Mitt Romney aims to pull off an 'Iowa' in South Carolina (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – Long-shot candidate Rick Santorum’s stunning near-win in the Iowa caucuses got the big headlines, but the victorious Mitt Romney also came out of the Hawkeye State with momentum.

Mr. Romney, too, had a bit of a surge at the end in Iowa, coming up from about 15 percent in the polls in early December to win with almost 25 percent. He hardly campaigned in Iowa, instead relying on the network he had built during his presidential campaign four years ago, and he kept expectations low until the end. Polls showing him as most able to beat President Obama in November made him strong among late deciders.

As the moderate former governor of Massachusetts, Romney was never a natural fit for Iowa Republicans, who skew more conservative and evangelical than Republicans as a whole. New Hampshire is home turf for Romney, and he is expected to win comfortably there next Tuesday.

RECOMMENDED: Mitt Romney gaffes: 8 times the button-down candidate should have buttoned up

But the next contest – South Carolina, on Jan. 21 – will be a challenge. Once again, Romney will face a GOP electorate that skews conservative and evangelical. Thus, he is taking detours for two appearances there, one Thursday afternoon, then Friday morning, before heading back to friendly New Hampshire.

Thursday morning, Romney released a new ad in South Carolina attacking Mr. Obama for going around Congress and appointing three new members to the National Labor Relations Board.

“You’re seeing a president adopt policies which affect our economy based not upon what’s right for the American worker but instead what’s right for their politics,” Romney said in the ad.

The White House accuses Romney of opposing protections to workers. The National Labor Relations Board came under heavy criticism in South Carolina for challenging Boeing Co. over its decision to build the 787 Dreamliner there.  

Romney’s goal in South Carolina: to pull off another “Iowa” – that is, win a plurality victory, or at least come close, amid a crowd of conservatives. Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s decision to stay in the race after finishing fifth in Iowa may help Romney, as it helps keep the conservative pie divided.

South Carolina, in fact, could be an easier sell for Romney than Iowa. South Carolina has a primary, which produces higher turnout and doesn’t favor just the most committed (presumably conservative) Republicans, as is the case in the Iowa caucuses.

And if South Carolina Republican primary voters are anything like they were four years ago, they won’t be as conservative as Iowa GOP caucusgoers. In 2008, the exit poll showed 68 percent of South Carolina Republicans self-identified as conservative. In Tuesday’s entrance poll in Iowa, 83 percent of caucusgoers self-identified as conservative.

In both states, about 6 in 10 Republican voters are evangelical. That works against Romney, whose Mormon faith makes some evangelicals uncomfortable. But in a cycle where the economy is the No. 1 issue and electability overrides all else for some voters, Romney is still competitive among religious conservatives.

Palmetto State Republicans pride themselves in being the “deciders” in competitive primaries. Since the first South Carolina Republican primary in 1980, the winner has always gone on to win the nomination. But analysts warn against presuming it will always be thus; there have been only six such contests. Florida Republicans, who vote on Jan. 31, will provide a better test of party sentiment, as Florida is a bigger, more diverse state. Romney is already airing ads there.

In the end, a loss in South Carolina for Romney may be merely a bump in the road on the way to the nomination. And if he manages to pull off a victory there, he’s well-positioned to lock up the nomination early. 

---

Watch this video, by Staff photographer Melanie Stetson Freeman, of Mitt Romney campaigning in New Hampshire prior to Tuesday's GOP primary:

youtube

RECOMMENDED: Why the 2012 election could all come down to Florida 

Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.

View the original article here

Ron Paul's strength in Iowa shows it's too soon to write him off (The Christian Science Monitor)

To most pollsters and pundits, any mention of Ron Paul typically comes with an implied asterisk. Whether they say it outright or not, they don’t think the Texas congressman has a chance of being the GOP presidential nominee. Too far outside mainstream, tea party, or born-again socially conservative Republicanism, they say. More libertarian than anything else.

And yet Rep. Paul soldiers on, and you know what? As other candidates – Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, Herman Cain – dash forward hare-like only to stumble or be run over by the next new thing, Paul is the perpetual tortoise in the race, mild-mannered, confident and unwavering in his positions (no flip-flopper he), advancing steadily toward the first real test in the Iowa caucuses six weeks from now.

MONITOR QUIZ: Weekly News Quiz for Nov. 13-18, 2011

Consider these recent headlines:

“Ron Paul is for real in Iowa. Seriously.” (Washington Post)

“Niche Voters Giving Paul Momentum in Iowa Polls” (New York Times)

“Ron Paul’s 19 percent in Iowa may indicate a path to the nomination” (Daily Caller)

“GOP outsider Ron Paul gaining traction in Iowa” (Associated Press)

“Ron Paul And Libertarians Can't Be Discounted” (Forbes)

A Bloomberg News poll this past week shows a four-way scrum for the lead in Iowa, with Paul in second place. (Cain gets 20 percent, Paul 19 percent, Mitt Romney 18 percent, and Newt Gingrich 17 percent among likely caucus goers.)

“A caucus state like Iowa is tailor-made to maximize the vote for a candidate like Ron Paul,” University of Virginia Center for Politics director Larry Sabato told The Daily Caller. “He has a dedicated band of supporters who will show up to vote in three feet of snow.”

That dedication shows up two ways in the latest poll in Iowa

Among likely caucus-goers who say their minds are made up, Paul leads with 32 percent, followed by Romney at 25 percent and former House speaker Gingrich at 17 percent, Bloomberg reports. And Paul’s campaign leads for voter contact, with about two-thirds of respondents saying they’ve heard from his campaign.

“Paul gets labeled a fringe candidate. But in this era of a closely divided electorate, anyone who commands the allegiance that Paul does from an activist libertarian movement must be accounted for in the political calculus,” pollster John Zogby writes in his regular Forbes column.

Dedicated allegiance has paid off for Paul in a string of straw polls.

The State Column, an online source of state political news, notes that Paul took second place in the Ames Straw Poll in August (finishing just 1 percentage point behind Bachmann), and he won a Values Voter Summit straw poll in October and a California Republican Party straw poll in September.

He also won an Ohio GOP poll with 53 percent of the votes, an Iowa straw poll at the National Federation of Republican Assemblies in Des Moines with 82 percent of the votes, and an Illinois straw poll with 52 percent of the vote – more than Romney or Cain.

RECOMMENDED: 10 things to know about Ron Paul

Much of that can be attributed to a hearty band of Paul loyalists – many of them young supporters – who do the most important thing in such contests: show up and vote.

In a way, Mr. Zogby points out, Paul is like Ralph Nader, even though he’s running as a major party candidate and not a third party outlier.

“In both cases, the support for Paul and Nader is a rejection of both parties,” Zogby writes. “Don’t expect Paul to endorse one of his GOP rivals, or for it to matter very much to libertarians if he did.”

Paul’s advantage is that rejecting both parties is a huge part of the tea party movement (at least before it started running its own Republicans in 2010) as well as of libertarianism. His challenge is that electability – finding the candidate most likely to defeat Barack Obama – has become the main thing Republicans are looking for in whichever champion they finally settle on.

Much of what Paul advocates is appealing to at least one faction of the Republican Party (mainstream, tea party, and socially conservatives), whether it’s about abortion, the definition of marriage, government regulation, foreign aid, military actions abroad, health care, or immigration.

He describes himself as “a constitutionalist” in ways that could appeal to civil libertarians. (He advocates an end to the Patriot Act, warrantless searches, the TSA, and the “war on drugs.”)

But it’s hard to imagine a Republican Party presidential candidate these days who would not support a constitutional ban on abortion, would cut defense spending by nearly a billion dollars, would shutter at least a half dozen departments of federal government, would leave it to religions (and not government) to define marriage, or who would end all US aid to Israel.

And while Romney beats Obama in at least a few polls, Paul does not, according to Real Clear Politics.

Still, Ron Paul keeps moving steadily toward a position of strength in the early voting – especially in Iowa. So he may yet surprise the pundits writing him off today.

The roar of Ron Paul: Five of his unorthodox views on the economy

Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.

View the original article here

Obama vs. GOP on jobs: Let the blame game begin (The Christian Science Monitor)

The partisan debate over jobs creation has descended into a blame game between President Obama and congressional Republicans.

“Over and over, they have refused to even debate the same kind of jobs proposals that Republicans have supported in the past – proposals that today are supported, not just by Democrats, but by Independents and Republicans all across America,” Obama complained in his radio address Saturday morning. “Meanwhile, they're only scheduled to work three more weeks between now and the end of the year.

Republicans in the House respond that they’ve passed 15 job-creating bills only to have those measures bottled up in the Democrat-controlled Senate.

“We call these bills the 'forgotten 15',” Rep. Bobby Schilling of Illinois said in the Republican address Saturday.

“These are common-sense bills that address those excessive federal regulations that are hurting small business job creation,” said Rep. Schilling, a freshman lawmaker whose family owns a pizza business in Moline. “A number of them have bipartisan support. Yet the Senate won't give these bills a vote, and the president hasn't called for action.”

The essence of the divide remains: Increase federal investment to stimulate job creation versus easing environmental and other regulatory restrictions that critics say can hinder job creation.

As with much of the debate in Washington these days – including the effort by the bipartisan congressional “super committee” to cut the federal deficit by $1.2 trillion before draconian budget cuts kick in automatically – this one can’t avoid the subject of taxes.

A new report by the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office gives Obama ammunition for his assertion that “millionaires and billionaires” can afford to pay more.

The CBO reported this week that while the rich got a lot richer over the past 30 years, the rest of American society struggled to keep up.

The CBO found that average after-tax income for the top 1 percent of US households had increased by 275 percent while middle-income households saw just a 40 percent rise and for those at the bottom of the economic scale, the jump was 18 percent.

"The distribution of after-tax income in the United States was substantially more unequal in 2007 than in 1979," CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf said in a blog post. " Income … for households at the higher end of the income scale rose much more rapidly than income for households in the middle and at the lower end of the income scale.â€

Obama says he’s doing what he can through executive order because GOP lawmakers refuse to consider his proposals.

On Friday, Obama directed government agencies to shorten the time it takes for federal research to turn into commercial products in the marketplace. The goal is to help startup companies and small businesses create jobs and expand their operations more quickly.

The president also called for creating a centralized online site for companies to easily find information about federal services. He previously had announced help for people who owe more on their mortgages than their homes are worth and for the repayment of student loans. The White House also challenged community health centers to hire veterans.

"We can no longer wait for Congress to do its job," Obama said Saturday. "So where Congress won’t act, I will."

Material from the Associated Press was used in this report.

View the original article here

Cracks in GOP promise of no new taxes for deficit cuts? (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – As Congress hurtles toward a self-imposed deadline to cut at least $1.2 trillion from deficits during the next 10 years, conservative lawmakers face tough choices on whether to keep their pledge to never raise taxes.

All six GOP members of the Joint Committee on Deficit Reduction have signed the taxpayer protection pledge, launched in 1986 by Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), an antitax group. All but six House Republicans and seven US senators have also signed.

The pledge commits lawmakers to opposing any hikes in tax rates. It also opposes cutting tax breaks or loopholes, unless they are entirely offset by spending cuts or other tax breaks. The idea is to ensure that no new money goes to the federal government but instead remains in the wallets of taxpayers.

But that opposition to any net tax increase is emerging as a major obstacle to the deficit "super committee" reaching a deal by its Nov. 23 deadline. Democrats on the panel are committed to a “balanced” approach to deficit reduction, which includes increases to federal revenue, such as tax hikes on the highest-income Americans.

RECOMMENDED: Who's who on the deficit 'super committee'

Now there are signs that, even for some prominent conservatives, the constraints of the ATR pledge are beginning to chafe.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R) of Wisconsin, who chairs the House Budget Committee, lately is avoiding being forced to give a yes-or-no answer to questions on tax hikes. All GOP presidential hopefuls responded in a recent debate that they would oppose revenue increases as part of a deficit-reduction deal, even if the ratio was $1 in tax hikes for every $10 in spending cuts.

“I think that was more of a gotcha question and trying to get people to look like they violated some pledge they may have taken,” he said during an interview with National Public Radio’s “Morning Edition” on Friday. “I’m not going to play this game.”

“I believe you can get higher revenues through tax reform and economic growth, and I think that’s the way to do it, because you don’t want to compromise job creation,” he said.

Rep. Buck McKeon (R) of California, who chairs the House Armed Services Committee, is lobbying his colleagues hard to not accept further defense cuts as part of a deficit compromise. But he doesn’t want to be forced to choose between defense spending and a tax hike.

“I don’t want to get to that point,â€

Rep. Jeff Flake (R) of Arizona, who has signed the pledge, has suggested there is some wiggle room. “Some [conservatives] won’t even let you get rid of a tax deduction or tax expenditure, unless it matches up with a tax cut. I’m not one of those.”

“If you can get rid of something as bad as the ethanol subsidy, I don’t think we should feel compelled to find a corresponding tax cut,” he added.

ATR President Grover Norquist calls adherence to the pledge a principled stance and a commitment to voters, not to ATR or to himself. He predicts it will not break down in the heat of negotiations to reach a deal.

“All of the guys on that committee have taken the pledge and understand it,” he says. “Everything I’m hearing is that we’re fine.”

An anti-Norquist pledge petition, signed by more than 11,000 online responders, calls on "Gridlock Grover" to affirm that the constitutional oath of public officials should trump ATR's no-tax pledge. "Over the past several months, politicians across the political spectrum have argued that your demand for ideological purity and your strong-arm enforcement tactics are paralyzing Congress and preventing Congress from solving the problems of the American people," reads the petition sponsored by the Constitutional Accountability Center in Washington.

On Tuesday, Sen. Max Baucus (D) of Montana, chair of the Senate Finance Committee and a member of the deficit panel, proposed more than $1 trillion in tax increases in a $3 trillion deficit-reduction plan. GOP leaders on and off the panel quickly dismissed it.

“Democrats come up with phony proposals like the $3 trillion [plan] to mask tax increases,” says Mr. Norquist. “Democrats want to raise taxes and they don’t want to cut spending. Republicans don’t want to raise taxes, but they want to cut spending. That’s exactly what we want the narrative to be between now and the next election cycle.”

RECOMMENDED: Who's who on the deficit 'super committee'

Get daily or weekly updates from CSMonitor.com delivered to your inbox. Sign up today.

View the original article here

Rick Perry zips past Mitt Romney in the polls (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – America, you have a new GOP frontrunner: Rick Perry has roared to the front of the GOP presidential field, according to the latest Gallup poll.

In only a short few weeks since the Texas governor announced his candidacy, Perry has gobbled up former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney’s lead in the national polls and then some, opening up a 12 percentage point advantage.

Not only that: Perry leads Romney among conservatives by a 33-16 margin, among all categories of church goers (even those who rarely, if ever, attend), and among all age groups. The only geographic grouping where Romney prevails is in the east, and even there he is ahead by a single percentage point.

(And don’t look now, but Texas Congressman Ron Paul has overtaken Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann for third place.)

Isn’t this just another tick in the horse race? Why are you telling us this, Decoder?

A campaign narrative can change in a flash. The open question with Mitt Romney was whether his slow, steady and largely silent campaign were keeping him above the fray or just lowering his profile. Now, it looks like it prevented him from putting down deep roots with Republican voters, who are, at least for the moment, flocking to the swaggering Texan.

Like your politics unscrambled? Go to DCDecoder.com

View the original article here

GOP leader: Rise in unemployment rate could sink Obama (VIDEO) (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – The increase in the nation’s unemployment rate in June is a major moment in President Obama’s reelection campaign and comments by one of Obama’s top advisers minimizing the political effects of joblessness are “like nails on a chalkboard to voters,” a top Republican strategist says.

Ed Gillespie, a former chairman of the Republican National Committee, told reporters at a Monitor-sponsored breakfast Friday that recent focus groups show independent voters think unemployment “is very important, and it is personal to them as we saw in these focus groups.”

Mr. Gillespie is referring to a series of focus groups conducted among independent voters in June by Resurgent Republic. It is a Republican group aimed at shaping the debate on the role of government. Gillespie is on the board of Resurgent Republic.

RECOMMENDED: Unemployment up? Not in these four maverick cities.

The focus groups included 41 independent voters. These independents – 31 of whom voted for Obama – don’t hold the president solely responsible for the economy’s problems, but are skeptical of his leadership and spending policies. They “don’t think he has made things better,” Gillespie said.

Jobless figures released Friday morning, showing the unemployment rate rose to 9.2 percent in June, are "reinforcing" data released last month which showed joblessness on the rise in May. Rising joblessness as the election draws closer “was a seminal moment in the reelection campaign,” Gillespie said. No modern president has been reelected with unemployment at its current level.

Gillespie blasted Obama confidant David Plouffe, who ran the President’s 2008 election campaign and now carries a “senior adviser” title at the White House. Mr. Plouffe spoke at a Bloomberg News breakfast on Wednesday, where he said that “the average American does not view the economy through the prism of GDP or unemployment rates or even monthly job numbers.”

Instead, Plouffe said, voters will vote based on “how do I feel about my own situation? Do I believe the president makes decisions based on me and my family?”

Voters “know the economy is bad,” Gillespie said. “When they hear people say, like the president of the United States, 'Well, just a bump in the road' or 'Things are not that bad,' it is like nails on a chalkboard to them. And for Plouffe to say, 'Well, unemployment doesn’t really matter in terms of the president’s reelection,' that will be more nails on the chalkboard to voters.”

RECOMMENDED: Unemployment up? Not in these four maverick cities.

----

youtube

View the original article here

Presidential election: Mitt Romney top GOP fundraiser, but behind 2007 pace (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – So far, Mitt Romney is the champion Republican fundraiser of the 2012 presidential cycle. On Wednesday, he reported raising $18.25 million in the second quarter of 2011 – all of it for the primaries – with $12.6 million in cash on hand. That’s far more than any other GOP candidate in the field raised, of the numbers released to date.

“Voters are responding to Mitt Romney’s message that President Obama’s policies have failed and that we need new leadership in Washington,” Romney finance chair Spencer Zwick said in a statement. “Our fundraising for the second quarter represents the strong support Mitt Romney has across the country.”

Indeed, Romney’s second-quarter take solidifies his position as the early frontrunner for the GOP nomination. But he failed to match his second quarter fundraising total from his last presidential run in 2007, when he brought in $23.5 million. That figure included $2.5 million of personal funds. This time, he has yet to self-fund. So the real apples-to apples comparison is $18.25 million versus $21 million.

IN PICTURES: Republicans in the 2012 presidential race

Why the decline? The down economy is certainly a factor, political analysts say. But there’s also still a sense that the field is unsettled. Texas Gov. Rick Perry still might jump in. And with so many other competitors, donors could be hanging back to see who develops momentum heading into early caucuses and primaries.

“There’s money on the sidelines,” says Ford O’Connell, chairman of the conservative Civic Forum PAC. “It’ s not necessarily for Governor Perry as much as it is for backing a winner who can go all the way.”

Mr. O’Connell also points out that an independent “Super PAC,” Restore Our Future, founded by former Romney political aides, raised $12 million in the first six months of 2011. The group, whose goal is to help Romney win the presidency, can raise unlimited donations from corporations, unions, and individuals, but must report those donors to the Federal Election Commission.

Romney is also garnering attention for holding a $2,500-per-person fundraiser in London on Wednesday. American citizens and green-card holders are also eligible to donate.

Some presidential candidates have yet to put out their second quarter 2011 fundraising numbers, including: former Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania, Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, and President Obama. Congresswoman Bachmann has been a stellar fundraiser in the House, but she was a presidential candidate for less than three weeks of the quarter. Mr. Obama’s campaign predicts a second-quarter total of $60 million, to be shared with the Democratic National Committee. The reporting deadline for second quarter fundraising is July 15.

Here are the totals reported by other candidates:

Rep. Ron Paul of Texas: $4.5 million. Second only to Romney, Congressman Paul’s take reflects the depth of passion among his supporters.

Tim Pawlenty, former governor of Minnesota: $4.2 million. That figure is not outstanding for a candidate who started early and is thought to have top-tier potential, but it’s enough to keep going, analysts say.

Jon Huntsman, former governor of Utah: $4.1 million. That total includes personal money he loaned the campaign. He joined the race only on June 21.

Herman Cain, former CEO of Godfather’s Pizza: $2.5 million, including some “modest seed money” of his own, his campaign reports.

Newt Gingrich, former House speaker: $2 million. But he has only $225,000 in the bank, and debt of about $1 million, according to news reports.

IN PICTURES: Republicans in the 2012 presidential race

View the original article here

Why the latest round of debt talks ground to a halt (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – With the exit of GOP negotiators and collapse of the debt talks led by Vice President Joe Biden, the onus of solving America’s debt crisis falls to President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner (R) of Ohio, and Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D) of Nevada.

This punt to the top is only the latest in a series of failed bids to make the toxic political choices that are needed, as early as Aug. 2, to avoid a default on the $14.3 trillion national debt. Options on the table, each fiercely defended by one party, include trillions of dollars in spending cuts, billions in tax increases, and overhauls of iconic entitlement programs.

Mr. Biden had hoped to present a “blueprint for putting America’s fiscal house in order” by the July recess, which begins for the House on Friday. Instead, these talks derailed over the scope of spending cuts and the prospect of tax increases. Still, Biden said, the aim of the talks from the outset was to “report our findings back to our respective leaders.”

RECOMMENDED: Debt ceiling 101

“The next phase is in the hands of those leaders, who need to determine the scope of an agreement that can tackle the problem and attract bipartisan support,” he said in a statement Thursday. “For now the talks are in abeyance as we await that guidance.”

On Monday morning, Mr. Obama and Biden will meet with Senator Reid and, in the evening, with Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R) of Kentucky to discuss the status of the debt negotiations.

Previous bipartisan efforts to chart a path out of unsustainable debt also derailed over the mix of spending cuts and tax increases. The chairs of the president’s 2010 deficit commission produced a plan to cut $4 trillion over 10 years, which failed a vote by the full commission and was ignored by both Obama and Congress. Six senators launched an independent, bipartisan “Gang of Six” to implement that plan, but it hit an impasse over entitlement cuts. Sen. Tom Coburn (R) of Oklahoma, the key link to conservatives, walked out on May 17.

The Biden talks, launched on May 5, included four Democrats and two Republicans with ties to leadership. Meeting weekly, then several times a week, negotiators produced a shortlist of some $2 trillion in proposed cuts over 10 years – including agricultural subsidies, federal employee pensions, and student loans.

But Democrats said that spending cuts had to be balanced by tax increases – including the elimination of “wasteful subsidiesâ€

On Wednesday, Senate Democratic leaders added another element to the mix by calling on the Biden negotiators to include a jobs plan to help stimulate the economy. “Cutting is only part of the game,â€

“We're seeking policies to build roads and bridges and dams and water systems and sewer systems, to create clean-energy jobs, to provide tax incentives for businesses to hire new employees,” he added. “They've been proven to create jobs in the past, and they have had, in the past, broad bipartisan support.”

It was a bridge too far for Republicans. But when House majority leader Eric Cantor (R) of Virginia and Senate minority whip Jon Kyl (R) of Arizona quit the talks on Thursday, they cited the dispute over tax increases and new plans for stimulus spending.

The House won’t vote to increase taxes, so taxes are off the table, said Representative Cantor, who led the walkout on Day 50 of the talks. “I believe it is time for the president to speak clearly and resolve the tax issue,” he said in a statement. “Once resolved, we have a blueprint to move forward to trillions of spending cuts and binding mechanisms to change the way things are done around here.”

Senator McConnell took to the floor after the walkout. “Most Americans had to wonder if they were dreaming this morning when they saw this headline: ‘Democrats call for new spending in US debt deal.’ More spending? As a solution to a debt crisis? What planet are they on?”

Still, Senate Republicans have taken a more conciliatory stance than their House counterparts in the Biden talks. In recent weeks, Senator Kyl said that spending and entitlement cuts could cover more than a 10-year period. And McConnell said that Republicans were open to short-term deals, if Congress can’t resolve the entire issue by Aug. 2.

House GOP leaders, on the other hand, see this moment as a historic opportunity to roll back the scope of government and set the nation on a new fiscal path. They are holding out for at least $2.4 trillion in spending cuts – the size needed to cover the increase in the debt ceiling through 2012.

House Republicans are also drawing a line on tax increases, including no cuts in corporate tax breaks unless such cuts are offset by new tax cuts elsewhere.

Yet over in the Senate, McConnell and 32 other Republicans joined Democrats in voting for a stand-alone cut in the subsidy for ethanol – a move that could open the door to including tax breaks in a blueprint for lower deficits. It's a move explicitly ruled out by the taxpayer pledge of Americans for Tax Reform, which scores members of Congress on their adherence to pledging not to raise taxes.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D) of Maryland, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee and a negotiator in the Biden talks, blames this rigidity over the pledge – which requires net offsets for ending any tax loophole – as the reason for Cantor’s exit.

Cantor denies that claim. “This was not just a matter of loopholes,” said Brad Dayspring, a Cantor spokesman. “Tax increases are a nonstarter.”

He added, “The way to move forward is to have the president get involved. Eric is confident there’s a foundation there for an agreement.”

While necessary at this point, the prospect of a deal emerging from a Gang of Three at the White House is unsettling to lawmakers at both ends of the political spectrum. They fear they will be forced to accept a deal under the gun of a government shutdown.

“It will be unacceptable for the White House talks or any talks to produce a controversial decision at the 11th hour and for them to come before the Congress all in a panic and say: ‘You’ve got to pass this solution that we have come up with in secret,’ ” said Sen. Bernard Sanders (I) of Vermont, one of the Senate’s strongest liberals, in a floor speech on Thursday.

Meanwhile, 98 House Republicans and 22 GOP senators have endorsed legislation sponsored by Rep. Tom McClintock (R) of California and Sen. Patrick Toomey (R) of Pennsylvania that aims to avoid default on the national debt by requiring the Treasury to pay debt obligations before any other government expenditures.

US debt risks exceeding the size of the US economy by 2021, according to a report released this week by the Congressional Budget Office.

RECOMMENDED: Debt ceiling 101

----

youtube

View the original article here

Karl Rove 'super PAC' won't favor any 2012 candidate during primaries (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – Supporters of Mitt Romney, the front-runner in the Republican presidential field, have launched a “super PAC” to raise money to promote his candidacy, even as leaders of American Crossroads, the biggest of the Republican super PACs, promised Friday to remain neutral during the primary season.

That signals that American Crossroads intends to save most of its fire for the general election, when the GOP nominee will be up against a well-funded President Obama, and will not choose a horse in the GOP nominating race.

The wrinkle in that scenario is that the new pro-Romney PAC and American Crossroads share a key executive – an overlap that had reporters closely questioning the Crossroads leaders about the neutrality assertion when they appeared Friday at a Monitor-sponsored breakfast gathering.

Gas prices and five other liabilities for Obama in 2012

Since the 2010 Supreme Court decision that opened the door to campaign spending by a wider array of contributors, so-called super PACs (political action committees) have been springing up. It's now permissible for these super PACs to raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations, and unions, as long as the donors are disclosed and the groups do not coordinate their spending with federal candidates.

According to a Washington Post report, Romney supporters have launched Restore Our Future PAC. It is not known how much Restore Our Future has already raised to support the Romney campaign.

American Crossroads, a group founded by Karl Rove, former President Bush's political adviser, among others, insists it will remain neutral during the 2012 primary season.

“It is important for us to clearly state that Crossroads … will not be involved in the Republican presidential primary. We are just not going to do that,” said the group's chairman, Mike Duncan. Though the group says it will not spend money to advance the cause of any primary candidate, it might spend as the primary season ends if Democrats attack the GOP's presumptive nominee, its executives said.

Reporters asked Mr. Duncan and Steven Law, the group’s president and CEO, pointed questions about American Crossroads' neutrality. The Washington Post story about the pro-Romney super PAC noted that its board of directors includes political operative Carl Forti, who was political director for Romney’s 2008 presidential campaign. Mr. Forti is now political director of American Crossroads.

“Carl is a contract employee with American Crossroads. He has other clients; we knew he had other clients. But clearly none of us are going to be involved personally in presidential campaigns. And he is not either,” Duncan said.

“The only thing I would add to that,” said Mr. Law, “is the work that Carl does for us is work that every contender for the Republican nomination would be supportive of, which is that he is helping find ways to make sure President Obama does not return to office.”

Getting bin Laden and five other boosts to Obama's reelection bid

View the original article here

Top GOP fundraiser: 'There's not too much money in politics' (The Christian Science Monitor)

Washington – Is politics awash with too much money?

Mike Duncan, chairman of American Crossroads, doesn't think so. His group, which solicits money to spend on behalf of conservative politicians, aims to raise $120 million to support GOP candidates in the 2012 election.

“There is not too much money in politics,” Mr. Duncan said Friday, in defense of his group's goal.

IN PICTURES: Will these Republicans run in 2012?

It is a matter of context, Duncan said at a Monitor-sponsored breakfast with reporters. "Our $120 million is in relation to a couple billion [dollars] on the other side.... We will probably be outspent as a party in this election.â€

In 2008, the Obama campaign raised $750 million. The Obama team is expected to spend more than that trying to get the president reelected in 2012.

American Crossroads, a Republican-backed independent group, was launched by Karl Rove, President Bush's former political adviser, among others. Mr. Rove acted after a 2010 Supreme Court decision, in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, made it permissible for "super PACs" to raise unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations, and unions, as long as the donors are disclosed and the groups do not coordinate their spending with federal candidates.

The $120 million goal includes funds that would be raised by American Crossroads, a tax-exempt 527 organization under Internal Revenue Service rules, and its affiliate, Crossroads GPS, a 501(c)4 group. Under the law, Crossroads GPS is not required to disclose donors' names to the public.

Crossroads President and CEO Steven Law said labor unions reported spending $400 million in support of Democratic candidates in the 2008 election. He expects similar spending by labor groups in 2012. Of his organization’s $120 million goal, Mr. Law said: “We are going to need every penny of it to have a chance of keeping up with the much larger dollars that we expect to be poured in by the left.”

IN PICTURES: Will these Republicans run in 2012?

View the original article here

GOP presidential hopefuls dance around climate change (The Christian Science Monitor)

There was a time when Republicans were at the forefront of efforts to investigate – maybe even do something about – the impact of human activity on global climate.

John McCain was an early and persistent supporter of cap-and-trade efforts to reduce the greenhouse gases (mainly carbon dioxide) associated with climate change. So was Newt Gingrich, who went on to make a YouTube video ad – with then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, no less – where he said, “Our country must take action to address climate change.”

Now, Republican presidential hopefuls seem to be racing in the opposite direction – disavowing their past support for policy measures on climate – even any sense that there’s a problem to be addressed.

MONITOR QUIZ: Weekly news quiz for June 13-17, 2011

As Governor of Minnesota, Tim Pawlenty signed a state greenhouse gas law limiting emissions, led a regional climate partnership with Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and he supported cap-and-trade. Since then, he’s flip-flopped.

At the Conservative Political Action Committee conference in Washington earlier this year he made his mea culpa.

“Have I changed my position? Yes," Pawlenty said. "But I'm not going to be cute about it, hem and haw, be dippy and dancy about it. Just saying yeah, it was a mistake. It was stupid. It was wrong."

Former US Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R) of New York, a strong supporter of the environment, says he has "never been so disappointed in all my life in the pretenders to the throne from my party."

"Not one of them is being forthright in dealing with climate science," he told the Associated Press recently. "They are either trying to finesse it, or change previous positions to accommodate the far right. They are denying something that is as plain as the nose on your face."

To liberal critics, the answer is obvious: The influence of climate change denialists financially supported by the billionaire Koch brothers (David and Charles) and others tied to the oil industry.

Whether or not that’s true, there’s no denying that climate change (and environmental issues generally) carry less political weight than they did in recent years.

While a majority (52 percent, according to Gallup) still believes climate change is caused by human activities as opposed to natural causes (43 percent), that’s down from a high of 61 percent in 2007. Similarly, the number of Americans who believe the impacts of global warming already are being felt has dropped to fewer than half.

“Americans are clearly less concerned about global warming and its effects than they were a few years ago,” Gallup’s Jeffrey M. Jones reported in March. “The reasons for the decline in concern are not obvious, though the economic downturn could be a factor…. environmental concerns tend to take a back seat to economic matters when the economy is in poor shape.”

It’s also a clearly partisan issue. Much higher percentages of Republicans (i.e., conservatives) now say the issue has been overblown in the media (67 percent), and they’re much less likely to connect increases in temperature to human activities. Just 31 percent worry about it at all, less than half the rate for Democrats.

Thus, the shift in overall public attitude is largely driven by the growing influence of politically conservative thought, especially the tea party. That, in turn, drives the actions and assertions of presidential hopefuls facing a gantlet of party conservatives in next year’s primary elections and caucuses.

Presumed front-runner Mitt Romney’s tack has been interesting.

He has not given it the full genuflect that Pawlenty and Gingrich did.

(Campaigning in Manchester, New Hampshire, in late May, Gingrich, the former cap-and-trader, suggested that climate change is "the newest excuse to take control of lives" by "left-wing intellectuals." Campaigning at a house party, Gingrich was asked about “the climate/global warming problem.” He went off on a long professorial toot in which he pointed out that as an “amateur paleontologist” he observed that “It was substantially warmer in the age of dinosaurs when there were no cars, at least not that we’ve been able to find, and no factories.”)

Romney was more direct.

"I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that," he told a crowd at a town hall meeting in Manchester. "It's important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors."

It was an “aha!” moment for ideological purists. “Bye, bye nomination” declared Rush Limbaugh, who says global warming is “one of the most preposterous hoaxes in the history of the planet.”

As the headline on one Huffington Post piece put it: “Mitt Romney Attacked For Being Reasonable About Climate Change”

Still, it’s not that Romney’s position differs at all from majority Republicans in the House, where cap-and-trade is dead and there’s unlikely to be any legislation addressing climate change.

Romney did get a shout-out from Al Gore.

“Good for Mitt Romney," Gore blogged. "While other Republicans are running from the truth, he is sticking to his guns in the face of the anti-science wing of the Republican Party."

Which was a little like President Obama praising Romney for the Massachusetts model on health care.

MONITOR QUIZ: Weekly news quiz for June 13-17, 2011

View the original article here