Submit documents to WikiLeaks

*H4A News Clips**June 11, 2015**LAST NIGHTS EVENING NEWS*ABC and CBS did not report on 2016 issues. NBC had a brief segment on JebBush’s campaign staff shakeup. Bush tries to downplay the changes in topcampaign positions. He remains a favorite among many Republicans; however,he is not the front runner anymore. Reporters claim that changes tocampaign staff is symbolizing campaign weaknesses.*LAST NIGHTS EVENINGNEWS……………………………………………………………….**1**TODAY’S KEYSTORIES………………………………………………………………………….**5**Hillary Clinton’s Hard Choice: Her First Instagram Post* // NYT // AmyChozick – June 10, 2015….. 5*Hillary Clinton win could mean an end to paid speeches by Bill* // WaPo //Rosalind S. Helderman – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….5*Clinton far out front of rivals from both parties in fielding army oforganizers across US* // AP // Lisa Lerer – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..6*SOCIALMEDIA…………………………………………………………………………………….**8**Scott Wong (6/10/15, 9:43 am)* – House will vote Friday on #TPA, say Rsemerging from GOP conf meeting 8*Reid Epstein (6/10/15, 9:52 am)* – Inbox: Whole slew of NH Republicanssend an open letter to Fox & RNC calling for wholesale changes to 2016debateformat……………………………………………………………………..8*Lis Smith (6/10/15, 10:51 am)* – Corrigan Brothers, who penned song about@BarackObama, now on the @GovernorOMalley train. Listen here:https://soundcloud.com/the-irish-times/martin-omalley-song … 8*Azi (6/10/15, 4:27 pm)* – attending @HillaryClinton’s rally? Bill deBlasio: “No .. I’m waiting to hear … her larger vision to addressing incomeinequality.”…………………………………………………………………………..8*Azi (6/10/15, 4:28 pm)* – “I’ve always liked what i heard from BernieSanders” — @BilldeBlasio…… 9*Maggie Haberman (6/10/15, 9:42 pm)* – Meanwhile, as the turmoil-in-Jeblandstories roll on …….. 9*HRC NATIONALCOVERAGE…………………………………………………………………..**9**How the $15 minimum wage could become a new dividing line in the 2016primary* // WaPo // Max Ehrenfreund & Lydia DePillis – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………..9*Hillary’s lurch to the left has been greatly exaggerated* // WaPo // GregSargent – June 10, 2015.. 10*Bill Clinton Likely to Stop Accepting Pay for Speeches If Hillary ClintonIs Elected President* // WSJ // James V. Grimaldi – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………..12*Clinton Foundation Helps the Poor* // WSJ // Donna Shalala – June 10,2015…………………………. 14*Clinton student loan reform plan has Warren stamp* // Politico // AnnieKarni – June 11, 2015…… 14*Hillary’s Game-Changing Voting Reform* // Politico // Michael Waldman –June 10, 2015…………. 17*Hillary digital push highlights organizing before NYC rally* // Politico// Gabriel Debenedetti – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….19*J Street poll: Jewish Americans favor Hillary over Jeb* // Politico //Nick Gass – June 10, 2015…… 21*Every wedding should have a Hillary Clinton Bible reading* // Politico //Kate Glassman Bennett – June 11,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….21*Domestic Worker Groups Announce Alliance At Clinton Global InitiativeConference* // HuffPo // Samantha Lachman – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………….22*Journalists Meet With Clinton Campaign Officials Over Access Concerns* //HuffPo // Michael Calderone – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………24*New York’s Forgotten Island Shrugs At Hillary Clinton’s Big 2016 Debut* //HuffPo // Scott Conroy – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………25*The selective liberalism of Hillary Clinton* // VOX // Jonathan Allen –June 10, 2015………………. 27*Bill Clinton Says He’ll Nix Paid Speeches If Hillary Wins* // NBC News //Andrea Mitchell and Cassandra Vinograd – June 11,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..31*Hillary Clinton and the New Politics of $15* // The Nation // John Nichols– June 10, 2015………… 31*Bill Clinton Says Hillary Win Could Change His Philanthropy Role* //Bloomberg // Margaret Talev – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..34*Hillary Clinton Needs a Do-Over* // RealClearPolitics // Jonah Goldberg –June 10, 2015………….. 35*Check Out Hillary Clinton’s First Instagram* // TIMES // Olivia Waxman –June 10, 2015…………. 36*Hillary Clinton launches Instagram account* // CBS News // HannahFraser-Chanpong – June 10, 2015 37*Hillary Clinton joins Instagram with a photo of her red, white and bluepantsuits* // Mashable // Bryian Ries – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….37*Parties set events; Democrats draw Clinton to dinner* // North WestArkansas Gazette // Michael R. Wickline – June 11,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….38*It’s official: Hillary Clinton’s logo is actually perfect* // Quartz //Annalisa Merelli – June 10, 2015 39*Hillary to be honored at Wildlife gala after making* // NY Post // GeoffEarle – June 10, 2015…….. 41*Bill Clinton contradicts Hillary on email claims* // Fox News – June 10,2015………………………….. 41*De Blasio likely to skip Hillary Clinton’s campaign launch* // Crain’s NewYork // Andrew Hawkins – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………42*Democrats Line Up Hillary Clinton For Jefferson-Jackson Dinner* // TalkBusiness – June 10, 2015 43*Clinton Has Edge Among Mass. Voters; Gov. Baker Remains Popular* // WBUR// Fred Thys – June 10, 2015 44*No blueprint on cutting college debt* // Boston Globe // Tracy Jan – June11, 2015………………….. 45*Clinton plans ‘Launch Party’ in Concord during Monday visit* // WMUR //John DiStaso – June 10, 2015 48*How Huma Abedin became Hillary Clinton’s confidante and ‘translator’* //Fortune // Nina Easton – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..49*Clinton Foundation donors have a bribery problem* // The WashingtonExaminer // Sarah Westwood – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..50*OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONALCOVERAGE…………………………………………. **52**O’MALLEY………………………………………………………………………………………**52**Martin O’Malley Backs Controversial Cybersecurity Bill* // US News // TomRisen – June 10, 2015 52*2016 hopeful O’Malley steps out on cybersecurity* // The Hill // CoryBennett – June 10, 2015…… 53*SANDERS……………………………………………………………………………………….**55**Bernie Sanders Denies Internet Claim on Dual Israeli Citizenship* // NYT// Gerry Mullany – June 10, 2015 55*De Blasio to Skip Clinton Rally, Praises Rival Sanders* // WSJ // EricaOrden – June 10, 2015……. 56*Sanders wants war spending paid for* // The Hill // Jordain Carney – June10, 2015………………… 57*Bernie Sanders, Gun Nut* // Slate // Mark Joseph Stern – June 10,2015……………………………….. 58*Lead, follow or get out of the way: Bernie Sanders opts for latter inIslamic State fight* // The Washington Times // S.A. Miller – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………59*CHAFEE…………………………………………………………………………………………**60**Chafee: Hillary is ‘more like the Republicans’* // The Hill // JesseByrnes – June 10, 2015………… 60*The hidden history behind Lincoln Chafee’s metric proposal* // MSNBC //Alex Seitz-Wald – June 10, 2015 61*OTHER…………………………………………………………………………………………..**64**Clinton, O’Malley, Sanders and Webb to attend Iowa dinner* // AP – June10, 2015…………………. 64*Warren shames both parties on college affordability* // Politico // AllieGrasgreen – June 10, 2015 64*GOP…………………………………………………………………………………………………..**67**BUSH……………………………………………………………………………………………..**67**How Jeb Bush’s campaign ran off course before it even began* // WaPo // EdO’Keefe and Robert Costa – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..68*Jeb Bush’s ‘It’s June!’ argument has two major flaws* // WaPo // PhilipBump – June 10, 2015….. 72*Jeb Bush says U.S. bank rules may have contributed to systemic risks* //Reuters // Reuters – June 9, 2015 73*Jeb Bush After Shake-Up: ‘I Don’t Read the Polls’* // NBC News // BenjySarlin – June 10, 2015…. 74*Jeb: It’s too early for poll-watching* // The Hill // Jonathan Easley -June 10, 2015………………….. 75*Jeb Bush is a compassionless conservative: His “Scarlet Letter” law waseven worse than it sounds* // Salon // Katie McDonough – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………76*Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush: A Boring Disaster Waiting to Happen* // TheBlaze // Chris Markowski – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..78*Tom Coburn on Jeb Bush: ‘His last name will kill 47 percent of the votes’*// The Washington Examiner // Philip Klein – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………….80*Shaming Unwed Moms Was the Law in Jeb Bush’s Florida* // The Daily Beast// Betsy Woodroff – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………80*Jeb Bush to visit Jimmy Fallon on ‘Tonight Show’ next week* // LA Times //Meredith Blake – June 10, 2015 81*RUBIO……………………………………………………………………………………………**82**Florida Poll: Rubio Gaining on Jeb* // The Weekly Standard // MichaelWarren – June 10, 2015…. 82*PAUL……………………………………………………………………………………………..**83**At GOP fundraiser in Maryland, Rand Paul decries racial injustice,champions diversity* // WaPo // Ovetta Wiggins – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………83*WALKER………………………………………………………………………………………..**84**Walker makes case for education reforms nationwide* // AP – June 10,2015………………………….. 84*Walker: We changed broken education system* // The Des Moines Register //Scott Walker – June 10, 2015 86*Scott Walker Courting Mitt Romney Donors After Slamming Candidate Romney*// Bloomberg News // John McCormick – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………….87*A teacher central to Scott Walker’s education pitch would like him to stopusing her story* // Business Insider // Colin Campbell – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………….89*Wisconsinites Blast Scott Walker’s Stadium Deal As ‘Outrageous’* // ThinkProgress // Alice Ollstein – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..90*Scott Walker To Remove Waiting Period For Wisconsin Gun Purchases* //Breitbart // Awr Hawkins – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………91*CRUZ……………………………………………………………………………………………..**92**“If you live by the pen, you die by the pen”* // WaPo // James Hohmann –June 10, 2015…………. 92*Ted Cruz team looks beyond Iowa, New Hampshire* // Politico // KatieGlueck – June 10, 2015….. 94*Ted Cruz Going After the Libertarian-Hawk Vote* // Reason // Matt Welch –June 10, 2015……….. 96*Ted Cruz And The False Narrative Of Christian Persecution* // Forbes //Rick Ungar – June 10, 2015 96*CHRISTIE………………………………………………………………………………………**98**In Washington Speech, Chris Christie Sounds Like He’s Ready to Run* // NYT// Nick Corasaniti – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………98*Court Ruling Removes a Bump From Chris Christie’s Path* // NYT – June 10,2015…………………… 99*N.J. Gov. Chris Christie Uses Court Pension Win in Fundraising Pitch* //WSJ // Heather Haddon – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….100*Christie faults GOP for sounding unwelcoming to Latinos* // AP // LuisAlonso Lugo & Jill Colvin – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..101*For Chris Christie, ‘good’ news is relative* // MSNBC // Steve Benen –June 10, 2015………………. 102*PERRY………………………………………………………………………………………….**103**Perry’s cherry-picked claim that America would have lost 400,000 jobswithout Texas* // WaPo // Michelle Ye Hee Lee – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………….103*Rick Perry Tries Again* // HuffPo // Chris Weigant – June 10,2015……………………………………… 105*The Legal Trouble That Could Haunt Rick Perry’s Presidential Campaign* //Mother Jones // Patrick Caldwell – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..108*Perry Switches On Trade: TPP’s Become ‘An Animal’ That ‘Needs To Go Away’*// The Daily Caller // Al Weaver – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..109*GRAHAM………………………………………………………………………………………**110**The most interesting candidate you’re not paying any attention to* // WaPo// Chris Cillizza – June 10, 2015 110*Lindsey Graham to Sean Hannity: Knock it off* // Politico // Nick Gass –June 10, 2015……………. 112*Lindsey Graham’s abortion push could imperil fellow GOPers* // Politico //Burgess Everett – June 10, 2015 113*SANTORUM…………………………………………………………………………………..**116**Rick Santorum is getting lost in the growing GOP pack* // LA Times //David Horsey – June 10, 2015 116*HUCKABEE……………………………………………………………………………………**117**Co-Author Of Mike Huckabee Books Was Accused Of Child Molestation In TwoLegal Cases* // Buzzfeed // Andrew Kaczynski – June 10,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………..117*Huckabee: Fox News Staff Thought I Was A “Psychopath” For Owning An AR-15*// Buzzfeed // Christopher Massie – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………….119*KASICH………………………………………………………………………………………..**120**Kasich Leads Field In Ohio* // Public Policy Polling – June 10,2015……………………………………. 120*CARSON………………………………………………………………………………………..**121**Ben Carson: Let’s spy on government workers* // MSNBC // Jane Timm – June10, 2015………….. 121*Carson: Gay rights aren’t the same as civil rights* // CNN // AlexandraJaffe – June 10, 2015…….. 122*Carson identifies as ‘pragmatic dove’ for conservative voters* // The DesMoines Register – June 10, 2015 123*FIORINA……………………………………………………………………………………….**125**Fiorina’s campaign-trail attacks leave out her own ties to Clinton CarlyFiorina* // LAT // Joseph Tanfani – June 11,2015…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..125*Carly Fiorina Steps Up Campaign Against Hillary Clinton* // NYT // AmyChozick – June 10, 2015 127*TRUMP…………………………………………………………………………………………**128**OTHER…………………………………………………………………………………………**128**Republicans Still Playing Catch-Up on the Digital Campaign Trail* // NYT// Ashley Parker – June 10, 2015 128*New Hampshire Republicans Urge Networks to Alter Debate Criteria* // NYT// Alan Rappeport – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..131*Their state economies may lag, but Republican hopefuls still brag* //Reuters // Andy Sullivan – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..131*Polling Memo: Clinton ‘Clearly Unpopular’ Among Battleground StateIndependents* // GOP.com – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..131*GOP ready to counter Hillary Clinton’s speech* // The Washington Examiner//David Drucker – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..133*TOPNEWS………………………………………………………………………………………..**135**DOMESTIC…………………………………………………………………………………….**135**Senate GOP denies funds for lawyers for immigrant children* // AP //Andrew Taylor – June 10, 2015 135*Republicans take aim at IRS budget* // Politico // Rachael Bade – June 10,2015…………………… 136*EPA takes crucial step toward climate rules for airplanes* // Politico //Alex Guillén – June 10, 2015 138*Senate shows Ex-Im support in test vote* // The Hill // Kevin Cirilli –June 10, 2015………………. 142*INTERNATIONAL…………………………………………………………………………..**142**Hackers May Have Obtained Names of Chinese With Ties to U.S. Government*// NYT // – David Sanger & Julie Davis – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………..142*U.S. Expands ISIS Involvement, Sending Up To 450 Military Personnel To NewTraining Site In Iraq* // Huffington Post – June 10,2015………………………………………………………………………………………………….145*American Keith Broomfield killed fighting in Syria* // CNN // Elise Labott– June 10, 2015………. 147*OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS………………………………………………………….**147**Jeb Bush’s Learning Curve on Russia* // NYT // Carol Giacomo – June 10,2015……………………… 147*Jeb Bush’s recipe for a better society: Shame* // WaPo // CatherineRampell – June 10, 2015…… 149*Back Clinton for voting rights* // The Quad-City Times // Elaine Baxter -June 10, 2015…………… 151*Bernie Sanders Was Just Another Hippie Rummaging Through My Mom’s Fridge*// The New Republic // Chelsea Summers – June 10,2015……………………………………………………………………………………………151*TODAY’S KEY STORIES**Hillary Clinton’s Hard Choice: Her First Instagram Post<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/10/jeb-bush-in-berlin-says-west-is-confronting-a-more-aggressive-putin/>// NYT // Amy Chozick – June 10, 2015 *Hillary Rodham Clinton’s first post on Instagram isn’t a picture of her onthe campaign trail or of supporters gathered at a house party. It’s a playon her memoir, “Hard Choices.”The “hard choice” in this case? What to wear. The photo features a rackfull of red, white and blue jackets of the pants suits Mrs. Clinton isknown for.The clothes hang in front of a sunny window presumably in Mrs. Clinton’shome in Chappaqua, N.Y. A needlepoint pillow and oil painting appear in thebackground.Mrs. Clinton has had some fun with social media since she joined Twitter in2013. Then her avatar featured her image as secretary of state, in darksunglasses on a military aircraft. Her bio, until she declared hercandidacy, read “TBD.” (Now it reads “Wife, grandma, women + kids advocate,FLOTUS, Senator, SecState, hair icon, pants suit aficionado, 2016presidential candidate.”)The tongue-in-cheek Instagram debut, like most things Mrs. Clinton does,prompted a divisive reaction. In four hours, the post had more than 6,600“likes.” But some commentators used the post as an outlet to attack Mrs.Clinton over her handling of the 2012 attacks on the American mission inBenghazi and her personal wealth.*Hillary Clinton win could mean an end to paid speeches by Bill<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/10/hillary-clinton-win-could-mean-an-end-to-paid-speeches-by-bill/>// WaPo // Rosalind S. Helderman – June 10, 2015 *Former President Bill Clinton might quit his lucrative career as a paidspeaker — if his wife is elected president.In an interview conducted with Bloomberg TV Wednesday on stage at a meetingof the Clinton Global Initiative in Denver, Clinton said he would likelystep off the lecture circuit that has earned him more than $100 millionsince he left the White House in 2001 if Hillary Rodham Clinton wins thepresidency.”I don’t think so,” he said when asked if he would continue to give paidspeeches. “Once you get to be president, then you’re just making a dailystory.”He also offered a robust defense of the foundation that has been his life’swork since his presidency ended, and which has been under intense scrutinyduring the first phase of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.Clinton said he would like to remain involved with the organization as longas possible during the campaign, to ensure it raises the money necessary tofund its global charitable work, but it would up to his wife whether hewould stay with the foundation if she is elected.”I believe if you have been president, and the current president of eitherparty asks you to do anything, if in good conscience you can do it, youshould do it. Now that’s the truth, quite apart from our being husband andwife,” he said. “That will be not an easy decision, should she be electedpresident. And she will have to decide what’s my highest and best use,including being around to buck her up every morning.”Clinton blamed political reporters for the increase in attention on donorsto the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation and whether they mayhave been trying to curry favor with the former president and his wifethrough their contributions. He said the organization has turned down moneyand avoided work in some areas because of its anti-corruption policies.”If you’re a political reporter primarily, or you’re a business reporteryou tend to see — tend to see the world through that lens. And it’s hardto imagine that there are businesses and individuals that contribute moneyfor things that have nothing to do with politics,” he said.”Has anybody proved that we did anything objectionable? No. Have we done alot of good things with this money? Yes,” he said.*Clinton far out front of rivals from both parties in fielding army oforganizers across US<http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2015/06/10/clinton-building-vast-network-of-campaign-staff-volunteers>// AP // Lisa Lerer – June 10, 2015 *Hillary Rodham Clinton has launched a sweeping national jobs program — forher presidential campaign.In the eight weeks since she announced her run for the White House,Clinton’s campaign has deployed roughly 100 organizers nationwide andopened 15 offices in early-voting states. That’s far more than any othercandidate of either party in the 2016 contest.In Iowa, Clinton now has at least 27 paid organizers — three times as manyas any of the roughly dozen Republicans in the race. Her campaign has hiredat least one staff member in every state, the District of Columbia and theU.S. territories.She has two regional directors in the reliably Democratic state ofCalifornia and even put one person on the payroll in Wyoming, a state thathas not voted for a Democratic nominee in more than 50 years.The overwhelming favorite for her party’s nomination, Clinton doesn’tnecessarily need the volunteers now. But her team, worried she will lackthe power of a competitive primary to energize the core group of supportersshe will need for the general election, has gone on an early hiring spreerare in presidential politics.”You can’t get to a point where the polls are tight and say, ‘Oh, wow, weneed to do some organizing,'” said Marlon Marshall, Clinton’s director ofstate campaigns and political engagement. “These organizing relationshipswill create a sense of urgency to let people know why we have to do thiswork now.”The effort isn’t cheap: Senior campaign aides have set a goal of raising$100 million to pay for Clinton’s primary campaign.Her campaign has organized 320 house parties, attracting almost 11,000people. This weekend, her appearance at an event in Iowa will be streamedto a gathering in every congressional district nationwide. “At this point,it’s more about finding people and getting them involved then convincingthem to back Clinton,” said Scott Hogan, a former gun control activisthired by Clinton’s campaign to organize voters in deeply DemocraticMinnesota.At a meeting in Mankato on Tuesday, Hogan wanted to know why his batch ofpotential volunteers was “ready for Hillary.” He didn’t get the answer hewanted, but it was enough to get the conversation started.”To tell you the truth, I like Bernie Sanders for just his honesty, but Idon’t think he’s electable,” said Gina Casey, 59, sitting at a conferencetable at a Democratic Party office. “So, I’m trying to love Hillary and Ineed to know more.”Hogan made the pitch for his boss over Sanders, the independent Vermontsenator mounting a longshot challenge for the Democratic nomination.”This campaign is about you,” Hogan told Casey and other Democrats in thesmall group gathered on a hot night. “It’s not about me. It’s not aboutHillary.”Clinton’s campaign staff takes great pains to keep a focus on the primarycampaign, despite her crushing advantage. Should the Democratic racesomehow become competitive, Minnesota — voting in the first big set ofprimaries after the first four states — could be decisive.But if Clinton runs away with the Democratic prize, and if Minnesota votesfor the Democratic nominee as it has done since 1972, the supporters Hoganis organizing now will become valuable for raising money, making calls andtraveling to neighboring battleground states such as Iowa and Wisconsin.The staff working in reliably Democratic states will be redeployed tobattleground areas at the end of this month. The goal is to leave behindengaged volunteer networks to organize small-dollar fundraisers and makesure Clinton is represented at local events.Clinton aides said the early investment will pay dividends in the finalweeks of the campaign. Data analyzed by President Barack Obama’s campaignshowed a direct correlation between supporter enthusiasm in the last sixweeks before the election and when local operations began in their area,according to former staffers.”The earlier you start, the larger your volunteer structure will be thelast two weeks or last month of the campaign, which is ultimately when thatinvestment pays off,” said Mitch Stewart, who oversaw battleground statesfor Obama’s campaigns and advised the pro-Clinton super PAC Ready forHillary.In Mankato, the gathering was half political strategy session, halfteam-building retreat.They each wrote a word that described her candidacy on a Post-it note andstuck it to a handmade poster of her campaign logo. Hogan encouraged themto post their support on social media, directed them to Clinton’s websiteand promised to follow up. The meeting ended with a group photo.At one table, a group of women had a suggestion for Hogan: Farmfest.Before the meeting, they hadn’t thought seriously about putting together abooth for Clinton at the three-day agricultural trade show in August, amust-attend event for political candidates in this part of the state.”Next year will be the more important time to be out there,” said LoriSellner, 46, of Sleepy Eye, Minnesota. “This is just earlier than we’veseen before.”*SOCIAL MEDIA**Scott Wong (6/10/15, 9:43 am)*<https://twitter.com/scottwongDC/status/608630556167970816>* – House willvote Friday on #TPA, say Rs emerging from GOP conf meeting**Reid Epstein (6/10/15, 9:52 am)*<https://twitter.com/reidepstein/status/608632824581586947>* – Inbox: Wholeslew of NH Republicans send an open letter to Fox & RNC calling forwholesale changes to 2016 debate format**Lis Smith (6/10/15, 10:51 am)*<https://twitter.com/Lis_Smith/status/608647585776152576>* – CorriganBrothers, who penned song about **@BarackObama*<https://twitter.com/BarackObama>*, now on the **@GovernorOMalley*<https://twitter.com/GovernorOMalley>* train. Listen here: **https://soundcloud.com/the-irish-times/martin-omalley-song …*<https://t.co/T1tUS70snS>*Azi (6/10/15, 4:27 pm)* <https://twitter.com/Azi/status/608732186334871552>*- attending @HillaryClinton’s rally? Bill de Blasio: “No .. I’m waiting tohear … her larger vision to addressing income inequality.”**Azi (6/10/15, 4:28 pm)* <https://twitter.com/Azi/status/608732420586762240>*- “I’ve always liked what I heard from Bernie Sanders” — @BilldeBlasio.**HRC** NATIONAL COVERAGE**How the $15 minimum wage could become a new dividing line in the 2016primary<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/10/how-the-15-minimum-wage-could-become-a-new-dividing-line-in-the-2016-primary/>// WaPo // Max Ehrenfreund & Lydia DePillis – June 10, 2015 *An unexpected thing happened over the weekend. Activists and union membersconvening in Detroit to rally for a $15 hourly minimum wage got anunexpected call from Hillary Rodham Clinton, who addressed the crowd byphone.The former secretary of state did not endorse a $15 minimum wage. But shesuggested her allegiance is with the efforts of the rallying workers. “Allof you should not have to march in the streets to get a living wage, butthank you for marching in the streets to get that living wage,” she said.Two of her rivals for the Democratic nomination, Martin O’Malley and BernieSanders, have already embraced a $15 minimum wage. And so Clinton’sdecision to call the fast-food workers shows not only the potential powerof organized labor in the 2016 campaign, but the way that the $15 minimumwage may become a kind of litmus test for Democratic candidates.Asked about Clinton’s position, the campaign provided the followingstatement: “She strongly supports workers in the fast-food industry incities across the country mobilizing to fight for a living wage. In thecoming weeks, she will lay out her specific plans for increasing wages.”The level of the minimum wage could prove to be an important theme in theDemocratic primary.”We need more cities and states to follow the lead of Los Angeles and St.Louis and New York,” Clinton told the fast-food workers. The Los AngelesCity Council recently voted to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour. Themayors of New York and St. Louis have proposed eventually raising theminimum wage to $15, as well. Other successes for the movement include SanFrancisco and Seattle.Workers at the convention were gratified by Clinton’s measured support butsaid they were aware of the political constraints she confronts as acandidate.”I honestly believe that Hillary Clinton is trying to use her voice to backup her campaign more than she is to back up our campaign,” said AshonaOsborne, 23, an Arby’s employee from Pittsburgh. “It’s great that she’ssupporting our movement, but we have to keep in mind that she’s willing todo whatever she can to get more votes.”The minimum wage is not the only major economic issue on which Clinton hasnot outlined a clear position. As Dan Balz reported for The Washington Postover the weekend, Clinton has said little about banking regulation and freetrade.Labor activists oppose the trade deal the Obama administration isnegotiating in the Pacific, which Clinton supervised and advocated for assecretary of state. Recently, though, she’s stuck to generalities aboutfairness, workers’ rights and economic growth.Sanders said in a statement that he thought the federal minimum wage of$7.25 an hour was “a starvation wage.” He’s argued it should eventually beraised to $15 an hour. “That is what I believe every candidate forpresident should say,” he said.”We don’t know where Secretary Clinton stands on the minimum wage,” saidHaley Morris, a spokeswoman for O’Malley. She noted that O’Malley signed abill raising Maryland’s minimum wage to $10.10 an hour by 2018 while he wasin office.There are reasons that Clinton might hesitate to support a minimum wage of$15 an hour. Most economic research on the minimum wage has focused on thesmall changes that states and cities have made in the past. No one is surewhat will happen if the federal minimum wage more than doubles from itscurrent level. Dylan Matthews has argued in Wonkblog that a $15 minimumwage would be too risky, while Demos’s Matt Bruenig gave a rebuttal.According to some experts, dealing with the issue on a local level might bebest anyway, since the cost of living and the average wage vary from cityto city.Clinton is expected to give a series of substantive speeches on policybeginning Saturday in New York.*Hillary’s lurch to the left has been greatly exaggerated<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2015/06/10/hillarys-lurch-to-the-left-has-been-greatly-exaggerated/>// WaPo // Greg Sargent – June 10, 2015 *For days now, a noisy battle has reverberated throughout the Beltway PunditThunderdome. Is Hillary Clinton’s campaign too focused on winning Obamacoalition voters, at the exclusion of everyone else? Could that endangerher candidacy? Wouldn’t winning that way imperil her ability to govern andtear the country asunder?The New York Times kicked things off with an article quoting anxious Dems(is there any other kind?) floating these frightful questions. David Brooksand Ron Fournier added to the hand-wringing. In response, Ed Kilgore, PaulWaldman, Jonathan Chait, Ruth Marcus and others noted that due to deeperpolarization and demographic change, the electorate and map are vastlydifferent today.I thought I’d go through Clinton’s stances on the issues, to see if thatsheds more light on what she’s really up to. Short version: Clinton isindeed ministering to Obama coalition voter groups — minorities,millennials, college educated whites. But nonetheless, she’s thus farcampaigning like a mainstream Democrat. In fact, those things are now twosides of the same coin. Meanwhile, very few of her positions thus farpreclude reaching beyond those groups.Immigration: Clinton supports a path to citizenship. That has majoritysupport nationally. While many note she suggested she’d go further thanObama’s executive actions on deportations, in reality she has only proposedbuilding on them very modestly, if at all. Would that alienate other votergroups? Maybe, but national polling is mixed on executive action.Even so, because the Democratic Party is far more unified on immigrationthan ever, partly because of its increased reliance on Latinos, backingexecutive action is a must in a nominee. (Indeed, Martin O’Malley isattacking her from the left on immigration.) On this issue, she’s amainstream Dem.Gay rights: Clinton’s shift in favor of gay marriage occurred relativelylate. But so did that of many, many other leading Dems. It would now beunthinkable for a Dem nominee not to support marriage equality. Yes, formerpresident Clinton was a relative troglodyte on the issue. But this onlyunderscores how rapid the cultural shift on it has been — forcing bothparties to play varying degrees of catch-up. Indeed, it now has broadmajority support across the country and may soon receive protection as aConstitutional right. So it’s hard to see how favoring gay marriageprecludes reaching beyond the core Dem coalition.Criminal justice reform: It’s true that Clinton called for an end to theera of mass incarceration that her husband helped usher in. While that ispartly about speaking to minority voters, the cultural shift among thebroader electorate since the 1990s on crime has been so pronounced thatcriminal justice reform is now a bipartisan issue.Voting rights: Clinton’s embrace of automatic, universal voter registrationis certainly an example of her speaking directly to the Obama coalition. Infairness, this could alienate some groups outside that coalition. Butabsent good polling on this, it’s hard to know for sure. It’s possible, forinstance, that a key Hillary target, non-college white women — particularlysingle ones, who tend to vote more sporadically — might support it.Climate change: Yes, Clinton has pledged to protect Obama’s climateactions. It’s also true that some Dems in more conservative states havebalked at his climate agenda. But even this is starting to change: GaryPeters won a Michigan Senate seat last year with an aggressive climatemessage. It’s also true her stance might alienate some blue collar whitesin the Rust Belt. But we still have no idea how much of an emphasis Clintonwill put on climate issues. Meanwhile, Clinton actually is seen byadvocates as insufficiently hawkish on climate.It’s hard to see a Dem winning the nomination without adopting an agendathat acknowledges global warming as a major challenge, making this yetanother area where Clinton is basically a mainstream Dem.Minimum wage: Clinton supports hiking the federal minimum wage to $10.10per hour, another mainstream Dem position that has majority support. Butshe has refrained from endorsing the $15-per-hour goal of a burgeoninglefty movement.Other economic issues: Clinton has not yet said whether she backs afinancial transaction tax or breaking up the big banks, or whether sheopposes the Trans Pacific Partnership — three of the most importantpriorities of the Elizabeth Warren wing of the party. There are reasons tothink she could stop short of embracing the first two. She very well mightback the TPP, if its labor and environmental protections are given thethumbs up by experts.On taxes, Clinton may mostly stick to supporting the sort ofloophole-closings and tax hikes on inherited wealth and capital gains thatObama has called for. She may well stick to a slate of policies she’salready come out for — ones that strengthen the safety net, fosterfamily-friendly workplace flexibility, and invest in education and jobcreation — without backing quite the kind of far-reaching economic agendasome on the left want. This, too, would put her in the Democraticmainstream.Conclusion: Clinton has shifted to the left on some cultural issues, andthat is partly about speaking to the Obama coalition. But this reflects thechanging nature of the Democratic Party. Indeed, the party’s growingreliance on the Obama coalition is the very reason she’s speaking moredirectly to those voters in the first place. Does that mean the party hasmoved leftward? Maybe, but on many of these issues, the rest of the countryhas, too. So none of this necessarily precludes broadening beyond thatcoalition.Meanwhile, on economic issues, she has not embraced the Warren-wing agendain key areas, and the key economic prescriptions she has adopted have broadmajority support. Have I mentioned that based on her campaign thus far,Clinton is essentially a mainstream Democrat?*Bill Clinton Likely to Stop Accepting Pay for Speeches If Hillary ClintonIs Elected President<http://www.wsj.com/articles/bill-clinton-likely-to-stop-accepting-pay-for-speeches-if-hillary-clinton-is-elected-president-1433971365>// WSJ // James V. Grimaldi – June 10, 2015 *Bill Clinton on Wednesday said he likely would stop accepting money forspeeches if his wife was elected president, and he gave his most forcefuldefense to date of fundraising by the Clinton Foundation.Mr. Clinton’s comments, made at a foundation-related event, addressed twoof the controversies that have followed the former president and his wiferecently: the large sums the Clintons have received for speeches whileHillary Clinton was a likely presidential candidate, and foreign donationsto the family’s foundation.Asked by Bloomberg Television whether he would make paid speeches if hiswife was elected, Mr. Clinton said, “No, I don’t think so…because once youget to be president, then you are just making the daily story.”“I will still give speeches, if I’m asked to do so,” without acceptinghonoraria for them, he said.Earlier this year, Mr. Clinton said he would continue to make paid speechesduring the time his wife is a candidate for office. “I gotta pay ourbills,’’ he told NBC News. ”I also give a lot of it to the foundation everyyear. You know, we’ve got a lot to do.’’Mr. Clinton on Wednesday said that no donors to the Clinton Foundation everasked for favors from Mrs. Clinton when she was secretary of state.“Has anybody proven that we’ve done anything objectionable? No,” said Mr.Clinton, answering his own question. “Have we done a lot of good thingswith this money? Yes.”He said Mrs. Clinton’s future wasn’t an issue when the Clinton Foundationwas created or when he launched the Clinton Global Initiative, one of thefoundation’s projects, 10 years ago. “It wasn’t like we were working on thepresumption that one day Hillary would be running for president,” Mr.Clinton said.Mr. Clinton cited a $500,000 donation from Algeria that breached a promisenot to accept certain foreign donations while Mrs. Clinton served in thestate department. He said it was true that Algeria was lobbying the StateDepartment at the time of the donation, but that the two events weren’trelated.Mr. Clinton said the foundation was a “pass-through’’ for the donation,which went to help aid efforts after the 20120 earthquake in Haiti, andthat no overhead was deducted for the foundation.“There are very few countries in the world I would not accept for help toHaiti,” Mr. Clinton said.He said there were only a couple of countries from which the foundationturned down money and overall he believes the foundation has performedwell. “There may be a thing or two that I would change, but the basic ideais right. I still think it is the right thing to do to solve as manyproblems a possible” by working with foreign governments, corporations,nongovernmental organizations and charities.Mr. Clinton’s defense of his charitable work came in media interviews atthe fifth Clinton Global Initiative America meeting.Mr. Clinton also answered questions about what he would do if Mrs. Clintonwas elected.“I believe that if you have been president, and the current president ofeither party asks you to do anything, you should do it,” Mr. Clinton said.“That will not be an easy decision if she’s elected. She’ll have to decidewhat is my highest and best use, including to be around to buck her up inthe morning.”However, Mr. Clinton said his wife might not accept all of his advice. “Ifthere is one thing she knows more about than anybody on earth, it is onwhat subjects I should be listened to and what subjects I shouldn’t,” hesaid.He didn’t say what would happen to the Clinton Foundation if Mrs. Clintonwas serving as president, though he has said in the past that he wanted itto keep operating and raising money. On Wednesday, he said he would stay onthe foundation board “for this year, as long as I can.”“She’s got better judgment about what is the highest and best use for meis,’’ Mr. Clinton said.” She’s been stuck with it for 40 years.”*Clinton Foundation Helps the Poor<http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton-foundation-helps-the-poor-1433879913>// WSJ // Donna Shalala – June 10, 2015 *I’m just finishing my first week as president of the Clinton Foundation,but I’ve worked here long enough to know that Kimberley Strassel’s “TheClinton ‘Charity’ Begins at Home” (Potomac Watch, June 5) misses the markabout the foundation and its dedicated, professional staff who anyorganization in the world would be proud to have.The foundation is a unique organization that has created a partnershipmodel to tackle our world’s biggest challenges. Our senior leadershipreflects this collaborative approach, with more than 200 years ofmanagement experience in diverse fields including global logistics,international development and finance.It’s true that some at the foundation have worked with President Clinton orSecretary Clinton at other points in their long careers. These are goodpeople, and I am honored to count myself among them. I know from my ownexperience that people are drawn to positions in public service for thesame reason they are drawn to nonprofits like the foundation—they want tomake a difference in others’ lives. That’s what they do every day at thefoundation.To claim that we are only interested in “the occasional good deed” isdemonstrably false. The foundation and its affiliates have helped 9.9million in 70 countries access HIV/AIDS medicines; more than 16 millionkids in America get healthier meals at school; and more than 85,000 farmersin Malawi, Rwanda and Tanzania increase their incomes.Helping people is not only our full-time job—it’s a deep passion that burnswithin everyone who works here.*Clinton student loan reform plan has Warren stamp<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/clinton-student-loan-reform-plan-has-warren-stamp-118865.html#ixzz3ckNWpZnc>// Politico // Annie Karni – June 11, 2015*On a litmus test issue for liberals, Hillary Clinton’s campaign has soughtout policy experts with ties to the Massachusetts senator.In weekly calls and meetings over the past few months, Hillary Clinton’spolicy team has been soliciting input from policy experts with ties to Sen.Elizabeth Warren, with the goal of making student loan reform the core ofClinton’s economic mobility agenda.The effort to make college more accessible — a litmus test for liberals andkey to attracting grassroots support on the left — comes as the Clintoncampaign finds itself under increasing pressure to accommodate progressivedemands. Yet it also could provide Clinton with a signature domestic policyissue, similar to healthcare for Barack Obama in 2008. With a student debtcrisis climbing upwards of $1.2 trillion, Clinton’s camp views the issue asone where the former secretary of state could drive the conversation andcreate a mandate for reformIn one of the clearest signs of the importance the policy team — headed bysenior adviser Ann O’Leary — is placing on the issue, student loan reformis expected to be one of the earliest policy roll-outs after Clinton’scampaign kick-off Saturday. The campaign is expected to unveil its studentloan plans in detail in mid-July, multiple sources said.To the great relief of restive progressives, Clinton’s campaign has soughtout policy experts with strong ties to Warren, who has crusaded on theissues of making college more affordable and refinancing student loans sothat students get the same interest rates on federal loans as banks do ontheirs.Heather McGhee, president of the liberal think tank Demos, has discussedthe issue directly with Hillary Clinton, sources said. McGhee’s think tankis aligned with Warren, whose daughter, Amelia Warren Tyagi, serves aschairman of the board.The Clinton campaign has also been seeking advice from Rohit Chopra, thetop student loan official at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, whowas hired by Warren when she launched the agency. Chopra remains close withWarren, who recently endorsed him as her top candidate to replace BenLawsky as the next New York state superintendent of financial services,after his name was floated in the press.Other experts who have also been speaking regularly with O’Leary and herteam, sources said, include Mark Huelsman, a senior policy analyst atDemos; economist Gene Sperling; James Kvaal, who was Obama’s policydirector in the 2012 election; and longtime Clinton advisor Neera Tanden,president of the Center for American Progress.None of the policy details have been finalized, and it’s still unclear howClinton plans to pay for any of the proposals currently being discussed.But on the table is a plan to support debt-free college — includingreducing the cost of attendance. That goes beyond what either of Clinton’sDemocratic opponents, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders or former Maryland Gov.Martin O’Malley, have discussed when addressing the issue of debt-freecollege. Sanders has used it to mean simply covering the cost of tuition,and O’Malley has focused more on capping student loan payments.It’s not clear yet exactly what form Clinton’s debt-free college proposalwill take — whether students will pay based on a percentage of theirincome, or carry some obligation based on their ability to pay.But covering the cost of attendance is appealing to the progressive policymakers advising Clinton. “The total cost of attendance is a more expansiveview of the actual cost of higher education,” said Huelsman. “We and othergroups have encouraged Clinton to include the cost of attendance as thedefinition of debt-free college. That would be a big deal.”Also under discussion is allowing students to refinance their loans, anissue that Warren championed in a bill that was defeated last year byRepublican opposition. “It would help a lot of middle class families withstudent debt,” said Huelsman.Outside experts are also pitching the campaign on a bill of rights forstudent loan carriers, and risk-sharing for colleges, which would mean aschool would be penalized if a student defaulted on his or her loans. Bothof those are currently under discussion with campaign officials.“It doesn’t hurt to have had a lot of people in the more progressive sideof the Democratic party say we want this to be a key issue going into2016,” Huelsman said. “It seems like they want to do something big on this.I’m extremely encouraged.”O’Leary has invited a group of experts to an hours-long briefing inWashington, D.C. on Thursday, at the Center for American Progress, todiscuss these issues.A campaign spokesman declined to comment about the meeting or the policiesunder review.But Clinton officials have made clear even in the ramp up phase of hercampaign that the issue is at the forefront of their planned agenda. “Whatvoters are looking for in this election is someone who is going to be achampion for everyday people,” campaign manager Robby Mook said in a CNBCinterview in May. “For young people, that’s debt-free college, that isfinding that job after you graduate.”Clinton herself has addressed it in her limited forays on the campaigntrail. “We have to deal with the indebtedness — to try to move towardmaking college as debt-free as possible,” she said last month in Iowa.Clinton’s most engaged moment during the roundtables she has participatedin so far was with Bryce Smith, a 23-year-old Iowan who owns a bowlingalley, who told her student loans were harming his ability to access creditfor his small business. “I’ve never heard anyone so persuasively link it tothe slowdown in business start-ups,” Clinton told him.She has also complimented Obama’s $60 billion community college plan, whichwould provide students with two years of free community college. Her plan,however, is expected to be more expansive and influence more institutionsthan just community colleges.*Hillary’s Game-Changing Voting Reform<http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/06/hillary-clinton-2016-voting-reform-118761.html#.VXi9ZVzBzGc>// Politico // Michael Waldman – June 10, 2015 *last week, in Houston, Texas, Hillary Rodham Clinton denounced the wave ofrestrictive new voting laws enacted by Republican legislatures around thecountry. Those of us who aren’t wild about disenfranchising eligiblecitizens welcomed Clinton’s passionate defense. It’s been years since amajor candidate made democracy reform a central issue. But the mostimportant thing about the speech was her embrace of a transformative policyinnovation: automatic, universal registration of voters once they turn 18.It’s an idea that’s already begun to gain ground across the country,building on reforms with bipartisan support. Now we have a chance to takeit even further.In a campaign season criticized for a dearth of big new ideas, this one’s adoozy.Why is it so important? Between a third and a quarter of all eligibleAmericans remain unregistered and therefore cannot cast a ballot.Automatic, permanent registration as Clinton proposes would add up to 50million to the rolls. It would cost less than today’s paper-clogged system.And it would curb the potential for fraud. Amid rising political inequalityand declining voter interest, this could give the ailing political system amuch-needed jolt of citizen energy.Our ramshackle voter registration system disenfranchises more people byaccident than even the harshest new laws do on purpose. To be sure, somepeople just don’t want to register and never will. Call them the “Don’tvote—it will only encourage them” caucus. But many others fall off therolls, or become tangled in the mess of the current system. According to a2012 Pew Center on the States study, 24 million entries are either invalidor inaccurate. Many eligible voters are under the impression that when theyfile a change of address form with the U.S. Postal Service, their voterregistration information automatically updates. And, yes, plenty of deadpeople have stayed registered. All these flaws risk undermining electionintegrity.While we deposit checks on our iPhones and push a button to start our cars,many states and localities still rely on piles of paper records to maintaintheir voting lists. Civil servants who perform data entry from paper-basedapplications must interpret citizens’ chicken scratch handwriting. Typosare common. And today’s system poorly reflects today’s hypermobile society.More than 26 million voting-age Americans move each year, and because ofresidency requirements, many of them fall off the rolls, even if they movewithin the same state.These glitches are a chief cause of polling place confusion and delay—whichlead to long lines on Election Day. In all, according to the definitivestudy by Cal Tech and MIT, some 3 million eligible citizens were unable tovote in 2008 because of registration problems. Many took time from theirfamilies or jobs, only to learn they were nowhere to be found in the voterrolls. The problems aren’t going away: The 2012 election saw a 40 percentjump in the number of in-person voters who experienced registrationproblems.Other democracies do it better than we do. In 2009, the Brennan Centerstudied voting systems in 16 democratic countries. The United States wasone of only four that put the responsibility for registering solely on thevoter. Great Britain, Canada, Germany, France all boast registration ratesabove 90 percent. Ours were as much as 30 percent lower. That’s one kind ofAmerican exceptionalism we don’t want to boast about.Tinkering won’t suffice. It’s time to modernize the way we run elections,and bring them into the 21st century. That’s where a system of universal,automatic registration would come in.So how would Clinton’s proposal work? From now on, the government ratherthan the voter would be responsible for making sure all eligible citizensare registered to vote and that rolls are accurate and complete. Citizenswould register at 18 and stay on the rolls for their entire lives. Allwould be given the chance to opt out; nobody would be registered againsttheir will.Clinton has not released details of her plan, so we don’t know for surewhat she’d enact, but there are several innovative reforms that couldachieve complete and accurate voting logs through collaboration betweenvarious government agencies. Universities, for example, could automaticallyregister 18 year olds, Medicare could do the same for seniors. And the U.S.Postal Service could let the voter registration agency know when someonehas moved.Some states are ahead of the curve. Ever since the Brennan Center publishedits proposal for Voter Registration Modernization in 2007, a package thatincluded permanent and portable registration, at least two dozen stateshave implemented voter registration reforms—moving to online registration,for example. High school “pre-registration” programs, in which young peopleregister as future voters and are automatically signed up when they turn18, are already in place in at least 10 states.The biggest breakthrough on this front—and one that Clinton mentioned inher speech—came in March in Oregon, when Gov. Kate Brown signed a law thatautomatically registered to vote anyone 18 and up who obtained a driver’slicense (unless that person chose to opt out). The move is likely to add atleast 300,000 voters to the rolls right away, and could end up givingOregon the highest registration rate in the country. Other states couldexpand on the model, moving beyond the DMV. When someone receives SocialSecurity benefits, pays state taxes or applies for disability benefits, herinformation could be passed along for registration or updates to anexisting record.States should keep pressing forward with initiatives like these on theirown. But, as Clinton suggested, there needs to be one national standard—amandate to ensure that all eligible voters are registered no matter wherethey live. A comparable proposal from Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and Rep. JohnLewis would set core federal standards while giving some flexibility tostates. In 2002, the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) took such an approach. Itrequired states to move to electronic voting, and provided federal funds tohelp them do it. This would be a similar technological upgrade—voting2.0—this time applied to registration.What are the risks? Some worry non-citizens would inadvertently findthemselves registered, even voting, without realizing they cannot—puttingthem at risk of deportation. So it’s hugely important to make sure that thelists omit non-citizens.Others might worry about cost. So far, the move to digital records hasproved very cost efficient in states that have tried it. Every so often,someone will grumble that this plan would—somehow—open the way to fraud.But that rationale quickly crumbles. After all, digital government lists,checked and rechecked, are likely to be more accurate than the namessubmitted by voter registration groups or private citizens. For thosereally worried about “Mickey Mouse” registering to vote, don’t worry—he’snot on the government list, even in Orlando (where he lives).In fact, automatic voter registration gives both left and right what theydemand. It enfranchises more people. And it protects better against fraud.The bipartisan Presidential Commission on Election Administration,co-chaired by Mitt Romney’s top attorney and Obama’s counsel, has endorsedkey registration reforms.The biggest reason for opposition to a proposal like Clinton’s, ifunstated, is the notion that maybe we don’t really want everyone to be ableto vote. But we all know that idea runs afoul of our most fundamental coreprecepts. Thomas Jefferson, in the Declaration of Independence, wrote thatgovernment is legitimate only if it rests on the “consent of the governed.”That consent becomes muddied by missing data, illegible lists and longlines of voters. Last year, turnout fell to its lowest level in sevendecades.One leading candidate has already spoken up. As 2016 approaches, let’s hopethat all candidates from both parties will tell us what they would do toimprove our democracy.*Hillary digital push highlights organizing before NYC rally<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/hillary-clinton-2016-digital-push-before-nyc-rally-118815.html#ixzz3cfTNKb5j>// Politico // Gabriel Debenedetti – June 10, 2015 *Days before Hillary Clinton will take the stage on New York City’sRoosevelt Island to headline her presidential campaign’s first full-scalerally, her political team is ratcheting up an effort to swing the spotlightaway from the candidate, framing the first two months of Clinton’scandidacy as an organizational victory beyond just the early-voting statesshe has visited so far.The former secretary of state has faced no shortage of scrutiny during the‘ramp-up’ phase of her presidential effort — a two-month period duringwhich she has focused on small round tables and political meetings ratherthan open speeches or traditional events, often facing charges of running adistant campaign. But Wednesday will see a concerted online effort tohighlight the inroads made by volunteers and organizers working on herbehalf.A memo from the campaign’s top organizing official, a series of images fromvolunteer meetings across the country, and a handful of maps andhand-picked supporter quotes will pepper Clinton’s online presence.The note from Director of State Campaigns and Political Engagement MarlonMarshall points to the fact that the Clinton camp has hired 50 organizersin the early-voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and SouthCarolina, and has brought on 51 more staffers in the other states,Washington, D.C., Puerto Rico and the territories. It also notes that thecampaign — which frequently says it is taking the Democratic primaryseriously despite Clinton’s commanding lead in national polls, and in thiskind of organizing — has opened 15 offices between the four early states,and that it has held nearly 4,000 one-on-one meetings with early-statevoters.The effort comes at a delicate moment for the Clinton camp, as ittransitions from a relatively quiet period for the candidate to a morepublic phase, while Bernie Sanders emerges as her primary liberalantagonist. The front-runner has seen her poll numbers slip slightly whileshe continues to receive fire from Republicans and Democratic critics fornot interacting more with voters or the press, and all eyes are on herSaturday rally, which will seek to energize her Democratic base after beingpushed back by a few weeks.After the speech she will quickly hit all four early-voting states, andwill then start holding more public appearances at open events.While Clinton has recently started to deliver more policy speeches, likeher Houston address on voting rights last week, she has been primarilyfocused on gathering money across the country before the end of thefundraising quarter as part of her broader goal of raising $100 million bythe end of 2015, a circumstance that factored into her campaign’s decisionto move the rally to mid-June after it was originally planned for May.Aides say the rally was moved to separate it from the onslaught ofpresidential announcements that came at the end of last month, but it nowsits just two days before Jeb Bush’s launch.Nonetheless, Wednesday’s digital push is an effort to underscore the rapidconstruction of the campaign’s organizing infrastructure, which in someways mirrors the 50-state strategy made famous by former presidentialcandidate and Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean.The Clinton campaign is similarly trying to bolster Democratic operationsin states where the party has been decimated in recent years, in some casesholding meetings in states that have not voted for a Democratic presidentin decades. The campaign says it has held or scheduled 320 suchget-togethers outside of Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina.And Marshall’s memo notes that nearly 11,000 people have attendedorganizing meetings outside of the four early-voting states, on top ofnearly 12,000 commitments to volunteer within the first four.While the campaign had no formal infrastructure when it officially launchedin April, it did have the benefit of being able to informally build offwork done by the Ready For Hillary PAC that was active in the early-votingstates during 2013 and 2014. In late May the campaign got access to thePAC’s email list of roughly 4 million Clinton supporters.*J Street poll: Jewish Americans favor Hillary over Jeb<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/poll-jewish-voters-favor-hillary-clinton-118831.html#ixzz3cgPPzAje>// Politico // Nick Gass – June 10, 2015 *American Jewish voters have a clear favorite between Democraticfront-runner Hillary Clinton and likely Republican candidate Jeb Bush,according to a new national survey.According to a poll commissioned by the left-leaning J Street Group,Clinton beats Bush in a hypothetical matchup by a count of 68 percent to 30percent, with 2 percent undecided.The Democratic Party also fared well in the poll, with a 46 percentfavorability rating, compared to 20 percent for the Republican Party.Asked whether they would “favor or oppose an agreement that would ease someof” the economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for restrictions on itsnuclear program without ending it and submit to greater internationalinspection standards, 59 percent said they would support such a deal, while53 percent of all Americans responded that way to a similar CNN/ORCquestion in April.At the same time, just 22 percent in the J Street poll said that they haveheard “a great deal” of information about the agreement, compared to 45percent who said “some,” 25 percent who said “not much,” and 9 percent whosaid “no information at all.”Republicans have repeatedly clashed with President Barack Obama over hisadministration’s stance toward Israel, especially with regard to ongoingnuclear talks with Iran. The president, for his part, has said that IsraeliPrime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu puts his country’s credibility at riskwith shifting comments about a two-state solution with the Palestinians.In 2012, Obama defeated Republican nominee Mitt Romney among JewishAmericans by 39 points, according to exit polls — down from a 57-pointadvantage over John McCain in 2008.The J Street poll, conducted by the Democratic-leaning GBA Strategies, wasconducted May 31-June 3 among 1,000 self-identified Jews in the UnitedStates. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.*Every wedding should have a Hillary Clinton Bible reading<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/every-wedding-should-have-a-hillary-clinton-bible-reading-118855.html#ixzz3ckRqds36>// Politico // Kate Glassman Bennett – June 11, 2015*You know you’re tight with the boss when she attends your wedding, but it’sa whole other level of closeness when she takes part in the ceremony. Suchwas the case this past weekend as Jake Sullivan, Hillary Clinton’ssteadfast foreign policy adviser, married Maggie Goodlander on Saturday atYale University in New Haven, Connecticut.The Democratic presidential front-runner was on the program at the couple’sevening wedding, reading from the Letter of St. Paul to the Romans, as theduo tied the knot at Battell Chapel on the Yale campus, where Goodlanderattended law school and Sullivan has been teaching. (Clinton’s was a biggerrole than that of U.N. Ambassador Samantha Power, who gave a toast at thecouple’s barbecue rehearsal dinner the evening before, which was alsoattended by Bill Clinton.) Hillary Clinton, for her part, squeezed thewedding into a busy week of East Coast fundraisers that included stops inGreenwich, Rhode Island, Boston and D.C.Clinton’s gesture signals the devotion she has to Sullivan, who politicalwatchers say may be poised to become the youngest national security adviserin history should she take the White House in 2016. Sullivan, 38, was oneof Clinton’s most trusted confidants when she served as secretary of state.Before starting his teaching post at Yale Law School last August, he wasVice President Joe Biden’s national security adviser. Goodlander, 28, is nostranger to politics either, having worked as a national security andforeign affairs adviser to Sen. Joe Lieberman.Wonky Washington CVs aside, Sullivan and Goodlander—who could not bereached for comment as they are reportedly unplugged on a Caribbeanhoneymoon—evidently hope to spend a portion of their married livesexploring destinations far away from our nation’s capital. Aside from thestandard Crate & Barrel stuff, Sullivan and Goodlander registered forwanderlust funding via Traveler’s Joy, a website that collects cash fromfriends wishing to donate to an adventure kitty, in lieu of candlesticksand Cuisinarts. According to the couple’s profile, “Maggie wants to travelto the front lines of freedom,” and “Jake wants to visit the places thatshaped the course of history (and also hit some of the obscure,out-of-the-way countries he missed while he was at the State Department).*Domestic Worker Groups Announce Alliance At Clinton Global InitiativeConference<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/10/clinton-global-initiative_n_7546826.html>// HuffPo // Samantha Lachman – June 10, 2015 *The growing social movement advocating for domestic workers and Care.com,which calls itself the world’s largest online care marketplace, willannounce a new partnership Wednesday afternoon at the Clinton GlobalInitiative America conference in Denver.The collaboration, called the Fair Care Pledge, joins the website, theNational Domestic Workers Alliance and Hand in Hand, a network of domesticemployers. The alliance is an “exemplary approach to addressing criticaldomestic challenges,” according to the Clinton initiative, an offshoot ofthe foundation founded by former President Bill Clinton in 2005. Clintonand his daughter, Chelsea Clinton, are serving as the conference hosts.According to a press release on the announcement, Care.com will promote thepledge by inviting hundreds of thousands of its members to affirm that theywill make an effort to be fair and respectful when they hire a provider towork in their home cleaning or caring for children or seniors. The pledgeasks families to commit to fair pay, clear expectations and paid time offfor their care providers.“We believe that care jobs will be the jobs of the future. It’s in all ofour interest to ensure that the quality of these jobs reflects the valueand importance of the work,” Ai-jen Poo, director of the National DomesticWorkers Alliance, said in a press release. “Fairness and quality care gohand-in-hand and we’re thrilled to be able to work with Care.com to promotethese values.”Poo has been a leading advocate for re-conceptualizing domestic work. TheUnited States appears unprepared for an impending crisis as the “BabyBoomer” generation ages. Twenty-seven million Americans will need some formof long-term care by 2050.“As a member of the ‘sandwich generation,’ I’ve relied on a slew ofcaregivers to help me juggle caretaking of my mother during her declinefrom Alzheimer’s, caring for my two daughters and pursuing my legalcareer,” Julie Kay, a Hand in Hand leader, said in the release. “While I’mso appreciative of the work these women do, many times I’ve asked myselfwhether I was doing right by them. The Fair Care Pledge provides me withguidance, information, and the assurance I’ve been looking for.”The domestic worker industry has traditionally been difficult to organizeand advocate for, given the isolating nature of the work. Ninety-fivepercent of domestic workers are women, and nearly half are immigrants.Because domestic workers are excluded from many protections guaranteed bythe federal Fair Labor Standards Act, many in the industry are paid belowthe minimum wage and are denied overtime, sick pay and vacation pay.The Department of Labor released regulations in 2013 that would cover somehome health care workers under those federal minimum wage and overtimecompensation laws. But a lawsuit filed by home care companies has tied upthose regulations.Care.com members and pledge-takers will be able to display an online badgeon their profile allowing care providers to know they’re “fair employers,”according to the press release.“Just as care impacts families, enterprise, policy and government invarious ways, so must all those groups be involved in the solution,” saidSheila Lirio Marcelo, the founder, chairwoman and CEO of Care.com. “One keyto driving real change is the professionalization of the caregiverindustry. We believe it’s critical to attract and retain skilledcaregivers. Families who employ full-time domestic workers should pay fairand legal wages, and provide vacation, overtime, and other criticalprotections that every professional deserves.”The groups’ partnership comes as debates about gender and workplacestandards are gaining increased scrutiny. Democratic presidential candidateHillary Clinton, who is not at this year’s CGI conference, has advocatedfor Democratic Party-backed legislation that would promote gender parity inpay. Clinton has also spoken about how the United States is one of justthree countries to not require paid maternity leave for new parents.*Journalists Meet With Clinton Campaign Officials Over Access Concerns<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/10/journalists-clinton-campaign_n_7555732.html?1433970296>// HuffPo // Michael Calderone – June 10, 2015*Two top communications officials with Hillary Clinton’s presidentialcampaign met Monday in Washington with representatives from the travelingpress corps to discuss journalists’ frustrations over access.The journalist-campaign détente followed a nearly two-hour meeting lastweek in which about 17 reporters covering the campaign, from outletsincluding The New York Times, The Washington Post and Politico, privatelyaired grievances.As The Huffington Post reported last week, journalists expressed concernsover issues including not receiving enough advanced notice about publicevents, being kept too far from Clinton at campaign stops, and not beingpermitted inside to cover fundraisers. Journalists also have taken issuewith the campaign reflexively providing information “on background,” or ona not-for-attribution basis, even when it may not appear particularlysensitive.Clinton Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri and press secretary BrianFallon represented the campaign at the meeting, which included threejournalists: McClatchy’s Anita Kumar, The Washington Post’s Anne Gearan andPolitico’s Gabriel Debenedetti.In emails to The Huffington Post, Gearan and Kumar confirmed the meetinghappened, but both declined to get into specifics.“Our conversations are ongoing — a work in progress — so I don’t feelcomfortable sharing the details right now,” Kumar wrote.Fallon declined to comment on behalf of the campaign.The group appeared to make progress Monday on some issues. For instance,the campaign seemed amenable to providing more advance notice for events,perhaps a week ahead, according to a source familiar with the discussionswho was not authorized to comment. Still, the two sides aren’t completelyon the same page. The campaign still expects to keep fundraisers closed tothe press for now.There was also talk during Monday’s breakfast about eliminating backgroundbriefings like one that recently took place at the campaign’s Brooklynheadquarters. CNBC’s John Harwood, an attendee, later mocked the campaign’srequest that top officials not be named in reports or even quoted blindly.A later tour of the headquarters, he noted, was off the record.On Friday, Palmieri and campaign manager Robby Mook will be speaking on therecord at a Politico-sponsored function in Manhattan, a day before Clintonholds her first campaign rally on Roosevelt Island.As Clinton ramps up her campaign this weekend, she’s expected to beginengaging more with the press. Though Clinton has answered some questions atcampaign events, she has still not given an interview during her two monthsas a presidential candidate. The campaign has yet to announce any scheduledinterviews as Clinton heads in the coming weeks to Iowa, New Hampshire,South Carolina and Nevada.*New York’s Forgotten Island Shrugs At Hillary Clinton’s Big 2016 Debut<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/10/hillary-clinton-roosevelt_n_7547602.html?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016>// HuffPo // Scott Conroy – June 10, 2015*It’s easy to understand why Hillary Clinton is holding her first 2016campaign rally at Franklin D. Roosevelt Four Freedoms Park on Saturday. Thesymbolism is about as subtle as a yellow-cab driver caught behind aslow-moving vehicle with the windows rolled down.Her midday speech will take place in the city where her family’smultibillion-dollar Clinton Foundation is based in the state sherepresented in the Senate for eight years and at a park that honors one ofthe most famous speeches delivered by America’s most revered Democraticpresident.”She has long been inspired by FDR’s belief that America is stronger whenwe summon the work and talents of all Americans,” said Clinton spokespersonKristina Schake. “Her fight, like his, is to work to ensure that everydayAmericans can achieve not just a sense of economic stability, but lastingprosperity.”Though the park’s namesake will be a fundamental element of Clinton’sspeech, less central to her unofficial campaign kickoff is Roosevelt Islanditself — a quirky sanctuary of inner-city suburbia, which bisects the EastRiver between Manhattan and Queens.To the people who live here, though, that’s not much of a surprise. This isa place that is used to getting overlooked.A 2-mile by 800-foot sliver of land that is currently inhabited by about14,000 people in a city of more than 8 million, Roosevelt Island remains apeaceful hamlet by New York City standards. It is perhaps best known forthe aerial tramway that offers a mobile addition to the Upper East Side’sskyline and was featured in a memorable fight scene in the 2002″Spider-Man” film.By and large, in a city famous for its islands, this particularneedle-shaped landmass — which falls under the jurisdiction of Manhattan– has long been largely anonymous outside (and sometimes inside) the city.“When I was growing up and through high school, you’d tell kids, ‘I live onRoosevelt Island,’ and it was like, ‘Where?’” said Mike Babcock, whosefamily was one of the pioneering families to move to the island in 1975,when the first residential building opened. “And these were kids who livedin the city.”But that undistinguished image has been changing quickly.Over the last couple of decades, Roosevelt Island has experienced ademographic evolution and construction explosion that has left it a morediverse and heavily urbanized place than it was decades ago — a lot likethe American electorate that the Clinton campaign believes will propel herto the White House.“On the tram, you used to pretty much know everyone by sight,” said LillianKirkman, who has lived on Roosevelt Island since 1982. “Now it’s prettymuch like riding the subway.”It’s possible to traverse Roosevelt Island on foot in under a minute, butthis is no longer a parochial place.Take a stroll down Main Street, and it can feel like you’re walking thehalls of the United Nations just across the river, as more than 40 percentof the population here was born in a different country.The modern incarnation of Roosevelt Island was founded as a place wheresmall-town charm could be found within spitting distance of the mostexciting city on earth, but its enduring legacy has long been that of aplace in constant transition.Back in the 19th century when it was known as Blackwell’s Island, it washome to a prison, the nation’s first hospital for treating smallpoxsufferers, and the New York City Lunatic Asylum where investigativereporter Nelly Bly faked insanity and later reported in the New York Worldher groundbreaking investigation of the facility’s wretched conditions.After a long period of decline, the island was rechristened RooseveltIsland in 1973 in honor of the nation’s 32nd president, and a dramaticrevitalization effort began that turned it into a thriving communityintended primarily to offer subsidized housing to young families with awide range of income levels.An increasingly Democratic slice of a heavily Democratic city, it’s notjust the Starbucks and Duane Reed, both of which opened a few years ago,that has signaled Roosevelt Island’s absorption into the modern urbanaesthetic that has taken hold from coast to coast since Clinton’s husband’spresidency.The Octagon — a relatively imposing structure presiding over the northernend of the island — originally served as the asylum’s main entrance. Nowit is the entranceway for a pair of solar panel and fuel cell-equippedhigh-rise apartment buildings.And in 2011, then-Mayor Michael Bloomberg announced that Roosevelt Islandwould be the site of a more than $2 billion science graduate school forCornell University — likely the single most transformational developmentin the island’s recent history. The “Four Freedoms” Park, where Clintonwill speak on Saturday, opened the year after that.Still, unlike just about every other corner of New York, even as it haschanged rapidly, Roosevelt Island has resisted some of the allures of itsneighboring localities. Here, $16 cocktails and ironic handlebar mustachesremain as scarce as they are common to the Instagram-saturated streets notfar from the Clinton campaign’s Brooklyn Heights headquarters.You will, however, find some of the same generally unimpressed attitudesthat prevail in the hipper parts of town.“We’ve had lots of local politicians — senators and congressmen — no onelike Hillary,” said Judy Berdy, president of the Roosevelt IslandHistorical Society and a lifelong resident. “But I just shrug. It’s part ofliving in New York. You get used to it.”Just four days before the big rally, there were few signs that anythingparticularly special was on the horizon, as residents prepared forSaturday’s Roosevelt Island Day — an annual, family-friendly event thatwill take place concurrently with the Clinton rally.At Piccolo Trattoria on Main Street on Tuesday, a sparse lunchtime crowdordered pizza slices and deli sandwiches, as employees mopped the floor andtook some run-of-the-mill verbal abuse from one woman, who wasn’tespecially impressed by the yellow sign that warned her to watch her step.“Seriously, it’s very slippery in here,” she said. “If I fall, you’rescrewed!”After Jesus Alvarez, 19, took the woman’s order from behind the counter, areporter approached to ask what he thought about Hillary Clinton coming tothe neighborhood.Alvarez, who has been working at Roosevelt Island’s lone pizza slice jointfor about a year, offered a perplexed look along with a reminder that forthe vast majority of Americans, the 2016 election remains far from theforefront of their minds.“There’s a rally here?” he asked. “I hadn’t heard about it.”*The selective liberalism of Hillary Clinton<http://www.vox.com/2015/6/10/8760287/Hillary-Clinton-selective-liberal-trust>// VOX // Jonathan Allen – June 10, 2015 *There’s a term for the way Hillary Clinton has handled policy in the earlystages of her campaign: Clintonian.That is, on the issues that most divide the Democratic base from itscentrist wing, she refuses to box herself into a position. She’d ratherwait to see how things play out — a tendency that reinforces the oftenasserted (but sometimes unfair) criticism that she doesn’t have coreconvictions.1. She’s thrilled that fast-food workers are fighting for a $15 minimumwage, but she won’t say whether she’ll fight for it — or even whether shethinks that’s the right level.2. She’s decidedly undecided on the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal,even though she called it “the gold standard in trade agreements” when shewas secretary of state.3. And her campaign has completely dodged the question of whether shethinks her husband’s welfare reform law was the right policy.It’s true that Clinton has rolled out a string of positions that pleaseconstituencies on the left, from support for LGBT rights and voting rightsto repudiating the results of her husband’s 1994 anti-crime law and vowingto enhance President Obama’s executive action on immigration. These areimportant issues, perhaps more important than the exact level of a wageincrease that surely won’t be $15 an hour as long as Republicans controleither the House or 41 seats in the Senate. But Clinton has been veryselective about how she’s courted her party’s progressive base, speaking asmuch to identity politics as to actual policy. On some of the morecontroversial policy questions, she’s taking a pass.As Ruth Marcus put it in the Washington Post Wednesday morning, “Theleft-leaning positions she isn’t taking are as significant as the ones shehas endorsed.”In keeping her powder dry, she is reminding voters — Democrats,Republicans, and independents — that it’s hard to pin down a Clinton. Herhusband was famous for practicing political “triangulation,” letting othersstake out their positions and then standing in the middle. Clinton’sunwillingness to commit to either side on the minimum wage, trade, andwelfare reform (Jeb Bush is calling for a new round of it) leaves everyonewondering what she really believes on those issues. That feeds an existingnarrative that she’s less than trustworthy. And that’s not good for Clinton.Clinton’s honesty problemMost adults say the label “honest and trustworthy” doesn’t apply to her.Nearly two-thirds of men think Clinton isn’t trustworthy, compared withabout half of women.The CNN/ORC poll released earlier this month is one in a series that showAmericans have greater faith in her ability to lead than in her willingnessto tell the truth. The problem is particularly acute with men and whites —two subcategories that lean more Republican and that have been problematicfor Clinton.The silver lining: almost three-fifths of nonwhite adults do believe she’shonest and trustworthy, and about half of women say the same. The positionsshe’s taken on voting rights, immigration, and ending the “era of massincarceration” should bolster those numbers. She still leads all Republicanchallengers in head-to-head matchups.But if voters don’t trust what Clinton says, it will be harder for her topersuade them to vote for her. Pew polling suggests honesty is an essentialleadership trait.The $15 head fakeClinton’s main rivals in the Democratic field, Vermont Senator BernieSanders and former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley, have both taken firmstands in favor of a $15-an-hour minimum wage. Clinton gave a head fakethis weekend.Clinton seemed to be taking a stand on Sunday when she called in to afast-food workers convention to say she stood behind them in their push fora $15-per-hour wage floor. The Washington Post noted that Clinton usedlanguage mirroring labor’s campaign for the higher pay standard and ran aheadline suggesting she was endorsing the $15 level. At first, her aidesdeclined to say whether she meant that she backs a $15 minimum wage. Andthen, after a couple of days, they still declined to say.One campaign spokesperson said Tuesday night that Clinton will eventuallyhave a position.”As Hillary Clinton expressed this weekend, she strongly supports workersin the fast-food industry in cities across the country mobilizing to fightfor a living wage. In the coming weeks, she will lay out her specific plansfor increasing wages.”That leaves open the question of whether she might back something otherthan the most often cited figures, $15 an hour and $10.10 an hour. It’s alittle reminiscent of the scene from There’s Something About Mary thatrevolves around one-upsmanship on whether six-, seven- or eight-minute absis the most effective workout routine.O’Malley spokesperson Haley Morris made the point that her boss raised thewage floor in his state (to $8.25 an hour).”We don’t know where Secretary Clinton stands on the minimum wage, butGovernor O’Malley’s stance couldn’t be clearer: he supports efforts toraise it to $15 an hour. This is another issue where he doesn’t just talk– he’s gotten things done. Last year, Maryland was just the second stateto raise its minimum wage.”Trading placesFor years, it would have been hard to find a more ardent advocate for aPacific Rim trade deal than Clinton. As Obama’s secretary of state, she wasa leader of the US “pivot” to Asia, which was later recoined a”rebalancing.” She wrote about the benefits of the Trans-PacificPartnership and spoke publicly about them. As White House CommunicationsDirector and former State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki put it on MSNBCthis week, Clinton spent a “great deal of time” extolling the virtues ofthe deal when she was a member of the administration.And then, in April, with pressure bearing down on Democrats to take aposition, Clinton backpedaled — through a spokesman.”Hillary Clinton believes that any new trade measure has to pass two tests:first, it should put us in a position to protect American workers, raisewages, and create more good jobs at home,” Nick Merrill said in astatement. “Second, it must also strengthen our national security. Weshould be willing to walk away from any outcome that falls short of thesetests. The goal is greater prosperity and security for American families,not trade for trade’s sake.”Senior aides have since said that she doesn’t need to take a position untilthe deal is finalized and the fine print can be analyzed. If she’s lucky,the House will reject Trade Promotion Authority for Obama this week,mooting TPP. But as it stands, the vast majority of House Democrats — andparty activists — oppose the deal. If Clinton supports it, she’lldisappoint them and give more fuel to Sanders and O’Malley, both of whomoppose the pact. If she opposes it, she’ll have flip-flopped and turned herback on Obama.Welfare reformThere’s also distance between Clinton and her rivals on welfare reform.When she said she wanted to end the “era of mass incarceration” — which wasspurred by Bill Clinton’s anti-crime law — the next logical question waswhether she would seek to reverse another major social policy law from hispresidency: welfare reform. As first lady, she had praised it.It became a more pressing matter when Bush, in the wake of violence inBaltimore, called for new welfare reforms.So far, Clinton and her aides have refused to address repeated questionsabout where she stands with regard to the 1990s law, which largelyaddressed government benefits and work requirements for women. As withother issues, they say she’ll have more policy to detail over the summer.Sanders voted against the 1996 welfare reform law, which split Democratsalmost evenly.In 2000, O’Malley signed a document expressing appreciation for the Clintonlaw but calling on government to “finish the job” by creating moreemployment opportunities for people moving off of government assistance.On this, too, Democrats are anxious to hear what Clinton thinks in thispresidential run.Time to chooseIt’s tempting to think that Clinton has plenty of time because it’s earlyin the presidential election cycle or because her Democratic rivalsprobably don’t have what it takes to beat her in a primary. But bysidestepping important policy questions, she’s giving oxygen to doubtsabout her sincerity. That’s a character question that should be familiar toClinton fans who watched Barack Obama turn honesty into a weapon againsther in 2008, and it’s one that crosses party lines.Ultimately, Clinton is going to have to choose a side on these issues. Thelonger she takes, the more it looks like she’s afraid of commitment.*Bill Clinton Says He’ll Nix Paid Speeches If Hillary Wins<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/prominent-new-hampshire-republicans-want-debate-open-all-candidates-n373421>// NBC News // Andrea Mitchell and Cassandra Vinograd – June 11, 2015*Former President Bill Clinton said he will most likely stop giving paidspeeches if his wife Hillary is elected president.The Clintons have been dogged by questions about potential conflicts ofinterest around their foundation and the amounts they’ve earned fromhigh-profile speaking engagements.When asked by Bloomberg Television whether he would continue to give paidspeeches if Hillary Clinton is elected president, Bill Clinton replied: “Idon’t think so.””I will still give speeches though on the subjects I’m interested in,” headded. “I’ve really enjoyed those things.”Clinton said “it would be a very good thing for America” if his wifeHillary Clinton wins the presidency.”She’ll have to decide what’s my highest and best use — including beingaround to buck her up every morning,” he said.While Hillary Clinton has begun her second campaign for president bycasting herself as a champion for middle-class voters, she’s long drawncriticism from Republicans about the wealth she and Bill Clinton havegenerated since he left the White House.In May, Federal Election Commission filings showed that the couple earnedmore than $25 million for more than 100 paid speeches between January 2014and May 2015 — an average fee of about $250,000 per speech.*Hillary Clinton and the New Politics of $15<http://www.thenation.com/blog/209585/hillary-clinton-and-new-politics-15>// The Nation // John Nichols – June 10, 2015 *Fast-food workers and their allies in the “Fight for 15” movement who weregathered Sunday in Detroit to plan strategy for action in the streets andat the ballot box got an unexpected call from the frontrunner for theDemocratic presidential nomination and, perhaps, the presidency.Declaring, “I want to be your champion,” Hillary Clinton told theactivists, “We need you out there fighting against those who would stripaway Americans’ right to organize, to collectively bargain, to fair play.No man or woman who works hard to feed American families should have to beon food stamps to feed their own family.”The Sunday morning phone call by the former secretary of state to thenational gathering in Detroit was a breakthrough moment for the movement toraise pay for fast-food and retail workers, as it signaled that theirissues are going to be a major part of the 2016 debate. It was alsosomething of a breakthrough moment for Clinton, who has been seeking sinceannouncing her candidacy to distinguish herself as a more progressive andpopulist contender.But how much of a breakthrough remains to be seen. Clinton did not talknumbers in her call. Indeed, as CNN noted, ” Just how high a wage hikeClinton supports, however, remains a mystery. The candidate has notprovided a figure yet. Her campaign did not return a request for commentSunday night.”Specifics are going to matter.Facing a spirited economic-populist challenge from Vermont Senator BernieSanders, who has long championed wage hikes, and prodded by former Marylandgovernor Martin O’Malley, who has a track record of work on living-wageissues, Clinton could not avoid the debate about hiking wages; she had tooffer the party’s base voters some economic populism. A recent Politicoheadline sums the circumstance up. “Hillary Clinton Camp Fears BernieSanders,” read one, while another declared, “Wall Street Fears LeftwardSwerve By Clinton.”To Clinton’s credit, her referencing of the Fight for 15 movement was not amild reference. It was laudatory. “I hope that every one of you willcontinue to raise your voices until we get all working Americans a betterdeal,” the candidate told the fast-food workers who had come to Detroitfrom across the country. “I want to be your champion. I want to fight withyou every day. I’m well aware that the folks on top already have plenty offriends in Washington, but we together will change the direction of thisgreat country.”Yet Clinton has not, as have Sanders and O’Malley, announced support for a$15-an-hour wage. And as with her relatively strong statements on tradepolicy—strong on principles, weak on precise stances—the specifics are whatwill matter.Clinton is a savvy politician. She recognizes that the “Fight for 15”movement has traction—and that major labor unions and grassroots activistsare starting to measure candidates according to their commitment to thefight. She has made a good statement, and gotten some good headlines. Nowshe must provide a sense of where exactly she stands on a federal$15-an-hour wage, on state and local fights, and on a host of other wageand work concerns. And, frankly, she needs to fill-in-the-blanks on relatedissues, such as the fight for a Retail Workers Bill of Rights and effortsto make it easily to organize and maintain unions.Clinton’s formal launch of her candidacy this coming Saturday at theFranklin D. Roosevelt Four Freedoms Park in New York City will be a keytest. Will she reference the Fight for 15 movement? Will she make thisstruggle a clear, and constant focus of her campaign?The pressure will only increase for Clinton and the other 2016 candidates.Following the lead of Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and other citiesacross the country have moved to implement $15 wage floors, and states suchas New York are starting to explore the prospect.New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who announced last month that he willconvene a special wage board to review and recommend higher wage rates forfast-food workers, explains why this is the case. “Nowhere is the incomegap more extreme and obnoxious than in the fast-food industry,” wrote Cuomoin a New York Times opinion piece. “Fast-food C.E.O.s are among thehighest-paid corporate executives. The average fast-food C.E.O. made $23.8million in 2013, more than quadruple the average from 2000 (adjusting forinflation). Meanwhile, entry-level food-service workers in New York Stateearn, on average, $16,920 per year, which at a 40-hour week amounts to$8.50 an hour. Nationally, wages for fast-food workers have increased 0.3percent since 2000 (again, adjusting for inflation).”As Service Employees International Union President Mary Kay Henry says, ”Powerful people around the world are listening to this movement to changeour world.”This is the context in which Clinton’s statement comes. Fast-food workersare organizing, and they are winning. Retail workers are organizing, andthey are winning. Home-care workers are organizing. A movement has takenshape. It is real. And it has specific “asks” of candidates.“We’ve got unstoppable momentum,” said LeTonya Wilson, 41, a Richmond,Virginia, McDonald’s worker who is paid $8.25 an hour. “Fifteen dollars issweeping the country and we’re going to build off victories in places likeLos Angeles, New York and St. Louis to win $15 in Richmond and all acrossthe country. Everyone said we had no chance, but we’ve shown when we sticktogether and speak out, we get life-changing results.”Wage hikes are life-changing for workers who are struggling to get by.And the movement for wage hikes is changing American politics.Presidential candidates are taking notice.Indeed, the front-runner in the race for the White House is saying toLeTonya Wilson and her fellow workers: “There’s a lot we can do togetherand you’re showing us what that route is. You’re on the streets, yourvoices are being heard. We need you.”That’s right. But that’s not enough. Getting a presidential front-runner to“call in” is not an indication that a corner has been turned on the “Fightfor $15.” Rather, it is a signal that the 2016 contest could, withcontinued pressure on all the candidates—Democrats and Republicans andthird-party contenders,; liberals and centrists and conservatives—be themoment when that turn is made.*Bill Clinton Says Hillary Win Could Change His Philanthropy Role<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-10/bill-clinton-says-hillary-win-could-change-his-philanthropy-role>// Bloomberg // Margaret Talev – June 10, 2015 *Former President Bill Clinton said if his wife is elected the next U.S.president, he will consider stepping aside from leading his globalphilanthropy, and that while he intends to keep delivering speeches onissues he cares about he will stop accepting money for them.“I believe if you have been president, and the current president of eitherparty asks you to do anything, if in good conscience you can do it, youshould do it,” Clinton said in an interview Wednesday with Bloomberg’sBetty Liu, when asked about his role in a potential Hillary Clintonadministration. He suggested he may step away from his role as head of thefoundation he established after his presidency in favor of his daughter,Chelsea.“That will be not an easy decision,” Clinton said in the most directacknowledgement to date that he’s considering stepping away from thefoundation to avoid conflicts of interest. “If she wins, and I think itwould be a very good thing for America if she did win,” he said, referringto his wife, “we’ll have to talk about it. But I don’t know.”“We’ll have to talk about it.”In a wide-ranging interview on the final day of the Clinton GlobalInitiative America meeting in Denver, Clinton also defended donations tohis tied to foreign governments and corporations, which have come underscrutiny by news organizations as Hillary Clinton’s campaign ramped up. Hesaid his organization operated for years without the presumption his wifewould run. In particular, he defended the decision to accept $500,000 fromAlgeria to pass on to international efforts in Haiti after the devastating2010 earthquake.”I’d take the money from Algeria again,” Clinton said. “There are very fewcountries in the world I would not accept for help to Haiti.” Clinton saidthere were a couple of donations the foundation did not accept because “wehave a strict no-corruption policy.” He also suggested the scrutiny of thefoundation was driven by cynical political journalists for whom “it’s hardto imagine” that businesses and individual would give money for anythingother than political purposes.Clinton said if his wife is elected president “she will make gooddecisions” and “she’ll consult widely and be inclusive.”As for his own role, he said he would be interested in working to restorethe middle class and a sense of “inclusion” in communities. But hesuggested that what he does as a first spouse would be up to his wife.”If there’s one thing she knows more about than anybody on earth, it’s onwhat subjects I should be listened to and what subjects I shouldn’t,”Clinton said, prompting a guffaw from the audience.*Hillary Clinton Needs a Do-Over<http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/06/10/hillary_clinton_needs_a_do-over_126923.html>// RealClearPolitics // Jonah Goldberg – June 10, 2015 *Almost exactly two months after Hillary Rodham Clinton’s officialannouncement that she’s running for president, she will give her first“official campaign announcement speech,” on June 13, according to herTwitter account.In other words, the Clinton campaign wants a do-over. Her first rollout wasthe most disastrous nonfatal presidential campaign debut in modern memory,so she wants another.Her initial announcement video in April — which most outlets accuratelyreported as her official announcement — was well done. After that,everything went downhill; a steady stream of news stories and damningallegations about her family foundation and tenure as secretary of statehas dogged her almost daily.Her best moment since announcing was when she was captured on grainysecurity video at an Ohio Chipotle franchise buying a burrito bowl. ABCNews and MarketWatch dubbed it an “adventure.” Bloomberg’s Mark Halperinexplained that Clinton’s excellent adventure was “fun” and “new.” “We’venever seen her get a burrito before.”Put “Burrito Day” in the win column.In the loss column: plummeting poll numbers. In March she enjoyed a15-percentage-point lead over Jeb Bush, according to a CNN poll. She hadroughly similar double-digit leads over Marco Rubio, Rand Paul, and ScottWalker.Those leads have nearly evaporated. Bush, whose rollout has also been lessthan stellar, now trails Clinton by eight percentage points, according toCNN (but only by three, according to an ABC News/Washington Post poll).Walker and Rubio are three percentage points behind her and Paul is one.Worse, the public is souring on her, like a carton of milk left out in thesun. More Americans now view her unfavorably rather than favorably (50percent to 46 percent), her worst polling performance in 14 years.Fifty-seven percent believe she is untrustworthy, and fewer than half (47percent) said she cares about people like them. Remember back in 2008 whenher image took a beating in her bruising primary fight with Barack Obama?Her image is worse today.She reminds me of Fred Thompson in 2008 or Rick Perry in 2012. Her best dayin the polls was the day before she announced.But fear not, the Clinton campaign has conveniently found a strategy thatsays none of this matters very much.Jonathan Martin and Maggie Haberman report in the New York Times that theClinton team has turned its back on a “nationwide electoral strategy,”opting instead to reassemble the Obama coalition of 2008 and 2012. To dothat, Clinton needs to run to the left and pick polarizing fights thatgalvanize low-information and hard-to-motivate voters.The days of trying to win swing voters and independents are apparentlyover. Today it’s all about that base. “The highest-premium voter in ’92 wasa voter who would vote for one party some and for another party some,”James Carville, a longtime adviser to the Clintons, told the New YorkTimes. “Now the highest-premium voter is somebody with a high probabilityto vote for you and low probability to turn out. That’s the golden list.And that’s a humongous change in basic strategic doctrine.”Carville’s right that it is a big change in doctrine, but it’s unclearwhether the doctrine is right. So far the entire theory rests on theprecedent of one candidate: Obama. “If she won,” Martin and Haberman write,“it would suggest that the so-called Obama coalition of young, nonwhite andfemale voters is transferable to another Democrat.”As I’ve been writing for a while, I’m extremely dubious. Here are fourreasons. First, Obama didn’t really run as a polarizing figure in 2008. Heran as a post-partisan reformer who would end gridlock and fix the failuresof the two-term incumbent (as did George W. Bush and Bill Clinton beforehim).Second, Obama was a very good politician without much baggage (that themedia were willing to report on). Clinton is a mediocre politician withmountainous baggage. Third, Obama’s coalition has never been transferableto any other cause or politician, despite the president’s best efforts. Andlast, Clinton is running to stay the course.The Obama veterans around Clinton boast of their willingness to break withthe practices of the past. But it looks more like they can’t break out oftheir own Obama bubble, running the same plays for a very differentquarterback.*Check Out Hillary Clinton’s First Instagram<http://time.com/3916627/hillary-clinton-first-instagram/> // TIMES //Olivia Waxman – June 10, 2015 *Hillary Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidentialelection, launched an Instagram account Wednesday. Her first post is aphoto of red, white and blue pantsuits with the caption “Hard Choices” —which is also the title of her memoir. The former Secretary of Statemodestly describes herself as a “Doting grandmother, among other things.”The account already racked up more than 32,000 followers at the time ofpublication — more than any of the other 2016 candidates with verifiedaccounts on the social network, such as Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT),Senator Rand Paul (R-KY),Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), Senator Marco Rubio(R-FL), former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee (R), retired neurosurgeonBen Carson (R).Having a presence on Instagram is an opportunity to engage withcollege-aged and 20-something voters, as “53% of young adults ages 18-29now use the service,” according to Pew Research Center’s Jan. 2015 reporton the demographics of social networking platforms. The study also says“women are particularly likely to be on Instagram, along with Hispanics andAfrican-Americans, and those who live in urban or suburban environments.”*Hillary Clinton launches Instagram account<http://www.cbsnews.com/news/election-2016-hillary-clinton-launches-instagram-account/>// CBS News // Hannah Fraser-Chanpong – June 10, 2015 *Hillary Clinton has joined Instagram.Clinton posted her first photo to the social media site Wednesday. It doesnot show Clinton but, instead, red, white and blue outfits hung on agarment rack, highlighting a sartorial choice that the presidentialcandidate has become well known for: the pantsuit.”Hard choices,” the caption reads.Many of the other presidential candidates, including Bernie Sanders, JebBush (and his wife, Columba Bush), Rand Paul and Marco Rubio already haveInstagram accounts. Clinton’s account was private until Wednesday morning.Since the launch of her bid, Clinton’s campaign has relied mostly onTwitter and Facebook to share photos of Clinton on the campaign trail,share news and highlight organizing events, and she recently joinedLinkedIn. Clinton chimes in herself on Twitter on occasion — both onpolicy and nonpolitical events like the Women’s World Cup — and signs hertweets with the letter “h.” Clinton campaign officials say that theInstagram account will more regularly show a more candid, personal side oftheir candidate and her supporters. The campaign also plans to use it asanother way to engage with her fans.Clinton, the former senator, first lady and secretary of state whosecolorful Twitter bio includes both “hair icon” and “pantsuit aficionado,”highlights only one of her titles on her Instagram page. “dotinggrandmother, among other things.” It includes a link to Clinton’s campaignwebsite.*Hillary Clinton joins Instagram with a photo of her red, white and bluepantsuits<http://mashable.com/2015/06/10/hillary-clinton-joins-instagram/?utm_medium=feed&utm_source=rss>// Mashable // Bryian Ries – June 10, 2015*Hillary Clinton exploded onto the Instagram scene Wednesday morning with anunfiltered photo of the things she knows best: her red, white and bluepantsuits.”Hard choices,” wrote the self-described “doting grandmother, among otherthings” in the photo’s caption, which appeared days ahead of the formerfirst lady’s official 2016 campaign launch. Clinton first announced hersecond bid for the presidency in April.The account, @HillaryClinton, was confirmed as hers by an Instagramspokesperson. So far, the reception toward the account is warm; one usercalled it “iconic,” while another gave her the Broad City-inspired rebelyell, “YAAS QUEEN.” Thirty minutes after creating the account, Clintonalready attracted more than 5,000 followers.Clinton joins 300 million Instagrammers — including many fellow 2016candidates — who share a reported 70 million photos and videos each day.*Parties set events; Democrats draw Clinton to dinner<http://www.nwaonline.com/news/2015/jun/11/parties-set-events-democrats-draw-clint-1/>// North West Arkansas Gazette // Michael R. Wickline – June 11, 2015*Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton will be thekeynote speaker at the Democratic Party of Arkansas’ annual fundraiser July18 in North Little Rock, party Chairman Vince Insalaco said Wednesday.Arkansas Republicans will hold their annual Reagan-Rockefeller fundraisingdinner in Hot Springs on July 17, party Chairman Doyle Webb said Wednesday.Details and speaker information will be announced soon, he said.Clinton, the wife of former President Bill Clinton, is a former Arkansasfirst lady, U.S. senator and U.S. secretary of state.”As Arkansas’ first lady, Hillary worked tirelessly to secure a betterfuture for our children and families — a responsibility that she continuedas the first lady of the United States, a U.S. senator and as secretary ofstate,” Insalaco said in a written statement. “We are excited to welcomeher to an Arkansas homecoming that celebrates both that progress and lookstoward a hopeful future.”Clinton moved to Arkansas in 1974 shortly after serving as an attorney forthe congressional committee that investigated President Richard Nixon. Shetaught students at the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville beforemarrying Bill Clinton, who later won elections for governor and thepresidency.She co-founded Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families and ledmultiple campaigns to improve children’s health and education in Arkansas,according to the state Democratic Party.State Democratic Party Executive Director Candace Martin said the partyhasn’t endorsed Clinton for president.Others who’ve said they’re running for president as Democrats are formerRhode Island Gov. and U.S. Sen. Lincoln Chafee, former Maryland Gov. MartinO’Malley and U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.Webb, the state GOP chairman, said Arkansas Republicans are trying to getthe party’s presidential candidates to help raise money at party events.”Our Reagan-Rockefeller dinner, the RPA’s largest annual fundraiser, willbe held at the Hot Springs Convention Center in Horner Hall on July 17,”Webb said in a written statement. “The RR dinner is the opening event ofour state Republican Leadership weekend, which includes our summer StateCommittee meeting and workshops. The announcement of details and thespeaker will be forthcoming.”Webb declined to say whether the keynote speaker will be former ArkansasGov. Mike Huckabee, who is among at least 10 Republicans who have said theyare running for president in 2016.Both Clinton and Huckabee ran unsuccessfully for their parties’presidential nominations in 2008.Arkansas Republican Gov. Asa Hutchinson last month signed into law a billmoving the state’s 2016 primary elections from May 24 to March 1 to allowArkansas to participate with several other Southern states in what itssupporters call the SEC presidential primary.Other states that plan to hold a March 1 primary include Alabama, Georgia,Texas, Tennessee and Virginia.The SEC is the Southeastern Conference, an intercollegiate athleticconference that includes many Southern states.The party filing period will be from noon Nov. 2 until noon Nov. 9 in thestate Capitol, said Chris Powell, a spokesman for Arkansas Secretary ofState Mark Martin.Webb said his party’s 2016 filing fees will be decided July 17 by theparty’s executive committee, but he doesn’t expect any change, including inthe $25,000 fee for presidential candidates.The state Democratic Party State Committee will determine the party’s 2016filing fees during its Aug. 15 meeting, Candace Martin said.*It’s official: Hillary Clinton’s logo is actually perfect<http://qz.com/423037/its-official-hillary-clintons-logo-is-actually-perfect/>// Quartz // Annalisa Merelli – June 10, 2015 *As soon Hillary Clinton announced her presidential bid, commentators begandissecting each and every aspect of her communications strategy. Despite afew critics, many noted that the launch video successfully installedClinton’s campaign as a collective effort rather than emphasizing thatClinton was “destined” for the presidency.What instead provoked nothing but bad reviews was the logo design—apatriotically blue, red and white “H” with an arrow pointing right at thecenter. Why is the arrow red (the Republican color in the US), some asked,and why is it pointing toward the right? Were voters going to interpret itas an imminent shift towards more conservative positions? Others plainlystated that the logo didn’t say anything at all. Quartz’s Anne Quitoweighed in with the following:As unoriginal and clunky as it may appear, Clinton’s logo is perfectlyfunctional. It’s unique enough, with utility that holds up across print,broadcast, and digital platforms. On Twitter, the red arrow is even anifty, albeit unnecessary, device that directs the eye right to themessenger.Clinton’s new logo builds upon Obama’s “O,” which was much closer to acorporate brand than a traditional political logo.The style informed both of Obama’s campaigns, and forever changed thevisual language of American politics, adding modern typography and designto an otherwise trite political visual vocabulary. Learning from thatlesson, Clinton’s 2016 one-letter logo is highly recognizable: Like abrand, the “H” is the complete logo and not accompanied by the full namenor the year—as to indicate a timeless commitment, and to separate thiscampaign from Hillary’s bid in 2008.Besides being bold, the one-letter logo is, as exceptionally social mediafriendly—no small quality, since compared to 2008 (and to an extent even2012), social media channels have now become a campaign requirement.“In the past, you got a lot of stars for being on a platform,” Jon Jones,chief digital officer at the Incite Agency who worked as the first digitalstrategist for Obama’s 2008 campaign, told Quartz. Now, he explained, it’smuch less about whether a platform is used, and why, and more about how itreflects on the candidate’s image.In this light, the square design is strategically sound: The strongestattribute of this design—what makes it particularly functional in the timeof memes—is its flexibility which, unlike with Obama’s “O,” does not appearto be a lucky accident.In the past two months the logo has already appeared in a number of avatarsboth on Twitter and Facebook, including the ones below:It is through all these iterations that Clinton’s logo fully displays itsiconic value: It is highly recognizable despite the changes, and themuch-criticized right-facing red arrow is now appears as it was likelymeant to: pointing the way forward. The different backgrounds aren’t justan innovative graphic solution—they are the visual embodiment of the valuesClinton is building her campaign around. It vehicles a leadership based oncollectivity and inclusiveness rather than the elitist individualismClinton is often accused of.“The real Hillary is what they are trying to get out there, as opposite toa top-down Clinton force,” Jones explained.The logo is young, modern, colorful. And the strategy of inclusiveness goesbeyond the design, extending to the offline campaign (with campaign workerstraveling by bus under the eyes of surprised reporters). Thus far, the bestexample has been Mary Jo for Hillary: In an unprecedented exercise inrelinquishing control, Clinton handed her official campaign Twitter handleto Mary Jo Brown, a small business owner from New Hampshire, who postedtweets about a day in her life (and work) in support of the grassrootsinitiative of “small business owners for Hillary.”This, said Jones, is something 2008 Clinton would have stayed away frombut, as other elements of her campaign—such as the pop merchandising,including items such as the pantsuit-printed t-shirt—is “a page of theObama book.”Indeed, like Obama’s 2008, Clinton’s 2016 looks like a campaign designed tobe remembered—not just to win.*Hillary to be honored at Wildlife gala after making<http://nypost.com/2015/06/09/hillary-to-be-honored-at-wildlife-gala-after-making-25k-donation/>// NY Post // Geoff Earle – June 10, 2015*There will be an elephant in the room Thursday when Hillary Rodham Clintonis an honored guest at the Wildlife Conservation Society’s annual gala inNew York: a big-bucks contribution the Clinton Family Foundation gave tothe organization.The group works to protect endangered elephants from ivory poaching andthreats, among other wildlife projects.The foundation gave the society a $25,000 grant in 2013 for its efforts,foundation records show.The good feelings appear to be mutual.The following year, at the 2014 gala — called “An Elephant’s Tale” —Hillary and Chelsea Clinton were honored by the group for “their commitmentto conservation and protecting wildlife and wild places.”An official release said they “have been tremendous allies in the fight tosave the African elephant.” and work “tirelessly” for the cause.Hillary Clinton is listed as an “honorary chair” at Thursday’s black-tieevent, to be held at the Central Park Zoo, which this year is called“Turning Tides.”Meanwhile, Renee Ring, the group’s corporate relations director, donated$5,000 to the pro-Clinton PAC Ready for Hillary in 2013, according tocampaign records.*Bill Clinton contradicts Hillary on email claims<http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/10/bill-clinton-contradicts-hillary-on-email-claims/>// Fox News – June 10, 2015 *Bill Clinton appeared Wednesday to contradict his wife’s claims about theirpersonal email use, saying he’s only sent two emails in his life — despiteHillary Clinton saying some of the private messages on her personal serverwere from her and her husband.The former president addressed his very sparing email use at a ClintonGlobal Initiative meeting in Denver.He said the “only time” he got on the Internet was to do “two emails” andorder Christmas presents.”Otherwise I found people said embarrassing things on emails. I didn’t wantto be one of them,” Clinton said, to laughter.The statement echoes what a spokesman told the Wall Street Journal in March– that the ex-president had only sent two emails in his life, one to U.S.troops and the other to astronaut John Glenn.Yet, when Hillary Clinton held a press conference in March explaining herpersonal email use, she said her private server “contains personalcommunications from my husband and me.”The now-Democratic presidential candidate gave this detail in assertingthat she would not turn over her personal server for examination — asRepublican lawmakers have requested.Her office, though, has turned over thousands of pages of emails to theState Department, which has started to release some of them.*De Blasio likely to skip Hillary Clinton’s campaign launch<http://www.crainsnewyork.com/article/20150610/BLOGS04/150609865/de-blasio-likely-to-skip-hillary-clintons-campaign-launch>// Crain’s New York // Andrew Hawkins – June 10, 2015 *Hillary Clinton is scheduled to formally launch her presidential campaignon Roosevelt Island Saturday, but Mayor Bill de Blasio’s office would notsay Tuesday whether her friend, former campaign manager and erstwhilesupporter will attend.A spokesman for the mayor did not respond to numerous requests for commenton Ms. Clinton’s rally, the second major event of her presidential campaignto take place in New York City. Even so, the mayor of the city, a stalwartprogressive Democrat, is unlikely to attend. He was absent from her speechon criminal justice at Columbia University in April. And despite numerousquestions, the mayor has steadfastly declined to endorse her campaign,asserting that he wants to hear more “vision” from the candidate on incomeinequality and other such matters.”Each of the candidates is beginning to address these issues,” he said onCBS’s “Face the Nation” Sunday. “I’m waiting to hear a fuller vision fromeach on how we’ll actually tackle income inequality.” Asked if thatincluded Ms. Clinton, whom he has known for several decades and whose 2000Senate campaign he managed, the mayor said, “Absolutely.”When questioned about whether an invitation had been extended to Mr. deBlasio to Saturday’s rally, a spokesman for Ms. Clinton’s campaign said hehad no information. Some supporters were perplexed by the mayor’s behavior.”It strikes me as surreal and bizarre that de Blasio will be missing inaction this Saturday when the presumptive candidate of his party has chosento launch her candidacy in his city and host her campaign headquarters inhis home borough,” said a New York City-based operative close to theClinton campaign.Letitia James, the public advocate and Clinton supporter, plans to bethere, but not City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito, who has yet toendorse a candidate. A spokesman for Comptroller Scott Stringer did notreply.Much of the mayor’s waffling has to do with his own national ambitions,namely his 13-point Progressive Agenda and his plans to host a presidentialdebate on income inequality later this year. As Mr. de Blasio sees it, hehas to withhold his endorsement in order to remain a credible, unattachedand authoritative voice in the national debate surrounding the politics ofpoverty.Also, the mayor might lose credibility with his liberal fan base and loseleverage to move Ms. Clinton to the left if he were to endorse her beforeshe takes a strong stand on his priorities, such as a much higher minimumwage and more taxation of the wealthy.”Since she’s appearing as a candidate and he’s still neutral in the race,it would be strange for him to show up,” said Kenneth Sherrill, professorof political science at Hunter College. “Showing up would be taken to be anendorsement. In this case, not showing up is good manners.”*Democrats Line Up Hillary Clinton For Jefferson-Jackson Dinner<http://talkbusiness.net/2015/06/democrats-line-up-hillary-clinton-for-jefferson-jackson-dinner/>// Talk Business – June 10, 2015 *Arkansas Democrats are getting ready for Hillary.The Democratic Party of Arkansas announced Wednesday that former FirstLady, U.S. Senator and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be thekeynote speaker at its Jefferson-Jackson Day dinner in July.The 2016 Presidential contender will speak to state Democrats on Saturday,July 18 at Verizon Arena in North Little Rock.“We are very excited to officially announce our 2015 Jefferson-JacksonDinner, featuring special guest Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton,” said DPAChairman Vince Insalaco. “I know you’re as excited as I am that the formerFirst Lady of Arkansas and the United States and now candidate forPresident of the United States will be coming to our state to join us forthis incredible evening.”“As Arkansas’s first lady, Hillary worked tirelessly to secure a betterfuture for our children and families – a responsibility that she continuedas the First Lady of the United States, a U.S. Senator, and as Secretary ofState. We are excited to welcome her to an Arkansas homecoming thatcelebrates both that progress and looks towards a hopeful future,” Insalacoadded in the statement.*Clinton Has Edge Among Mass. Voters; Gov. Baker Remains Popular<http://www.wbur.org/2015/06/10/wbur-poll-clinton-baker> // WBUR // FredThys – June 10, 2015 *Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton beat Barack Obama in theMassachusetts Democratic primary in 2008, but Massachusetts voters do nothave a very high opinion of her currently, a new WBUR statewide poll(topline results, crosstabs) shows.Of 502 registered Massachusetts voters surveyed late last week, only 48percent of respondents have a favorable view of Clinton. That’s compared to38 percent of poll respondents who view her unfavorably.Clinton is least popular among Republicans, as only 24 percent ofRepublicans view her favorably. But she’s also relatively unpopular amongthe state’s largest group of voters, the unenrolled: Only 42 percent ofunenrolled voters view her favorably, compared with 43 percent who view herunfavorably. It’s only among Democrats that Clinton enjoys a favorableimage, with 66 percent of Democrats responding positively.How voters view Clinton varies greatly depending on their race, the surveyfound. Only 44 percent of white voters view her favorably, compared with 73percent of voters of all other races.Clinton is most popular in the Boston area, with 54 percent of voters inBoston and surrounding cities and towns viewing her favorably. Clinton isin the Boston area Wednesday, attending a fundraiser in Newton.She is least popular in western and central Massachusetts, where only 43percent of voters view her favorably.Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., listens to testimony on Capitol Hill inFebruary. Warren has publicly declared she will not be running forpresident. (Susan Walsh/AP)Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., listens to testimony on Capitol Hill inFebruary. Warren has publicly declared she will not be running forpresident. (Susan Walsh/AP)Still, by a large margin, most Democrats and unenrolled voters who say theyare more likely to vote in the Democratic presidential primary than in theRepublican primary say they would vote for Clinton (58 percent).Although U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren remains well liked in Massachusetts —53 percent of respondents view her favorably — she comes in a distantsecond to Clinton, with 16 percent, among voters who say they are morelikely to vote in the Democratic presidential primary.Warren has said she’s not running, and 67 percent of poll respondents saythey do not expect her to run.The WBUR live phone survey was conducted by the MassINC Polling Group.Voters were interviewed last Thursday, Friday and Saturday. The poll’smargin of error is 4.4 percent.The poll also finds that Gov. Charlie Baker continues to be highly popularamong Massachusetts voters.Sixty-nine percent of respondents view Baker, a Republican, favorably,compared with just 10 percent who view him unfavorably.He’s most popular among Republicans. Seventy-eight percent of Republicansview Baker favorably. But he’s also extremely popular among unenrolledvoters, as 72 percent of these voters view him favorably. And evenDemocrats view him favorably. Sixty-three percent of Democrats have afavorable view of him.Among women, 64 percent have a favorable view of the governor. But Baker ismore popular among men, with a 75 percent favorability.Among the state’s over-60 voters, Baker remains popular with a 76 percentfavorable rating. His rating is lowest among the youngest voters, 18-29,though still relatively popular among them at 57 percent favorable.The poll, as we reported earlier Wednesday, also finds 49 percent of votersopposing Boston hosting the Olympics in 2024, with only 39 percentsupporting the idea.*No blueprint on cutting college debt<https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/nation/2015/06/10/democrats-calls-for-debt-free-college-are-next-frontier-social-programs-but-lack-realistic-funding-plan/vPHHKWMQdNnNBbs83qXmmM/story.html>// Boston Globe // Tracy Jan – June 11, 2015*WASHINGTON — Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont is calling for zero tuitionat public colleges. Former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley says he willfight to erase debt for college graduates. Hillary Rodham Clinton, at arecent campaign event in Iowa, endorsed the goal of slashing such debt.Promises to reduce, or even eliminate, the financial burdens of highereducation represent the newest frontier in Democrats’ call fortaxpayer-sponsored social programs. The anxiety-inducing $1.3 trillion instudent debt has quickly become a focus of the 2016 Democratic presidentialprimary contest.But while the concept is attracting attention from financially challengedmiddle-class families, details are scarce on how government should pay forpotentially the costliest initiatives since President Obama’s health careoverhaul.The one concrete source of funding comes from Sanders, who proposes a newtax on Wall Street transactions. While that idea draws cheers from hispopulist fan base, it would be a political long shot for passage in today’sWashington.Sanders also has produced the only guess at the huge costs: three quartersof a trillion dollars over the first decade.“This is a politically popular idea, but the solutions are hard andexpensive,” said Terry Hartle, senior vice president of the AmericanCouncil on Education, a nonpartisan policy and lobbying group in Washingtonfor colleges and universities. “How you pay for it very quickly becomes aseriously complicating issue.”Meanwhile, the effect of student debt on the national economy — frequentlycited on the campaign trail as a key reason to ease the burden — is hard tomeasure. While politicians often link higher student debt to lower rates ofhomeownership, entrepreneurship, and retirement savings, no one can pointto a reliable figure quantifying the effect of the debt on the overalleconomy.‘This is a politically popular idea, but the solutions are hard andexpensive.’Quote Icon“I would say it’s overreaching given the current landscape of research tosuggest a link between student debt and a drain on the economy,” said BethAkers, a Brookings fellow whose research focuses on the economics of highereducation.The squishiness of the candidates’ proposals is giving conservative criticseasy ammunition to denounce the ideas as nothing more than liberal talkingpoints.“This has quickly become a rallying cry for Democrats and advocates andalso somewhat of a litmus test for candidates: Are you with us or againstus on this?” said Andrew Kelly, director of the Center on Higher EducationReform at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tankbased in Washington. “I see why it’s enticing as an election- year slogan,but there are some serious flaws.”Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Massachusetts Democrat, got out front on theissue in 2013 when her first bill as senator called for reducing theinterest rates that government charges student borrowers. Since then, goalshave become far more sweeping.Nudged along by liberal Democrats, party members in both the Senate andHouse are also looking for greater access to debt-free higher education.Warren, along with Senators Brian Schatz of Hawaii, and Chuck Schumer ofNew York, introduced a nonbinding resolution in April calling for states toreduce tuition at public schools; for the federal government to increasefinancial aid; and for a program that allows students to refinance loans atlower rates.But the resolution has no teeth, and it makes no mention of how to pay forany of its lofty goals.Warren, in an interview Wednesday, said the idea for the resolution is to“push us in the right direction.”“We should be doing more as a country to leverage our federal dollars togive the schools incentives to drive down costs and to encourage states toinvest more in their flagship schools,” Warren said. “We need resources andincentives to bring down costs. This is a one-two punch.”Representative Katherine Clark, a Massachusetts Democrat, introduced aparallel resolution in the House, along with Representatives Raul Grijalvaof Arizona and Keith Ellison of Minnesota, all Democrats.Clark, in an interview, acknowledged that without money attached to theresolution, it is simply a political guidepost, a “first step” in anational conversation.So far, the resolution has garnered more than 70 cosponsors among Democratsin Congress, including Senators Edward Markey of Massachusetts, RichardBlumenthal of Connecticut, and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire.“Our ultimate goal is to make debt-free college central to the 2016election and signal to the candidates that if they embrace the idea, theywon’t be out on a limb,” said Adam Green, cofounder of the ProgressiveChange Campaign Committee, which lobbied Congress on the resolutions.Borrowers owe an average of $28,400 in federal and private loans combined,according to the Project on Student Debt by the Institute for CollegeAccess & Success.A May poll by Rasmussen Reports found that Democrats, women, and youngervoters were more likely to believe that the government should pay forcollege. But among the 800 adults surveyed, Americans were nearly evenlysplit — 43 percent agreed with the government paying for college and 40percent disagreed.Marv McMoore Jr., former president of College Democrats of Massachusetts,who graduated from Northeastern University last month, recently moved backhome with his parents on Long Island to save money while he attendsgraduate school at Fordham University in New York City.The son of an auto mechanic, McMoore is the first in his immediate familyto graduate from college. The 21-year-old estimates that he will have$60,000 of student loan debt by the time he receives his master’s degreenext year. He views the debt-free college campaign as a way to energize anew generation of voters. “With voter apathy among young folks, this is away to attract them back to the polls,” McMoore said.The recent push goes further than President Obama’s proposal in January tomake two years of community college free — which the White House estimatedwould cost the federal government $60 billion over 10 years but whichstands little chance of passing. A White House official said the presidentis encouraged that Congress is engaged in the conversation but would notsay whether Obama supports the debt- or tuition-free proposals.Sanders’ bill, which was introduced last month and has yet to drawsupporters in the Senate, Democrat or Republican, would cost $750 billionover 10 years, according to his office.Under the legislation, two-thirds of the cost of tuition and fees would beborne by the federal government and the rest by the states. The federalshare would come from a tax on Wall Street. The bill would also eliminatefederal profits on loans, build on existing work-study programs to defraycosts, and offer incentives for colleges to keep tuition down.Making public colleges free, said Sanders, an independent running for theDemocratic nomination, is the most efficient way to “create thebest-educated workforce that we can have.” But critics say they fear theplans to inject more federal money to ease college debt would only promptcollege costs to balloon and leave taxpayers on the hook.Said Lindsey Burke, a fellow with the conservative Heritage Foundation: “Weneed to think of policies that actually fix the college cost problem, nottake taxpayer dollars filtered through government programs and increasedsubsidies.”*Clinton plans ‘Launch Party’ in Concord during Monday visit<http://www.wmur.com/politics/clinton-plans-launch-party-in-concord-during-monday-visit/33512302>// WMUR // John DiStaso – June 10, 2015 *Hillary Clinton will host her first New Hampshire event that is open to thegeneral public on Monday, WMUR has learned.The Democratic presidential candidate will make her third visit to thestate since announcing her candidacy in mid-April and will hold a “LaunchParty with Hillary” in Concord at a venue and time to be announced, thecampaign said. Those attending must RSVP and register on the Clinton website.The Concord event, which is free, will be among at least three stops shewill make in the state that day.She will also appear at the ticketed Manchester Democratic City CommitteeFlag Day Dinner at the Puritan Backroom Conference Center at 5 p.m. Atleast one other stop is being planned, the campaign said.The visit will take place two days after her formal presidential campaignannouncement rally in New York City.In her prior two visits to the state, Clinton has held roundtables andgatherings with invited guests and what the campaign said were members ofthe public who expressed an interest in attending. She also met withGranite Staters at a quick stop at an ice cream stand in Derry.*How Huma Abedin became Hillary Clinton’s confidante and ‘translator'<https://fortune.com/2015/06/10/huma-abedin-hillary-clinton-aide/> //Fortune // Nina Easton – June 10, 2015 *Huma Abedin started as an intern at the Clinton White House. Now she isHillary Clinton’s closest aide, even in controversies.When Huma Abedin first joined the Clinton White House in the 1990s, shehoped to be assigned to the press office. Growing up in Jeddah, SaudiArabia, she had longed to be a journalist—specifically Christiane Amanpourwho “looked purposeful—and glamorous.” Instead, she was assigned to HillaryClinton’s chief of staff, Melanne Verveer.“Take a chance,” her mother counseled her disappointed daughter, accordingto Abedin. “Don’t be afraid of what you don’t know. And don’t fall in lovewith Plan A.” Plan B paid off–big time. Two decades later, Abedin is at thecenter of Clinton’s presidential bid, with a title of campaign vice chair.And by most accounts, she is candidate Clinton’s closest aide—“Hillary’stranslator,” as one insider puts it.Abedin is the high-fashion figure glued to Clinton’s side—passing notes,whispering in her ear, working her cell phone. During Clinton’s 2008campaign–when Abedin served as the candidate’s “body woman”— Clintoncommunications aide Mandy Grunwald told Vogue: “I’m not sure Hillary couldwalk out the door without Huma. She’s a little like Radar on M*A*S*H. Ifthe air-conditioning is too cold, Huma is there with the shawl. She’salways thinking three steps ahead of Hillary.”Two years ago, Abedin and her disgraced congressman husband Anthony Weinerwere emerging from the carnage of his sexting scandal. The New York Timesdescribed the young couple’s life with their toddler as “in retreat.” Sheserved as deputy chief of staff under Secretary of State Clinton while heplanned his (ultimately unsuccessful) political comeback running for NewYork mayor.As deputy chief of staff under Secretary of State Clinton, Abedin has spenthundreds of air-travel hours with Hillary, developing a relationship thatcolleagues describes as familial–along with an encyclopedic knowledge ofthe people and projects that populate the complicated global tangle ofClinton-world. A master of the “velvet no,” Abedin calmly manages timedemands on her candidate with apologetic grace.But her tightness with Clinton also has costs. She’s been caught up inquestions about the propriety of the then-Secretary of State’s privateemail server, and she is the target of an inspector generalinquiry—prompted by a Senate Republican– into whether Clinton actedproperly in hiring Abedin for government work even while she was employedby the private consulting firm Teneo Holdings. Abedin is also among theState Department aides on the list to be called as witnesses in a Housecommittee investigation into the 2012 Benghazi terror attack.Bill and Hillary Clinton have been the sun of Abedin’s solar system eversince she joined the White House as an intern at age 21. Her late father,of Indian descent, was a university lecturer and her mother a sociologyprofessor; both received their PhD’s from the University of Pennsylvania.Born in Kalamazoo, Michigan before moving to Saudi Arabia, Abedin speaksfluent Arabic. She graduated from George Washington University.At a 2012 Fortune dinner, Abedin said she has learned to take the advice ofher mother, and the value of Plan B. “Sixteen years later, I wouldn’tchange a thing,” she said at the time. “And I got to meet ChristianeAmanpour.”Read more profiles of the top women behind Hillary Clinton’s campaignoperation. Next up: Women behind the GOP candidates.*Clinton Foundation donors have a bribery problem<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-foundation-donors-bribery-problem/article/2565919>// The Washington Examiner // Sarah Westwood – June 10, 2015 *Nigerian businessman Gilbert Chagoury’s connections to the Clintons havecome under scrutiny following revelations that State Department policy mayhave benefited him personally while Hillary Clinton served as secretary ofstate.A pair of Clinton Foundation donors with financial ties to the former firstfamily have both been at the center of major corruption cases, raisingquestions about why they chose to give millions to the Clintons’ charity.Nigerian businessman Gilbert Chagoury’s connections to the Clintons havecome under scrutiny following revelations that State Department policy mayhave benefited him personally while Hillary Clinton served as secretary ofstate.Sen. David Vitter, R-La., has repeatedly pressed the State Department fordocumentation of Hillary Clinton’s decision not to place Boko Haram on theterrorist watch list while serving as secretary of state.”Disturbingly, while the department was refusing to make the [foreignterrorist organization] designation, former President Bill Clinton, alsothe head of the Clinton Foundation and account owner of the Clinton emaildomain, participated in events with a long-time donor and major Nigerianland developer, Gilbert Chagoury, who previously agreed to a $66 millionplea deal during international investigation into corruption chargesagainst him,” Vitter wrote in a March letter to Secretary of State JohnKerry.”We need to know if Mr. Chagoury had any influence in the decision not todesignate Boko Haram a [foreign terrorist organization], or had any otherinfluence with Secretary Clinton’s foreign policy decisions,” Vitter added.Chagoury’s financial support of the Clintons has raised red flags in thepast. In 1996, he was reportedly prodded by a Democratic National Committeefundraiser to give $460,000 to a nonprofit voter registration group thatlater won the DNC’s business.The group, Vote Now 96, drew attention “from congressional investigatorsbecause of its connections to the DNC and indications that in some cases,at least, donors ineligible to give to the party were steered to the votersgroup,” the Washington Post reported in 1997.Chagoury was one such ineligible donor whose gift to the supposedlynonpartisan organization nonetheless earned him a seat at a White Housedinner for top DNC donors months later “although he is not a partycontributor and could not legally give to the Democrats,” according to thesame Washington Post report.Chagoury’s donation was solicited by Mark Weiner, a top Democratic bundlerwho will co-host a fundraiser for Clinton’s presidential campaign in RhodeIsland Wednesday.Chagoury was an adviser to Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha, who held power inNigeria from 1993-98. He reportedly paid the incoming Nigerian government$300 million to avoid prosecution after Abacha’s death.Chagoury was “believed to have acted as a middleman for the late andcorrupt Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha,” according to the American CriminalLaw Review.Nigerian media outlets reported Chagoury and his brother, Jack, were among80 local officials who were indicted in the Halliburton bribery scandal in2010. The case alleged the Chagoury brothers were involved in a series ofbribes to Nigerian officials that preceded Halliburton’s acquisition oflucrative oil contracts in the country.In April 2011, a Lebanese media outlet reported Fouad Siniora, primeminister of Lebanon, “suggested that the U.S. deliver to Chagoury a sternmessage about the possibility of financial sanctions and travel bansagainst those who undermine Lebanon’s legitimate institutions.”Siniora’s call for sanctions against Chagoury came after his ties toLebanese officials gave the impression that he was interfering in Lebanesepolitics.Chagoury did not return a request for comment.But Chagoury isn’t the only international businessman whose checkered pasthas raised questions about the Clinton Foundation’s acceptance of generousdonations from foreigners accused of bribery.Victor Dahdaleh, a Canadian businessman and trustee of the ClintonFoundation, was arrested in October 2011 for his alleged role in a briberyscheme that funneled kickbacks from aluminum conglomerate Alcoa toAluminium Bahrain.Dahdaleh reportedly traveled with Bill Clinton through Europe in 2009,shortly after Hillary Clinton took office, and arranged speakingengagements for the former president dating back to 2005.The U.K.’s Serious Fraud Office dropped its case against Dahdaleh inDecember 2013 after key witnesses backed down, Reuters reported.The British agency had tapped lawyers from Akin Gum Strayss Hauer and Fieldto probe the bribery allegations, the same lawyers representing AluminiumBahrain in “a ‘hotly contested’ U.S. civil lawsuit against Dahdaleh,” whichraised “a potential conflict of interest between their assistance to the[Serious Fraud Office] and their own interests in the U.S. legal action.”Akin Gump is also a Clinton Foundation donor.*OTHER DEMOCRATS NATIONAL COVERAGE**O’MALLEY**Martin O’Malley Backs Controversial Cybersecurity Bill<http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/06/10/martin-omalley-backs-controversial-cybersecurity-bill>// US News // Tom Risen – June 10, 2015 *Cybersecurity is getting heightened attention in the wake of what could bethe largest hack of government networks ever, and former Maryland Gov.Martin O’Malley is presenting himself as the best Democratic presidentialcandidate to confront the issue.In an op-ed published Tuesday in Foreign Policy, O’Malley blamedcongressional gridlock for delay of legislation he said could protect U.S.networks. Touting his work supporting cybersecurity investment as governorand as co-chairman of the Council of Governors, he said the data breach ofthe Office of Personnel Management shows “the urgent need to advance a newagenda to improve our nation’s cybersecurity.”The Theodore Roosevelt Federal Building that houses the Office of PersonnelManagement headquarters is shown June 5, 2015 in Washington, D.C. U.S.investigators have said that at least 4 million current and former federalemployees might have had their personal information stolen by Chinesehackers.The hack that affected up to 4 million current and former governmentworkers originated in China, federal investigators have determined, but itis unclear whether the country’s Communist government was involved.O’Malley called on the Senate to respond to the data breach by passing theProtecting Cyber Networks Act, which would offer legal protections tocompanies and enable them to share with the government more informationabout threats to their networks.The White House backs the cybersecurity legislation, which passed the Housein April, but it also wants changes made in the Senate. Along with callingfor amendments to limit the collection and sharing of unnecessary consumerdata, the administration said giving companies too much legal protectionfor failing to protect consumer privacy or to act on hacker threat data”may weaken cybersecurity writ large.” Senate Majority Leader MitchMcConnell, R-Ky., announced on Wednesday that he wants to expedite passageof the Senate version of the bill, called the Cybersecurity InformationSharing Act, by attaching it to the National Defense Authorization Act nowon the Senate floor.Cybersecurity professionals, however, remain convinced both pieces oflegislation could damage privacy rights and endanger networks by sharingunnecessary information.Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., who are bothpresidential candidates, reportedly oppose the Senate bill because of thesimilar concerns about privacy, U.S. News has learned. O’Malley noted theseconcerns in his op-ed when he talked about his support for the ProtectingCyber Networks Act.”After making changes to protect consumer data and ensure the appropriatelevel of legal protection for companies, Congress should pass thislegislation,” O’Malley said in the op-ed. “We need to ensure that privacyissues are directly and adequately addressed in order to build the trustnecessary for businesses and other organizations to work with thegovernment on the safeguards we need to protect both.”McConnell’s move to attach cybersecurity legislation to a must-pass defensefunding bill would damage the process to address privacy concerns, theCenter for Democracy & Technology said in a blog post on Wednesday. Theadvocacy group warned that the Senate cybersecurity bill could enable theexpansion of government surveillance and would not address the conduct ofthe National Security Agency and other agencies. The advocacy group wantsthe bill to discourage government conduct that could damage cybersecurity,including the stockpiling of “zero day” vulnerabilities in consumersoftware that could allow intelligence agencies to monitor or hack networks.”This move would almost certainly stifle necessary debate on the privacyand civil liberties problems in the bill and thwart amendments thatSenators have been crafting to address those problems,” the blog post said.A group of engineers from firms including Twitter and Cisco on April 16sent a letter opposing the bill to House and Senate lawmakers, adding thatsecurity professionals already share threat data while complying withfederal law.”We do not need new legal authorities to share information that helps usprotect systems from future attacks,” the letter reads.Strong national cybersecurity is a bipartisan issue likely to be advocatedby all presidential candidates, but Congress has failed to pass acomprehensive bill on the issue in recent years because of concerns relatedto privacy protection. Support for stronger privacy on the issue could be away for a candidate to stand apart in the 2016 election.*2016 hopeful O’Malley steps out on cybersecurity<http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/244504-2016-hopeful-omalley-steps-out-on-cybersecurity>// The Hill // Cory Bennett – June 10, 2015 *Martin O’Malley is trying to make his mark as the Democratic presidentialcandidate most focused on cybersecurity.The former Maryland governor on Tuesday penned an essay for Foreign Policythat laid out his cyber agenda in the wake of the recent breach thatexposed 4 million federal workers’ records at the Office of PersonnelManagement (OPM).“A new agenda is urgently needed to improve our nation’s cybersecurity,”O’Malley said.The OPM hack has suddenly thrust cybersecurity into the 2016 election.GOP hopefuls have used the breach to lambaste President Obama’s policy onChina, chastising him for not standing up to the Asian power.But candidates seeking the Democratic nomination have been mostly mum oncybersecurity. Neither former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, thepresumptive front-runner, nor Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) have made anissue of the OPM breach.O’Malley’s essay wasn’t directly critical of Obama, but he did argue thegovernment needs to better promote collaboration between the public andprivate sector, while also boosting funds for state-level initiatives tobolster the nation’s cyber defenses.“Greater security requires greater investment,” O’Malley said. “Investingmore resources in cybersecurity is an economic and national securitypriority.”He pointed to the stalled cyber bill in Congress that would shieldcompanies from legal liability when sharing data with the government abouthackers. By enhancing this information exchange, the bill’s backers believethe country can better understand and defend against cyber threats.But concerns the measure will simply shuttle more private data tointelligence agencies have caused it languish in the upper chamber. SenateRepublicans are now trying to attach the offering to the annual defensespending bill in an effort to speed up its timeline.“We need to ensure that privacy issues are directly and adequatelyaddressed in order to build the trust necessary for businesses and otherorganizations to work with the government on the safeguards we need toprotect both,” O’Malley said.O’Malley also promoted state-level cyber investment, recalling his time asco-chairman of the Council of Governors.“We pushed for every state’s National Guard to develop cybersecurity units,which could be established quickly and affordably, and tap the skill setsof civilians,” he said. “The federal government should support theseefforts with financial and technical assistance.”He contended that he applied all of these agenda items during his time asMaryland governor. He pointed to CyberMaryland, “an initiative to attractand convene new cybersecurity firms.”“We targeted more than 40,000 state employees for cybersecurity trainingand conducted vulnerability assessments to test resilience to attacks,” hesaid. “We also created a cybersecurity tax credit and launched a program totrain 1,000 workers for the industry.”Cybersecurity was not a major campaign issue in the 2014 cycle, so itremains to be seen whether this flare-up lasts into the heat of the 2016election season.“Our digital information and networks are critical to our economic mightand national security,” O’Malley said. “We should treat them like theprecious resources that they are.”*SANDERS**Bernie Sanders Denies Internet Claim on Dual Israeli Citizenship<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/10/bernie-sanders-denies-internet-claim-on-dual-israeli-citizenship/>// NYT // Gerry Mullany – June 10, 2015*Senator Bernie Sanders declared in a radio interview on Wednesday that “Ido not have dual citizenship with Israel,” batting away an incorrectassertion that has cropped up on the Internet.The Democratic presidential hopeful was appearing on the Diane Rehm Show onpublic radio when the topic came up. At one point, Ms. Rehm said to Mr.Sanders, “Senator, you have dual citizenship with Israel.”To which Mr. Sanders replied, “I do not have dual citizenship with Israel.”He then added, “I’m an American.”“I don’t know where that question came from,” he said“I am an American citizen, and I have visited Israel on a couple ofoccasions,” Mr. Sanders continued. “No, I’m an American citizen, period.”Mr. Sanders, who is Jewish, blamed the misinformation on “the nonsense thatgoes on in the Internet.”Mr. Sanders then noted that his father came to the United States fromPoland “at the age of 17 without a nickel in his pocket.”Ms. Rehm, who herself comes from an ethnic Arab heritage of Greek OrthodoxSyrian background, also asked Mr. Sanders if there were “members ofCongress who do have dual citizenship or is that part of the fable?” Mr.Sanders replied that he did not know.Internet searches provide numerous lists incorrectly showing scores ofmembers of Congress and high-level members of the Obama administrationholding dual American-Israeli citizenship. Ms. Rehm did not say where shegot her information.*De Blasio to Skip Clinton Rally, Praises Rival Sanders<http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/06/10/de-blasio-to-skip-clinton-rally-praises-rival-sanders/>// WSJ // Erica Orden – June 10, 2015 *One of Hillary Clinton’s rivals for the 2016 Democratic presidentialnomination received an informal boost Wednesday from a curious source: Mrs.Clinton’s former campaign manager, New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.Mr. de Blasio, who managed Mrs. Clinton’s winning 2000 campaign for Senateand supported her 2008 presidential bid, said at an unrelated newsconference that “I’ve always liked what I heard from Bernie Sanders,” theindependent Vermont senator who is running for the Democratic 2016nomination.“I think Bernie Sanders is a great senator, is a great voice for a fairsociety and a fair economy,” he said.Mr. de Blasio, a Democrat, also said that he wouldn’t attend Mrs. Clinton’scampaign rally on Saturday in New York City, on Roosevelt Island.“I’m waiting to hear, as I’ve said, her larger vision for addressing incomeinequality,” Mr. de Blasio said when asked if he would attend her June 13event. “I look forward to that.”Mr. de Blasio has sought lately to cast himself as a national voice forliberalism.A spokesman for Mrs. Clinton didn’t immediately respond a question aboutwhether Mr. de Blasio was invited to the rally, nor to a request forcomment on the mayor’s remarks about Mr. Sanders.The mayor also praised Mrs. Clinton more extensively on Wednesday than hehas since the start of her campaign.“I’ve been very impressed by the comment she’s given so far on a host ofissues,’’ he said.“I saw her speech on voting rights — it was very powerful,” he said. “Ithought her vision for that was exactly right. I’m very impressed by hercriminal justice reform speech. What I am waiting to hear about is thefight against income inequality, how we raise wages and benefits.”Mrs. Clinton last week proposed that Americans be automatically registeredto vote when they turn 18, unless they opt out, and called for an expansionof early-voting opportunities across the country.Mr. de Blasio has had a lengthy relationship with both Mrs. Clinton andformer President Bill Clinton, in whose administration he worked as anofficial at the Department of Housing and Urban Development.This isn’t the first time Mr. de Blasio has distanced himself from Mrs.Clinton’s campaign or expressed reservations about her platform. In recentmonths he has said repeatedly that he hasn’t decided whether to endorse her2016 presidential bid.In April, Mr. de Blasio said in an interview on NBC that he wouldn’tendorse her “until I see an actual vision of where they want to go.”“She’s a tremendous public servant,” he told NBC. “I think she is one ofthe most qualified people to ever run for this office. And by the way,thoroughly vetted, we can say that. But we need to see the substance.”*Sanders wants war spending paid for<http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/244587-sanders-wants-to-pay-for-war-fund>// The Hill // Jordain Carney – June 10, 2015 *Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) wants to require Congress to pay for anyspending in the Pentagon’s war fund.Sanders, who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, is offeringan amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that wouldrequire that lawmakers offset spending in the Overseas ContingencyOperations (OCO) fund by raising new revenues.Congress isn’t currently required to pay for any spending through OCO. Thewar fund also isn’t subjected to the congressionally mandated budget capsunder the sequester.Sanders has long criticized Congress for not paying for wars, and a factsheet from his office says that the Iraq and Afghanistan wars “were put onthe nation’s credit card while the president cut taxes for millionaires andbillionaires at the same time.”The 2016 contender’s amendment to the defense policy bill comes after hecalled for a “war tax” earlier this year.Sanders wanted to include a new tax on millionaires to finance thecountry’s wars as part of a budget resolution.Critics argue that the fund, meant to pay for the wars in Iraq andAfghanistan and now financing operations against the Islamic State in Iraqand Syria, has turned into a slush fund for the Pentagon.Sanders faces an uphill path to getting his amendment approved as part ofthe defense policy bill. Though Democrats have taken aim at an additional$38 billion in war funding included in the defense policy bill, they failedto gain enough support to fence off the money until Congress reaches a dealon the budget caps under the sequester.*Bernie Sanders, Gun Nut<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2015/05/bernie_sanders_on_guns_vermont_independent_voted_against_gun_control_for.html>// Slate // Mark Joseph Stern – June 10, 2015 *When Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders jumped into the 2016 presidential race, hewas widely hailed as a far-left socialist who would appeal to the liberalwing of the Democratic Party. A liberal challenge to Hillary Clinton, saidPolitico. True progressives’ liberal alternative, trumpetedFiveThirtyEight. But before liberal Democrats flock to Sanders, they shouldremember that the Vermont senator stands firmly to Clinton’s right on oneissue of overwhelming importance to the Democratic base: gun control.During his time in Congress, Sanders opposed several moderate gun controlbills. He also supported the most odious NRA–backed law in recentmemory—one that may block Sandy Hook families from winning a lawsuitagainst the manufacturer of the gun used to massacre their children.Sanders, an economic populist and middle-class pugilist, doesn’t talk muchabout guns on the campaign trail. But his voting record paints the pictureof a legislator who is both skeptical of gun control and invested in theinterests of gun owners—and manufacturers. In 1993, then-Rep. Sanders votedagainst the Brady Act, which mandated federal background checks for gunpurchasers and restricted felons’ access to firearms. As a senator, Sanderssupported bills to allow firearms in checked bags on Amtrak trains andblock funding to any foreign aid organization that registered or taxedAmericans’ guns. Sanders is dubious that gun control could help prevent gunviolence, telling one interviewer after Sandy Hook that “if you passed thestrongest gun control legislation tomorrow, I don’t think it will have aprofound effect on the tragedies we have seen.” (He has since endorsed somemodest gun control measures.)None of these views are particularly shocking for a Vermont representative:Sanders’ deep-blue state has both high gun ownership and incredibly lax gunlaws, and it’s perfectly logical for the senator to support hisconstituents’ firearms enthusiasm. And a close friend of Sanders once saidthat the senator “thinks there’s an elitism in the anti-gun movement.”The act’s primary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded.But Sanders’ vote for a different kind of pro-gun bill is more puzzling—andprofoundly disturbing. In 2005, a Republican-dominated Congress passed theProtection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). This law doesn’t protectgun owners; it protects gun manufacturers, distributors, dealers, andimporters. The PLCAA was the No. 1 legislative priority of the NationalRifle Association for years, because it shields gun makers and dealers frommost liability when their firearms are used criminally. It is one of themost noxious pieces of pro-gun legislation ever passed. And Bernie Sandersvoted for it. (Sanders’ campaign has not replied to a request for comment.)Because the PLCAA deals with tort law—not a topic of great interest formost Americans—it didn’t stir much outrage when first passed. But the act’sprimary purpose is as simple as it is cold-blooded. Every state imposesliability on manufacturers who are negligent in their production and saleof products. If I crash my Prius because its accelerator malfunctions, Ican sue Toyota for negligently manufacturing a faulty pedal. If my childdismembers himself with a blender at Sears, I can sue Sears for negligentlyleaving that blender within a child’s reach. If I get stabbed by a teenagerwith a switchblade, I might be able to sue the pawn shop owner whoillegally sold a knife to a minor.Before the PLCAA, most states imposed some form of tort liability on gunmakers and sellers. If a gun manufacturer made an assault rifle that couldslaughter dozens of people in a few seconds, for instance, one of itsvictims might sue the company for negligently making a gun that couldforeseeably be used for mass murder. If a gun seller sold a gun to acustomer without performing any kind of background check—and then the buyeropened fire on the subway—his victims might sue that seller for negligentlyproviding a gun to a mentally unstable person. The standards in each statediffered, but the bottom line remained the same: Victims of gun violenceand their families could recover financially from the people and companieswho negligently enabled gun violence.The PLCAA changed all that. Remarkably, the act wiped out gun liabilitylaws in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a handful ofnarrow exceptions. (So much for states’ rights.) Thanks to the law, victimsof mass shootings are barred from suing the companies that produced awartime weapon that no civilian could ever need. With few exceptions,victims cannot sue a gun seller for negligently providing a semiautomaticweapon to a lunatic who shoots them in a movie theater. Even if a jurydecides a gun maker or seller should be liable, the PLCAA invalidates itsverdict. The law tramples upon states’ rights, juries’ rights, andfundamental precepts of America’s civil justice system. And it receivedBernie Sanders’ support—in both 2003 (when it was first introduced) and2005 (when it finally passed).Every few years, the families of mass shooting victims take gun makers tocourt for creating a weapon seemingly designed to kill as many people aspossible in as short a time as possible. Every time, they run headfirstinto the PLCAA. Right now, the families of Sandy Hook victims are searchingfor a loophole in the law, so they can sue Bushmaster for making the gunthat sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds.They will probably fail.Several liberal congressional representatives have recently spoken outagainst the PLCAA, and if Democrats retake both houses of Congress, theymay make repealing the law a priority. Hillary Clinton, who voted againstthe act as a senator, would almost certainly sign a repeal bill. Would aPresident Bernie Sanders? Until he says otherwise, we have every reason tobelieve the ostensible progressive hero would stand behind the vilelegislation he championed just a decade ago.*Lead, follow or get out of the way: Bernie Sanders opts for latter inIslamic State fight<http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/10/bernie-sanders-opts-us-get-out-way-islamic-state-f/>// The Washington Times // S.A. Miller – June 10, 2015 *Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernard Sanders said Wednesday thatthe United States should not take a leading role in the war against theterrorist army known as Islamic State.He said Middle East countries should “step up” and lead the fight to turnback the advancing Islamist terrorists in Iraq.“At the end of the day … I do not believe the United States can or shouldlead the effort in that part of the world. What is taking place now is awar for the soul of Islam,” Mr. Sanders said on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show.Mr. Sanders, an avowed socialist from Vermont, said that countries such asSaudi Arabia, which has the third-largest defense budget in the world,Turkey, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates should “step up to the plateand lead.”He said the United States and Western countries would play a supportingrole.Mr. Sanders‘ comments come as President Obama is considering a Pentagonproposal to send 400 more U.S. troops to beef up the training of Sunniforces in Iraq, hoping to turn back advances by the Islamic State, which isalso known by the acronyms ISIS or ISIL.The proposed build-up follows criticism of Mr. Obama saying Monday that hedoesn’t yet have a “complete strategy” to combat the Islamic State.“I think everyone understands ISIS is a barbaric organization and that theymust be defeated,” said Mr. Sanders, though he added it wasn’t worth thecost of getting the U.S. drawn into another Middle East war.“But here is my nightmare, and I see it moving forward every day,” he said.“You have a lot of Republicans who apparently did not learn anything fromthe never-ending war in Afghanistan, learned nothing from what happened inIraq and want us in perpetual warfare in the Middle East. I’m stronglyopposed to that.”Mr. Sanders‘ is waging a long-shot campaign to overtake front-runnerHillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic nomination.*CHAFEE**Chafee: Hillary is ‘more like the Republicans'<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/244532-chafee-hillary-is-more-like-the-republicans>// The Hill // Jesse Byrnes – June 10, 2015 *Democratic presidential candidate Lincoln Chafee on Wednesday likenedHillary Clinton to a Republican, citing her hawkish positions on foreignpolicy.”Really the main difference is our approach to the world,” Chafee said inan interview Wednesday on “Fox and Friends,” mentioning ongoing conflictsin the Middle East.”She’s more like the Republicans,” Chafee said. “My argument is, you won’thave a choice if Secretary Clinton is the Democratic nominee because she’sso similar to the Republicans.”He echoed that sentiment in another interview on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,”suggesting his party nominate “someone that differs from the Republicanapproach to the world.””Where we’re going in the world — her tenure as secretary of State, hervote for the Iraq war — kind of indicates a similarity to the Republicancandidates that are running,” he said on MSNBC.The former Rhode Island governor is mounting a long-shot bid againstClinton, who is running well ahead of all her rivals for the Democraticpresidential nomination.Chafee has dished up relentless criticism of Clinton’s 2002 vote as asenator authorizing the Iraq war, and has described her muscular approachto foreign policy as similar to the neo-conservatives who were part of theGeorge W. Bush administration.Last week he also discussed “questionable ethics practices” that havefollowed Clinton over the years.”I think that our candidates should stick to the ideas that draw a contrastbetween our party and our party’s agenda and the Republicans,” DemocraticNational Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.) said on CNNwhen pressed whether Chafee’s comments were appropriate.Chafee somewhat doubled down Wednesday over his criticism of Clinton.”Well obviously she has a credibility problem over a long history ofethical questions, most recently with the emails and the Clinton Foundationdonations,” he said on MSNBC.”But really my main criticism, if I could, is in her approach to the world.And that’s really what I want to talk about in the campaign.”*The hidden history behind Lincoln Chafee’s metric proposal<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/the-hidden-history-behind-lincoln-chafees-metric-proposal>// MSNBC // Alex Seitz-Wald – June 10, 2015 *When Democrat Lincoln Chafee told a group of mostly young journalists andeven younger college students that if elected president he would convertthe U.S. to the metric system, the response in the room was laughter.Virtually every other country in the world uses the metric system. But forthis millennial audience, the idea of the U.S. making a switch seemed onpar with the moon colonies of Newt Gingrich’s 2012 presidential campaign.For critics who have followed Chafee’s political career more closely inRhode Island, it was entirely in character. “He is very consistent in hisbizarro world. That was not a bad day. It’ll come up every day,” said SteveLaffey, who challenged Chafee in the 2006 Republican Senate primary.(Chafee was a Republican until 2007.) “He’s a good guy, he’s just odd,”Laffey added.Chafee framed his push for a switch to metric as a way for the U.S. toimprove its status in a world where every country except Liberia andMyanmar uses the metric system. Despite that goal, it’s hard to find anyone— including metric advocates — taking Chafee’s proposal seriously.That’s because measurement is woven into to the most fundamental parts oflife, from how Americans cook our food (in Fahrenheit), commute to work (inmiles), build our homes (in feet), and clothe ourselves (in inches). Itwould take an enormous psychological change and a huge expenditure ofpolitical capital to convert a country of 315 million people to metric.That was, in fact, the argument against converting made in the 1970s byformer Rhode Island Sen. John Chafee, Lincoln Chafee’s father, who said thegovernment had far more important issues to tackle than metrication, as theconversion is known.In addition, even advocates for the metric system concede that Americanexceptionalism and its cultural identity are bad fits for a francophoneinternational measurement system.“We have this thing where the metric system is seen as un-American. It’s areally emotional issue for some people,” said Paul Trusten of the U.S.Metric Association, which has been leading the charge for metrication forthe past 99 years.When the Federal Highway Administration announced in 1977 that it was goingto start putting kilometers on signs, it was inundated with 6,000 publicletters, many from people who saw the system as communist plot. “Thischange to the Metric System is just part of the Communist Diversionary tokeep our country in an uproar,” wrote a man from Kansas City.Conservatives and even anti-establishment liberals clubbed Jimmy Carterwith metric, and when Reagan essentially killed the conversion in 1982, theboard responsible for pushing metrication conceded there was “overwhelming”opposition.Still, Trusten is glad Chafee is raising the issue. ”It’s been silent forso long, and now people are talking about it,” he said.For those familiar with the history of the metric system in the U.S.,Chafee’s idea is both more and less serious than it might appear.Technically, but only technically, metric has been the official U.S.measurement standard for more than 100 years. In 1893, after a fire inLondon damaged the original British Imperial Yard — the physical metal barthat determined for the world how long three feet should be — the U.S.federal agency in charge of measuring stuff started defining U.S.measurements in relation to their metric counterparts.Since then, a foot is officially defined as 0.3048 of a meter. A pound is453.59237 grams. “We’ve actually been on the metric system since 1893, in asense,” Trusten said.For American metric advocates, widespread adoption seemed tantalizinglyjust over the horizon for decades or more. The closest the U.S. came toconversion was in 1975, as other countries were going metric and tradegroups, scientists, engineers and others successfully lobbied Congress tofollow suit. Two days before Christmas that year, President Gerald Fordsigned a law making metric “the preferred system of weights and measuresfor United States trade and commerce.”“To say that this legislation is historic is an understatement,” Forddeclared. But there were warning signs, even then.The next four presidents offered lip service instead of real action to moveforward with metric. Finally, in the face of political opposition andstatus quo bias, momentum petered out to almost zero kilogram meters persecond (the metric measure for momentum).The U.S. Metric Association maintains a tally every time metrication ismentioned in the press and academic journals. The graph elegantly shows therise and fall of the metric movement in America. Like a cartoon mountain,discussion of metrication starts near zero around the turn of the 20thcentury, then peaked in the mid-1970s, before falling back towards zero bythe turn of the turn of the next century.In 1982, Reagan defunded and abolished the U.S. Metric Board, which wassupposed to spearhead conversion. That signaled the beginning of the endfor metric conversion, even though Reagan six years later signed an omnibuslaw that, tucked deep inside, contained a measure stipulating the metricsystem “be used, to the extent economically feasible, in Federal agency’s’procurements, grants, and other business-related activities.”So some parts of the federal government have adopted metric, others stilluse the old system. A federal law requires consumer products packages tolist both.That helps explain why wine comes in 750-milliliter bottles, while beercomes in 12-ounce cans. Nyquil comes in 8-ounce bottles, but its activeingredients are measured in milligrams. Soda is available in both customaryand metric, with 20-ounce and 2-liter bottles.But widespread adoption never regained momentum, even after a conversionerror between inches and centimeters was blamed for the crash of NASA’s$125 million Mars Climate Orbiter in 1999.Adam Toobin, who founded Students for Chafee at Brown University in RhodeIsland, Chafee’s alma mater and the school where he taught classes betweenstints as senator and governor, acknowledged metric may not be the mostobvious way to fire up young people.“I support it in theory, totally,” he said. “It’s not the perfect issue.The Internet would make a lot of fun with that one.”*OTHER**Clinton, O’Malley, Sanders and Webb to attend Iowa dinner<http://www.kwwl.com/story/29288800/clinton-omalley-sanders-and-webb-to-attend-iowa-dinner>// AP – June 10, 2015 *Four Democratic presidential hopefuls will appear at an Iowa DemocraticParty event next month.The state party organization announced Wednesday that their “Hall of Fame”dinner will be attended by former Secretary of State Hillary RodhamClinton, former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sandersand former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb. All but Webb have officially announcedthey are running for president.The event will be held July 17 in Cedar Rapids. Clinton’s Iowa spokeswomanLily Adams confirmed that this is the first announced multi-candidate eventfor Clinton, the front-runner in the field. Some other Democraticcandidates have previously appeared together.Iowa Democrats have seen less big candidate round-ups than Republicans,given the smaller field of declared and potential contenders.*Warren shames both parties on college affordability<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/elizabeth-warren-college-affordability-democrats-republicans-118824.html>// Politico // Allie Grasgreen – June 10, 2015 *Progressive hero Sen. Elizabeth Warren on Wednesday hammered bothRepublicans and Democrats in an urgent call to make college more affordable.Warren, a divisive figure who so far has had little success with her ownlegislative proposal to allow borrowers to refinance their federal studentloans, seized the momentum of an issue that is resonating on the campaigntrail to tell her colleagues on both sides of the aisle to get past theirown hang-ups.Story Continued BelowWarren spread around the blame, hitting states for divesting in highereducation, Congress for letting resources taper off while the feds profitoff student debt, and the Education Department for lax enforcement oftroublesome loan servicers and for-profit colleges.“It starts with courage — the courage of both Democrats and Republicans toadmit how much is wrong and that the other side has a real point,” shesaid, according to prepared remarks to be delivered at the headquarters ofthe American Federation of Teachers. “We can do it if Republicans admitthat we will never have affordable college without investing more resourcesin education, and if Democrats admit that we will never have affordablecollege without demanding real accountability in exchange for thoseinvestments.”Warren’s comments are a clear indicator that Democrats plan to keep pushingcollege affordability in Congress and in the presidential race — an issuethat Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager recently called “what voters arelooking for.”Warren also pointed, aggressively, at colleges and universities forexacerbating the nation’s student debt problem, which is about $1.2trillion and climbing.She’s struck a similar tone at Senate education committee hearings of late,grilling college presidents who want Congress to ease regulations orincrease federal aid, but won’t commit to lowering tuition in return.“Resources matter — but so do incentives,” Warren said.Following the economic recession, higher education bore the brunt of publicfunding cuts. Even now, colleges in almost every state are spending lessper student than they were in 2008 — leading to program cuts, tuitionincreases and a heightened reliance on federal aid.But colleges can’t blame governments for their problems, Warren said. Shetook a swing at schools that “have doubled down in a competition forstudents that involves fancy dorms, high-end student centers, climbingwalls and lazy rivers — paying for those amenities with still highertuition and student fees.”Although Warren came down hard on the department — nothing new for theconsumer watchdog, a seasoned critic of the agency’s contracts andoversight — much of it will likely ring true. Just this week, Ted Mitchell,the top higher education official at the department, noted the risk ofstates supplanting their own funds with federal dollars through initiativesdesigned to increase college access and completion.President Barack Obama’s free community college proposal, for example,requires states to pick up part of the tab.It’s less clear how an increasingly popular “debt-free college” movement —of which Warren is a part — would have states contribute.But with a move in that direction, Democrats are taking their focus onstudent debt from the 2014 midterm elections to an even broader, moreprogressive level.High-profile Republicans have yet to come up with a proposal for reducingcollege costs that stands up to Democrats’ sweeping campaign promises: 2016contender Sen. Marco Rubio has offered several plans for reforming thestudent loan system, for example. And Republicans in Congress worked withDemocrats in 2013 to strike a bipartisan deal that has reduced student loaninterest rates in recent years.But none of their proposals have the allure of Democrats’ plan for collegewith no student debt at all.Some Republican candidates, including Rubio, meanwhile, have track recordsof supporting for-profit colleges that could become liabilities. Rubiowrote the Education Department in the summer of 2014 to ask the departmentto show “leniency” towards the now-defunct Corinthian Colleges after thedepartment placed the for-profit under strict oversight.Jeb Bush also addressed the for-profit trade group Association of PrivateSector Colleges and Universities in 2014, telling the crowd that “we mustempower people to make choices about their education.”Warren reiterated today that she wants to tighten the rules on for-profits.In other cases, potential Republican candidates such as Scott Walker haveproposed slashing state higher education budgets — another liability on thecampaign trail.Earlier Wednesday, Warren appeared with other members of the CongressionalProgressive Caucus to highlight the growing interest from Democrats in thedebt-free college idea. Senate and House resolutions supporting the concepthave a combined 62 co-sponsors including Sen. Chuck Schumer and Rep. BobbyScott, the ranking Democrat on the House education committee.There, Rep. Keith Ellison told a crowd of debt-free advocates to “get readyto get your marching shoes on.”Democratic presidential hopefuls are raising the issue on the campaigntrail. Though Clinton hasn’t offered any specifics, liberals swooned whenshe said last month in Iowa, “We have to deal with the indebtedness — totry to move toward making college as debt-free as possible.”Former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley recently told supporters nationwidethat “every student should be able to go to college debt-free.”And Sen. Bernie Sanders actually issued a concrete proposal, in the form oflegislation that would make tuition free at public colleges.Warren’s remarks come just days after the department offered a long-awaitedplan to help thousands of students at shuttered for-profit college giantCorinthian Colleges deal with millions in student loan debt. More than adozen congressional Democrats pushed the agency to forgive the debt ofthose students and others whose colleges may have committed fraud. (Thedepartment found that Corinthian falsified job placement rates, and thenow-bankrupt company is also under investigation by several federalagencies and state attorneys general.)But taxpayers will be stuck with the bill, to the tune of anywhere frommore than $500 million, in the case of Corinthian students whom thedepartment has already deemed eligible for loan forgiveness, to upward of$3.5 billion, the total loan portfolio of students who attended one of thecollege’s campuses in the last five years.Warren also delivered the speech as work is heating up on reauthorizationof the Higher Education Act, the massive bill governing federal financialaid and other college regulations.In her speech, the Massachusetts senator endorsed some policies that arebeing considered in a process that Senate education committee ChairmanLamar Alexander insists will be bipartisan.For example, Warren plugged her legislation that would require colleges toreimburse some portion of defaulted student loans, in theory encouraginginstitutions to “pay attention to rising costs and failing students.” Suchrisk-sharing concepts have gained traction from congressional Republicans,too.The federal government should simplify the application process for federalstudent aid, she said — as Alexander and other members from both partieshave said. Even the White House is on board with that one.Other ideas are less likely to find broad support.Warren floated a maintenance of effort rule for states, requiring them tomaintain minimum investments in schools. That idea emerged at areauthorization hearing last week — but Alexander shot it down, fast.And, unsurprisingly, Warren touted her student loan refinancinglegislation, which the Senate has blocked twice. Republicans have staunchlyopposed lowering interest rates for existing borrowers, though Warren notessome states — like North Dakota, under Republican Gov. Jack Dalrymple —have done so on their own.Some research has argued student loan debt is dragging down the economy,preventing borrowers from starting businesses and buying homes, cars andthe like.But that notion has its critics. At a hearing last week, for instance,Alexander asked why nobody’s panicking about the comparable cumulativelevel of car loan debt.It’s more familiar and less intimidating, witnesses said.*GOP**BUSH**How Jeb Bush’s campaign ran off course before it even began<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-jeb-bushs-campaign-ran-off-course-before-it-even-began/2015/06/10/386331e6-0eb6-11e5-adec-e82f8395c032_story.html>// WaPo // Ed O’Keefe and Robert Costa – June 10, 2015 *When asked to pinpoint where Jeb Bush’s presidential effort began runninginto trouble, many confidants utter a single word: Dallas.Mike Murphy, Bush’s political alter ego, decided early on to hold regularsenior staff meetings at an unusual location: a Hyatt hotel inside theterminal at Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. The idea was that itwas a central and relatively inexpensive gathering place for a teamscattered from Los Angeles, where Murphy lives, to Miami, where thewould-be candidate resides.It went fine at first but quickly became an awkward routine. Donors andother Republicans found the setup ungainly for a campaign-in-waiting thatwas supposed to be based in Florida.Older Bush hands also grew unhappy with rapid hiring by new advisers, andrelationships frayed, according to Bush associates. And as the formerFlorida governor began to founder on the trail and in the polls, thediscussions flared into arguments about how to divvy up money and resourcesbetween Bush’s allied super PAC and his official campaign.“These things are always tug of wars,” Thomas D. Rath, a Bush family friendin New Hampshire, said of the initial sessions. “It’s almost like the firstday of school, everyone trying to get to the right place and find the rightseats.”Bush talks to the media after attending a house party in March in Dover,N.H., in March. (Matt McClain/The Washington Post)The airport huddles were just one sign among many of a political operationgoing off course — disjointed in message and approach, torn betweenfactions and more haphazard than it appeared on the surface. Bush’s firstsix months as an all-but-declared candidate have been defined by a seriesof miscalculations, leaving his standing considerably diminished ahead ofhis formal entry into the race on Monday.In interviews this week, dozens of Bush backers and informed Republicans —most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to commentcandidly — described an overly optimistic, even haughty exploratoryoperation. Strategic errors were exacerbated by unexpected stumbles by thewould-be candidate and internal strife within his team, culminating in astaff shake-up this week.The original premise of Bush’s candidacy — that a bold, fast start wouldscare off potential rivals and help him overcome the burden of his lastname — has proved to be misguided.His operation’s ability to rake in large checks also fueled inflatedexpectations. Supporters acknowledged this week that an allied super PACwas likely to fall short — perhaps substantially — of predictions that itwould bring in $100 million in the first half of the year.On the stump, Bush has stuck to his pledge not to shift to the right to winthe primary, but his middle-of-the-road positions on immigration andeducation have come off more as out of step with the base of his party thanshrewdly pragmatic. His wonky question-and-answer exchanges with voterssometimes resemble college lectures rather than a friendly appeal for votes.The troubles have eroded the image Bush has sought to present as the oneRepublican uniquely ready for the presidential stage. He has slipped inpolls from presumed front-runner to one of several candidates jumbledtoward the top of an increasingly crowded field.“We’ve learned that the prospect of a big financial advantage is not goingto keep people out of the race and that the notion of a new face isstronger than we might have thought,” Vin Weber, an outside Bush adviser,said in an interview. “That requires modest adjustments in strategy, notwholesale changes.”After weeks of bad press, “donors were getting a little edgy,” Weber said.“No one is ready to jump ship. Nobody has lost heart. But they have watchedother candidates rise in the polls.”Speaking Wednesday in Berlin during an overseas trip, Bush expressedconfidence. “It’s June, for crying out loud, so we’ve got a long way togo,” he said, adding later: “I’m going to compete everywhere. If I’m acandidate, there’s no fifth-place, you know, kind of mentality in my mind.”Forced to make up lost ground, Bush, his aides and his super-PAC allies arenow preparing plans to attack the records and experience of his GOPcompetition, especially Sens. Marco Rubio (Fla.) and Rand Paul (Ky.) andWisconsin Gov. Scott Walker. A summer originally envisioned as a season ofslow and warm introductions to voters is now poised to be a battle as Bushtries to recapture his place atop the field.“The Bushes have always underestimated the depth of the base’sdissatisfaction with their policies, and they take the criticismpersonally,” Laura Ingraham, a conservative talk-radio host, said in aninterview. “Jeb has to try to understand the reasons why conservatives haveproblems with him instead of crowing about how principled he is.”Aides bristle at what they consider the media’s relentless focus on Bush’spersonal and professional past. They say that out on the campaign trail, invisits to more than a dozen states, he has been doing exactly what heshould.“Interacting with people on the road who deal with real issues . . . that’swhat brings true joy to Jeb,” Sally Bradshaw, a longtime consultant, saidin a recent e-mail.Bush started with an aggressive series of steps late last year and earlythis year— a kind of “shock and awe” entry that caught fellow contenders bysurprise. The moves were designed to send an unambiguous signal tofundraisers and party activists and to reinforce a natural advantage Bushhad with establishment donors.At the same time, Bush’s inner circle operated on the theory that there waslittle that could be gained by trying to speed up the political clock andthat most voters in early states would not begin paying attention untillater in the year.Bush revived a 650-member alumni network of aides who worked for him asgovernor and recruited 21 veterans of his father and brother’sadministrations to advise him on foreign policy. He hired state directorsin the first four early states, aides for outreach to evangelicals andHispanics, and a spokeswoman dedicated to fielding questions from theSpanish-language press.As Bush travels the country, he has fielded more than 900 questions fromdonors, reporters and voters, according to aides. He has maintained a busyschedule that stretches from the early-voting states of Iowa, NewHampshire, South Carolina and Nevada — where conservative Republicansremain skeptical — to places visited less frequently at this early stage bypresidential candidates, including Denver, Seattle and Puerto Rico.Despite those efforts, recent surveys put Bush in a five-way tie for thelead. Recent polls touted by his advisers give him a wide lead in NewHampshire, but others taken nationally and in the early states put himbehind Rubio and Walker.Sensing Bush’s vulnerabilities, Ohio Gov. John Kasich this week hired twoveteran GOP operatives as he prepares to launch a bid and make a play forthe same donors Bush has already wooed.“I didn’t think I was going to be back up here again, because frankly Ithought Jeb was just going to suck all the air out of the room, and it justhasn’t happened,” Kasich told New Hampshire business leaders last week.Bush dispatched one possible rival early when Mitt Romney decided not torun again. His fast entrance also bruised the chances of New Jersey Gov.Chris Christie, who is still pondering a bid. They did not regard Rubio asa likely opponent but were proved wrong when the young, telegenic CubanAmerican jumped in the race.Early on, there were signs that Bush’s ability to command huge amounts ofcash for his allied Right to Rise super PAC was emerging as the dominantcharacteristic of his potential candidacy. His team laid outpresidential-style goals for fundraisers, asking them to hit goals of$50,000, $100,000, $250,000 or $500,000 by April 17. The money was flowinginto the super PAC so rapidly that his advisers issued an edict — nocontributions of more than $1 million, for now.“He was more of a super-PAC candidate than a retail candidate,” said oneRepublican close to the Bush operation. “The candidate hasn’t been outstumping for a while. When was the last time he’s asked anyone for a vote?It’s been quite a few years.”Those concerns, simmering under the surface, finally boiled over one weekin mid-May with a series of interviews focused on the most obvious issueimaginable for a Bush: the Iraq war.Starting with an interview aired on Fox News on Monday, May 11, Bushstruggled over four days to answer whether he would have authorized the warbegun by his brother given what is known now about bad intelligence. Hefirst said yes, then said “maybe,” and then refused to answer altogether.Finally that Thursday he attempted to settle the issue at a campaign-styleevent in Arizona. “Here’s the deal,” he said. “If we’re all supposed toanswer hypothetical questions — knowing what we know now, what would youhave done — I would have not engaged. I would not have gone into Iraq.”The episode served to crystallize some of the key concerns about Bush — hisreluctance to criticize or distance himself from the unpopular policies ofGeorge W. Bush, and his tendency toward prickliness if pushed.“We should have had that answer nailed down,” one donor said. “There werepeople who were really shaken by that.”By the time major party donors gathered in Dallas in late May for a meetingof the Republican Governors Association’s executive roundtable, theoverwhelming sentiment was that Jeb Bush was less formidable than manythought he was going to be, according to several participants. Some flatlystated that they did not believe he could win the nomination.People close to Bush started getting anxious, according to a top partyfundraiser with close ties to his advisers — and things began todeteriorate inside the Bush team.David Kochel, an Iowa-based strategist and former Romney aide, had beenbrought aboard in January as a de facto campaign manager. As the monthswore on, Bradshaw and Murphy became jittery about Kochel’s concentration onstaffing issues rather than deflecting the shots being thrown Bush’s way.Meanwhile, Bush was growing chummy with Danny Diaz, a 39-year-oldWashington native and onetime plumber, who was spotted several times on thetrail while Kochel ground away at headquarters near the Miami airport.By late May, Kochel’s grip on power had eroded. Bradshaw and Murphy movedwith the candidate’s blessing to push Kochel into a lesser role and ensurethey alone had final say about the allocation of resources. The candidate,urged on by his allies and donors, suggested that a more aggressiveapproach was necessary.On Monday, just as Bush prepared to leave for Europe, Diaz was named thecampaign manager.Friends and donors are hopeful that Bush has corrected course and that hissubstantial resources will carry him further than others.“He’s going to try to do it his way without acting with every change in thewind, without doing full face-plants on the pandering,” said Tallahasseelobbyist John “Mac” Stipanovich, a Bush ally.*Jeb Bush’s ‘It’s June!’ argument has two major flaws<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/10/jeb-bushs-its-june-argument-has-two-big-flaws/?wprss=rss_the-fix&tid=sm_tw_pp>// WaPo // Philip Bump – June 10, 2015*”It’s June, for crying out loud,” Jeb Bush said with apparent exasperationon Wednesday, “so we’ve got a long way to go.” Bush was responding to aquestion about his standing in the polls, which, given the size of thefield, really isn’t that bad.But he was also responding to the strain of running a presidential campaignand to questions about the state of his campaign team, given prominentstaff changes this week. His cry of “it’s June!” was more a cry of ‘it’stoo early for much of this to make a difference, so calm down.’There’s truth to that. If you look at how candidates did relative to pollsfrom June of the year prior, the ones that ended up in the upper echelonusually didn’t see a whole lot of up and down movement until the debatesand primaries began in earnest. In 2011, Newt Gingrich started to spiketoward the end of the year; Rick Perry came and went. But Gingrich, MittRomney and Rick Santorum were pretty flat until November. The middle partof the year didn’t make much of a difference.But in 2007, things looked a bit different. Fred Thompson pulled a RickPerry, arriving and departing. Rudy Giuliani’s slide began in March andcontinued unabated until October, at which point he was all but finished.It’s that Giuliani thing that offers an asterisk to Bush’s “it’s early”declaration. Usually, candidates hold pretty steady through the end of theyear before the election. As Rudy showed, not always.Past performance is no guarantee of future results, as daytime infomercialsare legally obligated to remind us. So Bush’s steadiness is by no meansguaranteed, and questions about the state of his campaign are very muchwarranted.And then we get to the other thing.An April editorial in the Post decried candidates that “mock the law” byrunning for president without declaring that they are presidentialcandidates. There are legal (read: financial) reasons they don’t, but bynow most of the big names have accepted reality. They’re running.Bush’s campaign launch is still a few days away. While he filed paperworksuggesting that he is a candidate, he hasn’t filed with the FederalElection Commission.In other words, most of the analysis about and machinations of Bush’s teamover the past few weeks related to someone who wasn’t even technicallyrunning for president. So were we not all playing this game about how Bushisn’t a candidate even though he’s a candidate, he might have pointed outthat before his campaign became subject to its death notice, perhaps itshould actually begin.His exclamation works the other way, too. It’s June, for crying out loud,months after Bush started running and should have had things sorted out.There is a messy, subpar campaign that he’s been running, despite the legallines set by the FEC. The odds are good that the not-campaign won’t fallapart more between now and December, it’s true. But not-yet-campaigns havedoomed candidates before.*Jeb Bush says U.S. bank rules may have contributed to systemic risks<http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/09/usa-election-bush-banks-idUSL1N0YV1XK20150609>// Reuters // Reuters – June 9, 2015 *Likely Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush on Tuesday criticized the2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street oversight law, saying it did not stop banksfrom becoming “too big to fail” and may have contributed to new risks inthe U.S. financial system.Bush, the former governor of Florida, is expected to formally launch hisbid for the White House on June 15, after he completes a five-day Europeantrip.Speaking in Berlin on Tuesday, Bush said reforms enacted in response to the2007-2009 economic meltdown led to bigger banks and may have heightenedrisk in the U.S. financial system.”We have more banks with more concentrated assets in the United States, andthe systematic risk is perhaps greater now than it was when the law wassigned,” Bush said.”And so I would beware of regulations in general. I think they need to bethoughtful,” he said.During the crisis, the biggest banks received government bailouts becauseregulators worried they were so big it would threaten financial marketstability if they went under, a concept that came to be known as “too bigto fail.”The 2010 Wall Street law made a wide variety of changes to financialoversight, such as forcing banks to rely less on debt for funding, in orderto bolster financial firms and prevent them from needing bailouts in thefuture.Critics of the White House administration of Bush’s brother, George W.Bush, say tougher oversight of banks and the U.S. housing market could haveprevented the crisis or lessened its impact.But many critics of the 2010 law argue that instead of eliminating the “toobig to fail” problem, the cost of complying with tougher rules forcedsmaller banks to shut down or sell themselves, resulting in fewer, moreconcentrated banks than before the meltdown.Jeb Bush, who had long been expected to seek the presidency in the November2016 U.S. election, said regulation was needed “around bad banks” toprevent another crisis that would hurt the middle class, but he saidDodd-Frank did not have the effect Congress desired.Some seeking the Democratic nomination for the presidency, including formerMaryland Governor Martin O’Malley and U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, take theopposite view. They say Congress should go even further than it did withDodd-Frank and break up the largest U.S. banks.*Jeb Bush After Shake-Up: ‘I Don’t Read the Polls'<http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/jeb-bush-after-shake-i-dont-read-polls-n372746>// NBC News // Benjy Sarlin – June 10, 2015*Days before his presidential launch, Jeb Bush told reporters on Wednesdaythat his decision to replace his campaign-manager-in-waiting was astrategic move rather than a response to his tepid position in the polls.”I don’t read the polls,” he told reporters outside the Pestana Hotel inBerlin, where he is on the first leg of a trip through Germany, Poland andEstonia. “It’s fun to see them when you’re winning, not so fun when you’renot. Doesn’t really matter, though, its June for crying out loud, so we gota long way to go.”Bush said that he had chosen Florida Republican Danny Diaz as campaignmanager over David Kochel, who was tapped for the role initially, to allowKochel to take a different role masterminding the campaign’s efforts inearly states.”You have a real focus on four states in February then you have anavalanche of states after that and you think about how to organize allthat, how to develop the messaging part of this, the scheduling part of it,it’s a pretty overwhelming challenge and so I decided to kind of split upthe duties,” Bush said. “David has got great success in these early states,particularly Iowa, he’s also got a great strategic mind and Danny’s agrinder.”He added that he was “confident that the team in place will do their joband I got to do my job as well.”Responding to a reporter’s question about his early expectations, Bushpushed back against the idea that he should be in a more dominant positionby now given his fundraising strength and high-profile name brand.”I know I’m going to have to earn this,” he told reporters. “It’s a lot ofwork and I’m excited about the prospects of this. It’s a long haul. Youstart whenever you start and you end a long, long way from today. I justurge everybody to be a little more patient about this.”Turning to his European tour, Bush repeated his call for a harder lineagainst Russian President Vladimir Putin, who he called a “ruthlesspragmatist” in Berlin on Tuesday at a conference hosted by ChancellorAngela Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union party.”He’s a bully and you enable bad behavior when you’re nuanced with a guylike that,” Bush told reporters, urging America and its allies to makeclear that he would face specific consequences if he continued hisaggression in Ukraine or expanded it to other neighboring states.As part of that effort, Bush said he supported a “more robust” Americantroop presence in Poland and Baltic countries that he would decide based onmilitary leaders’ recommendations.Bush said he had not seen reports that President Obama is consideringsending hundreds of American troops to Anbar province in Iraq to helpadvise and train local forces working to retake Ramadi, but that he hopedthey would play a more active role in combat than the administration hasallowed so far.”I think our advisers, if that’s what they are, ought to be embedded in the[Iraqi] military,” he said. “It helps us with our intelligence gathering,it certainly helps with morale and their ability to train the troops.”*Jeb: It’s too early for poll-watching<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/244518-jeb-its-too-early-for-poll-watching>// The Hill // Jonathan Easley – June 10, 2015 *Jeb Bush on Wednesday expressed frustration with the press over itsobsession with the horse race aspect of the presidential race, tellingreporters that it’s too early to be poll-watching and encouraged them tofocus on more important matters.Speaking to a gaggle of reporters on a sidewalk in Germany, Bush said hewas “not at all concerned” by expectations from some Republicans that heshould have further separated himself from the field of GOP contenders bynow.“I just encourage people to be a little more patient about this,” Bushsaid. “Ya’ll cover this kind of in the here and now, and who is winning andwho is losing. It’s important, and I have to respect that, but if you havea strategy and you think about it over the long haul is a better approach,at least for me.”“Anybody have any questions about Germany?” Bush asked, nodding to thesurrounding environment.Bush has not officially entered the race for the Republican presidentialnomination, but he’s widely expected to make it official on Monday in Miami.Bush has spent the past six months building a political team, amassing ahuge campaign fund for his super-PAC, giving policy speeches, attendingRepublican cattle calls and seeking to curry favor with party leaders.His name recognition and deep political ties have buoyed him in the earlypolls, but some conservatives question whether that support is durable.Bush faces deep skepticism from many in the party’s base, and stiffcompetition from Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Sen. Marco Rubio.“I don’t read the polls,” Bush said Wednesday. “Polls are, you know, it’sfun to see them when you’re winning, not as much when you’re not. Itdoesn’t really matter though. It’s June for crying out loud, so we have along way to go.”The state of Bush’s campaign came into focus this week when he reshuffledhis staff ahead of a five-day trip to Germany, Poland and Estonia.Earlier this year, Bush brought on David Kochel, an Iowa GOP operative, fora leading role in his super-PAC, Right to Rise, with the intent of movinghim over to campaign manager once he launched.But this week, the Bush team announced that instead, Kochel would serve aschief strategist to the campaign, and Danny Diaz, an aggressive 39-year-oldopposition researcher and conservative media consultant, would be thecampaign manager.The move stoked stories of struggle within the campaign and provokedquestions over whether the Bush team was hitting the panic button at anearly stage.The former Florida governor downplayed the staff changes on Wednesday.“This is an adjustment based on the skills of people that I’ve gotten toknow over the past few months,” Bush said.“Nothing other than just the magnitude of the journey [provoked thischange],” he continued. “You have the real focus on four states inFebruary, and you have the avalanche of states after that, and you thinkabout how to organize all of that, how to develop the messaging part ofthis, the scheduling part of this. It’s an overwhelming challenge. So Idecided to split up the duties, and David has great success in these earlystates, particularly Iowa, and he has a great strategic mind, and Danny isa grinder.”*Jeb Bush is a compassionless conservative: His “Scarlet Letter” law waseven worse than it sounds<http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/jeb_bush_is_a_compassionless_conservative_his_scarlet_letter_law_was_even_worse_than_it_sounds/>// Salon // Katie McDonough – June 10, 2015 *In Jeb Bush’s 1995 book, “Profiles in Character,” the likely Republicanpresidential contender wrote that Americans have dropped the ball on publichumiliation and called for a return to a time when “public condemnation”was used to deter people from “irresponsible conduct.”Public condemnation — and in the criminal justice system, sentencingintended to humiliate — never actually went anywhere, so Bush wasn’t reallycalling for a return to humiliation — he just wanted more of it. Here’s theexcerpt on single parenting, which Huffington Post political reporter LauraBassett unearthed on Tuesday:One of the reasons more young women are giving birth out of wedlock andmore young men are walking away from their paternal obligations is thatthere is no longer a stigma attached to this behavior, no reason to feelshame. Many of these young women and young men look around and see theirfriends engaged in the same irresponsible conduct. Their parents andneighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule tothis behavior. There was a time when neighbors and communities would frownon out of wedlock births and when public condemnation was enough of astimulus for one to be careful.Bush points to Nathaniel Hawthorne’s “The Scarlet Letter” as a referencefor how this kind of thing might work, writing: “Infamous shotgun weddingsand Nathaniel Hawthorne’s ‘Scarlet Letter’ are reminders that publiccondemnation of irresponsible sexual behavior has strong historical roots.”Bush wasn’t just riffing, he was setting up policy prescriptions for hisfuture tenure as governor. As Bassett points out, Bush waived his vetopower after the state legislature passed a 2001 law requiring single womenwho wanted to put a child up for adoption to publish their sexual historiesin a newspaper. The ads included women’s names, ages, physical descriptionsincluding her hair, weight and eye color. Women were also required toprovide details about their sexual encounters — including names of sexualpartners, dates and locations.From the bill:The notice… must contain a physical description, including, but not limitedto age, race, hair and eye color, and approximate height and weight of theminor’s mother and of any person the mother reasonably believes may be thefather; the minor’s date of birth; and any date and city, including thecounty and state in which the city is located, in which conception may haveoccurred.Women were required to pay for the ads, which ran once a week for theduration of a month. The law included no exceptions for victims of rape orminors. Bush expressed reservations about publishing these details, butdeclined to veto the law while it wound its way through the courts for twoyears.Florida adoption lawyer Charlotte Dancui challenged the law in the PalmBeach County Circuit Court, representing six plaintiffs, including a14-year-old girl and a rape victim. Dancui told the New York Times that inaddition the women and girls she was representing in the lawsuit, othershad come forward feeling terrorized by the law.”I had a woman come to me who had a child 10 years ago while in college andnow her husband of five years wants to adopt her child and in order to dothat she had to put her name, her daughter’s name and all the men she sleptwith in college in her college newspaper,” she said.But the law wasn’t just being criticized by women’s rights groups and theleft — many conservatives opposed the law, arguing that violating women’sprivacy and subjecting them to public shame for choosing adoption wouldincentivize abortion and decrease adoption rates.In 2003, after the law was declared unconstitutional, Bush signed a repeal.As the Times reported after the original law was overturned, the repealreplaced the provision to humiliate women with a new provision allowing mento electively enter into a confidential parental registry. Bush’s wasapparently satisfied with the change, according to a spokesperson for hisoffice:This was an important bill to sign and it has been two years in coming. Itnot only streamlines the adoption process by outlining specific steps forthe unwed biological father but it also balances and protects the privacyrights of the mother and child.But opponents of the bill were unimpressed that Bush acted only after thecourts struck down the law. ”Only a male-dominated legislature couldpossibly pass a law that facilitates adoptions by requiring publichumiliation of women,” Howard Simon, executive director of ACLU of Florida,told the Times.”You’ve got to have a real narrow vision to congratulate the governor forsigning a repeal of a statute that, as a result of a lawsuit we wereinvolved in, the courts struck down as unconstitutional,” he continued.”The legislature shouldn’t have passed it in the first place.”One of the women involved in the lawsuit against the law told the Timesthat she welcomed the repeal and was relieved that other women wouldn’thave to be subjected to that kind of humiliation. ”They don’t have to puttheir names in the paper in this barbaric gesture,” she said. ”They don’thave to be afraid anymore.”Add this to the list of Bush’s credentials as a compassionate conservative.*Hillary Clinton vs. Jeb Bush: A Boring Disaster Waiting to Happen<http://www.theblaze.com/contributions/hillary-clinton-vs-jeb-bush-a-boring-disaster-waiting-to-happen/>// The Blaze // Chris Markowski – June 10, 2015 *Some people have enough “celebrity status” that even announcing anannouncement garners media coverage.Jeb Bush recently proclaimed that on June 15 “an announcement will bemade,” and it’s now all the media can talk about. “Another Clinton vs. Bushelection?” is plastered across the headlines.But Americans are clearly bored with these families.While there are plenty of candidates who don’t have family ties to theWhite House, those are not the candidates soaking up all the press. WithBush’s announcement this year’s presidential campaign is sure to be one forthe books, but we certainly don’t need another boring Clinton vs. Bushelection. We’re not being run by a monarchy here – even the Kennedy’scouldn’t pull it off. That snoozer of an election would bring the lowestvoting turnout in ages.We’re bored with these families. Two Bush’s in the past 20 years, a Clintonas well, and now one of each is running for president. If a Clinton or Bushis elected again, that says something about the United States. The mediaand Wall Street elites love it, but they’re the only ones excited about it.We “peasants” cannot continue to allow the same families to have power overour country year after year, even if they have a longstanding record ofholding office.A great example of this is the Kennedy’s, one of America’s most loved andwell-known political families. The family had at least one member inelective office in Washington for 64 years, yet only John Fitzgerald wasable to reach the Oval Office. While many family members have been inWashington since Kennedy’s assassination, none since have served aspresident.Even great political families leave Americans feeling bored after a while.The country as a whole has decided to stop electing members of thesefamilies, so when will they decide to stop running altogether?Furthermore, we don’t need another Clinton vs. Bush election. Neither ofthese candidates are been doing well in the polls, and while they both haverecognizable names and families, American voters are not fans. Although thecandidates are from different parties, they are virtually interchangeable.Taking money from the same big Wall Street companies, having a well-knownname, and engaging in shady political practices are all common factors forthese two. These are not “rock the boat” kind of candidates, and what wereally need here is a change.In addition to being one and the same, these candidates aren’t the typethat will bring voters to the polls. While Barack Obama was able to bringout people who may have never voted before, a Clinton vs. Bush electionwill leave people wanting to stay inside on voting day. After advertisingon MTV and social media, voters came out of the woodwork to place theirvotes for Obama, because it was made “cool.” Neither Clinton nor Bush hasthat same kind of pull or appeal, and they definitely won’t be able to makethemselves seem “hip” or “cool” to the masses.These candidates aren’t able to generate any excitement with voters,because we’ve seen it all before. For these candidates and their families,the elections are all about power and being a part of the “dynasty” thattheir families have had in the past.American’s are understandably tired of these families, and I predict thatit will show when it comes time to vote. We’ve had an “old boys club” inWashington for far too long. It’s time that we have a new,non-establishment candidate in office.*Tom Coburn on Jeb Bush: ‘His last name will kill 47 percent of the votes'<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/tom-coburn-on-jeb-bush-his-last-name-will-kill-47-percent-of-the-votes/article/2565997>// The Washington Examiner // Philip Klein – June 10, 2015 *Former Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn had a blunt assessment of Jeb Bush’schances of capturing the White House: “I don’t think another Bush can getelected.”In an interview with the Washington Examiner Coburn said, “I think there’sBush fatigue and I think you automatically lose a large percentage of theelectorate.”He explained, “I like Jeb Bush. But the fact is his last name will kill 47percent of the votes for him — potential votes in this country. That’s abig deal to get over.”Though he said that he thought George W. Bush was a “great president,” he’ssaid he remained a polarizing figure.”Why would you run a candidate that is going to have trouble with 47percent of the electorate?” Coburn asked.He made the comments in a wide-ranging interview with the Examiner. Staytuned for more.*Shaming Unwed Moms Was the Law in Jeb Bush’s Florida<http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/06/10/shaming-unwed-moms-was-the-law-in-jeb-bush-s-florida.html>// The Daily Beast // Betsy Woodroff – June 10, 2015 *Remember that time when Gov. Jeb Bush allowed a bill to become law thatrequired unwed, pregnant women to publish their sexual history in thenewspaper in order to give their babies up for adoption?But this was just the beginning of the weird parental follies of Florida inthe early 2000s.In 2001, Bush didn’t veto adoption-overhaul legislation that included aprovision making it harder for unwed mothers to put their children up foradoption, as The Huffington Post recently reported.And by taking a pass, he allowed a particularly offensive provision tobecome law.This provision required any woman who wanted to put her child up foradoption, but who didn’t know who the father was, to take out an ad in alocal newspaper listing her name and description, as well as the name anddescription of each possible father and the locations where the baby couldhave been conceived.In other words, women had to broadcast her sexual histories to, well,pretty much everybody before attempting to find stable homes for herchildren.The law’s sponsor, state Sen. Walter Campbell, said the provision wasdesigned to keep “potential biological fathers from coming back and takingchildren out of adoptive parents’ hands.” And the law didn’t include anexception for women who became pregnant because of rape.“You cannot just allow someone to say they were raped and use that as anexcuse not to provide a name,” said Deborah Marks, who helped draft thelaw, at the time.Alvin Coen, a veteran adoption lawyer, told the New Pittsburgh Courier atthe time that concerns about birth fathers interfering with adoptions werebaseless.The bill passed overwhelmingly in the state house and by a 30-8 vote in thestate senate. Bush said he decided not to veto it because Campbell told himthe newspaper-reporting language would get fixed. That didn’t happen. Whatdid happen? More abortions. The Orlando Sentinel reported there were almost2,000 more abortions in the first six months of 2002—after the legislationwent into effect—than in the first six months of 2001.After state courts declared the law unconstitutional, Bush signedlegislation repealing it. The bill that took its place put thefathers-rights onus on potential fathers. The law still exists today.“In place of the publication requirement, the new law establishes a‘’father registry’ through which men who believe they may be fathers mustprovide the name, address, and physical description of the mother and thedate and place where conception took place to protect their parentalrights,” The New York Times reported.This wasn’t the only time children’s issues have gotten the former governorin trouble. As governor, Bush drew sustained criticism for his adamantopposition to gay adoption. And Bill O’Reilly leveled harsh criticism athim after a young girl’s disappearance from the state’s foster-care systemwent unnoticed for years. Her death led to an overhaul of how the statehandled foster care.Basically, Florida men have some major issues when it comes to dealing withvulnerable children. And in the early 2000s, it appears Jeb Bush was noexception.*Jeb Bush to visit Jimmy Fallon on ‘Tonight Show’ next week<http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/tv/showtracker/la-et-st-jeb-bush-to-appear-on-tonight-show-20150610-story.html>// LA Times // Meredith Blake – June 10, 2015 *Pesidential aspirant Jeb Bush will visit “The Tonight Show Starring JimmyFallon” on June 16, the day after he is expected to formally announce hiscandidacy.It will be the first appearance by the former Florida governor — brother ofGeorge W., son of George H.W. — on a late-night talk show. Under Jay Leno,”The Tonight Show” was an all-but-required stop for presidential candidatesand was considered a friendlier venue for Republicans than DavidLetterman’s “Late Show” or either of Comedy Central’s late-night shows.Since Fallon took over the reins of “The Tonight Show” in February 2014, hehas welcomed several politicians, including frequent guest Gov. ChrisChristie of New Jersey and former GOP candidate Mitt Romney.Bush is considered a frontrunner in the race for the White House and hasbeen busy in Europe this week burnishing his foreign policy credentials. Hefaces stiff competition in the polls from fellow Floridian Sen. MarcoRubio, but he may get a leg up as the first declared candidate in theever-expanding GOP field to make a visit to “Tonight.”*RUBIO**Florida Poll: Rubio Gaining on Jeb<https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/florida-poll-rubio-gaining-jeb_968688.html>// The Weekly Standard // Michael Warren – June 10, 2015 *A new poll of Florida Republican primary voters finds a tightening racebetween the Sunshine State’s two favorite sons in the 2016 GOP presidentialprimary. According to St. Leo University’s Polling Institute, formergovernor Jeb Bush has 30 percent support among likely Republican primaryvoters in Florida, while Marco Rubio, the state’s sitting junior senator,has 24 percent support. That’s a surge of eight points for Rubio since St.Leo’s last poll of the GOP primary in March, when the younger Republicanhad 16 percent support to Bush’s 31 percent.It’s worth noting that since the March poll, Rubio has declared hiscandidacy, while Bush remains in the exploratory phase and is notofficially a candidate.Rubio continues to do well in Florida as a second choice for primaryvoters, with a field-high 29 percent calling him their second choice. Bushcomes behind with 12 percent listing him as their second choice. And in ahead-to-head matchup with no other Republican candidates? Rubio beats Bushby 8 points, 48 percent to 40 percent.There was not much movement from March to June for the non-FloridaRepublican candidates in the poll. Wisconsin governor Scott Walker comes inat 7 percent, down from 10 percent in March, and retired neurosurgeon BenCarson is at 7 percent as well, down from 9 percent in March. Kentuckysenator Rand Paul stayed steady at 7 percent support while former Arkansasgovernor Mike Huckabee is up to 6 percent in June from 4 percent in March.Florida’s presidential primary usually follows the first three contests ofIowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina. Given the state’s large populationand numerous (and expensive) media markets, Florida has often been a testof a campaign’s big-money viability given the state’s numerous andexpensive media markets. This year, however, the Florida primary will occurtwo weeks after the “Super Tuesday” March 1 primaries taking place in 12states, including several in the GOP-heavy south.*PAUL**At GOP fundraiser in Maryland, Rand Paul decries racial injustice,champions diversity<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/06/10/at-maryland-fundraiser-rand-paul-decries-racial-injustice-champions-diversity/>// WaPo // Ovetta Wiggins – June 10, 2015 *Speaking at a Maryland Republican fundraiser less than 15 miles from WestBaltimore, where Freddie Gray was taken into police custody and riotingtook place two months ago, Republican presidential hopeful Rand Paul toldan audience made up mainly old white men about the recent suicide of ayoung black man who spent three years imprisoned without a trial.Paul said he has relayed the story of Kalief Browder’s imprisonment formore than a year, including a March visit to the historically black collegeBowie State University. He said he considered not mentioning it sinceBrowder’s death last weekend.Browder was accused of stealing a backpack and waited three years atRiker’s Island for a trial.”He wasn’t even convicted,” the Kentucky senator. “So when I see peopleangry and upset — and I’m not here to excuse violence in the cities — butwhen I see anger I understand where some of the anger is coming from. …Imagine how [Browder’s] classmates feel about American justice, imagine howhis parents feel.”Paul’s speech Tuesday night was a collection of his stances on not onlycriminal justice reform, but on the Patriot Act and NSA data collection,and party inclusion. He took swipes at Democratic presidential front-runnerHillary Clinton, saying her handling of Benghazi should “forever precludeher from being president.”Paul told the crowd that the Republicans must expand beyond its base.”If we want to win elections we have to be a big party,” Paul said. “I tellpeople that we’ve got to have people with tattoos, without tattoos, withlong hair, without, with earrings, black, white, brown, rich, poor, workingclass. We’ve got to be a more diverse party.”Paul’s appearance in Maryland is part of two days of events sponsored bythe Maryland Republican Party in the Baltimore area. On Wednesday, thestate party will partner with the Baltimore City NAACP for a paneldiscussion to discuss criminal justice reform.The party is trying to make some strides in Maryland, where where Democratsoutnumber Republicans by more than a 2-to-1 margin but Gov. Larry Hogan (R)captured a surprise win in November.D. Bruce Poole, the chairman of the Maryland Democratic Party, said in astatement prior to Paul’s appearance that the Republican candidate’smessage does not resonate in the deeply Democratic state.”If Rand Paul wants to convince Marylanders and Americans that he is goingto be a champion for the issues that matter most,then he will have to abandon his destructive policies that only help thoseat the very top. Unfortunately for Paul and the Republican Party, thattrain has already left the station,” Poole said.Since the libertarian Kentucky senator declared his candidacy in April,Paul has struggled to gain ground among rank-and-file Republicans, whosesupport he will need to win the nomination.Many Republicans have expressed unease over Paul’s stance on variousissues, including security, criminal justice reform, and recenthigh-profile cases involving police conduct.Paul has taken a hard-line stance on the NSA, leading the charge to blockthe renewal of the anti-terrorism law used to justify domestic spyingprograms. He has spoken forcefully about police officers who have killedunarmed African Americans, and has sponsored legislation to addressinequities within the prison system.A recent Washington Post-ABC News poll shows Paul and Gov. Scott Walker ofWisconsin with each capturing 11 percent of the vote among Republicans andRepublican-leaning independent registered voters. But, with a margin oferror of plus or minus six percentage points, the contest remains wideopen, with former Florida governor Jeb Bush and Sen. Marco Rubio of Floridawith 10 percent each. The rest of the field received single digits.*WALKER**Walker makes case for education reforms nationwide<http://fox11online.com/2015/06/10/walker-makes-case-for-education-reforms-nationwide/>// AP – June 10, 2015 *Scott Walker touted changes he’s made to K-12 education as governor inWisconsin in a newspaper column published Wednesday, saying there’s “noreason” what he’s done in the state can’t be matched nationwide.Walker, expected to announce a run for the Republican presidentialnomination within weeks, inflamed teachers across Wisconsin four years agowhen he pushed for a law that took away their collective bargaining rights,while also forcing them to pay more for health and pension benefits, aspart of an effort to balance the state budget.“Now, more than ever, we need to push big, bold reforms to improve ourschools,” Walker wrote Wednesday in a column published by The Des MoinesRegister in Iowa. “If we can do it in Wisconsin, there is no reason wecan’t push positive education reforms across the country.”Walker’s education policies have included expanding school choice effortsand cutting funding for public schools. His call to take such effortsnationwide elicited anger from his opponents in Wisconsin, who alsovehemently opposed his efforts on union rights.“When it comes to the damage Gov. Walker has inflicted on Wisconsinstudents, it’s hard to come up with a short list,” said Betsy Kippers,president of the statewide teachers union, the Wisconsin EducationAssociation Council.Walker’s first state budget cut funding for public schools by $1.2 billion,the largest reduction in state history. This year, Walker proposed cuttingpublic school funding by $127 million in the first year of a two-yearbudget, a move rejected by the Legislature’s Republican-controlled budgetcommittee.Walker has also successfully expanded Wisconsin’s private school voucherprogram statewide after it debuted in Milwaukee. Walker’s pending budgetproposal would gradually remove the program’s enrollment caps and use taxdollars currently provided to public schools to pay for it.Walker has argued the state, and schools specifically, are better off underthe collective bargaining law, which affected nearly all state employeesand led to his recall election in 2012. He renewed that argument inWednesday’s column, saying he fixed a “broken” system.“Today, the requirements for seniority and tenure are gone,” Walker said.“Schools can hire based on merit and pay based on performance. That meansthey can keep the best and the brightest in the classroom.”Walker also pointed to higher graduation rates, improved third-gradereading scores and the fact that Wisconsin’s high school student ACT scoresare the country’s second best.He did not note that Wisconsin’s graduation rates were increasing for yearsbefore he took office and the recent growth is not as strong as thenational average. Wisconsin’s ACT scores were also consistently among thenation’s best prior to his election.Walker also wrote that he opposes the Common Core academic standards. Whenhe took office in 2011, Walker called for creating tests that were tied tothe standards. He first objected to the standards during his re-electioncampaign last year.His pending budget reiterates that school districts can’t be forced toadopt the standards, a protection they already have under current state law.In the column, Walker also mentions Megan Sampson, a teacher who was laidoff after being named the outstanding first-year teacher by the WisconsinCouncil of Teachers of English in 2010. Collective bargaining agreements inplace at the time, since eliminated, protected those with more seniorityfrom losing their jobs.Walker often tells the story, and Sampson has repeatedly asked him to stop.She did so again Wednesday.“I do not enjoy being associated with Walker’s political campaign,” Sampsonsaid.*Walker: We changed broken education system<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/opinion/columnists/caucus/2015/06/10/walker-changed-broken-education-system/28778201/?utm_content=16075932&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter>// The Des Moines Register // Scott Walker – June 10, 2015 *Megan Sampson was named the outstanding first-year teacher by the WisconsinCouncil of Teachers of English in June of 2010. A week later, she receivedanother certificate: a layoff notice from the Milwaukee Public Schoolssystem.Why would they get rid of a new teacher like Sampson — especially inMilwaukee, which was one of the most troubled urban school districts in thenation? Well, under the old union contracts, the last hired was first fired.In 2011, we changed that broken system in Wisconsin. Today, therequirements for seniority and tenure are gone. Schools can hire based onmerit and pay based on performance. That means they can keep the best andthe brightest in the classroom.Best of all, the reforms are working. Schools are better. Graduation ratesare up. Third grade reading scores are higher. Wisconsin students now rank2nd best in the country for ACT scores in states where more than half thestudents take the exam.In addition to improving traditional public schools, like the ones my ownsons attended, we increased the number of quality education choices allover Wisconsin. Over the past four years, we expanded the number of charterschools, lifted the limits on virtual schools and provided more help forfamilies choosing to home school their children.We also dramatically expanded the 25-year-old Milwaukee Parental SchoolChoice program to add more students, more schools and working classfamilies. Then, we expanded school choice across the state.Last fall I had a chance to meet a mom by the name of Dana from Appleton.Her son and daughter were two of the first students to participate in thestatewide school choice program.Dana told me that her son was doing poorly in a public school a few yearsago. He was being bullied and he hated going to school each day. Now, afterDana signed him up for the voucher program, his school scores had doubled,he plays the trumpet in the band and he signed up for the football team.Dana’s son loves school. She thanked us for giving her son a chance tosucceed.Now, more than ever, we need to push big, bold reforms to improve ourschools. If we can do it in Wisconsin, there is no reason we can’t pushpositive education reforms across the country.Nationwide, we want high standards but we want them set by parents,educators and school board members at the local level. That is why I opposeCommon Core.Money spent at the local and state level is more efficient, more effectiveand more accountable. That is why I support moving money out of Washingtonand sending it to states and schools. Students deserve a better education.And every student in the our nation’s capital should have access to a greateducation. Therefore, we should expand the options for families in theDistrict of Columbia to choose the school that is best for their children.As a father, an uncle and a governor, I believe that every child deservesaccess to a great education — be it at a traditional public, charter,choice, private, virtual or home school environment. We need leaders whovalue quality choices and who trust parents to put the interests of theirchildren first.*Scott Walker Courting Mitt Romney Donors After Slamming Candidate Romney<http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-06-10/walker-courting-romney-donors-after-slamming-candidate-romney>// Bloomberg News // John McCormick – June 10, 2015 *Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker makes clear in his political memoir that hethinks Mitt Romney did a lousy job of running for president in 2012.That isn’t keeping Walker from traveling to the mountains of Utah Thursdayto gain favor with the former Massachusetts governor — and potentially taphis robust donor network.“Instead of offering a big, positive vision for the future, Romney wasworking to make the campaign a referendum on President Obama,” Walker wrotein his book, noting that Romney was trying to mimic the 1980 presidentialrun of Republican icon Ronald Reagan. “The problem was, the Romney team gotthe 1980 Reagan campaign all wrong.”“The problem was, the Romney team got the 1980 Reagan campaign all wrong.”Walker, 47, is among at least six declared or likely Republicanpresidential candidates scheduled to attend Romney’s third annual retreatin Park City. The E2 Summit, mostly closed to the media, is meant to bringtogether influential business, political and policy leaders to discuss theU.S. leadership.Roughly 250 guests can also play flag football with Senator Marco Rubio ofFlorida, skeet-shoot with Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, andride horses with Romney’s wife, Ann.Walker, of course, isn’t the only Republican critical of Romney’s 2012missteps. Others have routinely knocked him for gaffes such as standingbefore rich campaign donors and asserting that 47 percent of voters aredependent on government assistance.Misreading WisconsinOf the potential candidates attending the Romney gathering, Walker has beenamong the most outspoken about those failings, arguing the party’s 2012nominee didn’t do enough to connect with voters or present his own positivevision.In his book, “Unintimidated: A Governor’s Story and a Nation’s Challenge,”Walker fills most of a chapter entitled “Misreading the Message ofWisconsin” with Romney criticism.Walker writes that shortly after his June 2012 victory in Wisconsin’srecall election, he realized Romney could lose the state in November. Herecalled Romney saying the message of his victory was that Americans didn’twant more police, firefighters and teachers, as Obama had asserted.“Unfortunately, it was Romney who did not get the message of Wisconsin,”Walker writes. The rollback of union power, he said, was meant to avoidmass layoffs of such public employees.The chapter also provides a window into Walker’s own likely presidentialcampaign, which he’s expected to announce in early July after Wisconsin’stwo-year budget is completed.47 PercentWalker repeatedly suggests that Reagan had dealt with similar campaignsituations more effectively.“Reagan did not dismiss 47 percent of the country as a bunch of moochers,”Walker writes. “Quite the opposite: At the Republican convention in Detroithe appealed to those who wanted nothing more than to get off governmentassistance and find work.”While Walker praises Romney’s decency and compassion in the book, about theonly thing he gives him credit for doing right in the campaign is pickingRepresentative Paul Ryan of Wisconsin as his running mate.Obama ultimately won Wisconsin, carrying it with 52.8 percent of the vote,about the amount Walker won in his recall.Stuart Stevens, Romney’s chief strategist in 2012, said he doesn’t thinkcriticisms from Walker or others bothered Romney during or after thecampaign. “It’s just not in his DNA,” he said.AshLee Strong, a spokeswoman for Walker’s political committee, Our AmericanRevival, said in a statement that Romney and Walker are friends.“While Governor Walker has said he may have made some different campaigntactics in 2012, he has tremendous respect for Governor Romney as a leaderand what he has done for the Republican Party,” Strong said. “GovernorWalker believes that had Mitt Romney been elected in 2012, the U.S. wouldhave restored its leadership position in the world and would be safertoday.”CEO TurnoutBesides Walker, Rubio and Graham, other declared or likely 2016 Republicancandidates expected to attend the Utah gathering will be New JerseyGovernor Chris Christie, Ohio Governor John Kasich and formerHewlett-Packard Co. Chief Executive Officer Carly Fiorina.Some Democrats also will be there, including David Axelrod, Obama’slongtime strategist, and Lawrence Summers, a former U.S. Secretary ofTreasury. Corporates leaders attending include General Electric Co. CEOJeffrey Immelt and Meg Whitman, Hewlett-Packard’s CEO.Walker is expected to meet privately with the Romneys. He’ll spend much ofThursday at their gathering and will join them for barbecue that evening.He’ll speak on Friday before departing on an almost week-long trade missionto Canada.In his run-up to a campaign, the Wisconsin governor is trying to present amore working-class image than the one offered by Romney, a former privateequity executive worth hundreds of millions of dollars.Last weekend, Walker rode a rented Harley Davidson motorcycle in Iowa andtalked about his modest family upbringing. And he’s fond of highlightinghis frugality: from clipping coupons to tweeting photos of theham-and-cheese sandwiches he brings to work.“My brother and I did not inherit fame or fortune from our family,” Walkersaid in Iowa. “What we got was more important, and that is the belief thatif you work hard and you play by the rules you can do and be anything youwant in America.”*A teacher central to Scott Walker’s education pitch would like him to stopusing her story<http://www.businessinsider.com/teacher-wants-scott-walker-to-stop-using-her-story-2015-6>// Business Insider // Colin Campbell – June 10, 2015 *Likely presidential candidate and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) regularlytouts his education policies by citing a local teacher who long ago askedhim to stop including her in his speeches and writings.The teacher, Megan Sampson, repeated her opposition to Walker using hername in an email to Business Insider on Wednesday.”I would like Walker to stop using my story as a political narrative forhis campaign,” the English teacher wrote.Walker’s most recent Sampson reference came Tuesday night in a Des MoinesRegister op-ed that began by mentioning her.”Megan Sampson was named the outstanding first-year teacher by theWisconsin Council of Teachers of English in June of 2010. A week later, shereceived another certificate: a layoff notice from the Milwaukee PublicSchools system,” Walker wrote. “Well, under the old union contracts, thelast hired was first fired.”This part of the piece is almost identical to the opening of Walker’s 2011op-ed in The Wall Street Journal. The day that article was published,Sampson strenuously objected to being cited as part of the governor’spolicy advocacy, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.Sampson told the newspaper’s education reporter, Erin Richards, that theattention was unwelcome and resulted in “stress.””My opinions about the union have changed over the past eight months, and Iam hurt that this story is being used to make me the poster child for thispolitical agenda,” she said then. “Bottom line: I am trying to do my joband all this attention is interference and stress for me.”Business Insider reached out to Walker’s government office and campaignteam on Wednesday inquiring about why they decided to continue usingSampson’s name; both have yet to respond.*Wisconsinites Blast Scott Walker’s Stadium Deal As ‘Outrageous’<http://thinkprogress.org/sports/2015/06/10/3667600/wisconsinites-blast-scott-walkers-stadium-deal-outrageous/>// Think Progress // Alice Ollstein – June 10, 2015 *Depending on who you ask, building a new, publicly financed basketballstadium for the Milwaukee Bucks is either a horrendous example of corporatewelfare and official corruption, or a chance to reinvigorate aneconomically depressed city.With the fate of Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s plan up in the air — hitby criticism from progressives and conservatives alike — the county heldits first public meeting Tuesday night to discuss the proposal to use tensof millions of taxpayer dollars to keep the team in the city.The large crowd took issue with many aspects of the deal, which would sellpublic land valued at nearly $9 million for $1 dollar to the team’sbillionaire owners.Earlier this month, Milwaukee County Executive Chris Abele, a key architectof the deal, promised the plan to build a brand new stadium close to the27-year-old existing venue would “create jobs, generate millions of dollarsin economic activity and property value, and provide a great return oninvestment for taxpayers.”Local Milwaukee blogs have raised questions about whether it would also bea great return on investment for Abele personally, given that he recentlypurchased a $2 million condo directly next to the site of the proposedarena and the restaurants and stores slated to surround it.“The appreciation for that condo will go sky-high,” Milwaukee economicsprofessor Michael Rosen told ThinkProgress. “I’m not saying that’s why hebought it, but the fact is that will appreciate like crazy if the stadiumgets built. He has an interest in this, even though his job as publicofficial is to look out for this community.”Abele’s office did not respond to an interview request from ThinkProgress.Several local officials are also speaking out against the county’s promiseto collect $4 million per year in unpaid debts from residents, plus apenalty fee of 15 percent, to contribute to the stadium. For example, awoman who owed $1,000 for an old traffic ticket would be charged $1,150.Milwaukee County Supervisor John Weishan, Jr. called the proposal to goafter unpaid ambulance rides, delinquent property taxes and court fees“crony capitalism.”“This plan shifts the cost of the new arena from the state and theMilwaukee Bucks’ new wealthy owners to the poorest in our community,” hesaid. “I will not foreclose on someone’s home or shake down a senior forunpaid medical bills in order to build an arena for millionaires andbillionaires.”Whether or not it’s morally right to collect these debts to pay for thestadium, some county officials say it may not be possible, because most ofthe residents that owe that money are indigent.County comptroller estimated in an official report that the county couldonly collect about 2 percent of the money they’re promising — in partbecause much of the unpaid court fees would go to restitution for victimsof crimes if they ever got collected.“This is phony money. This is hocus-pocus,” Rosen told ThinkProgress. “Theywon’t be able to collect it, and if they do, it’s going to come from ourpoorest citizens, and that’s outrageous.”The scramble to find a source of revenue for the stadium is exacerbated byGovernor Scott Walker’s pledge not to create any new taxes to pay for theproject. But many lawmakers on both sides of the aisle remain critical ofthe plan, and say it’s inappropriate to tuck it into the must-pass statebudget. A growing bloc of lawmakers are demanding a separate vote.*Scott Walker To Remove Waiting Period For Wisconsin Gun Purchases<http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/06/10/scott-walker-to-remove-waiting-period-for-wisconsin-gun-purchases/>// Breitbart // Awr Hawkins – June 10, 2015 *Republican lawmakers passed a bill to do away with the 48-hour waitingperiod on gun purchases in Wisconsin, and Gov. Scott Walker is expected tosign it.Spokeswoman Laurel Patrick said Walker supports laws which “make it easierfor law-abiding citizens to access firearms and difficult for criminals toobtain illegal firearms.”According to the UK Independent, Wisconsin Democrats are already claimingthat a repeal of the waiting period will lead to more gun violence. Staterepresentative Fred Kessler (D-12th) said taking away the 48-hour wait is“just going to result in more violence in our urban communities.”But Kessler is countered by Republicans who argue that women can morequickly acquire guns with which to protect themselves if they do not haveto wait 48 hours before taking the gun home. For example, Rep. SamanthaKerkman (R-61), argued that removing the waiting period “would curbdomestic violence against women” and she pointed out that “[she] purchasedher own handgun to protect her own family.”The point is simple: A woman under threat from a former boyfriend orhusband may not have 48 hours to wait for a gun. Any delay in getting afirearm simply provides her would-be attacker with a safe period in whichhe can come after her.On June 3, Carol Bowne’s former boyfriend allegedly stabbed her death whileshe was waiting on state’s permission to buy a gun in New Jersey. AlthoughNew Jersey requires residents to wait much longer than 48 hours, theprinciple is the same — time spent waiting is time spent in a vulnerablecondition.*CRUZ**“If you live by the pen, you die by the pen”<http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/06/10/if-you-live-by-the-pen-you-die-by-the-pen/>// WaPo // James Hohmann – June 10, 2015 *Ted Cruz would spend his first day in office trying to undo some of BarackObama’s biggest achievements via executive order.In a wide-ranging interview about how he’d spend his first 100 days aspresident if he won, the Texas GOP senator pledged to roll back more thanjust the president’s controversial orders related to immigration.“If you live by the pen, you die by the pen,” Cruz said by phone Tuesday,as he traveled from Dallas to an afternoon tour of the Southern border.“Everything put in place by executive order can be undone by executiveorder.”Cruz said he would use the transition to bring a team together “to engagein a careful, systematic review of each executive action and to rescindevery one of them that exceeds the Constitutional and legal authority ofthe president.”Cruz’s comments underscored the tenuousness of some of Obama’s biggestsecond-term accomplishments, enacted by executive order because of aRepublican-dominated Congress. He’s the first of several presidentialcandidates to outline his governing priorities in an interview withPowerPost, a new Washington Post site that will focus on the intersectionof policy and politics.Other highlights from the interview:Cruz promised to do whatever it takes to stop Iran from getting a nuclearweapon, which he calls “the single greatest national security threat to theUnited States.”“On day one, I would expect to convene the national security team for aserious, careful, sober assessment of where Iran stands – how close theyare to acquiring nuclear weapons – and to review every tool at ourdisposable to assure that under no circumstances does Iran acquire nuclearweapons,” he said.On Israel, he responded to this week’s Supreme Court decision by sayingthat he would allow Americans born in Jerusalem to list Israel as theirbirthplace on passports. Though Republicans and Democrats have promised inthe past to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Avis to the contested city, Cruzpledges that he would actually follow through.The senator, who was the first major party candidate to formally announcehis candidacy back on March 23, said he’s running to try “to get a mandatefrom the electorate” to push far-reaching tax and regulatory reform. Hereally wants to eliminate the Internal Revenue Service, which he believeswould be possible with a flat tax, but he recognizes how politicallychallenging such a proposition would be. So he would want to get the publicbehind it through the primary and general election.“I intend to do everything possible to make 2016 a referendum on repealingObamacare and adopting a flat tax,” he said.Asked about his legislative priorities, Cruz said he would focus on tax andregulatory reform first. He would also push for Congress to “repeal everyword of Obamacare.”He described himself as “cautiously optimistic” that the Supreme Court willside against the government in King vs. Burwell on the grounds that thefederal government has “illegally collected billions of dollars in taxesfrom Americans who do not owe them.” If the court invalidates coverage formillions now receiving health subsidies, Cruz said he wants legislationthat would let states “opt-out of Obamacare” altogether.Cruz promises on the trail to repeal the Common Core state standards.“This administration has used Race To The Top funds to pressure states toadopt Common Core standards,” he said. “At the very outset, if I’m elected,the administration would no longer use federal authority to coerce statesinto adopting Common Core.”Asked who he might appoint to his Cabinet if he were elected, Cruz saidthat engaging with that question in a detailed way would be like telling awoman on a first date what he would like to name his children.“One step at a time,” he said.But Cruz said he could definitely see picking some of his GOP rivals in the2016 race for prominent posts.“Any Republican president would be a fool not to look very seriously at themen and women who will be on that debate stage as very serious and evenlikely members of a Republican cabinet and even a Republican dream team,”he said.*Ted Cruz team looks beyond Iowa, New Hampshire<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/ted-cruzs-2016-iowa-new-hampshire-118799.html#ixzz3cfJGUtZE>// Politico // Katie Glueck – June 10, 2015 *He’s stuck in the middle of the pack in Iowa, lags in polls, and much ofthe GOP donor class views him with disdain.But Ted Cruz is embracing a novel strategy for winning the nomination: He’slowering expectations in the early states while investing in later-votingstates that hardly see a candidate before March.In the past week or so alone, the Texas senator has taken his presidentialcampaign to Michigan and Massachusetts, staffed up in New Jersey andTennessee, and skipped an Iowa cattle call to stump in North Carolina — allstates expected to vote in March, with the exception of New Jersey, whichhas a primary slated for June 2016.It’s a risky bet that defies the usual wisdom — and historical precedent —that a candidate must achieve an early-state victory to stay in the game.But Cruz’s team is bracing for a long fight based on picking up delegates —a battle they plan to stretch all the way to the convention, where, thetheory goes, he’ll be the last conservative standing — though a contestedconvention hasn’t happened in nearly 40 years.“Our strategy is taking it to the convention, which is why you’ve seen usannouncing chairmen in California and New Jersey, as well as Iowa and NewHampshire,” said Mark Campbell, Cruz’s political director. “There are 2,470[delegates] total, and you need 1,236 of them to win. None of these can beaccumulated at any one time, which is why it’s a marathon more than asprint. So we are methodically going state by state, focusing on grassroots and party activists.”Campbell said they expect Cruz to place “in the top three” in Iowa, NewHampshire and South Carolina, and Cruz is spending time there as well — buthe made clear that the real strategizing is, already, built around delegatecounts.“We expect to do well in all of the early primary states, which will giveus sufficient momentum to do extremely well in the March 1 primaries … andcaucuses,” he said. “Obviously Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina andNevada are important, but then there are many large states that will bedistributing their delegates starting March 1.”Betting big on later contests has little track record of success. There’soften talk of a contested convention — as there was, briefly, in 2012 — butthe last time that actually happened was in 1976, when Gerald Ford narrowlybeat out Ronald Reagan over a contest for delegates at the RepublicanNational Convention. And it’s almost as rare for a nominee to clinch thetitle without winning at least one of the first two nominating contests.Bill Clinton and George McGovern failed to win Iowa or New Hampshire in1992 and 1972, respectively, but both clocked in as strong second-placefinishers in the Granite State, ultimately propelling them to thenominations. On the Republican side, no candidate has won the nominationwithout winning either state going back to when the Iowa caucuses gainedprominence in the 1970s — a dynamic, Cruz’s team notes, the senator himselfhas acknowledged.“Candidates who play down the importance of a strong showing among earlyprimary states do so out of necessity, not choice,” said Chris Maloney, asenior vice president at Black Rock Group who worked for Mitt Romney and iswell-versed in presidential campaign logistics. “While super PACs now carrythe potential to sustain candidacies in place of early victories, it’sdifficult to envision a scenario where the eventual nominee does notpossess a first-place finish in an early nominating contest. Campaigncapital — donations, personnel — flows with momentum, not against it, andmakes recruiting delegate slates, notaries and attorneys well-versed inonerous and often costly ballot-access requirements that much easier amongstates with later contests.”But there is a scenario, note people who have observed Cruz’s strategy, inwhich three different candidates win Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina— which wouldn’t necessarily be a surprise, given how crowded and fluid theGOP field is at this point. Then all of a sudden, delegates start tomatter. So even in places where Cruz is highly unlikely to be the favoriteof the bulk of the state’s Republican primary voters — moderateMassachusetts, for example — in the states where delegates are allottedproportionally, he could still rack up some points.“If essentially there becomes no clear front-runner, then it becomesimportant for a particular candidate to start looking at raw counts,” saida Texas Republican operative. “The traditional focus on Iowa, NewHampshire, South Carolina becomes less important, and it becomes moreimportant to deal with raw delegate counts.”Cruz’s potential targets, where he has either campaigned or hired staff,include Massachusetts, Georgia, Oklahoma (where he will return thisweekend), Tennessee and Cruz’s home state of Texas — all of which aretentatively planning to vote on March 1. Then, on March 8, comes Michigan,where Cruz also visited last week, and North Carolina Republicans arehammering out details but are also eyeing March dates. But other placeswhere he’s investing resources — New Jersey, for example — aren’t expectedto have primaries till June, and party leaders hope and expect that therewill be a nominee long before then.In the meantime, Cruz — and, to some extent, Rand Paul, who has alsomaintained a relatively unorthodox campaigning schedule — is able to boosthis name ID by soaking up the free media that accompanies visits to stateswhere there are fewer candidates traipsing through.“My guess is … he’s doing a solo media strategy, going where he can get 100percent of the attention while the others are fighting for the attention inIowa,” said conservative radio host Erick Erickson, who is based inGeorgia, where Cruz visited recently. He noted that over the weekend, Cruzwas in North Carolina instead of at Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst’s Roast and Ride(Campbell said the trip was long-planned and was an opportunity to pick upstate co-chairs). “So none of the other guys got the media coverage he gotby just going to North Carolina, which I guess if you’re trying to do afree media campaign, that’s the way to do it.”*Ted Cruz Going After the Libertarian-Hawk Vote<https://reason.com/blog/2015/06/10/ted-cruz-going-after-the-libertarian-haw>// Reason // Matt Welch – June 10, 2015 *At National Review, Joel Gehrke reports that the Ted Cruz campaign “thinksit has identified a way to begin” to “pick off enough libertarian votes tohobble Rand Paul.” How? By running to the right of Paul on nationalsecurity:Perhaps surprisingly, Cruz’s [analytics] team discovered that nationalsecurity is a prominent and growing concern among libertarian voters.”There is a plurality of libertarians whose top issue is national securitytoday,” [Cruz campaign director of research and analytics Chris] Wilsonsays, pegging the figure in the mid-30s. “Now, I doubt that was the case in2008. It may not have been even in 2012. But today it is.” Consequently, hebelieves that Cruz’s support for the USA Freedom Act, which Senate MajorityLeader Mitch McConnell backed begrudgingly after failing to pass a billreauthorizing the Patriot Act, hit the sweet spot in terms of appealing tolibertarians who dislike the NSA but fear ISIS.Are libertarian-leaning Republicans really worried that Rand Paul is toosoft on ISIS? Color me doubtful. While there’s no doubt that Americans as awhole, Republicans especially, are more anxious about national security andmore willing to send out American bombers than they were in 2013, hawks inmy estimation have been wishful in their thinking that those numbers hasmade re-palatable notions like pre-emptive war and American boots on theground in the Middle East. Being worried about ISIS is not the same asendorsing whatever Marco Rubio thinks we should do about the Islamic State.If interventionism was really back in vogue GOP candidates wouldn’t havespend a week in mid-May stumbling over the Iraq War.It’s more likely here that analytics are being bent to fit a strategicreality and imperative. Which is to say, Ted Cruz is going after thelibertarian vote (in addition to the overlapping Tea Party vote andespecially the social conservative bloc), and he is more hawkish than Paul,so he’s going to continue heightening the contrasts while looking forpositions and rhetoric that don’t totally alienate people who distrust theNational Security Agency. I’m no Cruz fan, but I’d rather have two of theparty’s top five or six candidates vying for the libertarian vote than justone.*Ted Cruz And The False Narrative Of Christian Persecution<http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2015/06/10/ted-cruz-and-the-false-narrative-of-christian-persecution/>// Forbes // Rick Ungar – June 10, 2015 *If you ask Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) about the state of religious freedomin America, you are likely to get an earful on how Christians in thiscountry are being forced to live through some terrible era of religiouspersecution.Speaking at the Faith and Freedom Coalition summit in Iowa, Cruz told hisaudience that “There is a liberal fascism that is dedicated to going afterbelieving Christians who follow the biblical teaching on marriage,” andthat there is “no room for Christians in today’s Democratic Party.”Really?Last I checked—which was about five minutes ago—all but 30 (28 Jewish and 2Muslim) Democrats serving in the United States House of Representatives andSenate identify as Christians.These numbers might lead a more rational and less politically motivatedobserver to conclude that there is still quite a bit of room for Christiansto be a part of the Democratic Party and its leadership.In truth, even the most ardent evangelical should be able to summon thelogic required to realize that using the Constitution to resolvedisagreements and conflicts between Christian beliefs and the beliefstructures of their fellow Americans who think differently is hardly an actof persecution. Rather, these efforts are simply an act of fealty to ourfounding document and the men who wrote it—most of who were, themselves,Christian believers.It is possible that Senator Cruz’s inability to distinguish between legaldisagreements and religious persecution may rest in his inability torecognize what persecution in America really looks like?As Paul Waldman so aptly wrote a few years ago in The American Prospect,“The impulse to jam that crown of thorns down on your head is a powerfulone in politics. It means you’ve achieved the moral superiority of thevictim, and the other side must be the victimizer. The problem is thatthese folks don’t seem to have much of a grasp on what second-classcitizenship actually looks like. Last time I checked, nobody was forbiddento vote because they’re a Christian, or not allowed to eat in their choiceof restaurants, or forced to use separate water fountains, or even beforbidden by the state to marry the person of their choice. That’s whatsecond-class citizenship is. Having somebody on television call your viewsretrograde may not be fun, but it doesn’t make you a second-class citizen.”It seems unlikely that a victim of religious persecution would be permittedto make the statements we hear Ted Cruz utter—in his effort to rally thereligious right to his cause —without suffering some form of personalrepression or punishment. Can anyone testify to the effort being made byour government to silence Senator Cruz? So far as I can see, he remainscompletely free to say and do what he wishes, including publicly making funof a grieving father who has just suffered the loss of his eldest son. Hashe been forced to change his religious practices under threat of penalty?Has Ted Cruz’s life or status in society been altered in any way merelybecause he is a Christian believer?Further, is it unfair to ask why the cries of religious persecution pouringforth from those now claiming great offense are missing in action when aperson of color, or one with a different sexual orientation, is treatedwith less respect or opportunity? Galatians 3:28 states, “There is neitherJew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one inChrist Jesus.”Is it not, therefore, a violation of Christian belief to allow a black manin America to be treated differently than a white man in America? Would itnot be a violation of Christian belief to view a gay American as something‘lesser’ than a straight American?Let me be clear that I sympathize with the Christian baker or flowersupplier who feels that being forced to provide their products to a gaywedding violates their religious convictions. Indeed, I agree that nobodyshould be required by law or otherwise to affirmatively perform an act thatis in conflict with a religious conviction that can be legitimately tracedto the roots of the religion in question.I would, however, raise for the discussion the case of a religious Jewwhose religion prohibits work, driving, or even speaking on the phoneduring the sabbath, being forced to do one or all of the same when his orher employer demands. I can’t help but wonder where the cries of religiouspersecution are when this type of an event takes place.In my view, there is a difference between the law providing same sexcouples the equal opportunity to marry, which I anticipate the SupremeCourt will soon confirm is a right in compliance with our Constitution, andforcing those who do not believe in the same to actively participate inthat wedding. While I certainly agree that our Constitution protects theright of a same-sex couple to marry in the same way that I am entitled tosuch protection, I disagree with the notion that people should be requiredto commit an act that is in violation of their religious convictions. Thedecision of a local baker to politely decline to provide a cake for thewedding reception hardly constitutes a denial of a same sex couple’sConstitutional right to marry as they please.*CHRISTIE**In Washington Speech, Chris Christie Sounds Like He’s Ready to Run<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/10/jeb-bush-in-berlin-says-west-is-confronting-a-more-aggressive-putin/>// NYT // Nick Corasaniti – June 10, 2015 *Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey told reporters on Tuesday that his familywas completely supportive of a potential presidential run; his decisionhinged on his will to do it.Speaking in Washington on Wednesday, he seemed ready to make the jump aswell.“I want to be a part of that discussion, I want to be a part of thatdebate, and I want to be part of the leadership that brings our country tonew heights through the power and the goodness of each individual thatmakes up this country,” he said at the Latino Coalition Small BusinessSummit.Indeed, Mr. Christie seemed like someone ready to make his case to thecountry. To showcase his coalition-building potential, he ticked off thegains he made in his 2013 re-election effort, noting that he drew thesupport of a majority of Latinos in the state and doubled his support amongAfrican Americans. He plans to continue that outreach effort, he said, incontrast to some of his fellow Republicans.“My party, quite frankly, has been guilty in some respects of speaking in away that doesn’t sound very welcoming to new members,” he said, arguingthat if “a club doesn’t sound like it’s welcoming you, you’re not going tocome, no matter how much you might agree with them.”He weaved in broad platitudes about his successes as a governor, speakingat length about Goya, the Latin American food purveyor, opening itsheadquarters in Jersey City in April, and he made few specific policystatements, aside from calling for the end of the Dodd-Frank financialregulatory law and for providing more choices in education.He was reserved, at times even somber, invoking phrases like “the goodnessof their heart” and “the goodness of the soul.” But his trademark blusteremerged at the end of the session, when he responded to a questionregarding education that recalled his battles with the teachers’ unions.Mr. Christie tore through a list of critiques of the unions, while callingon the need for “raw politics” to deal with them, and concluded with yetanother indication that he’s ready to run.“If you’re ready to start offending people in order to achieve a greatergoal, you’ve found the right guy,” he said. “I’m here to help offend peoplewith you.”*Court Ruling Removes a Bump From Chris Christie’s Path<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/10/jeb-bush-in-berlin-says-west-is-confronting-a-more-aggressive-putin/>// NYT – June 10, 2015 *New Jersey’s highest court handed Mr. Christie a victory on Tuesday when itallowed him to skip the pension payments he promised to make in a signaturelaw.That means he won’t have to find the $1.58 billion a lower court had wantedhim to restore to this year’s state budget, and it will make balancing nextyear’s budget a lot easier. He can decide whether to run for president, acall he has promised to make this month, spared of any “fiscal crisis”headlines.The court sided with him against public employee unions, which may helpremind Republican primary voters that the governor was willing to take onthose powerful interests – a fight that spurred his rise to nationalstardom. But the decision could also reinforce doubts among Republicansabout his fiscal management of New Jersey. Mr. Christie couldn’t make thepayments because the state’s job growth has lagged well behind neighboringstates and the nation. The missed payments resulted in a record nine creditdowngrades.While Mr. Christie has been selling himself as a straight shooter, thecourt, despite its ruling for him, didn’t make him seem like a man of hisword.“The loss of public trust due to the broken promises” in the law, the courtwrote in its decision, “is staggering.”Mr. Christie speaks at a Latino Coalition event on Wednesday in Washington.He won a majority of Latino voters in his re-election two years ago andpresents that victory as the kind that can help a Republican win the WhiteHouse. But that was so many problems ago.*N.J. Gov. Chris Christie Uses Court Pension Win in Fundraising Pitch<http://blogs.wsj.com/metropolis/2015/06/10/n-j-gov-chris-christie-uses-court-pension-win-in-fundraising-pitch/>// WSJ // Heather Haddon – June 10, 2015 *One day after New Jersey’s highest court delivered Gov. Chris Christie avictory on a pension-funding fight, the potential 2016 Republicanpresidential candidate is using the issue to fundraise.Mr. Christie’s political-action committee, Leadership Matters for America,sent a fundraising email to supporters Wednesday that touted the court’sdecision as a sign of the governor’s leadership abilities. It concluded byasking for donations to the PAC, according to a copy of the email.“The greatest leaders in our history weren’t afraid to fight for what wasright, even if it was unpopular. Do you want a leader like that inWashington?” the email read. “If your answer is yes, donate $5 or moretoday and help us support the fight to send courageous leaders to D.C. onceagain!”Mr. Christie’s willingness to take on public-sector unions has helped raisehis profile among Republicans nationally.The fundraising solicitation came from Mike DuHaime, a senior advisor toMr. Christie’s PAC and a longtime strategist for the governor. Mr. DuHaimedidn’t respond to a request for comment.On Tuesday, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that the Christieadministration could slash funding to pensions for state workers, eventhough the governor signed a law requiring escalating payments into theunderfunded benefit system.If the court had ruled against Mr. Christie, it would have been anotherobstacle for the governor as he pursues the possibility of entering thepresidential race. On Tuesday, state Democrats and the public-sector unionsdenounced the court’s rulingIn a statement, Mr. Christie said the court’s decision was a victory forstate taxpayers who can’t “afford these unsustainably high costs” and thatall parties needed to resume discussions about how to make public-employeebenefits more affordable.Mr. Christie spoke before Hispanic leaders at a Washington D.C. luncheonWednesday, where he attacked teachers unions for being more interested inthe comfort of their members than doing more to improve student learning.The governor has spoken about the need to extend the school day and year.On Thursday, Mr. Christie leaves for Iowa, home of the first-in-the-nationpresidential caucus, for two days. Mr. Christie has said he’ll announce adecision on whether he’s running at the end of the month.*Christie faults GOP for sounding unwelcoming to Latinos<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/christie-faults-gop-for-sounding-unwelcoming-to-latinos/2015/06/10/0f62db70-0fba-11e5-a0fe-dccfea4653ee_story.html>// AP // Luis Alonso Lugo & Jill Colvin – June 10, 2015 *New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie faulted his party Wednesday for itsunwelcoming tone at times to minority voters.In a speech to a Latino Coalition small business conference, the potentialRepublican presidential contender also boasted about getting 51 percent ofthe Hispanic vote in his re-election as governor.Christie portrays himself as the kind of Republican who can attractfemales, blacks, Hispanics and other voters who are normally drawn toDemocrats.Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP nominee, won just 27 percent of the Latino votein his contest against President Barack Obama — a disconnect thatintensified interest among some Republicans in expanding the party’s appealto a broader spectrum of people, especially the growing Hispanic vote.The GOP “has been guilty in some respects of speaking in a way that doesnot sound very welcoming to new members,” Christie said. “If you want to bea leader in this country, you have to first reach your hand out and changethe tone of our national conversation.”If Christie chooses to run for the nomination, he will face challengers whohave already begun an aggressive outreach to Hispanic voters. One of themis former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush, who speaks Spanish. And another is FloridaSen. Marco Rubio, who is Cuban American.Christie credited his meetings with communities across New Jersey for hisgains with Latinos and others in his re-election campaign. He was ridinghigh in opinion polls in the aftermath of Superstorm Sandy and faced anopponent who gained little traction.He said his experience “tells you that if we change the way that we heareach other, if you treat each other with respect, even when we disagree, wecan bring people together.”Christie says he will decide this month whether to run for the Republicannomination.*For Chris Christie, ‘good’ news is relative<http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/chris-christie-good-news-relative-0>// MSNBC // Steve Benen – June 10, 2015 *The headline on the front page of The Hill yesterday was, for the mostpart, accurate: “NJ Supreme Court gives Christie a win on pensions.” Andinsofar as the Republican governor hoped the state court would rule hisway, yesterday offered Chris Christie some welcome news.The New Jersey Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that Gov. Chris Christie (R) canmove ahead with his proposed $1.57 billion cut to the state’s publicemployee pensions system to clean the state’s fiscal house.The decision came as much-needed good news for Christie, who is expected toannounce whether he’ll run for president in the coming weeks.When it comes to political, economic, and legal developments, the GardenState governor hasn’t had it easy lately, and I don’t doubt that Christieand his political team were delighted by the 5-2 ruling from the stateSupreme Court.But with Christie, “good news” is relative. As the New York Times reportedthis morning, “While Mr. Christie has been selling himself as a straightshooter, the court, despite its ruling for him, didn’t make him seem like aman of his word. ‘The loss of public trust due to the broken promises’ inthe law, the court wrote in its decision, ‘is staggering.’”In other words, in Christie’s “win,” the same judges who agreed with hislegal argument also concluded that the governor broke his word and violatedthe public trust.For those hoping for a refresher in this story, this 2014 column from theStar-Ledger’s Tom Moran on New Jersey’s pension reform efforts is worthanother look.[Christie] did only the easy part. He made public workers pay more forskimpier benefits, and froze cost-of-living adjustments for currentretirees. That tough medicine was justified to deal with the emergency.But the other half of the deal was just as important. For his part,Christie promised to ramp up state payments into the pension fundsgradually, over seven years, to make up for the scofflaw governors in bothparties who shorted these funds over two decades.The point is that both sides had to absorb their share of pain. Publicworkers did their part. Now Christie is saying he will not do his, that hewill short the funds by a whopping $2.4 billion through next year.The GOP governor said he’d boost investments in the pension funds, butChristie was counting on increased job creation and improved economicgrowth to help provide additional resources. When New Jersey’s economylagged, the money wasn’t there, and Christie didn’t follow through.A record nine debt downgrades soon followed.The New Jersey Supreme Court sided with Christie, effectively saying hecould legally pursue his preferred course: investing far less in thepension funds than he said he would. Whether or not this should beconsidered a Christie “victory” is a matter of perspective.*PERRY**Perry’s cherry-picked claim that America would have lost 400,000 jobswithout Texas<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/wp/2015/06/10/perrys-cherry-picked-claim-that-america-would-have-lost-400000-jobs-without-texas/>// WaPo // Michelle Ye Hee Lee – June 10, 2015 *“In the last seven years of my tenure, Texas created 1.5 million new jobs.As a matter of fact, without Texas, America would have lost 400,000 jobs.”–Former Texas governor Rick Perry (R), presidential announcement speech,June 4, 2015In declaring his second bid for the presidency, Perry touted one of hisfavorite talking points: job growth in Texas. Perry, the state’s governorfrom 2000 to 2015, frequently makes references to the state’s economicaccomplishments, and this topic likely will be repeated through thecampaign.The Fact Checker recently examined separate claim from Perry about jobcreation in Texas, which earned him Two Pinocchios. Despite that rating,however, he unfortunately repeated the claim in his presidential campaignannouncement. The Fact Checker has long urged readers to be wary ofpoliticians using jobs numbers to highlight their success in office, asmuch of what happens in the economy is out of a politician’s control andjobs data are subject to manipulation.Is Perry’s often-repeated statement correct?The FactsTexas’ workforce as a whole, indeed, has grown since 2000. Texas has hadnoteworthy economic recovery compared to other states, for many reasonsthat cannot all be tracked to the decisions of a single policymaker or thestate’s chief executive.Perry’s staff cited the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Current PopulationSurvey, a monthly survey of about 60,000 households. This is used to trackchanges of unemployment rates and labor force activity. It measures thenumber of people who are employed, unemployed and are unemployed butlooking for work. Perry’s figure comes from the survey’s total civilianemployment numbers, which includes agricultural, self-employed and unpaidfamily workers.In December 2007, there were 10,997,356 employed residents in Texas andtotal U.S. employment was 146,273,000. (The U.S.-without-Texas employmentwas 135,275,644). In December 2014, there were 12,570,050 employed Texasresidents, and 147,442,000 total employed residents in the United States.(The U.S.-without-Texas employment was 134,871,950).So while Texas gained 1,572,694 jobs between December 2007 and December2014, the United States gained 1,169,000 in the same period. The differencebetween the two (i.e., U.S.-without-Texas employment in December 2014 minusU.S.-without-Texas in December 2007) was 403,694 — essentially the figurePerry used.But that is not the same as the number of “jobs” that would have been“lost” without Texas. In fact, the BLS warns against aggregatingstate-level data and adding them up to the national total, as state figuresare adjusted at the state level.The standard measure for job gains or losses is a different data set: BLSCurrent Employment Statistics, also called establishment survey or payrollsurvey. This is a monthly survey of about 588,000 worksites in the countryand is an estimate of non-farm wage and salary jobs, not of employedAmericans. It does not include agriculture, self-employed or unpaid familyworkers.Economists, the BLS and the Federal Reserve use the establishment surveywhen measuring job growth. Perry’s staff did not respond when we asked whyhe used the household survey instead of the more commonly citedestablishment survey.The establishment survey shows a much different picture. The seasonallyadjusted non-farm payroll data show that between December 2007(138,350,000) and December 2014 (140,592,000), there were 2.2 million netnew jobs in the United States. During the same period, there were 1.2million net new jobs in Texas (10,529,900 in December 2007 to 11,749,500 inDecember 2014).Let’s see what happens when you apply Perry’s logic to the establishmentsurvey, despite the BLS’s warning that this is not kosher math: WithoutTexas, America still would have gained 1,022,400 jobs.There’s more, still applying Perry’s logic. (BLS officials can close theireyes for the next few paragraphs.)If you pick the month of December during any other year Perry was governorof Texas, and compare it to December 2014 employment numbers, it begins tobecome clear why he picked 2007. If you compare December 2000 to December2014, or compare December 2001 to December 2014, and so on, the only twoyears he can use to say that America would have “lost jobs” “without Texas”are December 2006 and December 2007.As the graph shows, if Perry picked December 2001 to compare to December2014, he would have to say: “Without Texas, America still would have gained8.8 million jobs.” If he picked December 2006 to compare to December 2014,he may have said: “Without Texas, America would have lost 240,000 jobs.”Last one, using the Perry logic: From January 2000 to December 2014 —Perry’s entire tenure as governor — the United States gained 8.2 millionnet new jobs without Texas.Further, the BLS establishment survey shows that after a bump in the numberof jobs in Texas from December 2014 to January 2015, the number isdecreasing — potentially due to the plummeting oil prices that affectstates such as Texas more than others.The Pinocchio TestThis is a classic case of politicians manipulating or cherry-pickingnumbers to put their state’s performance in the best possible light. Perryused a BLS dataset used to measure unemployment rate, not job growth. Headded up state employment numbers in the way that BLS says you shouldn’t.And he picked a baseline year (December 2007) that over-inflates Texas’share of total U.S. employment and deflates what is happening to the restof the country.Perry has made similar claims in the past (FactCheck.org examined oneearlier this year) and may repeat them as he launches his campaign. Wewavered between Three and Four Pinocchios, but his raw numbers were rootedin accurate BLS data, so it tipped his claim, just barely, to Three.*Rick Perry Tries Again<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/rick-perry-tries-again_b_7557480.html>// HuffPo // Chris Weigant – June 10, 2015*I’ve been giving each of the major candidates for president a seriousoverview, right after they officially announce their candidacy. Today,we’ll take a look at Rick Perry, who made his formal announcement last week.Perry is the tenth Republican to throw his hat in the 2016 ring, joiningBen Carson, Ted Cruz, Carly Fiorina, Lindsey Graham, Mike Huckabee, GeorgePataki, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio and Rick Santorum. There are at least fiveother Republicans who will also likely make a run for their party’snomination, but they have yet to formally announced their candidacies.Rick Perry served the longest term as Texas governor in the state’shistory, taking over the office from George W. Bush (when Bush left tobecome president), and Perry only stepped down from this post earlier thisyear. He, obviously, wants to follow the trail Bush blazed from the Texasgovernor’s office to the Oval Office. However, this will be the second runfor Perry, and he’ll have to improve significantly on his previousperformance to even have a chance of doing so.This is likely the biggest obstacle Perry faces. In an incredibly crowdedRepublican field, there are only three men who are not making their firstrun for the presidency: Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum and Perry. None ofthese three have exactly caught fire in the polls yet (although it isearly, and anything could still happen). But it does seem that this timearound the Republican electorate is looking for a completely new face tohead their ticket, which could spell doom for the three also-rans.Perry’s 2012 run was impressive, at least at first. Right after heannounced, he leapt to the top of the polling, beating out Mitt Romney andall the rest of the Republican field. Unfortunately for Perry, he didn’tstay on top of the heap for very long, and his chances all but evaporatedafter a disastrous debate performance. When asked to name the three federalgovernment departments he would work to abolish as president, Perryinfamously could only name two of them. After hemming and hawing for awhile, Perry just threw in the towel and replied: “Oops.” This “oopsmoment” absolutely torpedoed whatever chance he might have had to beatRomney and the rest of the field, and his poll numbers quickly sank like astone.A plausible explanation for his disastrous debate performance was revealedlater: Perry had undergone back surgery mere weeks before he announced hiscandidacy, and was on some serious painkillers during the debates (indeed,during his whole campaign). Anyone who has ever been on such painkillerscan easy attest that they don’t exactly go hand-in-hand with coherentthinking or clear-headedness. If Perry was popping pills before walking onthe debate stage, it’s a little more understandable that his memory wasn’tfully in working order, in other words. Perry’s big problem, however, isthat you rarely get a second chance to make a first impression.Perry falls somewhere in the middle of the conservative ideologicalspectrum. He’s taken a very hard line on some issues dear to the Republicanbase, but then he’s also championed some rather unorthodox positions aswell, which might cause him problems if he does rise to the frontrunnerranks of the Republican pack (where his positions will get much morescrutiny from his fellow Republicans).Perry, as governor, slashed the state’s safety net to the bone, and pusheda conservative version of health care reform, which consisted mostly of”tort reform.” But Texas is now the number one state in the country when itcomes to the rate of uninsured citizens, meaning this panacea didn’texactly work wonders. Perry is a hardliner on abortion, and opposes it inalmost all cases — including for rape or incest victims — and would onlycarve out an exception if the life of the mother is at risk. Perry iscounting on the religious right’s support (he announced his 2012presidential candidacy at a prayer rally), and is stridentlyanti-gay-rights. He has expressed support for a constitutional amendmentlimiting marriage to a man and a woman. Perry is an Eagle Scout, andstrongly supported the Boy Scouts banning gays from their ranks. He is (nosurprise, for a Texas Republican) very pro-gun and presided over theexecutions of hundreds of Texas prisoners — more than any other state byfar. All these things are pretty standard Republican positions, well withinthe mainstream of his party.Perry, however, has broken ranks with Republican orthodoxy in severalnotable ways. He signed a law in Texas to give undocumented immigrantsin-state tuition rates at state colleges, which is much more liberal thanmost conservatives’ position. Unlike some of the other Republicans runningfor president (Marco Rubio, chiefly), Perry actually stood behind thisaction and defended it, rather than running away from it in an effort topander to Republican voters. Perry also championed mandatory HPV vaccineshots for young women, which raised eyebrows among many Republicans (andnot only the anti-vaccine crowd). Perry has one further issue that has longbeen a bugaboo among the more conspiracy-minded Republicans (andlibertarians). Perry supported the “Trans-Texas Corridor” project whichwould have created a major transportation route from Oklahoma to Mexico, inan effort to boost trade through his state. But this soon became the stuffof conspiracy theory, supposedly being just a preliminary to some sort ofmerger of Canada, Mexico and the United States into asupposedly-nightmarish regional government which would destroy life as weknow it in America. Or something. This likely won’t hurt Perry all thatmuch, however, because so few people have heard about it, and because theproject never really got off the ground.Perry’s strong point — the foundation of his campaign, if last time is anyindication — is the explosive growth in Texas during his time in office.Perry likes to refer to this as the “Texas miracle,” on the campaign trail.Texas showed an enormous amount of growth in jobs and population over thepast 15 years, and (just as one indicator) the state added a whopping fourseats in the House of Representatives in the last reapportionment (afterthe 2010 census) — far more than any other state (California, bycomparison, added zero seats, while New York and Ohio both lost two seats).Perry is running as the man who made such spectacular growth happen, inshort. How much of the credit is his is debatable, as is much of the “TexasMiracle” itself, but politicians aren’t exactly shy about claiming suchcredit, so Perry’s claims are really just par for the course.Perry may be weak on the actual fiscal record of Texas, however — a pointso far not being made by his opponents in the Republican field, but onewhich could gain traction if Perry starts doing better in the polls. WhilePerry was governor, the state began financing such basic services as roads(and other infrastructure) and unemployment benefits, by borrowing anenormous amount of money. The total state debt essentially tripled duringhis term as governor, due largely to his refusal to raise taxes. This maynot go over very well with the fiscal conservatives in the Republican base– again, if any of his opponents actually uses it to attack Perry.Perry is also running as a strong proponent of beefing up border security,an issue where he’s got more experience than most of his Republicanopponents (Texas shares the longest border with Mexico of any state). He’shoping to defuse the immigration issue by being the strongest voice forincreasing border patrols and stopping illegal entry on America’s southernborder.Could Perry’s candidacy catch fire the way it did the last time around?Well, anything’s possible, especially this early in the race. But so far,it just hasn’t happened. He has received a small bump in the polling, buthe’s still in tenth place overall — right behind Donald Trump. If he’sgoing to be considered a viable candidate, he’ll have to get his pollnumbers out of the bottom tier of candidates. Unfortunately for Perry,there are a lot of other people who will be attempting to do exactly thesame thing.If Perry does surprise everyone and start moving up, he’s got as good achance as most of the candidates to break into the top rank (currentlyoccupied by Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Scott Walker). At the present time,however, there are no indications that this is going to happen. But perhapsone very good debate performance (to finally bury the notoriety of hisprevious debate performances) could move him up to challenge thefrontrunners.Perry’s Texas swagger probably wouldn’t go over all that well in a generalelection, though, if he were somehow to become the Republican nominee. Inthe first place, the last Republican who was president also had apronounced Texas swagger, and look what that got us all. Perry will have asimilar problem to Jeb Bush’s, in separating himself from the man he tookover the Texas governor’s office from: George W. Bush. My guess is that ifit came down to a race between Hillary Clinton and Rick Perry, Clintonwould beat him pretty easily. But I would be very surprised if Perry gotthat far. I think his “oops moment” is going to be remembered by too manyvoters for him to recreate his image (glasses or not). I also think thatthe Republican electorate truly is looking for something new in theircandidate of choice this year, and as a direct result Perry isn’t evengoing to merit much attention from most Republican primary voters.*The Legal Trouble That Could Haunt Rick Perry’s Presidential Campaign<http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/06/rick-perry-president-indictment>// Mother Jones // Patrick Caldwell – June 10, 2015 *Rick Perry’s recently launched presidential campaign is off to a relativelysmooth start. Sure, unlike his 2012 bid, he’s entering the field far, farbehind in the polls—he’s trailing Donald Trump!—but he’s been getting goodpress. “Rick Perry’s still got it,” proclaimed Politico’s Katie Glueck overthe weekend, noting that “when it comes to glad-handing and working acrowd, Perry still sets the gold standard even if he trails in the polls.”But as he launches his second run for the White House, Perry faces ongoinglegal trouble back home in Texas stemming from his time as governor. LastAugust, a grand jury indicted Perry for abusing his power as governor.Perry has repeatedly requested that judges dismiss the case, only to berebuked as the allegations progress toward a trial—one that could play outduring the heat of the GOP primaries.The case is a bit convoluted, but it stems from Perry’s 2013 effort to ousta county district attorney who investigates public corruption.Texas has an unusual system of keeping politicians in check. There’s no astate-level commission that scrutinizes political malfeasance. Instead, theTravis County DA—based in Austin—is responsible for conducting theseinvestigations.Texas Republicans had never been huge fans of a system that entrusts thisliberal county with that power (especially after the Travis DA chargedformer US House majority leader Tom DeLay with violating election law in2005). Nevertheless, the status quo had hummed along until April 2013, whenpolice arrested Travis County DA Rosemary Lehmberg for drunk driving.Lehmberg, a Democrat, was caught on videotape the night of her arrestthreatening police officers.Republicans, including Perry, immediately called on Lehmberg to resign. Butshe refused, managing to hold onto her job despite various legal maneuversto remove her from office. So Perry attempted a more creative method to getrid of Lehmberg. In 2013, he used the governor’s line item veto power tocross out $7.5 million in funds allocated to the Public Integrity Unit, thesubsection of the Travis County DA’s office that investigates politicalcorruption. Perry directly linked the veto to Lehmberg’s arrest, saying hecouldn’t allow the funds to go to this outfit “when the person charged withultimate responsibility of that unit has lost the public’s confidence.”That raised the ire of Texans for Public Justice, a left-leaning goodgovernment outfit. It filed a complaint alleging Perry had abused hisoffice’s powers. “The governor overstepped his authority by sticking hisnose in Travis County’s business,” the group’s executive director said in astatement at the time. This led to a judge tasking a special prosecutor tolook into the case, and that led to a grand jury and felony indictment forPerry on one count of abusing his official capacity and another count ofcoercing a public servant.Perry has been dismissive of the case, turning his mugshot into afundraising t-shirt. And a number of legal commentators, even liberal ones,have agreed, questioning the seriousness of the charges leveled againstPerry. University of California, Irvine law professor Rick Hasen termed it”the criminalization of ordinary politics.”Yet judges in Texas aren’t ready to shelve the charges. San Antonio JudgeBert Richardson has repeatedly turned down motions from Perry’s lawyers todismiss the case. In April, the case was assigned to a three-judge panel inTexas’ 3rd Court of Appeals. No date has been set for initial hearings, sothe case might not get fully aired until the peak of presidential primaryseason later this fall. If Perry he ends up getting convicted on bothcounts, he would face a maximum sentence of over 100 years of jail time.No matter the outcome of the case, Perry soon might get his wish to seeLehmberg off the public corruption beat: The state house and senate bothrecently passed bills to reassign corruption cases to the Texas Rangers—alaw enforcement agency that is overseen by the governor’s appointees.*Perry Switches On Trade: TPP’s Become ‘An Animal’ That ‘Needs To Go Away’<http://dailycaller.com/2015/06/10/perry-switches-on-trade-tpps-become-an-animal-that-needs-to-go-away-audio/>// The Daily Caller // Al Weaver – June 10, 2015 *After initially offering up support for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)deal, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry has withdrawn his backing ahead of aHouse vote to potentially approve a deal Friday.In an interview on “The Hugh Hewitt Show” Wednesday, the 2016 candidateargued that much like the Ex-Im Bank, which Perry also supported untilrecently, the TPP has now become “an animal” that “needs to go away” atthis point and time.Perry had signaled his potential opposition to the TPP in May based on hislack of trust in President Barack Obama negotiating a trade deal.“As you find out information, I don’t mind — just like the Ex-Im Bank, Ibelieve that America has to be a competitor out there. I think we have todo everything we can to well our products around the world. But like theEx-Im Bank, when it came to be abundantly clear of the fraud and corruptionthat was going on there, I finally said ‘listen, I can’t support youanymore,” Perry told Hewitt. “At this particular point and time, this thingneeds to go away. And the TPP has now become that kind of an animal, if youwill.”“When you will not tell Congress and when you will not tell the Americanpeople what is in a trade agreement — Washington has a real issue withtrust as it is, and when you try to pull that on the American people and westart hearing some of the things that are in there — with this president’srecord of pulling some of the things he has done, we have to pass the billso we’ll know out what’s in it type of rhetoric,” Perry continued. “If youlike your doctor, you can keep your doctor. If you pass Obamacare, thecosts are going to go down…With that kind of record and not being honestand transparent with the American people, I think it’s just easier — well,I wouldn’t say easier, I think the wise thing to do is to say Mr.President, if you don’t trust the American people to know what’s in thistrade deal, we don’t trust you enough to pass it.”Perry had previously signaled reservations about a potential deal, asreported on May 19 by the Texas Tribune.“I would rather Barack Obama not be negotiating for me right now, but he’sgoing to be there for about 20 more months, and this deal needs to betransparent, and that’s my greatest concern — is the lack of transparencyin this piece of legislation,” Perry said. “Until the public and Congressare comfortable that they know what’s in this trade agreement, I’m notgoing to recommend that they sign it, and if we have to wait until there’sa new president, then that’s okay.”*GRAHAM**The most interesting candidate you’re not paying any attention to<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/06/10/the-most-interesting-candidate-youre-not-paying-any-attention-to/?postshare=1651433962579040>// WaPo // Chris Cillizza – June 10, 2015 *When Lindsey Graham talks, the political world, generally, yawns. Graham,while a very well-regarded figure from his Senate perch, is notparticularly regarded at all in the 2016 presidential race that he recentlyjoined.Graham is an asterisk — or close to it — in polling in every early state(except for his home state of South Carolina) and nationally. He’s noteven close to making the stage in the first Republican debate set forAugust. He’s generally regarded as a cause candidate, with that cause beingto represent the most hawkish views on foreign policy and national securityagainst attacks by Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul.Ok, fine. But, if you stop and actually listen to some of what Graham issaying — particularly on the subject of bipartisanship — you realize thathe’s one of the most interesting candidates in the field and one of the fewwho can genuinely sell himself as a change agent.Here’s Graham answering a question from “Meet The Press” host Chuck Toddabout how he would address political polarization in Washington:I think there’s a market for a better way. When I talked to that young guythere, I said, you’re going to have to work a little longer, pal. If I’mpresident, I’m going to ask you to work a little bit longer. What do peopledo between 65 and 67, they work two years longer. Ronald Reagan and TipO’Neil showed us what to do. I’m making a bet here. I’m making a bet thatyou can talk about problem-solving in a Republican primary and still getthe nomination. I’m making a bet that you can openly embrace working withDemocrats and still get the nomination. I’m making a bet that with awar-weary public, you can rally them to go over there and keep the fightover there before it comes here. Now, if I lose those bets it doesn’t meanAmerica is lost, it just means I fell short. To a young person in politics,listen to what I’m doing here and see if it makes sense to you. There is agrowing desire by the public at large to stop the BS. I feel it, I senseit, and I’m running on the idea that if you elect me, I’ll do whatever isnecessary to defend the nation. I’m running not as a candidate for a singleparty but for a great nation.If you believe the American people when they say they want leaders who arewilling to work with one another and take positions because they believe inthem not because the policies are popular, it’s hard for me to imagine abetter message than that paragraph from Graham above.And, not for nothing, Graham’s recent life in politics suggests he actuallywalks some of his talk. Graham was one of the leading voices in support ofthe comprehensive immigration reform proposal that passed the Senate inJune 2013 only to die in the House. Unlike most of the Republican Senatorsinvolved in that effort *** cough *** MARCO RUBIO *** cough ***, Grahamstood steadfastly behind his support for immigration reform — despite thefact that it drew him five primary challengers who cited it as exhibit Athat he simply wasn’t conservative enough for South Carolina.Graham won that primary last June with 56 percent of the vote. How? Here’show The Atlantic’s Molly Ball diagnosed it: “Graham talked about hissupport for a path to citizenship at nearly every campaign stop, toutinghis work with Democrats on the issue as evidence of his willingness tosolve tough problems in Washington. By his calculus, voters would accept adifference of opinion, but they wouldn’t accept insincerity.”That’s pretty compelling stuff, right? A guy who not only says he iscommitted to work across the aisle but actually has done it — and owned it?And yet, Graham is where he is: An asterisk in the polls, classified,already, in the “also-ran” pile of GOP presidential candidates.There’s a case to be made that it’s early in the process and Graham stillhas plenty of time to rise above his currently meager station in the pollsand so on and so forth. True, if unlikely based on the history of thesesorts of races.To me though, Graham’s candidacy is a sort of campaign thought experiment:What if politics produced a candidate that had lots and lots of what thepublic said it wanted but in a somewhat unlikely package (asouthern-drawling lifetime politician) and without the buzz and fanfarethat surrounds the so-called “top tier”?Could a candidate like that possibly hope to break through?*Lindsey Graham to Sean Hannity: Knock it off<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/lindsey-graham-sean-hannity-knock-it-off-118813.html>// Politico // Nick Gass – June 10, 2015 *Fox News host Sean Hannity went after presidential candidate Lindsey Grahamon Tuesday night, responding to the South Carolina Republican’s recentremarks that blamed both him and MSNBC host Rachel Maddow for the role theyplay in polarizing American politics.“I’ve come to conclude that the Republican Party and the country as a wholeneeds to knock off some of this stuff,” Graham told Hannity.Story Continued BelowGraham’s initial comments, aired June 2 in an interview with NBC News’Chuck Todd, imagined what the two political commentators from opposite endsof the spectrum might have said to Benjamin Franklin.“You know, Ben Franklin comes outside and Rachel Maddow and Sean Hannityjump on him, ‘Don’t give in, Ben.’ Just think how hard it is in today’s24/7 news cycle [with] talk radio, cable television and money,” Graham toldTodd. “There is a group telling you to say no about everything.”Hannity ticked through his policy positions available on his website,touting his own solutions.“Absolutely, you have solutions,” Graham responded. “But so does RachelMaddow. And the problem is that we can’t blend these solutions.”“Wasn’t Martin Luther King Jr. polarizing in a good way for justice?”Hannity asked. “He was a polarizing figure, right?”Ronald Reagan was also described as “polarizing” when he took on sittingPresident Gerald Ford for the Republican nomination in 1976, Hannity said.The Fox News host also brought up Graham’s own support of President BillClinton’s impeachment while he was a member of the House, as well as hissupport of the troop surge in Iraq.At times, Graham acknowledged he has been polarizing, but told Hannity thathis solutions don’t work. Shutting down the government over the AffordableCare Act, for example, Graham said, “made zero sense to me.”*Lindsey Graham’s abortion push could imperil fellow GOPers<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/lindsey-grahams-abortion-push-could-imperil-fellow-gopers-118849.html>// Politico // Burgess Everett – June 10, 2015 *Sen. Lindsey Graham is renewing a GOP push for a 20-week abortion ban — abid that could boost his long-shot presidential campaign but spell troublefor vulnerable GOP senators up for reelection in swing states next year.Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) earlier promised a vote onthe hot-button bill, which already passed the House. Abortion foes say avote in the Senate would be a historical milestone, the most consequentialvote on the issue in more than a decade.But Graham’s effort threatens to hand political ammunition to Democratstrying to knock off GOP senators in purple and blue states that will decideSenate control after the 2016 election. Among them are Rob Portman of Ohio,Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin and Pat Toomey ofPennsylvania.Democratic leaders, cognizant of the damage that social issues likeabortion have done to Republican candidates in the recent past, practicallydared McConnell to take up the ban.“They can do whatever they want. We’re ready for them,” said MinorityLeader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), one of the party’s top electoral strategists,was slightly more measured.“I don’t think it’s the right thing to do and I don’t think it helps thempolitically,” said the Democratic leader in waiting.In an interview, the South Carolina Republican called his legislation “goodpolicy” and “acceptable politics.” He waved away the possibility that he isimperiling some of his GOP colleagues running in tough states — in a yearthat’s expected to favor Democrats with Hillary Clinton at the top of theticket.Ayotte, Portman and Johnson have backed the 20-week ban in the past, andsaid they would do so again if it came to a vote. But they did not urge itsspeedy consideration on the Senate floor.“Late-term abortions are obviously something that the American people don’tagree with. So I am looking at the bill and it’s up to the leader whetherhe brings it to the floor. But I’ve previously been against late-termabortions,” said Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), who in 2014 worked with Grahamto pressure then-Majority Leader Harry Reid in putting the bill up for avote, citing polls that show support for a 20-week abortion ban.Graham asserted that the measure, which he plans to introduce formally at anews conference Thursday, would be tricky even for some Democrats who backabortion rights to oppose.“A lot of pro-choice people would say, ‘Hey, that late in the pregnancy weprobably should not allow wholesale abortion,’” Graham said.Graham’s rivals for the GOP presidential nomination in 2016 uniformlyendorse a ban after 20 weeks of pregnancy. And some governors running forpresident have overseen enactment of strict abortion legislation or, likeGov. Scott Walker (R-Wis.), are in the process of doing so.But Graham would be leading the charge from the stage of the Senate floor,possibly in the thick of the 2016 primary season. Graham is running as abipartisan pragmatist who’s strong on national defense; a high-profileanti-abortion campaign could raise his profile among social conservativeactivists, some of whom will stand aside him on Thursday morning when hemakes his push for Senate action on the bill. Little known outside his homestate and far behind in the polls, Graham is looking to jump-start hisfledgling campaign.“It’s a good debate to have. We’re one of seven countries I believe thatallow wholesale abortion on demand five months into the pregnancy. I’d liketo get out of that club,” Graham said. “This is a reasonable position totake.”The abortion push is already causing some grumbling among some Republicansenators who say the party should steer clear of a pitched battle oversocial policy that will never get past President Barack Obama’s veto peneven if it somehow managed to break a filibuster.“I don’t think that should be the priority,” said Sen. Susan Collins(R-Maine). Asked if she could support such a bill, she demurred: “I don’tthink it is good policy for us to turn to that issue, period.”For Graham personally, though, there’s little downside to pressingMcConnell follow through on his pledge a year ago to put the abortion billon the floor if he became majority leader. Graham has long been a staunchanti-abortion advocate, taking up the charge to pass the 20-week ban twoyears ago and successfully pushing through a law that legally recognized inutero children killed in crimes.But the 20-week bill’s political complexity has confounded GOP leaders. Inthe House, GOP leaders were forced to pull the bill and rewrite it toassuage concerns of Republican women who objected to rape-reportingrequirements in the bill. After four months of work, the legislationeventually passed the House last month. McConnell has said little about itsince, giving no indication when it will come up for a vote in the Senate.Graham said McConnell isn’t backing away from his pledge to have a vote.“I have no reason to believe he’s changed his mind,” Graham said. But GOPleaders and senior aides suggested McConnell is no rush to bring the billto the floor.Democrats involved in 2016 Senate races indicated that they’re prepared topounce if McConnell takes up the abortion measure.“In 2016, voters across the country – men and women alike – will rememberthat Senate Republicans were more interested in playing politics withwomen’s health than in moving our country forward,” said Sadie Weiner ofthe Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.Republican leaders are defending 24 Senate seats next year, including inseveral states that President Barack Obama carried twice. Privately, someRepublicans groused that putting the legislation up for the vote wouldrevive “war on women” broadsides from Democrats and hurt the GOP in purplestates. But several vulnerable GOP incumbents said they would likelysupport the 20-week bill.“It’s pretty important to so many people that are pro-life, as am I. Ithink at some point in time it’s just reasonable to say that we shouldprotect life,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), whom former Democratic Sen.Russ Feingold is planning to challenge in what’s expected to be a closerace.From right to left: Sen. Rob Portman, Sen. Pat Toomey and Sen. Kelly Ayotte| AP PhotoPolls are mixed on abortion. The 20-week ban frequently garners a pluralityor majority of support in polls, most of which were conducted in 2013. Butlast week a Gallup survey showed Americans self-identifying as “pro-choice”for the first time since 2008.Republicans are reading the supportive polls for the 20-week bill as areason to forge ahead. But Democrats remember their previously successfulefforts to portray the GOP as insensitive on women’s healthcare.“It’s yet another proof point of them being out of touch,” said JessMcIntosh of EMILY’S List. “They were elected to create jobs.”National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman Roger Wicker ofMississippi brushed off that attack.“It’s a fully formed baby at this point. The pregnancy is halfway over,” hesaid of the abortions the bill seeks to end.A vote could help other Republicans politically.Backing the the 20-week bill could allow Republican senators such as JohnMcCain of Arizona, Roy Blunt of Missouri and Portman to flex theirconservative muscles in primary races. And pro-abortion rights Sen. MarkKirk (R-Ill.) could tout his opposition during a general election.“That’s going to be an issue that probably works for our candidates,” saidSen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the No. 3 Senate Republican. “The politics of thelife issue has changed dramatically in the past few years and the way thatLindsey’s approaching it is pretty good ground for us to stand on.”But nobody may benefit more than Graham, who stands out among many of hisconservative rivals for the Republican nomination as a lawmaker willing tocompromise.On Thursday morning he’ll stand aside leaders from social conservativegroups that say a vote on his bill is the most important abortion action inthe Senate since former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) managed to pass apartial-birth abortion ban a dozen years ago.“This moment is tailor made for him,” said Marjorie Dannenfelser, presidentof the Susan B. Anthony List, which opposes abortion rights.*SANTORUM**Rick Santorum is getting lost in the growing GOP pack<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/topoftheticket/la-na-tt-rick-santorum-lost-in-pack-20150609-story.html>// LA Times // David Horsey – June 10, 2015 *Within days after Mitt Romney lost the 2012 presidential election, I beganto receive emails from Rick Santorum’s media relations staff. At the time,I thought to myself, “This guy is still running for president.” And, ofcourse, I was right.Santorum, the former Pennsylvania senator, finished No. 2 in the 2012Republican primaries, so it made sense that he might want to have anothergo at it. The unceasing flow of emails on his behalf did not mention thenext election, of course. They were merely updates on Santorum’s speakingschedule and statements about major issues arising in the news — part of acoordinated effort to signal he remained a player in the political game.Many of the news releases arrived under the banner of Patriot Voices, anorganization formed by Santorum and his wife, Karen, in 2012 with a statedmission to “fight to protect faith, freedom, family and opportunity.” Theunstated, but rather obvious, underlying mission was to maintain apolitical organization Santorum could mobilize for another White House run.It also allowed him to avoid having to take a real job.Santorum probably hoped his good showing in the last round of primaries andhis unceasing effort to sustain grass-roots support would give him theinside track to the 2016 GOP nomination, but it has not turned out thatway. In polls, he is now languishing near the bottom in the most crowdedfield of candidates in his party’s history. Instead of fighting for firstplace with Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio and Scott Walker, Santorum is stuckbetween Carly Fiorina and George Pataki.Still, there is no reason to give up. The Iowa caucuses are still eightmonths away and, as yet, no candidate holds a commanding position in anever-expanding group of candidates that is splitting the polling numbersinto smaller and smaller fractions. Anything could happen.The uncertain nature of the Republican race at this point has made it easyfor just about anyone to announce his or her candidacy and expect to betaken at least halfway seriously. Politically speaking, there are noheavyweights in the GOP ring in this election cycle, no prohibitivefavorites. If you were a Republican with even a modest resume as a senatoror governor or Fox News analyst (or, if you were Donald Trump, with an egothe size of Manhattan), it would be easy to look around at the competitionand think, “Really? I’m at least as worthy as the rest of these guys.”And even though most of the announced and soon-to-be-announced candidatesmust know their chances are slim, they have also learned there areconsolation prizes for also-rans. Mike Huckabee turned his failed candidacyin 2008 into a lucrative TV career that is paying for a gaudy mansion inFlorida. A turn as a vice presidential nominee elevated Sarah Palin from aboring job as governor of Alaska to a glitzy celebrity career at thecrossroads of politics and entertainment. For others, being a presidentialcandidate at least earned them frequent appearances on the Sunday morningpolitical news shows.Santorum may face more meager rewards if and when he loses again. Still,considering that Pennsylvania voters booted him out of the Senate in 2006,by November 2016, he will have spent much of a decade as a presidentialcandidate or candidate-in-waiting with all the perks and attention that gowith that role. That’s not nearly as good as getting the keys to the WhiteHouse, but, for a politician, it is sure better than obscurity.*HUCKABEE**Co-Author Of Mike Huckabee Books Was Accused Of Child Molestation In TwoLegal Cases<http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/co-author-of-mike-huckabee-books-was-accused-of-child-molest#.grVmrAx63>// Buzzfeed // Andrew Kaczynski – June 10, 2015*John Perry, a prolific author who co-wrote two books with former Arkansasgovernor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee and co-wrote one withAlabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore, was accused of child molestationin two separate lawsuits, BuzzFeed News has found.A 2012 police investigation of Perry’s alleged offenses found that “theallegations of sexual battery were sustained” but that the statute oflimitations had expired.Perry co-wrote Do the Right Thing: Inside the Movement That’s BringingCommon Sense Back to America about Huckabee’s 2008 presidential campaign.He also did research and writing for Huckabee’s 2007 book Character Is theIssue, a memoir of his early time as governor. Perry also co-wrote So HelpMe God, Moore’s autobiographical account of fighting to keep a monument tothe Ten Commandments at Alabama’s Supreme Court.Those books are just a few of the titles produced with Perry’s help: Hewrote For Faith & Family: Changing America by Strengthening the Family withRichard Land, the president of Southern Evangelical Seminary, a book withformer Southern Baptist Convention president James T. Draper, as well as abook with Frank Page, the president and CEO of the Southern BaptistConvention Executive Committee. Perry even co-authored The Vow, the bookmade into a feature film starring Rachel McAdams and Channing Tatum. Perryalso lists writing two books for prominent pastor John F. MacArthur on hiswebsite.In a sworn affidavit submitted during divorce proceedings, Perry’s ex-wifeattests that she “filed for divorce as a result of Mr. Perry’sinappropriate marital conduct, to which he admitted to in his Response toInterrogatories numbers 1 and 2.” Throughout the court documents,“inappropriate marital conduct” appears to be a euphemism for the allegedmolestation.Perry’s responses are not included in the case file.Another filing, submitted by Perry’s ex-wife’s attorney earlier in the sameproceedings, refers to Perry’s “admitted sexual abuse” of a minor child.Perry’s response to that filing — also submitted prior to his ex-wife’saffidavit — does not deny the abuse, or that Perry admitted it. Instead,Perry claims that “there was never any testimony or other evidence of anykind presented” to the court, “or any orders or findings of fact […]regarding any alleged sexual abuse of any minor child relative to theparties’ divorce or any other legal proceeding.”This claim is not, however, necessarily incompatible with Perry’s ex-wife’sclaim that Perry “admitted to” the alleged “inappropriate marital conduct”during the discovery process, because it appears that those findings werenot technically “presented” to the court.Likewise, a police investigation launched in 2012 found the allegationsagainst Perry “were sustained,” according to a police departmentspokesperson, but that statute of limitations had passed.“The alleged sexual battery was reported to have occurred when the victimwas between the ages of 11 and 14,” said Nashville police departmentspokesperson Don Aaron in a statement to BuzzFeed News.“As a result of the investigation, the allegations of sexual battery weresustained, but it was determined that the statute of limitations hadtolled, barring prosecution. The victim was age 18 when she first disclosedthe allegations to non-law enforcement and said at that time she did notwant the matter reported to the Tennessee Department of Children’s Servicesor the police.”In a second series of lawsuits brought in a county court in Tennessee, andrelated to the same alleged acts of child molestation, Austin Davis, aformer parishioner of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Nashville, claimsthat the church covered up Perry’s alleged acts of child molestation andlaunched a campaign to silence and harass Davis.Inquiries to Covenant Presbyterian were forwarded to their attorney. AutumnGentry, a lawyer for Covenant Presbyterian, told BuzzFeed News they can’tcomment on ongoing litigation.The individual Perry allegedly molested told BuzzFeed News that shebelieved that the church reacted appropriately, and did not cover upPerry’s alleged offense. Perry has not returned multiple requests forcomment from BuzzFeed News.In an affidavit submitted as part of his case, Austin Davis claims theaccuser told him that she had been molested between the ages of 11 and 13.In Davis’s court case, he presents what he alleges are minutes fromCovenant Presbyterian Church meetings that show Perry resigning from thechurch’s diaconate in 2008, and minutes from 2010 showing Perry wasexcommunicated from the church because he “has confessed to committingheinous and repetitive sin […] and has not shown evidence of repentance.”The minutes appear to have been introduced as evidence in one of Davis’lawsuits against the church. The church does not appear to have objected tothe introduction of the minutes or contested their authenticity.BuzzFeed News spoke to a longtime church member, who said he had obtainedthe minutes for Davis and vouched for their authenticity. The minutes areaccessible to any church member. The individual Perry allegedly molestedalso told BuzzFeed News that Perry was excommunicated from the church as aconsequence of the alleged abuse.Catherine Davis, the wife of Austin Davis, likewise wrote in a swornaffidavit that during the summer of 2012, she spoke to the accuser, whoconfirmed the abuse occurred numerous times when the individual was aminor. Davis said the accuser told her that she broke her silence in 2007and began telling friends, family members, church leaders, and schoolofficials about what had allegedly occurred.Spokespeople for Huckabee did not return a request for comment.*Huckabee: Fox News Staff Thought I Was A “Psychopath” For Owning An AR-15<http://www.buzzfeed.com/christophermassie/huckabee-fox-news-staff-thought-i-was-a-psychopath-for-ownin#.yoVA5QxGv>// Buzzfeed // Christopher Massie – June 10, 2015 *Former Arkansas Gov. and Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabeesaid earlier this year that the staff of his Fox News show was “scared todeath” and reacted like he was a “psychopath” when he told them he owned“several” AR-15 rifles.“I’ll never forget sitting around with my own staff at Fox News, NewYorkers all, and something came up about guns, and they were saying abouthow nobody should ever own an AR-15, ‘Well, there’s just no reason to ownan assault weapon,’” Huckabee said, speaking at the Destiny Worship Centerin Destin, Florida in January.Huckabee said he challenged his staff’s definition of the term ‘assaultweapon,’ telling them that even “a pencil is an assault weapon if you pokeit in someone’s eye,” before making them “really shocked when I said‘AR-15s, I got several of them.’”“They were scared to death,” Huckabee said. “I thought they were gonna diveunder the table. I really did. It was like they were, ‘Huh!’ He’s apsychopath.’”Huckabee said he explained to his staff that the AR-15 rifles were lesspowerful “than the rifles that I deer hunt with” and that the features thatmake them look intimidating are “all practical functional features of therifle to make it lighter, to make cooler, to make it easier to hold so thata woman as well as a man who is short or tall can use these.”“‘You’re just looking at it and you think because you saw it on a Rambomovie that it must be more lethal than anything else,’” Huckabee said hetold his team. “And I said that’s nonsense.”*KASICH**Kasich Leads Field In Ohio<http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/main/2015/06/kasich-leads-field-in-ohio.html>// Public Policy Polling – June 10, 2015 *PPP’s new Ohio poll finds that John Kasich would be the first choice ofRepublican primary voters in his home state- more than a lot of the otherGOP hopefuls can say in theirs. Kasich polls at 19% to 13% for Ben Carsonand Scott Walker, 12% for Jeb Bush and Marco Rubio, 9% for Rand Paul, 6%for Mike Huckabee, 5% for Ted Cruz, and 4% for Chris Christie.Kasich is pretty universally popular with Republican voters in the state-72% approve of the job he’s doing to only 17% who disapprove. But he stillperforms unspectacularly with voters on the right in the primary- among’very conservative’ voters he manages just a tie for third place with MarcoRubio at 12%, behind Ben Carson’s 19% and Scott Walker’s 17%. But he leadsthe field among the more centrist ideological groups within the Republicanelectorate. Among ‘somewhat conservative’ voters he gets 24%to 14% forRubio, 11% for Carson, and 10% each for Walker and Rand Paul. And amongmoderates he ties Jeb Bush for the top spot at 23% with Walker at 11% andRubio at 10% also in double digits.Rubio has the highest favorability rating among GOP voters in Ohio, as wehave found to be the case many places lately, at 58/16. Ohio makes yetanother state where Christie is outwardly disliked by GOP voters- hisfavorability is 34/44- to put into perspective how poor that is the nextleast popular Republican we tested- Jeb Bush- is still at +16 at 48/32.Hillary Clinton remains as dominant as ever on the Democratic side- shepolls at 61% to 13% for Bernie Sanders, 7% for Michael Bloomberg, 2% eachfor Lincoln Chafee and Martin O’Malley, and 1% for Jim Webb.We threw in Bloomberg because of the fascination of the New York media witha potential bid from him. We found that 1) Bloomberg isn’t actually thatwell known- 54% of primary voters have no opinion about him and 2) he isnot that well liked- only 22% of Democrats have a favorable opinion of himto 24% with a negative one.This is the first poll we’ve conducted since O’Malley and Chafee formallygot into the race and their 2% showing suggests neither has gotten much ofan initial bump from his announcement. Neither has a positive favorabilityrating among Democratic primary voters in the state either.Clinton is polling over 70% with African Americans, over 60% with liberals,women, and seniors, and over 50% with moderates, men, and younger voters.There’s no major demographic group within the Democratic electorate shefails to receive majority support from.The general election match ups in Ohio are generally close with oneexception- Kasich leads Clinton 47/40 in a hypothetical contest. Kasichboasts a solid 49/35 approval rating following his resounding reelectionvictory last year. The key to Kasich’s advantage is that 89% of Republicanssupport him, compared to 75% of Democrats for Clinton.The only other Republican who Clinton trails in Ohio is Rand Paul at 44/41.She also ties Marco Rubio at 44. She has small advantages over the rest ofthe GOP field- it’s 44/43 over Ben Carson, Ted Cruz, and Scott Walker,45/43 over Jeb Bush, 44/41 over Chris Christie, and 45/42 over MikeHuckabee.Clinton may not be polling great against the Republicans in Ohio butthere’s still a huge gap between how she fares and how any other Democratdoes in a general election match up. In match ups against Scott Walker,Bloomberg trails 40/32, Sanders 40/30, O’Malley 41/26, Chafee 39/24, andWebb 41/25.*CARSON**Ben Carson: Let’s spy on government workers<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/ben-carson-lets-spy-government-workers> //MSNBC // Jane Timm – June 10, 2015 *Republican presidential contender Ben Carson said Wednesday that if electednext year he might implement a “covert division” of government workers whospy on their coworkers to improve government efficiency.The pediatric neurosurgeon-turned-candidate told a crowd of IowaRepublicans he is “thinking very seriously” about adding “a covert divisionof people who look like the people in this room, who monitor whatgovernment people do.”Carson suggested people would work harder if they suspected their coworkersof monitoring their work. “And we make it possible to fire governmentpeople!” he said to loud cheers.Conservatives often criticize government employees as bureaucrats who liveoff public money and aren’t accountable to taxpayers. Still, Carson’ssuggestion that such workers should spy on each other is the latest in astring of unusual — and often bizarre — ideas he’s floated that win cheersfrom far-right crowds and raised eyebrows from everyone else.It’s true that firing government employees who underperform can benotoriously complicated – so much so that most agencies don’t even try todo it, a Government Accountability Office report found earlier this year.Campaign communications director Doug Watts tried to clarify Carson’scomments in an email to msnbc. “Covert division? More like Secret Shopper,a quality control strategy used worldwide to improve customer service andcustomer care,” Watts said.While Carson is considered to be a long shot for the GOP nomination atbest, his polling numbers and fan base are strong and active, indicatingthat Republicans can’t count Carson – or his covert division – out just yet.*Carson: Gay rights aren’t the same as civil rights<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/10/politics/carson-gay-rights-civil-rights/index.html>// CNN // Alexandra Jaffe – June 10, 2015*Ben Carson said Wednesday night that he was “irritated” by the comparisonbetween the fight for same-sex marriage rights and the Civil RightsMovement because there’s no overt segregation against gays.Speaking on Fox News’ “Special Report”, Carson elaborated on his remarks onCNN in March that he believes being gay is a choice because people “go intoprison straight — and when they come out, they’re gay.”The GOP presidential contender told host Brett Baier that he “shouldn’thave allowed my emotions” into the conversation, but was reacting to CNNhost Chris Cuomo’s line of questioning on the issue.”I was a little bit irritated that he was equating the whole [gay marriage]issue with the Civil Rights movement. Because, quite frankly, I didn’tremember any times when there were signs up that says, you know, ‘everybodyelse here and gay people have to drink at this fountain,'” he said.”I was a little irritated, but I shouldn’t have allowed that to enter intothe discussion,” Carson said.During his March interview on “New Day,” Cuomo had pressed Carson on hisassertion that the marriage issue should be left up to the states todecide, drawing a comparison to segregation against blacks.”What if people of a state vote for a law, 100 to zero, that winds upinfringing on the rights of a minority — like happened very often withslavery? Like many would argue is happening now with people who are gay?”Cuomo asked.Carson replied that “the Constitution was followed and we corrected thosethings” in the case of segregation against blacks, but suggested the casewith gay marriage was different because being gay is a choice. Hissubsequent line of reasoning — that it’s a choice because some people comeout of prison gay — sparked a firestorm of criticism and eventually Carsonapologized for the comments, admitting his words were “hurtful anddivisive.”But on Wednesday night, Carson expressed satisfaction with how thecontroversy played out.”They saw that as the opportunity to finally knock this guy out — and theythought that they had done it. Stick a fork in him, he’s gone. They werejubilant,” he said of critics. “And now they’re saying, I can’t believethis guy’s still here, are you kidding me?”Carson came in seventh place in a late May CNN/ORC survey of the GOPpresidential field, taking 7% support.*Carson identifies as ‘pragmatic dove’ for conservative voters<http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2015/06/10/carson-calls-pragmatic-dove-urbandale-conservative-breakfast/71012298/>// The Des Moines Register – June 10, 2015 *Ben Carson identified himself as a “pragmatic dove” with a declarationagainst ISIS Wednesday morning.The retired neurosurgeon’s “only choice is to destroy them” stance won around of applause near the end of a 30-minute speech at the WestsideConservative Club breakfast gathering in Urbandale.”Pragmatic doves do not allow themselves to be destroyed. They will do whatthey need to do to preserve themselves,” Carson said to nearly 200captivated faces packed into a side room at the Machine Shed Restaurant.He added that he disagreed with the decision to invade Iraq in 2003.The Republican presidential candidate shared his biography in brief,including an early desire to become a missionary doctor that faded with an”I’d rather be rich” realization in high school.”Lord, what are you up to?” was a recurring question as he achievedsuccess, influence and fame, he said. Carson was the youngest physician tohead a major division at Johns Hopkins Medical Institution. He also sat onmajor corporate boards and got invited twice (1997 and 2013) to speak atthe National Prayer Breakfast.Carson said he heard the answer to his question when people started tellinghim to run for president, prompted largely by his harsh criticism of theObama administration at the 2013 prayer breakfast.”It was the good Lord giving me a lot of experience,” Carson said beforediving into a range of issues.His speech depicted an America that is slipping away with special interestgroups and intentional “purveyors of division” at the helm. He quotedJesus, stating that a house divided cannot stand and how he will onlyanswer to citizens.”I would much rather lose than get involved with a special interest group,”Carson said.Lack of political experience was the first concern on the mind of DavidStilley, a 59-year-old physician at the Wednesday event.”Are we going to get right back where we were with someone who doesn’tunderstand how government works on the day-to-day,” Stilley said,highlighting Barack Obama’s short political career prior to the White House.Carson resolved some of those fears with anecdotes about overseeingfinances on corporate boards and travel to 50-some foreign countries duringhis career.”He’s definitely stepped up a couple notches for my support based on hiscomments,” said Stilley, who owns DoctorsNow Walk-in Care with threeclinics in the Des Moines metro. “Fixing the economy fixes everything else.”Several Wednesday attendees – in an audience nearly 100 percent white andmostly above the age of 50 – pointed to the economy as their chief concern.Kim Hiscox, owner of a West Des Moines real estate company, asked Carsonabout his solution for illegal immigration.Carson said he would seal “all the borders, which we can do within a year …and turnoff the spicket that’s dispensing all the goodies.”Hiscox, a 60-year-old Republican voter, called the response brilliantlythought-out. Carson won her over as a top choice, tied with Rick Perry, fora GOP candidate.”Perry knows how to handle himself in public, fielding questions. Now I cansee Carson also is a very capable public speaker,” Hiscox said. “I don’trespect canned, tele-prompted speeches.”SETTING: Machine Shed Restaurant in Urbandale for Westside ConservativeClub breakfastCROWD: Captive audience of nearly 200REACTION: Many laughs and several rounds of applause paused Carson’s30-minute speech; several hands went up after and Carson answered fivespecific questions.WHAT’S NEXT: This is part of a two-day visit for Carson. His schedulecalled for a busy Wednesday after the breakfast club: volunteering at afood bank in Waterloo, a meet-and-greet in Cedar Falls and an ice creamsocial visit in Eldora. He also plans to attend a coffee-with-residentsgathering Thursday morning in Fort Dodge.*FIORINA**Fiorina’s campaign-trail attacks leave out her own ties to Clinton CarlyFiorina<http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-fiorina-clinton-ties-20150611-story.html>// LAT // Joseph Tanfani – June 11, 2015*In a crowd of Republican presidential contenders hammering away at HillaryRodham Clinton, no one has been more relentless than Carly Fiorina.In speeches and media interviews, some of them while shadowing Clinton onthe campaign trail, the former Hewlett-Packard chief executive has attackedthe Clintons’ family foundation for a lack of transparency amid reportsthat it accepted money from foreign governments. “She is not trustworthy,”Fiorina says in a video on her website, itself named ReadytoBeatHillary.com.In a Facebook post, Fiorina excoriated the Clintons for accepting donationsfrom foreign governments “while making promises about transparency thatthey never intended to keep.”“What else don’t we know? What don’t we know about your donors?” she askedWednesday on Fox News about the Clintons’ charitable efforts. “What don’twe know about the conflicts of interest that those donors represent?”But in Fiorina’s own philanthropic ventures, one of the key points of herresume as a White House hopeful, she has had a friendlier relationship withthe Clintons and their foundation than she highlights on the campaigntrail. And, in pressing for help for women around the globe, Fiorina ismore similar to Hillary Clinton than she admits.The discrepancies show how personal and professional ties can complicatelife on the campaign trail for well-connected people like Fiorina, who alsounsuccessfully ran for Senate in California in 2010.One Fiorina charitable effort, a campaign to fund women’s empowermentprojects around the globe, went forward with help from the State Departmentwhen Clinton was secretary.And Fiorina has roles in two charities that participated in projects thatbecame commitments with the Clinton Global Initiative, one of theorganizations in the Clintons’ worldwide philanthropic network in whichcharities and companies announce partnerships to pledge action on socialprojects.She has also twice participated in Clinton Global Initiative events. In2013, she spoke on a small panel that discussed how to boost femaleentrepreneurship. Last year, she appeared with former President Clinton andthree other people on a televised panel discussion on how best to pullpeople out of poverty.Fiorina at times sparred with the former president and criticizedDemocratic economic policies, saying that the Obama administration “madethe rich much richer.” But she also argued for the role of small businessand praised the organization’s work. “Seed capital, support, tools, energy– all of the initiatives that the Clinton Global Initiative invests in totry and build Main Street entrepreneurship — it has always been the hopeof this country,” Fiorina said.A spokeswoman for Fiorina said she was “delighted” to participate in asession advocating for women who are entrepreneurs, and characterized thesecond discussion as “a debate with Bill Clinton.”Fiorina has contrasted her belief in transparency with Clinton’s, sayinglast month: “Unlike Hillary Clinton, I am not afraid to answer questionsabout my track record or beliefs.” She did not respond to follow-upquestions about her involvement with the foundation or her work with theState Department.Bill Clinton, speaking at a Clinton Global Initiative conference onWednesday, said the foundation had always considered itself nonpoliticaland had hosted a number of Republican politicians, including Mitt Romneyand John McCain. He didn’t mention Fiorina.Fiorina helped spark a charitable drive in 2008 called the One WomanInitiative, targeting women’s empowerment groups, mostly in Muslimcountries. According to the organization, she set it up with help from theState Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development andthen-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.It took about a year to raise the money. By the time the approximately$500,000 in grants was released, in June 2009, President Obama was in theWhite House and Clinton was secretary of State. The initiatives included amicrofinance program in Pakistan, a conflict-resolution program in thePhilippines and an economic development program in India.The initiative aimed to distribute grants with the help of corporatesponsors, and with support from the Department of State and USAID. Theagencies also declined to comment on the initiative.The Clinton Global Initiative draws together corporate and charity leadersfor networking and to announce commitments to complete projects together.Fiorina is connected to two groups that participated in such programs. Sheis board chairman of Good360, a Virginia-based group that connectscompanies who want to donate goods with charities that need them. HiltonWorldwide made that program a Clinton Global Initiative commitment in 2013.Fiorina also is on the advisory board of the National Center forEntrepreneurship and Innovation, a group that wants to open a centercelebrating inventors and entrepreneurs on the National Mall in Washington.That too was announced as a Clinton initiative commitment in 2013. But theplans have stalled, in part because the Smithsonian decided it couldn’tdevote resources to the project, said Philip Auerswald, the group’s boardchairman.The advisory board and Fiorina didn’t play a role in the decision toannounce the project as a Clinton initiative commitment, he said, adding:“Carly has been nothing but supportive throughout this process.”*Carly Fiorina Steps Up Campaign Against Hillary Clinton<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/09/carly-fiorina-steps-up-campaign-against-hillary-clinton/>// NYT // Amy Chozick – June 10, 2015*Carly Fiorina does not always seem entirely comfortable in her role as theRepublican Party’s designated Hillary Rodham Clinton attacker.But that has not stopped the former Silicon Valley executive from doublingdown on her strategy of trying to catapult her long-shot candidacy byfocusing on attacking Mrs. Clinton in more aggressive and pointed ways thanher male Republican rivals. The most recent instance: Ms. Fiorina ispushing traffic to ReadyToBeatHillary.com.A play on the pro-Clinton group Ready for Hillary, the website, financed bythe Fiorina campaign, does not have Ms. Fiorina’s name or image on itshomepage. Instead, a series of photos of Mrs. Clinton highlight the StateDepartment’s handling of the 2012 attack on a United States mission inBenghazi, Libya, when she was secretary of state; her family foundation’sacceptance of foreign donations; and other criticism of the Clintons overthe last couple of decades. If one clicks on the image and video of Ms.Fiorina criticizing Mrs. Clinton, a request for donations appears.“So far, Hillary’s been running one of the shadiest campaigns inpresidential history,” reads an email from Ms. Fiorina announcing the newwebsite, which plays on the Clinton campaign’s red arrow logo.A Clinton campaign spokesman did not immediately reply to a request forcomment.Ms. Fiorina has drawn large crowds in Iowa and New Hampshire, and hercandidacy, while hardly registering in national polling, has drawnincreasing attention. For now, Ms. Fiorina’s biggest task it building hername recognition and poll numbers so she can qualify for the firstRepublican debate on Fox News in August. The attacks on Mrs. Clinton, hercampaign says, can only help get Ms. Fiorina a coveted spot on the debatestage.*OTHER**Republicans Still Playing Catch-Up on the Digital Campaign Trail<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/11/us/politics/republicans-still-playing-catch-up-on-the-digital-campaign-trail.html>// NYT // Ashley Parker – June 10, 2015*The criticism after the 2012 presidential election was swift and harsh:Democrats were light-years ahead of Republicans when it came to digitalstrategy and tactics, and Republicans had serious work to do on thetechnology front if they ever hoped to win back the White House.Now, with the 2016 campaign already underway, Republicans are eager to showthey have learned the lessons of past cycles and are placing a premium onhiring top digital talent to build the tools they deem necessary to compete.But their immediate problem is slightly more low-tech: the basics of supplyand demand.“Shopping around for a digital data firm was already difficult — and whenyou’re one of 20 possible candidates in a party that has yet to establishits own expertise in this area, it’s even harder,” said Sasha Issenberg,author of “The Victory Lab: The Secret Science of Winning Campaigns.”This type of work — often described in political circles as digital, dataand analytics — encompasses many areas, from building email systems forsmall-dollar fund-raising to generating buzz on social media to analyzingdata to help direct ads at specific groups of voters.Using data to determine the most efficient and effective way to targetvoters, considered by many to be a crucial advantage for President Obama’scampaign in 2012, could prove particularly important in a crowdedRepublican primary in which every dollar counts. But it is another area inwhich only a handful of Republican companies specialize.The lack of experience among Republican operatives and companies iscaptured in a coming study by Daniel Kreiss, an assistant professor ofpolitical communications at the University of North Carolina at ChapelHill, and Christopher Jasinski, a graduate student there.Using the Federal Election Commission and other data sources, includingLinkedIn, the two identified 626 political operatives with experience indigital, data and analytics on every presidential campaign since 2004. Thebreakdown was stark: 503 of those staff members were hired by Democraticcampaigns, 123 by Republicans.They also found that 75 different political companies or organizations werefounded by those former campaign workers on the Democratic side, but only19 on the Republican side.“Historically, the one thing that’s pretty clear is that the Democrats,over the course of three cycles, have been investing much more in creatinga deeper pool of talent that can do things like work in digital, data andanalytics, and that runs from top to bottom in the party,” Mr. Kreiss said.The study also found that Democrats have done a better job of activelyrecruiting and attracting employees from places like Silicon Valley whobring innovative thinking and new technologies from the commercial sectorinto the political arena.Though the imbalance seems to stem largely from recruitment efforts, Mr.Issenberg added that Republicans suffer from a cultural disadvantage aswell. Many who work in technology have a somewhat libertarian worldviewthat, especially on social issues, more closely aligns with Democrats.The limited number of Republican companies and the pressure to attractpremium talent has added a new dimension to the so-called invisibleprimary, where candidates vie for expertise and money, and createdunexpected opportunities for operatives with digital experience.For instance, Targeted Victory — one of the largest companies on theRepublican side, which ran Mitt Romney’s 2012 digital operation — hassigned on with former Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, but also plans to splititself off into distinct parts to take on one or two other campaigns oroutside groups.“This is the first time there have been more campaigns that view digital asan actual weapon, as opposed to a box they have to check,” said MichaelBeach, co-founder of Targeted Victory.Vincent Harris and his company, Harris Media, which handled Ted Cruz’s 2012Senate bid in Texas, is running the digital operation for the 2016presidential campaign of Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky. And Senator MarcoRubio of Florida has hired both Optimus, one of the few Republicananalytics companies, and Push Digital to lead his digital effort.Other likely campaigns, including those for Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsinand former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, are solving the problem by buildingin-house teams. Mr. Walker, for example, hired staff members who worked onSenator Joni Ernst’s successful 2014 campaign in Iowa and from the SiliconValley office of the Republican National Committee.Republicans say they are optimistic this cycle will help usher in a truecultural change, much as the 2008 Obama campaign did — with its emphasis ondata and analytics that helped create a pipeline to recruit and nurturetech talent.But the party faces a difficult path to building the vast operation that ageneral election requires, said Patrick Ruffini, founder of Engage, aRepublican digital strategy company. “There is going to be a real challengein terms of finding people who were at the level the Obama campaign peoplewere four years ago,” he said.Still, Republicans say they see progress. Anton Vuljaj, chief revenueofficer for IMGE, a digital advocacy agency whose political clients areRepublicans, said that after the 2012 cycle, companies like his have moreleverage because campaigns now see the value in the work they do.“We’ve had a lot more conversations with campaign managers and generalconsultants who know at least the very basics of what questions to ask us,like how are you segmenting and amplifying your email lists or how are youmeasuring the impact of your advertising,” he said.Brian Stobie, a partner at Optimus, also said there were signs of change —even in the sheer number of campaigns willing to take a meeting. “Noweveryone wants to have the meeting,” he said. “They may not sign on thedotted line, but they want to have the meeting. Before 2012, it was like,‘Analytics? We don’t need that.’ ”The digital firms are also getting to be increasingly choosy about justwhich candidate they work for — a perk of their elevated stature in theparty hierarchy.“Who we sign on with is very much tied to how much they buy into ourworldview,” said Zac Moffatt, co-founder of Targeted Victory. “I don’t knowthat you would want to spend a year just running into a wall, so I thinkeveryone we sign up with cares about the cost of efficiency and wants tohave a plan for how we turn out 40,000-plus folks in Iowa.”But some Republican operatives with digital experience privately wonder howmuch the emphasis on digital and analytics is simply for public imagepurposes. Will the digital team, they worry, still be the first item cutwhen the budget gets crunched?“There’s a difference between having a seat at the table, because there areseats at the table, and then there’s the back room where all the decisionsget made, and there’s who does the candidate call at 11 p.m. at night,” Mr.Ruffini said.How much the Republican digital field evolves may not truly be known untilafter Election Day.“If one of the campaigns that actually uses data to make decisions wins,then the culture changes,” Mr. Stobie said. “If one of the campaigns thatuses data as a hood ornament wins, then nothing changes.”*New Hampshire Republicans Urge Networks to Alter Debate Criteria<http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/06/10/jeb-bush-in-berlin-says-west-is-confronting-a-more-aggressive-putin/>// NYT // Alan Rappeport – June 10, 2015 *Republicans in New Hampshire are urging Fox News and party leaders toreconsider its plans to limit participation in presidential debates basedon performance in polls.The group of local lawmakers and activists argued in a letter to RogerAiles, president of Fox News, and Reince Priebus, chairman of theRepublican National Committee, that limiting the number of candidates whocan participate in debates would supplant the role that early nominatingstates such as New Hampshire play in allowing voters to narrow the field.“Historically, it has been the responsibility of early primary and caucusstates to closely examine and winnow the field of candidates, and it is notin the electorate’s interest to have TV debate criteria supplant thissolemn duty,” they wrote.The letter comes as Iowa is fighting to retain the significance of itsstraw poll and other traditional early contest states are increasinglyfearful of losing their status as springboards for those who eventuallycapture the nomination.Fox and CNN have said they would limit the number of candidates on thedebate stage, basing the criteria on performance in national publicpolling. Lesser-known candidates like Carly Fiorina and Ben Carson havecriticized this plan, and some political analysts have said that it willalter the way candidates campaign early on, as they focus on televisionexposure instead of retail politicking in hopes that they will get noticed.Bigger names, including Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Gov.John Kasich of Ohio, who is mulling a run, could also struggle to qualifyto debate.The New Hampshire Republicans suggested that Fox consider dividing thedebate into two panels and use a random drawing to determine who willparticipate in each.“The New Hampshire primary, as well as the contests in Iowa, SouthCarolina, and Nevada, exist to afford every candidate – regardless of moneyand polling – a level playing field and the opportunity to personally sharetheir message and experience with as many voters as possible,” they wrote.Craig Benson and Stephen Merrill, former governors of New Hampshire, areamong the more than 50 people who signed the letter.Fox is scheduled to broadcast the first debate on Aug. 6.*Their state economies may lag, but Republican hopefuls still brag<http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/06/10/us-usa-governors-idUSKBN0OQ2RK20150610>// Reuters // Andy Sullivan – June 10, 2015 *Various Republican governors with an eye on the White House can point totax cuts and other business-friendly policies they spearheaded as theyenter the crowded 2016 presidential contest. But many of them can’thighlight robust economic growth.Among the handful of governors and former governors competing for theRepublican presidential nomination, only one – former Texas Governor RickPerry, who declared his candidacy last week – can say that his state hasoutpaced the national economy over the past four years.Economic growth lagged in other states whose governors are expected to runfor president, according to U.S. government figures released on Wednesday.”Only Perry can really brag,” said George Mason University economistStephen Fuller. “The other guys just haven’t been there long enough anddon’t have anything to show for it, anyway.”The Texas economy grew by 17.8 percent between 2011 and the beginning of2015, according to the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, well above thenational pace of 6.3 percent during that period. The state’s economy,however, has begun to show signs of weakness recently as oil prices haveplunged.In Ohio, Governor John Kasich, who has been mulling a White House run,presided over a state that grew by 6.0 percent over those four years,slightly less than the national average. Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker,considered a likely Republican contender, oversaw growth of 4.3 percent inhis state.In New Jersey, the state economy under Governor Chris Christie grew by 3.8percent, while Louisiana grew by only 1.2 percent during that period underGovernor Bobby Jindal. Both Christie and Jindal are eyeing White House bids.Governors have a limited ability to shape a state’s economy in the shortterm, economists say.Investments in education and highways can take years to bear fruit, whiletax cuts must be offset by spending cuts to keep budgets in balance,resulting in little overall stimulus in the short term.”If you shift state tax policy to make it more inviting for businesses toexpand here, that can increase employment,” said Dale Knapp, researchdirector at the nonpartisan Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance. “But that’s along-term impact.”The dynamics of the particular industries that dominate in a region play asignificant role as well. Economists say that manufacturing-heavyWisconsin, for example, is more susceptible to recession than an oil statelike Texas.Experts say the true impact of any governor often isn’t apparent untilyears after the person leaves office.But that has not stopped potential candidates from talking up theireconomic track records on the campaign trail as they criticize DemocraticPresident Barack Obama for presiding over sluggish growth at the nationallevel.Walker, for example, argues that tax cuts and weakened labor laws havehelped Wisconsin climb out of recession, even if he fell far short of hispromise to create 250,000 jobs by the beginning of 2015.In Texas, Perry’s spokeswoman said growth was boosted by Perry’s focus onlow taxes, business-friendly regulations and limits on lawsuits.In Louisiana, Jindal’s administration cites a growing population, risingincome and favorable ratings by business magazines to argue that theeconomy has improved, despite the tepid growth of recent years.In New Jersey, Christie spokesman Kevin Roberts said Democrats have slowedhis efforts to cut taxes and implement other changes. New Jersey’s economyalso suffered when Hurricane Sandy devastated much of the coast in 2012.No matter the facts on the ground, White House hopefuls will find a way toargue that they are leaving their states in better shape than when theyarrived, said James Pethokoukis of the conservative American EnterpriseInstitute.”For these guys there’s only two kinds of situations: a booming economy ora turnaround economy, and in both situations they get the credit,” he said.*Polling Memo: Clinton ‘Clearly Unpopular’ Among Battleground StateIndependents<https://gop.com/polling-memo-clinton-clearly-unpopular-among-battleground-state-independents/>// GOP.com – June 10, 2015 *The Republican National Committee (RNC) today released the followingpolling summary memo from American Viewpoint, showing Hillary Clinton’sclear shortcomings in voter perception of her character, trust, anddecision-making.To: Chairman Reince PriebusFrom: Linda DiVall, Randall GutermuthRe: Independent Battleground States Survey Key FindingsDate: June 9, 2015The following are the key findings from a survey conducted on behalf of theRNC by American Viewpoint in 10 key battleground states with Independentvoters, which provide 137 electoral votes. Interviews were conducted May3-7, 2015, using mix-mode interviewing. The margin of error for the entiresample, N=1500, is +/- 2.5% at the 95% confidence level. N=600 interviewswere conducted with a landline sample, N=600 interviews were conducted witha cell phone sample and N=300 interviews were conducted online in thefollowing states:Hillary Clinton is clearly vulnerable and already has a net unfavorablerating with these Independents.· Clinton’s favorable to unfavorable ratio is 44:49 and she trailsthe generic Republican candidate 40%-36% in these key battleground states.Hillary Clinton’s supposed superior strength with women is a myth withthese battleground state Independent women.· Clinton’s favorable to unfavorable ratio with these Independentwomen is barely a net favorable (49:43) and she only leads the genericRepublican by 3-points among them. Conversely, she trails amongbattleground state Independent men by 11-points (45%-34%) and her favorableto unfavorable ratio is an abysmal 39:56.· The Party, its candidates and its surrogates need to be verycareful in their tone and demeanor towards Hillary Clinton to ensure sheisn’t able to turn the gender gap back in her favor.The most significant driving factor to Hillary Clinton’s perceptual issuesis a question of trust.· Throughout the data, this was the most unprompted hesitationvoters gave and is the attribute that she scored the lowest on. This is allbefore an attack ad has run this cycle.· Messages tested dealing with her email scandal and the influencepeddling of her brothers underscore her untrustworthiness, but were not inthe top tier overall because this perception is already established anddoesn’t move Independents as much as other issues.Hillary Clinton’s own personal problems are only further magnified byPresident Obama’s poor ratings. However, this shouldn’t be a race about theincumbent President.· President Obama has a net unfavorable rating with thesebattleground Independents (45:50) and his job approval is a similar 43%approve, 52% disapprove. This is problematic for Clinton’s candidacy as herfavorable to unfavorable ratio is only 21:74 among those who disapprove ofthe job the President is doing.When discussing Hillary Clinton’s speeches, the focus needs to be lessabout her getting rich and more about how this hurts working families.· Making tens of millions, flying in private jets and theoutrageous demands she made of those giving her six figures for speechesmay work well with the base, but for swing voters in these essentialbattleground states, it’s more important to tie the millions taken frompublic universities to tuition rate increases and budget cuts.To further drive down Hillary Clinton’s support with Independent women, herhypocrisy on equal pay can be highlighted.· The fact that Hillary Clinton only paid her female Senate staff72 cents on the dollar raises real questions as to her claims of being achampion of equal pay.The most important case to prosecute against Hillary Clinton is hermismanagement of the State Department as Secretary of State. This severelyundercuts her perceived strength of resume.· Specifically, the most persuasive message tested in this surveystates “as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton’s State Department approvedthe sale of a Canadian uranium mining company to a Russian state atomicenergy agency. This action allowed Russian President Vladimir Putin tocontrol 20% of American uranium and poses a grave threat to U.S. nationalsecurity.”Character, trust and decision-making are all key tests voters have for acandidate running to be President and Commander and Chief, and this surveyclearly indicates a pattern of Hillary Clinton failing all three of these.Further conveying her problems on these tenets will prove to be veryproblematic for her.*GOP ready to counter Hillary Clinton’s speech<http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/gop-ready-to-counter-hillary-clintons-speech/article/2565945#.VXhRe6uLwyk.twitter>// The Washington Examiner //David Drucker – June 10, 2015*The Republican National Committee is ratcheting up its “Stop Hillary”campaign, planning a flurry of political hits on presumptive Democraticnominee Hillary Clinton to accompany her first major speech sinceannouncing for president in April.Clinton on Saturday will deliver a speech from Roosevelt Island in New Yorkthat her campaign is promoting as the former secretary of state’s official2016 launch event. The site is named for President Franklin DelanoRoosevelt, the Democratic icon who was first elected in 1932 and wasresponsible for the creation of Social Security (FDR died in office duringhis fourth term.)The RNC plans an aggressive response on traditional and social media, andon the ground in New York and in the early primary states where Clinton hasspent the bulk of her time campaigning since kicking off her secondpresidential bid in mid April. This effort is part of the GOP’s plan tooffer public opposition to Clinton while the party’s crowded field ofpresidential contenders focuses on themselves in their battle for the 2016nomination. According to information shared with the Washington Examiner,the party’s activities include:— New web ad pushed nationwide with higher emphasis placed on targeting IA,SC, NH and NV— Statements/Op-eds— Releasing Hillary oppo book— Bracketing Hillary’s events in NYC, IA, SC, NH, NV.— New gimmicks will be delivered to news outlets— Surrogates booked on radio/TV.— Staff on the ground for her state visits.Additionally, the RNC commissioned a poll of independent voters that itclaims proves Clinton’s vulnerability with independents in 10 battlegroundsstates, most of which the GOP has not won in a presidential race since atleast 2004, if that. The states polled included Virginia, Florida, NorthCarolina, Iowa, Wisconsin, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Colorado andArizona. Arizona is the only state in the group that is solid red.Among the poll’s findings:Hillary Clinton is clearly vulnerable and already has a net unfavorablerating with these independents.• Clinton’s favorable to unfavorable ratio is 44:49 and she trails thegeneric Republican candidate 40%-36% in these key battleground states.Hillary Clinton’s supposed superior strength with women is a myth withthese battleground state Independent women.• Clinton’s favorable to unfavorable ratio with these Independent women isbarely a net favorable (49:43) and she only leads the generic Republican by3-points among them. Conversely, she trails among battleground stateIndependent men by 11-points (45%-34%) and her favorable to unfavor*ableratio is an abysmal 39:56.*• The Party, its candidates and its surrogates need to be very careful intheir tone and demeanor towards Hillary Clinton to ensure she isn’t able toturn th*e gender gap back in her favor.*The most significant driving factor to Hillary Clinton’s perceptual* issuesis a question of trust.*• Throughout the data, this was the most unprompted hesitation voters gaveand is the attribute that she scored the lowest on. This is all before a*nattack ad has run this cycle.*• Messages tested dealing with her email scandal and the influence peddlingof her brothers underscore her untrustworthiness, but were not in the toptier overall because this perception is already established and doesn’tmove Indepe*ndents as much as other issues.*Hillary Clinton’s own personal problems are only further magnified byPresident Obama’s poor ratings. However, this shouldn’t be a race* aboutthe incumbent President.*• President Obama has a net unfavorable rating with these battlegroundindependents (45:50) and his job approval is a similar 43% approve, 52%disapprove. This is problematic for Clinton’s candidacy as her favorable tounfavorable ratio is only 21:74 among those who disapprove of the job thePresident is doing.The survey was conducted by American Viewpoint May 3-7, 2015, using”mix-mode” interviews: 600 via land line telephone, 60 via cellphone, 300via the Internet. The margin of error was 2.5 percentage *points.*Disclosure: The author’s wife works as an adviser to Scott Walker.*TOP NEWS**DOMESTIC**Senate GOP denies funds for lawyers for immigrant children<http://bigstory.ap.org/urn:publicid:ap.org:fa2c4b8b6830408696c1b3009001252f>// AP // Andrew Taylor – June 10, 2015 *A GOP-controlled Senate panel on Wednesday blocked President Barack Obama’srequest for $50 million to pay for legal help for unaccompanied immigrantchildren coming to the United States after fleeing violence in CentralAmerica.Responsible for the move was Republican Sen. Richard Shelby of Alabama,chief author of a spending bill funding the Justice Department’s budget.The measure won initial approval on Wednesday but has a long way to gobefore becoming law.The flow of children fleeing gangs and other dangers in Guatemala, Hondurasand El Salvador and finding their way to the U.S. is down significantlyfrom last year, when an influx created a humanitarian crisis, in statesalong the U.S.-Mexico border.Without lawyers, children are much more likely to be sent back to theirhome countries. Under federal law, immigrant children have two options toseek legal status, including requesting asylum for fear of returning hometo face gang violence.Without legal help, the maze of documentation and legal requirements is farmore difficult for a child to maneuver.Republicans opposed to people who are in the United States illegally havegreater priorities in the $51 billion measure, which also funds theCommerce Department and science-related agencies such as NASA.The measure is one of 12 annual appropriations bills covering theday-to-day operations of government agencies. Such discretionary spendinggets reviewed and funded annually unlike mandatory programs such asMedicare, Social Security and food stamps.The 12 spending bills are at the center of a fight between Obama andRepublicans, who have given the Pentagon almost $40 billion in relief fromautomatic spending curbs but are resisting Obama’s demands for equaltreatment for domestic agencies facing a funding freeze.The battle is particularly bitter in the tea party-driven House.Republicans pressed ahead Wednesday with bills seeking to force furthercuts to the agencies they particularly dislike, the IRS and theEnvironmental Protection Agency.The House measures are full of provisions aimed at blocking various Obamapolicies, including implementation of the Affordable Care Act by the IRSand environmental regulations, including protections for the endangeredsage grouse that are opposed by Western energy interests.*Republicans take aim at IRS budget<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/gop-irs-budget-118835.html> //Politico // Rachael Bade – June 10, 2015 *Ever since the IRS tea party scandal broke two years ago, House Republicanshave redoubled their efforts to gut the agency’s budget — year after yearafter year.But now — for the first time since Lois Lerner’s infamous 2013 apology —they’re finally getting their moment to impose serious financialconstraints on the tax-collecting agency they love to hate.House GOP appropriators on Wednesday proposed chopping IRS resources almost8 percent, reducing the agency budget to $10.1 billion. It would be a hugehit to the agency responsible not only for overseeing tax collections butadministering Obamacare’s health care subsidies.And those cuts are bound to balloon even more once the bill hits the Housefloor. Republicans are eager to offer further amendments snipping at theIRS — especially amid headlines about the IRS targeting conservativegroups, giving rogue employees bonuses and falling short of protectingtaxpayer rights and privacy.While House Republicans in past years have had to negotiate with theDemocratic-controlled Senate — which was often able to restore the IRSbudget or at the very least, ease proposed cuts — this time around, GOPallies are behind the wheel in the Senate.That means President Barack Obama — who requested an 18 percent increasefor the IRS — could be forced to sign a spending bill later this year thatwould add new hardships for the agency, which already is reeling fromscandal and begging for more money to boost taxpayer services and protecttaxpayers’ information. Holding up a broader spending bill in the name ofthe IRS, after all, is a political no-no with an American public deeplyskeptical of tax collectors. If the president were to refuse to sign aspending bill only because of cuts to the IRS, he’d risk serious politicalbacklash.“This will hold the agency’s budget below the sequester level and below thefiscal year 2004 level,” a House Appropriations Committee news releaseboasts. “This funding level is sufficient for the IRS to perform its coreduties, but will require the agency to streamline and better prioritize itsbudget.”The bill would cut $838 million from the current IRS budget, bringing theagency’s funding $2.8 billion below what Obama requested.The bill, as in years past, would also block the IRS from proposing acontroversial, much-awaited regulation aimed at reining in the politicalactivities of 501(c)(4) tax-exempt groups like Crossroads GPS. Such groupsare supposed to limit their campaign activity under law, but the IRS got introuble during the tea party hubbub for holding up the approvals ofconservative groups that weren’t engaging in politics but advocacy.Still, the IRS says it needs clarity for itself and for taxpayers aboutwhat is and isn’t allowed.Another thing it can’t do under the GOP bill: Collect penalties underObamacare’s individual mandate. That would potentially save hundreds if notthousands of dollars for Obamacare protesters who refuse to buy coverage.The agency argues that such cuts would only hurt taxpayers and leave athreadbare IRS unable to help people address their tax problems. The IRSalso administers the core of Obamacare — health care tax credits — andrecently experienced cybersecurity lapses that amounted to people’spersonal information being hacked.The bill specifically gives the IRS a $75 million boost for taxpayerservices, in an effort to prevent any cuts from hurting Americans who needtheir tax questions answered.The cuts are part of a $20.2 billion financial services bill filled withpolitical red meat designed to appeal to GOP lawmakers. While Republicanappropriators have decried spending caps for other appropriations bills,leaving them in a tough spot cutting key priorities, they’re more thanhappy to make reductions on this measure.“While making good use of limited tax dollars, this legislation also makesgreat strides in reining in wasteful spending, and stopping harmful andunnecessary bureaucratic over-reach,” House Appropriations Chairman HalRogers (R-Ky.) said in a statement.Overall, the bill is about $1.3 billion below last year’s level and $4.8billion below what the president wanted.The legislation makes cuts to prized Democratic agencies, including aproposal to bring the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under thecongressional appropriations process. Currently, it’s funded through theFederal Reserve, but the change would give Congress — namely, Republicans —more power over the agency.The bill is also packed with conservative policy provisions like onerequiring the administration to “report to Congress on the cost andregulatory burdens of the Dodd-Frank Act,” and another to bar the SEC frommandating political-donation disclosures in filings.*EPA takes crucial step toward climate rules for airplanes<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06/epa-airplane-emissions-118829.html>// Politico // Alex Guillén – June 10, 2015 *The Obama administration took the first step Wednesday toward regulatingairplanes’ greenhouse gas emissions, adding yet another major industry tothe roster of businesses falling under the crosshairs of President BarackObama’s environmental and climate agenda.The EPA said it was proposing to declare that planes’ carbon pollutionthreatens public health and welfare by significantly contributing toclimate change. The agency’s “endangerment finding” comes amid a flurry ofactivity by the EPA, which is also pushing ahead with a contentiousregulation for wetland and waterways, preparing to tighten fuel efficiencystandards for heavy trucks and nearing a midsummer launch for a landmarkgreenhouse gas rule for power plants.But the aircraft rules — which will likely take years to write — may notreach the altitude that environmentalists are hoping for. They could alsoface pushback from the airline industry, which enjoys hefty lobbying powerin Washington, particularly among lawmakers who jet home each weekend — andthe Republican Party that rules the Capitol is always skeptical of EPAregulations.“Just when I thought the EPA couldn’t get more ridiculous,” Sen. Tom Cotton(R-Ark.) said on Twitter, linking to POLITICO’s coverage of the proposal.Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Science Committee,predicted that the rules would increase the price of air travel and harmdomestic airlines. “The sky is the limit when it comes to how much of theU.S. economy the EPA wants to control,” he said in a statement.But the Sierra Club said both airlines and travelers would save money asthe regulations yield more efficient, less-polluting planes.“President Obama is taking an important step on climate once again byfinding that carbon pollution from airplanes poses the same danger to ourclimate as carbon pollution from other sources,” Sierra Club attorneyJoanne Spalding said. The World Wildlife Fund’s Brad Schallert called themove “common sense,” and urged EPA to “take the next step and close a majorloophole that allows the airline industry to emit unchecked amounts ofcarbon into our atmosphere.”“Since today’s announcement will likely cause a fight in Congress, we hopethe president makes this a fight worth having by requiring real cuts inairplane pollution,” said Heather Leibowitz, director of EnvironmentAmerica’s New York chapter. “Bold action on climate should solve theproblem of pollution from airplanes, not just acknowledge it.”Air travel is undeniably an international industry, and a growing one toboot. While airplanes are used more extensively in the U.S. than in manyother nations — American air travel makes up 29 percent of global aviationemissions — getting cooperation from Europe, China and other majormanufacturing centers and plane purchasers will be key to making the globaleffort work.Green groups and the administration are already debating one key issue:whether the U.S. climate rules for airlines should match those beingdeveloped worldwide — or be even tougher.The International Civil Aviation Organization, a United Nations body, plansto set international targets to limit airline emissions in 2016. The U.S.,through the EPA and FAA, is contributing to that process, and many in theair travel industry maintain that a global setup would be a better bet thanindividual nations taking action that could create a regulatory patchworkacross the planet.Wednesday’s proposal is “part of preparing for a possible subsequentdomestic rulemaking process to adopt standards that are of at leastequivalent stringency as the anticipated ICAO CO2 standards,” EPA says inits proposed rule. Member nations must adopt standards at least asstringent as what the international body approves, the agency adds.White House press secretary Josh Earnest said relying on an internationalstandard is “common sense.”“Obviously these airplanes operate in a variety of different countries inmany cases,” Earnest said.Bill Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean AirAgencies, also called for the U.S. and the international body to cooperate.“It is critical that EPA and the rest of the world, through theInternational Civil Aviation Organization, move quickly and seek meaningfulgreenhouse gas emission reductions,” he said.But environmentalists fear that the international targets will lead to onlysmall reductions in global aviation emissions, particularly given that ICAOis generally considering only changes to newly designed aircraft engines,not retrofits to the existing fleet or designs already in production. Sinceaircraft remain in service for decades, emissions reductions would comeslowly under that approach.One environmental group, the Center for Biological Diversity, expressedunhappiness about the EPA’s attachment to the international standards.“Passing the buck to an international organization that’s virtually run bythe airline industry won’t protect our planet from these rapidly growingemissions,” said senior counsel Vera Pardee, whose group had previouslysued and threatened to sue EPA for its slowness to regulate planes’greenhouse gas emissions. “We’re disappointed that the Obama administrationremains sufficiently captive to the airline industry to consider allowingunlimited aircraft carbon emissions for what could be decades to come.”Airlines for America, the U.S. airline industry’s lead trade group, said itsupports the international efforts to develop a carbon standard. Itinterpreted EPA’s action Wednesday as showing the agency’s “commitment tothe ICAO process.”“Aviation is a global industry, making it critical that aircraft emissionsstandards continue to be agreed upon at the international level,” A4A VicePresident for Environmental Affairs Nancy Young said in a statement.The U.S. already has a history of implementing the international aviationbody’s standards. Twice in the last decade, the group has issued standardslimiting emissions of acid-rain-causing nitrogen oxides from new planes —and both times, EPA has followed suit with rules conforming to thosestandards.Environmentalists worry that the U.S. government may take a similar pathwhen it comes to carbon emissions from planes. They hope to persuade EPA toset stronger standards that could serve as a runway to guide other nationstoward tougher standards as well. Meanwhile, manufacturers fear that U.S.standards tougher than the rest of the world’s will only encourage enginemakers to move overseas.Along with the proposed endangerment finding, EPA issued an advanced noticethat it is considering how to regulate the planes’ emissions under theClean Air Act — under provisions that are both relatively untested andbroader than the statutes used to write other pollution regulations.EPA must consult with the FAA and cannot set standards that decrease safetyor increase noise, but otherwise appears to face fewer limits in itsauthority than in the sections of the Clean Air Act regarding pollutionfrom other sources. FAA is charged with writing separate rules to ensurecompliance with EPA’s standards.In its call for input, EPA is taking comment on when carbon standardsshould take effect, how stringent they should be and whether standardsshould apply only to newly designed aircraft or to designs already inproduction.Any future regulations would almost certainly apply to manufacturers ofplanes and engines — specifically, jets with a maximum takeoff mass of atleast 6.3 tons and prop planes with maximum takeoff mass of at least 9.3tons. That range that would cover everything from smaller jets to jumboliners such as the Airbus A380 and the Boeing 747. (Smaller recreationalcraft and military planes are not covered by the proposal.)But given that any price increase will be borne by carriers, the U.S.’major airlines are sure to weigh in on the climate rules, if not theendangerment finding itself.Boeing spokesman Tim Neale told The Associated Press that the industry isalready shrinking its carbon footprint. “We’re hard at work on lighterairplanes, and GE is hard at work on more efficient engines,” he said. “Andwe’re working a lot of these operational issues with the carriers so theyoperate the planes more efficiently.”The administration has already weathered one flap over internationalemissions efforts.In 2012, U.S. carriers balked when the European Union instituted anemissions trading scheme that would apply to flights that arrived at ordeparted from member airports. Congress passed legislation that allowed theTransportation Department to block U.S. airlines from having to comply, andthe issue moved to the back burner for several years after the EU put thatprogram on hold.Legally speaking, EPA may be on solid footing with its proposedendangerment finding.The Supreme Court has made it clear that EPA can regulate greenhouse gaseslike carbon dioxide so long as it determines those emissions threatenpublic health, and it upheld EPA’s 2009 finding that cars pose such athreat. EPA later extended that finding to emissions from power plants, thegreatest source of U.S. carbon pollution.While critics will have a chance to weigh in via public comments, fewexpect EPA to alter course significantly in its final decision.One potential argument against the endangerment finding is the fact thatU.S.-related airplane emissions make up just 0.5 percent of globalhuman-caused greenhouse gas emissions. But in the ramp-up to thisDecember’s international climate talks in Paris, every action helps buildsupport, no matter the size.EPA expects to finish the endangerment finding next year. While that wouldtrigger a requirement to subsequently issue greenhouse gas regulations forplanes, the timing means that the next president will oversee thoseefforts. Regardless of who wins the White House next year, a positiveendangerment finding would legally require EPA to write the carbonregulations.Environmentalists are pushing for the U.S. to set stricter goals and becomea standard-bearer on the issue, but it remains unclear whether anyadministration would go beyond ICAO’s eventual plan.“President Obama has a unique and extremely important opportunity todemonstrate leadership not only domestically but, around the world,” saidBecker.*Senate shows Ex-Im support in test vote<http://thehill.com/policy/finance/244608-senate-shows-ex-im-support-in-test-vote>// The Hill // Kevin Cirilli – June 10, 2015 *Supporters of the Export-Import Bank showed they have the support to breaka filibuster against its renewal on Wednesday in a test vote highlightingthe bank’s support.In a 31-65 tally, the Senate voted against tabling an amendment toreauthorize the bank.The amendment was offered by Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.). Sen. Kelly Ayotte(R-N.H.), who supports the bank, then removed the amendment.“What we’re trying to do here is basically show support for the Ex-ImBank,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a bank supporter who is one offive senators running for president. “This is not the last vote we’ll takeon the Ex-Im Bank.”Twenty GOP senators joined 45 Democrats to support the bank.Presidential candidates Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.)voted against the bank. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), another presidentialcandidate and outspoken bank critic, did not vote.Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who is running as a Democratic presidentialcandidate, also voted against the bank.The Export-Import Bank will expire unless its charter is extended by theend of this month, and conservative Republicans in the House have mountedan effort to kill it.Despite the show of support in the Senate, it appears unlikely the bankwill be extended before June 30. Supporters will likely attach an amendmentextending its charter to a transportation bill, but that legislation wouldnot move until July.Those opposed to the bank argue it is a form of crony capitalism in whichfavored companies get advantages. The bank finances overseas investmentsintended to boost U.S. exports.*INTERNATIONAL**Hackers May Have Obtained Names of Chinese With Ties to U.S. Government<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/11/world/asia/hackers-may-have-obtained-names-of-chinese-with-ties-to-us-government.html>// NYT // – David Sanger & Julie Davis – June 10, 2015 *Investigators say that the Chinese hackers who attacked the databases ofthe Office of Personnel Management may have obtained the names of Chineserelatives, friends and frequent associates of American diplomats and othergovernment officials, information that Beijing could use for blackmail orretaliation.Federal employees who handle national security information are required tolist some or all of their foreign contacts, depending on the agency, toreceive high-level clearances. Investigators say that the hackers obtainedmany of the lists, and they are trying to determine how many of thosethousands of names were compromised.In classified briefings to members of Congress in recent days, intelligenceofficials have described what appears to be a systematic Chinese effort tobuild databases that explain the inner workings of the United Statesgovernment. The information includes friends and relatives, around theworld, of diplomats, of White House officials and of officials fromgovernment agencies, like nuclear experts and trade negotiators.“They are pumping this through their databases just as the N.S.A. pumpstelephone data through their databases,” said James Lewis, a cyberexpert atthe Center for Strategic and International Studies. “It gives the Chinesethe ability to exploit who is listed as a foreign contact. And if you are aChinese person who didn’t report your contacts or relationships with anAmerican, you may have a problem.”Officials have conceded in the briefings that most of the compromised datawas not encrypted, though they have argued that the attacks were sosophisticated and well hidden that encryption might have done little good.The first attack, which began at the end of 2013 and was disclosed in themiddle of last year, was aimed at the databases used by investigators whoconduct security reviews. The investigators worked for a contracting firmon behalf of the Office of Personnel Management, and the firm was fired inAugust.The broader attack on the personnel office’s main databases followed inDecember. That attack, announced last week, involved the records of morethan four million current and former federal employees, most of whom haveno security clearances.White House and personnel office officials have provided few details aboutthe latest breach. But the Department of Homeland Security has been tellingoutside experts and members of Congress that it regards the detection ofthe attack as a success, because it made use of new “signatures” of foreignhackers, based on characteristics of computer code, to find the attack.In a statement, the personnel office said Wednesday that “it was because ofthese new enhancements to our IT systems that O.P.M. was able to identifythese intrusions.” But the detection happened in April, five months afterthe attack began.The list of relatives and “close or continuous contacts” is a standard partof the forms and interviews required of American officials every five yearsfor top-secret and other high-level clearances, and government officialsconsider the lists to be especially delicate.In 2010, when The New York Times was preparing to publish articles based on250,000 secret State Department cables obtained by WikiLeaks, the newspapercomplied with a request by the department to redact the names of anyChinese citizens who were described in the cables as providing informationto American Embassy officials. Officials cited fear of retaliation by theChinese authorities.Officials say they do not know how much of the compromised data was exposedto the Chinese hackers. While State Department employees, especially newones, are required to list all their foreign friends, diplomats have somany foreign contacts that they are not expected to list them all.But other government officials are frequently asked to do so, especially ininterviews with investigators. The notes from those interviews, conductedby a spinoff of the personnel office called the United States InvestigativeService, were obtained by hackers in the earlier episode last year.Intelligence agencies use a different system, so the contacts of operativeslike those in the C.I.A. were not in the databases.But the standard form that anyone with a national security job fills outincludes information about spouses, divorces and even distant foreignrelatives, as well as the names of current or past foreign girlfriends andboyfriends, bankruptcies, debts and other financial information. And itappears that the hackers reached, and presumably downloaded, images ofthose forms.“I can’t say whether this was more damaging than WikiLeaks; it’s differentin nature,” said Representative Adam B. Schiff, a California Democrat whois a member of the House Intelligence Committee, which was briefed byintelligence officials, the Department of Homeland Security and thepersonnel office on Tuesday. Mr. Schiff, who declined to speak about thespecifics of the briefing, added, “But it is certainly one of the mostdamaging losses I can think of.”Investigators were surprised to find that the personnel office, which hadalready been so heavily criticized for lax security that its inspectorgeneral wanted parts of the system shut down, did not encrypt any of themost sensitive data.The damage was not limited to information about China, though thatpresumably would have been of most interest to the hackers. They are likelyto be particularly interested in the contacts of Energy Departmentofficials who work on nuclear weapons or nuclear intelligence, CommerceDepartment or trade officials working on delicate issues like thenegotiations over the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and, of course, WhiteHouse officials.In a conference call with reporters on Wednesday, Senator Angus King, anindependent from Maine on both the Intelligence Committee and the ArmedServices Committee, called for the United States to retaliate for thesekinds of losses. “Nation-states need to know that if they attack us thisway, something bad is going to happen to their cyberinfrastructure,” hesaid.But Mr. King said he could not say if the attacks on the personnel officewere state-sponsored, adding, “I have to be careful; I can’t confirm theidentity of the entity behind the attack.” The Obama administration has notformally named China, but there has been no effort to hide the attributionin the classified hearings.The scope of the breach is remarkable, experts say, because the personneloffice apparently learned little from earlier government data breaches likethe WikiLeaks case and the surveillance revelations by Edward J. Snowden,both of which involved unencrypted data.President Obama has said he regards the threat of cyberintrusions as apersistent challenge in a world in which both state and nonstate actors“are sending everything they’ve got at trying to breach these systems.”The problem “is going to accelerate, and that means that we have to be asnimble, as aggressive and as well resourced as those who are trying tobreak into these systems,” he said at a news conference this week.The White House has stopped short of blaming Katherine Archuleta, thedirector of the personnel office, for the breach, emphasizing that securinggovernment computer systems is a challenging task.*U.S. Expands ISIS Involvement, Sending Up To 450 Military Personnel To NewTraining Site In Iraq<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/10/obama-troops-iraq_n_7553908.html?ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016>// Huffington Post – June 10, 2015 *The United States will send another 450 military personnel to Iraq to helpforces there combat the extremist Islamic State group, the White Houseannounced Wednesday, signaling a shift in focus for the U.S. and a tacitacknowledgement that the extremists have not been weakened as much as theObama administration has claimed.The additional personnel will establish a new U.S. training site — thefifth in Iraq — at Taqaddum military base in Iraq’s Sunni-majority Anbarprovince, according to White House spokesman Josh Earnest.Earnest said that President Barack Obama made the decision followingrequests from Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi and recommendations fromtop military commanders and national security advisers. But theannouncement also suggests a possible resolution to an ongoing strugglewithin the Obama administration about how best to move forward in Iraq, asmilitary commanders have previously said that sites in Anbar province –such as the provincial capital, Ramadi, which was captured by the IslamicState last month — are less important than potential offensives elsewhere.The additional U.S. forces will not play a combat role, administrationofficials emphasized Wednesday afternoon in a call with reporters. Instead,they are intended to bolster Iraqi forces’ morale in the embattledprovince, help the Iraqis respond more promptly to Islamic State advancesand eventually strengthen them to the point where they can retake Ramadiand other towns like Fallujah. The officials tried to strike an optimistictone, citing prior success at the al-Asad air base, an already-establishedU.S. training camp in Anbar province.But that is a difficult message to sell in light of a Monday report fromThe Hill indicating trouble at the air base. U.S. military officials thereare frustrated, according to the report, because the central Iraqigovernment has not sent new recruits to al-Asad for at least the past fourweeks.Officials on Wednesday’s call said that recruitment for the new trainingmission will be facilitated by the Iraqi government’s commitment to movecloser to Sunni tribal fighters in Anbar province, something Iraqi leadershave made a priority following the fall of Ramadi. Ben Rhodes, the deputynational security adviser, told reporters that Baghdad’s decision to auditits military rolls — removing soldiers who have fled or defected — wouldfree up Iraqi cash to pay more soldiers, particularly Sunni tribal recruits.Administration officials also emphasized that Wednesday’s decision had beenmade in response to what the Iraqis said they needed. Abadi had sought aU.S. training presence with Sunni tribesmen for some time and reiteratedthe request after Ramadi fell, according to Rhodes.”The Iraqis want to be in the lead themselves,” he said.The statements came one day after Salim al-Jabouri, speaker of the Iraqiparliament and a prominent Sunni politician, told Foreign Policy that heblames the Islamic State’s success in Anbar province not only on problemsin the Iraqi forces but also on a lack of urgent U.S. attention to theproblem.The White House also announced Wednesday that it will speed up the deliveryof heavy equipment, notably anti-tank missiles, to its Iraqi partners onthe ground. The administration did not say whether it would directly supplythe Kurdish peshmerga forces in the north or the Sunnis already battlingthe Islamic State, although those communities have said they desperatelyneed supplies because they claim Baghdad is slow to distribute equipment.The White House did not indicate how Wednesday’s development will affectpreviously announced plans to retake Mosul, Iraq’s second largest city anda key prize for the Islamic State. Military officials controversiallypredicted in February that Mosul would be liberated in the spring,prompting vocal criticism from Iraq and a struggle to temper expectations.The New York Times reported on Wednesday that Mosul might not be retakenuntil next year.Asked about the change in policy, Rhodes did not mention whether it willaffect Mosul, where residents are reportedly living in fear of themilitants. Rhodes said the administration is constantly revising itsapproach based on reports from the ground in Iraq and Syria showing whathas and hasn’t worked for the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State.”I wouldn’t think of it as a formal review process,” he said.He added that Obama is constantly thinking about force protection as hecontinues to approve an expansion of the U.S. military footprint in Iraq.Elissa Slotkin, a top defense official, said on the call with reportersthat the 450 additional troops for the new U.S. training camp will be builtup beginning immediately, first by redeploying forces already within Iraqand then by sending U.S. troops there from elsewhere.*American Keith Broomfield killed fighting in Syria<http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/10/politics/american-killed-fighting-syria-keith-broomfield/index.html>// CNN // Elise Labott – June 10, 2015*American citizen Keith Broomfield was killed fighting in Syria, a StateDepartment official confirmed Wednesday.The official said the State Department was in touch with Broomfield’sfamily.Jennifer Broomfield, a woman who identified herself on Facebook as KeithBroomfield’s sister, shared an image of a text message conversation on thesocial medium, which she said were the “Last words I had with my brother.””My unspoken prayers and tears for those in the Middle East were answeredwhen he left to fight,” she wrote. “I didn’t think I would lose him.”The State Department said in its press briefing Wednesday that additionaldetails on Broomfield’s death were not immediately available.Idris Nassan, Kurdish co-deputy foreign minister of the Kobani district,also confirmed to CNN Broomfield had been fighting alongside the Kurdsagainst ISIS.”Broomfield was fighting alongside the Kurdish People’s Protection Units inthe Kobani countryside when he was killed battling against ISIS,” Nassansaid. “It is unclear how long Broomfiled had been fighting with the Kurdishforces, but he had become well acquainted with the militiamen, even earningthe Kurdish nom de guerre Damhad (meaning: it’s the time to do something).”*OPINIONS/EDITORIALS/BLOGS**Jeb Bush’s Learning Curve on Russia<http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/10/jeb-bushs-learning-curve-on-russia/>// NYT // Carol Giacomo – June 10, 2015 *Few world leaders are easier to criticize these days than PresidentVladimir Putin of Russia. There can be no defense of his decision to annexCrimea, worsen Ukraine’s civil war by sending troops and weapons to theeastern region and threaten nuclear responses if NATO tries to deter hisaggression.So it was no surprise that Jeb Bush, an all-but-declared Republicanpresidential candidate, used Mr. Putin as a target during a visit to Berlinon Tuesday and Wednesday that was intended to burnish his non-existentforeign policy credentials.“Ultimately to deal with Putin you need to deal from strength – he’s abully and … you enable bad behavior when you’re nuanced with a guy likethat,” Mr. Bush said. He called for a “more robust” approach and asked,“Who can doubt that Russia will do what it pleases if its aggression goesunanswered?”It was also no surprise that Mr. Bush took the opportunity to faultPresident Obama, saying the administration’s attempt to “reset” relationswith Russia had failed.Despite the venue, his most important audience was not Germans or evenEuropeans but Republican voters who are eager to blame Mr. Obama foreverything that goes wrong in the world.It has sometimes been hard to watch the Europeans waffle over imposingsanctions on Russia. But they and the Americans have done just that, andthe sanctions seem to be holding even if they don’t seem to have alteredMr. Putin’s outrageous behavior.So what would Mr. Bush do differently? Nothing, it seems. He proposed abeefed-up presence of NATO troops along Russia’s border with the Balticstates and said the allies should signal what further sanctions Russiacould face if it persists in its aggression – things the United States andits allies are already doing.Mr. Bush coupled his exhortations about strength with caution, insisting,“I’m not talking about being bellicose.” That suggests the kind of nuancethat Mr. Obama has tried to bring to his Russia policy. Getting the balanceright is complicated by the fact that Mr. Putin’s help is still needed tosolve other challenges, including in Syria and Iran.What Mr. Bush failed to offer is a detailed plan for ending the presence ofRussian-backed troops in Ukraine.He apparently saw no irony in the fact that while he faulted Mr. Obama fortrying in 2009 to reset relations with Russia, his own brother, PresidentGeorge W. Bush, famously declared on meeting Mr. Putin in 2001 that he hadgotten “a sense of his soul” and found him “trustworthy.”President Bush obviously went overboard with his naïve and cloyingassessment. But like Mr. Obama, he was serving the national interest intrying to establish a working relationship with the leader of a majorcountry that controls thousands of nuclear weapons.As Jeb Bush correctly noted, Mr. Putin has changed and is far moreaggressive than in the past. If he wants to be taken seriously as apresidential candidate, Mr. Bush will have to come up with more thoughtfulexplanations of what Mr. Obama’s failings are and how he will tackle theworld’s most thorny problems differently.*Jeb Bush’s recipe for a better society: Shame<http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/jeb-bushs-recipe-for-a-better-society-shame/2015/06/10/9c28ecd4-0f92-11e5-adec-e82f8395c032_story.html>// WaPo // Catherine Rampell – June 10, 2015 *Judge a little more, blush a little more, and all of society’s ills will becured.So posited now-presidential hopeful Jeb Bush in a book published shortlyafter his unsuccessful first run for Florida governor in 1994.“Profiles in Character” (which Bush co-authored with Brian Yablonski) ispart compilation of platitudes about community, religiosity and integrity;part series of inspirational biographies (the “profiles” of the title); andpart diatribe about bloated government. The juiciest and weirdest bits,though, are in a subchapter about the need to revive “shame.”“Society needs to relearn the art of public and private disapproval and howto make those who engage in undesirable behavior feel some sense of shame,”Bush writes.The book argues that the diminishment of dishonor has contributed to allsorts of depravity. If only we as a populace were a bit more judgmental,the poor would stop being so poor, the promiscuous would learn restraint,deadbeats would pay their bills, criminals would keep to the straight andnarrow, school shooters would lay down their arms and bastard childrenwould finally start getting “legitimize[d]” (their term, not mine) throughmarriage.To contrast today’s shamefully shameless culture with the past, the bookwaxes wistful about ye olden times: “There was a time when neighbors andcommunities would frown on out-of-wedlock births and when publiccondemnation was enough of a stimulus for one to be careful. Infamousshotgun weddings and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s Scarlet Letter are remindersthat public condemnation of irresponsible sexual behavior has stronghistorical roots.”His priceless Andover education notwithstanding, Bush may be a littleconfused about one of the great American literary classics. Hawthorne’sunforgiving, shame-wielding Puritan Salemites were not exactly portrayed asworthy of imitation.But no matter; scarlet A’s for all sluts, please. In fact, after Bush wonthe governorship, Florida’s legislature passed a measure nicknamed the“Scarlet Letter” law because it required single women to publishinformation on their past sexual partners in a newspaper before they couldput children up for adoption. The law was repealed after being struck downas unconstitutional.Bush also pines for the days of “pillories and public dunkings,” andregrets that “much of today’s criminal justice system seems to be lackingin humiliation.” He endorses one idea, proposed by a Miami Heraldcolumnist, that juvenile offenders should be shamed by dressing them “infrilly pink jumpsuits and making them sweep the streets of their ownneighborhoods.” This sounds a lot like the infamous pink underwear inmateswear in Arizona’s Maricopa County, but apparently even that would beinsufficiently emasculating.Perhaps most astonishingly, Bush advocates using corporal punishment inpublic schools, because he says the humiliation involved (rather than thephysical pain) is so effective.Kids These Days “do not care if the teacher yells at them or if their testresults are less than stellar,” Bush writes. In most districts, teachershave few available tools to adequately humiliate delinquents — but in somelucky districts, such as Florida’s Walton County, educators were still ableto practice corporal punishment. (This was true when the book wascopyrighted, in 1995; last year, the county school board voted to banpaddling.) “Profiles in Character” quotes an anonymous student whodeclares, “We feel ashamed when it happens to us, but when you’re in thatclassroom and you want to learn and somebody else won’t let you learn,well, they are dealt with.”Bush then implies that spankings are the key to preventing more egregiousforms of school violence: “To date, Walton County has never experienced ashooting at any of its schools.”Yes, and I have an amulet that keeps away tigers.Bush has some other strange and/or relatively retrograde things in thetext, including some histrionics about the rise of no-fault divorce (aswell as “no-fault psychotherapy”) and fierce objections to the fact that acriminal defendant’s childhood and life circumstances are ever taken intoconsideration before passing judgment.The book was written 20 years ago, around the time that Hillary Clintonwrote an entire book about her pets (fun fact: rejected names for Clinton’sdog Buddy include “Arkanpaws” and “Clin Tin Tin”). So it’s hard to knowwhich, if any, of these specific policies he still favors. (Hisspokesperson did not respond to questions about Bush’s current views onshame and corporal punishment, saying only that people should look to hisrecord as governor.)But even if Bush no longer directly embraces, say, corporal punishment, hisunderlying philosophy is clear, and it’s consistent with attitudes we’veseen among conservatives now in power in places such as Kansas andWisconsin: that the main reason people are broke, unmarried, in prison orunemployed is because it’s all just too much gosh-darn fun.*Back Clinton for voting rights<http://qctimes.com/news/opinion/mailbag/back-clinton-for-voting-rights/article_662e7c7f-47a6-53c8-b1ce-d86800c048a9.html>// The Quad-City Times // Elaine Baxter – June 10, 2015 *In Iowa, we take voting seriously. Every four years, presidentialcandidates make Iowa their first stop on the road to the White House. Incities from Burlington to Council Bluffs, Iowans listen, carefully considertheir options and then turn out on caucus night for their preferredcandidate. Voting isn’t just a civic duty here – it’s a core part of whatmakes us Iowans.When more people vote, it’s better for our state, our country and ourdemocracy. In Iowa, we have made it easier than most states. From same dayregistration to in-person absentee voting, we have eliminated barriers tothe ballot box. Hillary Clinton agrees with us and offered concrete,common-sense policy proposals to increase participation in our electionsfor the entire countryHillary is calling for no fewer than 20 days of early voting in everystate, has called for the restoration of voting rights for convicted felonsand she believes it’s time for all eligible citizens to be registered tovote automatically when they turn eighteen in every state in the union.When I was Secretary of State, making it easier for Iowans to vote was aprimary goal of mine. My service convinced me more than ever that morepeople voting is never a bad thing. I applaud Hillary Clinton for her boldcall to expand access to the ballot. Her solutions will strengthen ourdemocracy and ensure that our leaders are accountable to the greatestnumber of citizens. That’s just the way we like it in Iowa.*Bernie Sanders Was Just Another Hippie Rummaging Through My Mom’s Fridge<http://www.newrepublic.com/article/122005/he-was-presidential-candidate-bernie-sanders-was-radical>// The New Republic // Chelsea Summers – June 10, 2015*One hot night in July 1972, I walked into my family’s kitchen to see mymother brandishing a broom at a skinny man who had his head stuck deepinside our refrigerator.“You get out!” my mom yelled, hitting the man on his skinny ass. “Out,out!” Under her tan skin, my mother’s face was red with indignation. Wedidn’t have much in our fridge, but my mom would fiercely defend it. Theman pulled his head out of the fridge, dropping the food on the shelf. Hishair was curly; a cherub’s full-bodied curls framed his startled face.Chagrined, he loped off to the other apartment housed in my family’sconverted two-room schoolhouse in Huntington, Vermont, the site of alate-night mock-up session for The Vermont Freeman, the alt-weekly myparents published. Years later, I’d find out that man was Bernie Sanders.Standing on the waterfront park of Burlington, Vermont, on Tuesday, May 26,2015, Sanders announced his candidacy for president. Shortly thereafter,Mother Jones published “How Bernie Sanders Learned to Be a RealPolitician,” an article detailing Sanders’ decades-long shift from scruffyradical to hirsute politician. While the article delineates much ofSanders’ early history, including his time with the doomed Liberty Unionparty, his multiple failed political bids, and his hardscrabblehippie-adjacent life, the media fixated on one element: The “50 Shades”satiric erotica that Sanders wrote for the Freeman in October 1972.“A woman enjoys intercourse with her man,” goes the most quoted portion ofthe essay, “she fantasizes being raped by three men simultaneously.” Called“Man—and Woman,” the short piece originally appeared in the “China” issueof the Freeman. You’d likely imagine that an underground Vermont newspaperwould have a hard time drumming up enough copy to fill a China issue—andyou’d be right. The piece is bad, but it speaks to the gendered zeitgeistof the time, the ’70s confusion about who humans are when we can’t rely onthe gender roles we grew up in with. It’s a confusion that lingers,suggesting that though his prose is execrable, Sanders is posing questionsthat were valid for the time, questions that the anger of Men’s RightsActivists and fourth-wave feminist divisions suggest are still relevant.“It is very bad,” Frank Kochman, my father and co-publisher of the VermontFreeman, said of Sanders’s 1972 piece. “But it has a wonderful graphic.”“We were probably hard up for copy,” Jennifer Kochman, my mom, anotherco-publisher, added.Distancing himself from the piece, even Sanders called it “bad writing,”but this was the text that the media fixated on; from NPR to the WashingtonPost and beyond, the media glommed onto Sanders’s semi-salacious prose. Itcertainly was the first time that The Vermont Freeman was featured on “Meetthe Press.” From 1971-1974, the Freeman, with a circulation of about 1,500ranging across the state of Vermont and into New Hampshire, lived andbreathed in our converted two-room schoolhouse. My dad calls the Freeman a“heavy duty, Hanoi Jane, anti-war, people’s revolution sort of thing—shortof violent revolution; the Freeman never advocated actual revolution.”The newspaper’s pages detailed the vicissitudes of the Vietnam War, localpolitics, labor strikes, generalized feminism, and whatever other foodco-op–fed hobby-horses my parents and their friends were riding thatparticular week. Printed on newsprint with type laboriously cut and pastedby hand, illustrated by pictures my mom drew or found in clip-art, theFreeman looks like a forerunner to ‘zines, and its copy often reads a lotlike late-night posts to LiveJournal. Sometimes experienced journalistsplaced pieces too hot to publish anywhere else, but most of the paper hadthe feel of earnest kids doing everything they could to pretend to be real.When I was a nine-year-old girl, I saw Sanders as just another one of themop-haired, rangy hippies crowding my house. However, unlike all thoseother Freeman writers, Sanders was a radical who never left the politicalscene. While my parents left the Freeman to pursue other ventures—my dadbecame a lawyer and my mom did public relations for non-profits—Sandersdidn’t abandon his politics. Instead, he made a career out of them, runningunsuccessfully for Vermont governor and U.S. Senate multiple times as aLiberty Union candidate before being elected as an independent to the Houseof Representatives in 1991 and to the Senate in 2007. (Sanders has alwayscaucused with the Democrats.)And it was as a candidate that Sanders first came into contact with theFreeman. In its identity as the liberal alternative to thethen-conservative Burlington Free Press, the Freeman covered the nascentanti-war Liberty Union Party. Starting as early as October 1971, theFreeman covered the Liberty Union Party and its candidates, including aphoto of a very young Senate hopeful Bernie Sanders with his son. Everyonelooks so fluffy and soft, their children on their laps and nary a necktieto be seen.By the next year, Sanders had grown disillusioned with the coverage of theFreeman, and he penned a letter to the editor. Beginning with a churlishcharge that the paper “virtually ignored” his campaign, Sanders continuedto lay out a three-point campaign platform consisting of “a radicalrevision of the state’s regressive tax structure,” an end to the VietnamWar, and an amorphous call to “abolish all laws which attempt to impose aparticular brand of morality.” Rather than an ethical argument, Sandersused finances as the basis for ending the Vietnam War and suggested thatthis money fund universal health care, low-cost housing, and environmentalcleanup.It’s a three-point policy that’s remarkably similar to Sanders’ currentpresidential platform, which consists of income and wealth inequality,getting big money out of politics, and working against climate change andfor environmental causes.As Sanders’ trademark truculent tone hasn’t changed, so too has hispolitical position remained notably consistent. The 1972 senatorialcandidate who somewhat hazily pledged to “abolish all laws dealing withabortion, drugs, sexual behavior” in his letter to the Freeman became aU.S. representative who voted against the Defense of Marriage Act, and justas he opposed the Vietnam War as a candidate, he voted against the use offorce in Iraq in 1991, 2001, and 2003.In that 1972 letter, Sanders opposed the “gradual erosion of freedoms andthe sense of what freedom really means” in the Nixon administration—aloosey-goosey, hippie-dippy expression that, forty-plus years later, makesit hard to know what freedoms Sanders is referring to, exactly. However,the passage of time has solidified Sanders’ vague understanding of personalfreedoms—or it has given him a well-defined foe, and he vociferouslydecried the Patriot Act and other “Orwellian surveillance,” as he calledit. His voting record stands against big banking but usually with the NRA,necessary if you want to get elected in hunter-heavy Vermont.“Bernie really is not much different now than he was then,” my dad says.“His ties and suits are way better—of course, he had no ties or suits, buthe has been boringly consistent for 44 years.”In 1981, my first election as a voter, I voted for Sanders’s firstsuccessful bid to be mayor of Burlington. It was the cool thing to do, andI did it to wear the button and prove my loyalty to the collective cool.Forty years later, it’s an uncanny thing to see this person I’ve knownsince childhood become a viable candidate for president. It’s like seeingmy childhood validated, slapped on a campaign button, dissected by thepress, and turned into a slogan.My family moved out of that converted schoolhouse decades ago, but my momloves telling the refrigerator story. She says she forgives him. “He wasprobably just hungry,” she says. “We all were.”*Alexandria Phillips**Press Assistant | Communications*Hillary for America | www.hillaryclinton.com

Videos