EJ Dionne, Norm Orenstein, Thomas Mann/Atlantic with excerpts from a new book:
How the GOP Prompted the Decay of Political Norms
The Republican Party laid the groundwork for dysfunction long before Donald Trump was elected president.
Norms are defined as “a standard or pattern, especially of social behavior, that is typical or expected of a group.” They are how a person is supposed to behave in a given social setting. We don’t fully appreciate the power of norms until they are violated on a regular basis. And the breaching of norms often produces a cascading effect: As one person breaks with tradition and expectation, behavior previously considered inappropriate is normalized and taken up by others. Donald Trump is the Normless President, and his ascendancy threatens to inspire a new wave of norm-breaking.
This is a theme i have written about, along with shared values. We used to have them. Some we still do, despite trump’s best efforts (Nazis are still bad, e.g.).
Trita Parsi/ Guardian:
Trump is conflating Pyongyang with Tehran. The results could be catastrophic
President Donald Trump took a page out of the George W Bush playbook at his UN address on Tuesday. To justify confrontation with Iran, conflate it with Pyongyang. To justify confrontation with North Korea, conflate it with Tehran.
This is the latest gimmick in Trump’s desperate efforts to kill the nuclear deal with Iran: by focusing on Tehran’s objectionable non-nuclear policies and false claims of the unevenness of the Iran deal, Trump is arguing that sustaining the international accord can no longer be justified since it doesn’t address the totality of America’s concerns with Iran.
Problem is: there is no deal that could address the totality of US-Iran tensions unless Trump is willing to engage in extensive diplomacy with Iran for such a grand bargain. Thus far, Trump has shown zero interest in negotiations with Iran. And mindful of how he has conducted himself on the world stage, significant doubts exist as to whether his administration has the capacity and competence to face Iran diplomatically.
Instead, the contours of Trump’s Iran policy are crystallizing. Rather than a new deal with Iran, Trump is reigniting the US-Iran cold war that the nuclear deal began to cool down.
Lawfare:
The Latest Scoops from CNN and the New York Times: A Quick and Dirty Analysis
What does this mean for the future of the Trump-Russia investigation?
No one knows for sure—and take with a grain of salt anyone who predicts things confidently. It’s clear that L’Affaire Russe isn’t going away anytime soon. It’s clear that Mueller knows a great deal that the rest of us do not. And it’s clear that the White House’s public dismissiveness aside, there is real reason for the president and his coterie to worry about the many shoes left to drop. Beyond that, things remain very murky.
Consider, for example, that for all the Times’ certainty that Manafort will be indicted, neither the Times nor CNN gives much hint beyond the vaguest phrases of what charges might be expected. People anticipating a swift end to this drama should temper their expectations.
Tyler Cowan/Bloomberg:
Incentives Are All Wrong for Single-Payer Health Care
Americans won't give up their private insurance unless the government option is better. And that won't be cheap.
Let’s say the federal government sets up a “public option,” as it sometimes is called. Individuals would have the opportunity to buy into government insurance at some price. The new government program would be competing with private insurance, but just how good will the new benefits be? If you’re healthy and have other coverage, you probably won’t switch -- if you did, that would be a sign that the new government program was of very high quality and probably too expensive for the nation as a whole. Boosting the health care of the best-covered Americans isn’t the policy priority right now.
Instead, the public option might be set up to attract those who don’t already have good coverage. But those are the same people who don’t have the money to pay a fair market price for health insurance now. In essence, the program would come to resemble a Medicaid expansion, whether or not it would fall under the formal rubric of Medicaid.
Jeet Heer/TNR:
Donald Trump, the Teenage Monarch
The Democrats are trying to cut deals with the president, but doing so risks legitimizing a man-child who is unfit for the office.
Both parties have made a devil’s bargain with the president. Republicans might be appalled by Trump’s betrayal of core principles, but remain wedded to him in the hopes he’ll enact a modicum of the GOP agenda. Meanwhile, Democratic leaders fawn over a president they know is a cruel bigot and ignoramus in the hopes they can save vulnerable Americans from his wrath.
The Democrats’ bargain is at least defensible. Thanks to Trump’s decision to rescind Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), in a few months nearly a million Dreamers could be deported from the country they consider home. If Schumer and Pelosi can pull off a deal that gets Dreamers citizenship, it’ll be worth the cost of working with Trump. But there is ample reason for doubt, as Trump seems to be playing both sides against each other. Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican, said Sunday on Meet the Press, “In fact, [Trump] called me a couple nights ago to say there’s no deal. He wants to make sure that we protect the interest of American workers. In particular, by ending unlimited chain migration, which is why we have so many unskilled workers coming into the country.” Whom is Trump telling the truth to, Cotton or Schumer? Most likely neither. Trump has no real immigration policy in mind, so either he’s telling each faction what they want to hear or he’s constantly changing his mind based on the latest advice given to him.
The risks and costs of working with Trump has to be acknowledged by anyone who negotiates with him, especially those in the Democratic opposition.
Dr Mary-Claire King/HuffPost:
The Week My Husband Left And My House Was Burgled I Secured A Grant To Begin The Project That Became BRCA
The week of April Fools’ Day of 1981 began badly. That Sunday night my husband told me he was leaving me. He had fallen in love with one of his graduate students, and they were headed back to the tropics the next day.
I was completely devastated. It was totally unexpected. 33 years later, I still don’t know what to say about it. I was just beside myself.
He gave me a new vacuum cleaner to soften the blow.
Wait… what kind of vacuum? Kidding aside, this is an amazing story.
Axios:
Senate leadership is aiming to start voting on the Cassidy-Graham health care plan next Wednesday. "I think so. I think that's the likely thing," Sen. Roy Blunt, a member of leadership, told me.
- Leadership is still trying to figure out where each senator stands.
- The vehicle Republicans are using to pass the bill with only a 50-vote threshold expires next Saturday.
What we're watching: Sens. Lisa Murkowski and John McCain. If either of them (or a wild card) comes out against the bill before next week, it's unclear whether it would come to the floor.
"Some don't want to take another tough vote if the whole team (or at least 50) isn't on board. Some say we can't get this close and not try by forcing the vote – make people identify where they are. I think the 'vote no matter what' school is winning out," a senior GOP aide said.
It is nearly impossible to figure who the third vote to kill this is. After Collins and Murkowski, is it McCain? Paul (ha ha, no really)? Capito? Lamar Alexander after Mitch McConnell screwed him over the HELP committee Patty Murray deal? Stay tuned.
Hardball.
More hardball.