing district where independent voters will cast the deciding votes. Independents have come to detest Ryan. The Bannon wing of the GOP seems willing to let the seat fall to a Democrat to get rid of their own bête noire. Breitbart wants Ryan out more than they want a red district. Bannon has some poison up his sleeves headed Ryan's way. But even without him, Randy Bryce can win this thing. Want to help? Below is a Stop Paul Ryan thermometer. Please click on it and contribute what you can.

The Republican Party Is About To Amp Up Its War Against The Poor In A Really Big Way

As NY Times columnist Frank Bruni noted yesterday, there isn't a core of shrewdness beneath Señor Trumpanzee's antics nor a method to his madness. "Mostly, there’s a raging, pouting child... The House passed health care legislation that blatantly contradicted his incessant promises of terrific, inexpensive coverage and betrayed the hard-luck Americans whose champion he purported to be. The Senate made clear that it was going nowhere anyway. He’s not coming to anyone’s rescue, just giving the Trump-Kushner clan a loftier status and more leverage for enriching themselves. He’s not draining the swamp. He’s globalizing it... He’s 70, but if we’re talking about deeds and not digits, psychological maturity instead of epidermal sag, he’s our youngest president ever, with the frailest ego. Aides feed him his information in easily digested bites: pictures, charts. They whisper sweet grandiosities in his ear. They devise strategies to shield him from upset and work around his ever-shifting moods. They cross their fingers and they tremble. So do I. And when I picture him at that Time magazine dinner, with a portion bigger than anybody else’s, I don’t see him on a throne. I see him in a highchair, keeping his audience guessing about just how much ice cream he’ll fling against the wall."

And Paul Ryan and Miss McConnell put up with it because he'll blithely sign all their devastating toxic agenda items without even reading them or understanding them-- or caring one way or another about what kind of misery and destruction they're likely to bring in their wake. And they have some plans to bring quite a bit.

Rachel Bade made that point Sunday in a Politico posting, Republicans plan massive cuts to programs for the poor. Keep in mind that that new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released yesterday indicates that only 23% of Americans approve of TrumpCare and that the Democrats hope to use TrumpCare as the premier issue in the 2018 midterms. Bade made the point that Ryan and his crew of slash-and-burn sociopaths "just voted to slash hundreds of billions of dollars in health care for the poor as part of their Obamacare replacement. Now, they’re weighing a plan to take the scalpel to programs that provide meals to needy kids and housing and education assistance for low-income families." Scalpel? More like an ax... or chain saw.

Trump’s refusal to overhaul Social Security and Medicare-- and his pricey wish-list for infrastructure, a border wall and tax cuts-- is sending House budget writers scouring for pennies in politically-sensitive places: safety-net programs for the most vulnerable.

Under enormous internal pressure to quickly balance the budget, Republicans are considering slashing more than $400 billion in spending through a process to evade Democratic filibusters in the Senate, multiple sources told Politico.

The proposal, which would be part of the House Budget Committee's fiscal 2018 budget, won't specify which programs will get the ax; instead it will instruct committees to figure out what to cut to reach the savings. But among the programs most likely on the chopping block, the sources say, are food stamps, welfare, income assistance for the disabled and perhaps even veterans’ benefits.

If enacted, such a plan to curb safety-net programs-- all while juicing the Pentagon’s budget and slicing corporate tax rates-- would amount to the biggest shift in federal spending priorities in decades.



Atop that, GOP budget writers will also likely include Speaker Paul Ryan’s (R-Wis.) proposal to essentially privatize Medicare in their fiscal 2018 budget, despite Trump’s unwavering rejection of the idea. While that proposal is more symbolic and won’t become law under this budget, it’s just another thorny issue that will have Democrats again accusing Republicans of “pushing Granny off the cliff.”

...Enraged by Democrats claiming victory after last month’s government funding agreement, White House officials in recent weeks have pressed Hill Republicans to include more Trump priorities in the fiscal 2018 blueprint.

House Budget Republicans hope to incorporate those wishes and are expected, for example, to budget for Trump’s infrastructure plan. Tax reform instructions will also be included in the budget, paving the way for both chambers to use the powerful budget reconciliation process to push a partisan tax bill through Congress on simple majority votes, as well as the $400 billion in mandatory cuts.

“The critique last time was that we didn’t embed enough Trump agenda items into our budget,” said Rep. Dave Brat (R-Va.), a Budget panel member. “[Trump has] made it clear it will be embedded in this budget. … And so people will see a process much more aligned with President Trump’s agenda in this forthcoming budget.”

New spending, however, makes already tough math even trickier for a party whose mantra is “balance the budget in 10 years.” Lawmakers need to cut roughly $8 trillion to meet that goal, budget experts say. And while a quarter of their savings in previous budgets came from repealing Obamacare and slicing $1 trillion from Medicaid, Republicans cannot count on those savings anymore because their health care bill sucked up all but $150 billion of that stash, mere pocket change to play with.

Republicans’ first reflex would be to turn to entitlement reform to find savings. Medicare and Social Security, after all, comprise the lion’s share of government spending and more than 70 percent of all mandatory spending.

But while former Freedom Caucus conservative-turned-White House budget director Mick Mulvaney has tried to convince the president of the merits of such reforms, Trump has refused to back down on his campaign pledge to leave Medicare and Social Security alone. (He’s reversed himself on a vow not to touch Medicaid, which would see $880 billion in cuts under the Obamacare repeal bill passed by the House.)

Mulvaney, sources say, has been huddling on a weekly basis with House Budget Chairwoman Diane Black (R-Tenn.) and Senate Budget Chairman Mike Enzi (R-Wy.) to plot a path forward. There appears to be some common ground to consider cuts to other smaller entitlement programs: While the Office of Management and Budget would not respond to request for comment, CQ reported Tuesday that the White House was also considering hundreds of billions in cuts to the same programs being eyed by House budget writers.

The other day, we met Randy Bryce, the Democratic and union activist likely to take on Ryan in 2018. Yesterday he told me that "Aside from having complete control over every arm of the United States government, Republicans in D.C. can’t get a single thing accomplished. We are now seeing very clearly who holds the real power. It’s not the majority of voters-- it’s all special interests. We are seeing that although cats do nothing but fight, they still produce a lot of kittens. Problem is-- the 'have nots' get to take care of them while those who 'have' only seek to fill the litter box." Bryce is going to a formidable opponent for Ryan, even if the DCCC continues to pretend Ryan is invincible and not worth targeting.

In a way we are lucky. If Donald Trump had the experience or intelligence to actually sit behind the desk in the Oval Office, maybe one of his campaign promises would have been kept.

It would appear that frustration may be taking control of the legislative process. Seeing as the courts have determined that not only are corporations people, but that corporations are the only people that matter, be prepared to enjoy an abundance of less.

We saw the same thing happen in Wisconsin under Scott Walker. Just when we thought things could not get worse-- they did.

If the Republicans get their act together, we will truly be in a world of hurt. Hopefully with the legal proceedings, it will keep them weighed down and acting like a bucket of crabs-- pulling anyone back down who gets too close to the top.

2018 will be here before we know it. We need to save our Democracy. That happens by taking back Congress.

As this is being written on Mother’s Day, I just left my mother (diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis since early 80s) and my father (Alzheimer's) who probably will make it to 2018. I’d like to see them around for as long as possible. I’d also like for everyone reading this to be able to see their loved ones for as long as possible as well.

That’s going to require a government that actually looks out to “promote the general welfare.”

Neither Donald Trump nor Paul Ryan are concerned with people like you or me. They have proven that they can’t be trusted.

We need people like you or me to fill as many spots as we can.

Please join me-- save our Democracy. Let’s get momentum rolling sooner rather than later. 2018-- the year we save our Democracy. It’s not a spectator sport. If you’re reading this-- you are needed.

Please frequent this blog to find out how you can be involved no matter where you live.