Republican Crisis Management

Now that Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee of the Republican Party, many party stalwarts are so upset with the billionaire businessman that they are considering backing an independent party candidate.   Others believe that the party will take a such a severe shellacking at the polls in November with Trump that the party could lose control of Congress.   

Trump himself put Republicans on notice Sunday in an interview on ABC when he said,  "This is called the Republican Party, it's not called the Conservative Party."  Trump later added, "I think it would be better if it were unified...there would be something good about it, but I don't think it actually has to be unified in the traditional sense."  The question for many Republicans is how can they embrace a candidate who is not a true conservative, and whose extensive use of personal attacks has dragged the campaign into the gutter?

Conservative commentator William Kristol says the answer is don't support Trump.  Kristol called Trump unqualified for the presidency, on CNBC Monday, because of his lack "character and temperament."   While ruling out voting for Democrat Hillary Clinton, Kristol said, "We don't need a binary choice.  The system is set up to allow independent candidates to get on the ballot." Actually, he is misinformed on the last point.  For instance, the Texas deadline for independent candidates to file an application to be included on the November ballot is Monday, May 9.  And the application, "must contain 79,939 signatures of registered voters who did not vote in the presidential primary of either party." 

Kristol met in Washington last week with former GOP standard-barer Mitt Romney to discuss the prospects for a third party candidate.  Romney has been critical of Trump's candidacy, but he has said he is not interested in a third party run.  The Washington Examiner reported Romney said he currently could not support either party's candidate.  Nonetheless, he lamented, "I am dismayed at where we are now, I wish we had better choices, and I keep hoping that somehow things will get better, and I just don't see an easy answer from where we are."

Many establishment Republicans have decided to focus their attention on the down-ballot races that may be jeopardized with Trump at the top of the ticket.  Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, in a statement Friday posted on Facebook, said, "In November, I will not vote for Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, but I will support principled conservatives at the state and federal levels, as I have done my entire life."  Neither his brother or father, both former Republican presidents, will endorse Trump.  Trump called Jeb Bush "dishonorable" for reneging on his pledge to support the GOP candidate.  

The Trump candidacy has left many incumbent Republican Senators and Representatives squirming.  Arizona Senator John McCain, the party's 2008 presidential candidate, in in a tough reelection bid this year in a state with a large Latino population.  McCain, perhaps walking a fine line on Trump, told CNN, "You have to listen to people that have chosen the nominee of our Republican Party."  He concluded, "I think it would be foolish to ignore them."  McCain has stressed he is running his own campaign, but recent polls show he is tied with Democratic opponent Ann Kirkpatrick.

Meanwhile, rhetoric involving Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan has reached the boiling point.  Ryan said last week he is not yet ready to endorse Trump.  Trump supporter and former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin told CNN she would work to defeat Ryan by supporting his primary opponent in his Wisconsin district.  Trump is scheduled to meet with Ryan and other party leaders in Washington Thursday, and he has said he would not rule out removing Ryan as the chair of the Republican Convention.  

The ongoing political battles involving Trump and other Republicans are taking attention away from the still unresolved Democratic primary.  They are also unsettling for GOP efforts to raise campaign funds.  Do donors put their money behind Trump, or instead only target down-ballot races?  And while Trump has "expanded" the party base during the primaries, he has also alienated many traditional Republicans. 

Following Thursday's meetings in Washington, no doubt the participants will all say they had a good meeting, and that they have agreed to work to unite the party.  But, given the tenor of the Republican campaign, how can they really unite?   Of course, these are politicians.

   

Fix the Glitches

The government shutdown was a misguided and senseless tactic that cost American taxpayers at least $24 billion and damaged the Republican brand.  But the error-plagued rollout of the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, has given the GOP a way to change the conversation.

Senator Ted Cruz's reckless strategy to defund Obamacare was never going to succeed.  But he knew that.  However, the ambitious Cruz saw it as tremendous opportunity to galvanize Tea Party members behind his leadership.   And, while moderate Republicans call his maneuvers a "fool's errand," there is no question Cruz has now won the loyal support of many on the right.

Yet many Republicans are shaking their heads in frustration because the Cruz shutdown has taken attention away from Obamacare's problems.  "The fiasco of rollout has been obscured because of this internecine strife that's been going on in the Republican Party," Senator John McCain (R-AZ) said Sunday on CNN.  "Keep up the fight against Obamacare, but don't shut down the government and have so much collateral damage to innocent Americans."

However, out of the GOP wreckage will quickly emerge an all out attack against the problem-plagued launch of Obamacare.  On CBS's Face the Nation Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell called Obamacare,  "The worst piece of legislation passed in the last half century...we need to get rid of it." He claimed that even if one can get on the site, they will find fewer choices and higher costs.

Democrats recognize that the faulty rollout is an issue ripe for exploitation.   Last week on MSNBC, Former White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs called it, "Excruciatingly embarrassing for the White House and for the Department of Health and Human Services." On ABC's This Week, former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called the problems "unacceptable."  She added, "This has to be fixed, but what doesn't have to be fixed is the fact the tens of millions of more people will have access to affordable healthcare, quality healthcare.  That no longer having a preexisting medical condition will bar you from getting affordable care." 

The White House and HHS have had years to prepare for the launch of Obamacare.  All along they have said that Republicans oppose it because Americans will fall in love with it once it is available.  But now the architects of President Obama's signature legislative achievement are vulnerable to attack and relentless scrutiny from Congressional Committees.  Republicans would like nothing more than to turn Obamacare against Democrats in the 2014-midterm elections.

Already Republican Chairmen Fred Upton, of the House Energy and Commerce Committee has announced he will investigate.  "It is well past time for the administration to be straight and transparent with the American people," he said in a statement last week.  For instance, how many millions of dollars were spent to design the error plagued software?  Whose fault is it that the program has failed?

President Obama is expected to address the health care glitches on Monday.  While making health care accessible for all remains a worthy goal, and millions of people have already tried to learn more about the offerings, the problems must be quickly remedied.  If the president fails to make that happen, Obamacare may damage his ability to achieve any further legislative successes.

Mr. Obama has already stated his intention to pivot onto the difficult and complex issue of immigration reform.  He has also indicated he is interested in achieving a budget deal with Republicans that will include infrastructure, tax and entitlement reform.   But the problems with Obamacare will weaken his position.

Republicans are mindful of the words once spoken by the president's former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, "You never want a serious crisis to go to waste."

Immigration Reform Now

Immigration is one of the great stories of America's history.  It is immortalized in the words penned by Emma Lazarus, and engraved on a bronze plaque that hangs on an inner wall of the Statue of Liberty, "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free."


The United States is a nation built on the blood and sweat of immigrants; it is a great melting pot of cultures that together have strengthened the country, and have broadened its horizons.  America, the land of opportunity, of immense freedom, and of a generous people, has attracted millions of people from all over the world.  Nonetheless, immigration has been politicized for decades, and reasonable reforms have eluded Washington.

But now is the time to do something meaningful.  President Barack Obama will announce an effort to overhaul immigration Tuesday in Las Vegas, Nevada, a critical state where he carried the Latino vote this past November.   Leading Republicans, like Florida Senator Marco Rubio, are also leading reform efforts within that party, which have become a priority because Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney received less than 30% of the Latino vote.   

Appearing on ABC's This Week Sunday, Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J) said it is time for action.   “First, Americans support it in poll after poll. Secondly, Latino voters expect it. Thirdly Democrats want it. And fourth Republicans need it,” he said.  Senator John McCain (R-AZ) echoed that sentiment, “There’s a new appreciation on both sides of the aisle including, maybe more importantly on the Republican side of the aisle, that we have to enact comprehensive immigration reform.”


There are more that 50 million Latinos in the United States, and they are the fastest growing demographic in the country.  Every month, 50,000 Latinos reach the voting age.  But they also make up the largest portion of the 11 million illegals living in America's shadows.  And many Americans, especially Republicans, remain opposed to laws that would make it easier for illegal immigrants to stay in the country or obtain legal status.

According to the Washington Post, a bipartisan group of senators is nearing agreement that will normalize the status of illegals, allowing those with no criminal record to obtain work permits, and they will call for tighter border controls and verification procedures.   Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) told Fox News, “We’re at the talking points stage...we need to get to the legislation.”  So the devil is in the details.  

While there are huge Latino populations in California, Texas, New York and Florida, Latinos live in every state.  Latinos are successful small business owners; they work in homes and on assembly lines.  Illegal or not, they contribute to daily life in America.   Because of the recession, illegal immigration has slowed to a trickle.  Nonetheless, Pew Research projects that Latinos will make up nearly 30% of the U.S. population in 2050.  

Now is the time for immigration reform.  Let history be the guide for politicians in Washington because immigration has always enriched the fabric of America.  Think of the Statue of Liberty, in New York Harbor, and the words displayed on the bronze plaque, "From her beacon-hand glows a world-wide welcome."

Debt Ceiling Showdown

No wonder Congress is so unpopular. Last year's House and Senate teamed up to be the most ineffective Congress in decades. Sadly, the new Congress looks like it is going to underperform its predecessor.

In the next few weeks, Congress must decide whether to raise the debt ceiling. Under law, the debt ceiling limits the U.S. Treasury's authority to borrow money to pay for decisions already enacted by Congress and the president. In other words, the government needs Congress's approval to raise money to pay its bills.

If Congress fails to raise the debt limit, America will be in default. In 2011, the rancorous debate over raising the debt limit caused bond-rating agencies to downgrade America's credit. Though the debt ceiling was raised, the government (i.e. taxpayers) had to pay higher interest on money it borrowed.

The near crisis also had an adverse affect for America in the global markets.
So here Americans are again, after surviving the end of the world, supposedly predicted by the Mayans, and after avoiding the fiscal cliff, on the verge of yet another financial crisis. The fact that Republicans would use raising the debt ceiling as "leverage" to secure deep budget cuts, largely in entitlement programs, is irresponsible.

In his appearance on ABC's This Week Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell ruled out additional tax increases as part of a debt ceiling or deficit reduction deal. "That's behind us. Now the question is, what are we going to do about the biggest problem confronting our country and our future? And that's our spending addiction. It's time to confront it," Senator McConnell said. "The president surely knows that. I mean, he has mentioned it both publicly and privately. The time to confront it is now." Senator McConnell indicated he would not approve action on the debt ceiling without sizable budget cuts.

But, in his weekly radio address, the president, who was able to get Congress to pass tax increases on high-income earners, was adamant about not using the debt ceiling as a bargaining chip. "One thing I will not compromise over is whether or not Congress should pay the tab for a bill they've already racked up," President Obama said. "If Congress refuses to give the United States the ability to pay its bills on time, the consequences for the entire global economy could be catastrophic. The last time Congress threatened this course of action, our entire economy suffered for it. Our families and our businesses cannot afford that dangerous game."

America is in the midst of a slow recovery. Unemployment is still unacceptably high, and consumers are wary of the future. Yet who can blame them given Congress's erratic behavior. Most Americans feel a responsibility to pay back the money they owe in a timely manner. They full well know the consequences of failing to do so, including having their credit rating reduced.

If Congress fails to act it risks another downgrade of U.S. Treasury bonds. Brian Kessler, of Moody's Analytics, told MarketWatch, "For the last 60-ish years, U.S. Treasury bonds have been the foundational rock of the entire world financial markets. A second downgrade could be like an earthquake on that financial rock." He added, "I'm very nervous that people in Washington don't really take that seriously enough."

In the 2011 debt ceiling debate, The Economic Policy Institute said that failure to raise the limit would create, "a massive shock to the economy." It further warned, "Social Security checks would be cut, doctors would not be reimbursed in full for seeing Medicare and Medicaid patients, and private contractors doing business with the federal government would not be paid." Ditto for 2012.

Making matters even more complicated are upcoming debates over the "sequester" spending cuts to defense and domestic spending, agreed to as part of the 2011 debt ceiling deal, and a stopgap bill that will likely be needed in March to keep the government operating.

Congressional Republicans must act responsibly by putting country ahead of partisan politics. They must vote to raise the debt ceiling. American cannot endure another self-inflicted wound from Congress.

The U.S. Constitution defines the powers it grants Congress. They include: "The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States." If Congress fails to raise the debt ceiling it will weaken the country and fail to provide for the general welfare of the United States.
  

CNN: "The Newsroom"

CNN's embarrassing mistake on Thursday of declaring the U.S. Supreme Court overturned President Barack Obama's health care law was unforgivable.  The rush to be first prevailed over the need to be right for the desperate and ratings challenged CNN.  The incident was also a black eye for all television news.

The Newsroom, which premiered Sunday on HBO, was an overly dramatized attempt to decry the current state of the television news business. The program, which was filled with smart dialogue, internal conflict and self-righteousness, was a bit misleading about what happens behind the scenes at a cable news network.

Nonetheless, Aaron Sorkin should be praised for raising some important questions about television news. However, on Wednesday's CBS This Morning, Sorkin said, "News shows should be exempt from having to deliver ratings." Really? If there were no news ratings how would media companies pay their news gathering expenses?

Global news organizations, such as ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and Fox, each cost several hundred million dollars to operate per year. For example, the Fox News Channel invests around $700 million annually, surpassing CNN for the first time in 2010. CNN has about 46 news bureaus worldwide, while Fox News has fewer than 20.

The idea that network news divisions were once allowed to be money-losing operations is not really true. No matter, today there is no way media companies can cover the massive costs of operating a quality and highly competitive global news organization by allocating funds from their other divisions. And why should they since the news business is a big business?

CNN and HLN (Headline News) combined make about $600 million in annual profits. The Fox News Channel makes more than $800 million in profits per year, and MSNBC about $200 million. The cable news companies benefit from two streams of revenue, advertising dollars and subscription fees. Fox News receives slightly more than CNN in advertising revenue per thousand viewers (CPM), but enjoys a huge advantage over CNN in monthly revenue per subscriber. Broadcast news organizations, such as CBS and ABC, are most heavily reliant on just advertising dollars.

In all cases news organizations are heavily dependent on ratings. Advertisers pay to have their commercials aired on newscasts based on how many viewers their ads reach. The higher the ratings the more a network can charge for its commercials. And if there is great demand for a cable news channel the subscription fees are likely to be affected.

In a report titled "The State of the News Media 2012" released three months ago, the Pew Research Center's Project for Excellence in Journalism highlighted the strength of the cable news business model. "One reason for the vigor is that the business model of cable news -- in which the cable channels receive half their revenue from fees bundled into monthly cable subscriptions from customers and half from advertising -- has proved over time to be remarkably resilient," the report said, "even as other sectors of the news industry continue to search for sustainable revenue streams."

But total cable news audience growth has pretty much flattened out. The news audience is increasingly more reliant on the Internet and mobile devices for information. Facebook and Twitter are impacting news coverage. And, to reinforce one of Sorkin's points, cable news programming often devolves into mindless chatter, hackneyed talking points and senseless spin. The topics are frequently predictable, the content is repetitive and news stories are often over-hyped.

NYU professor Jay Rosen wrote last year about his frustration with CNN:

"Too often, on-air hosts for the network will let someone from one side of a dispute describe the world their way, then let the other side describe the world their way, and when the two worlds, so described, turn out to be incommensurate or even polar opposites, what happens? CNN leaves it there. Viewers are left stranded and helpless. The network appears to inform them that there is no truth, only partisan bull. Is that real journalism?"

While all three of the cable news networks are facing ratings challenges, CNN has fallen and apparently it can't get up. Fox News has cornered the truly devoted conservative viewers, while MSNBC appeals to the liberals. That leaves CNN more or less in the middle trying to be all things to everybody in order to hang on to their loyal following. They seem to have lost their identity. Their programming strategy appears ad hoc, and their day-to-day production is uneven. CNN has one star, Anderson Cooper, but he is being misused. In fact, CNN only does well in the ratings when there is breaking news, but recently Fox News has been winning this category too.

Last month Turner Broadcasting President and CEO Phil Kent described some of CNN's problems as "self inflicted." CNN reports to Kent, so it was particularly noteworthy when he said, "We haven't put the best shows on the air." That's for sure, and nothing erodes viewer loyalty more quickly than poorly produced shows.

CNN can improve their current ratings performance just by increasing its original reporting, improving its writing and story-telling, focusing on more relevant stories and helping viewers understand why they should care about the issues it highlights. It can improve ratings by pursuing impactful investigative reports, challenging talking points and spin during newsmaker interviews, replacing some of its overused contributors, doing a better job of designing and executing programs, providing better teases, intros and tags, adding extra value in every report and using some imagination. These steps will give viewers more of a reason to watch CNN for longer periods of time at a sitting, and reason to return again more frequently each week.

At the same time CNN should think about a longer-term strategy. What new approach can it take to ensure its viability in the rapidly changing media landscape over the long haul? The times they are a changing.

Aaron Sorkin is a bold creator and a brilliant storyteller who produces with swagger and purpose, and casts his productions with strong and powerful talent. CNN is a fabulous news organization with many wonderful professionals. Perhaps there is a message in The Newsroom for CNN afterall.

I was "Lost" but Now I'm Found

Several years ago I gave up on ABC's "Lost". In a couple seasons "Lost" had devolved into a most enigmatic and unsatisfying series. Last night's concluding episode left me confused and most grateful that I did not waste more time on the program.

I applaud innovation. I am attracted to strong story lines, great writing and powerful characters. But following a strong start "Lost" veered off the road into the marshes. There the program became mired in absurdity, ambiguity and obfuscation. It is unclear whether the show rigidly followed the producer's original outline. Whatever the circumstance, it always felt like it was being thrown together on the fly. Worse, its twists and turns truly challenged even its most ardent fans.

The concluding episode felt self-indulgent. I would have never in a million years guessed that "Lost" would have ended that way. All dead? All reunited? In a church? So this got me to thinking, what would I have done?

Locke, Desmond and Jack enter the cave and find Marlon Brando, reprising his role as Colonel Walter E. Kurtz, sitting on a rock sipping on a bowl of Vietnamese soup. Brando says, "I expected someone like you. What did you expect? Are you an assassin?" "Yes," says Locke, "I have been sent to free the island." With that he stabs the Kurtz character and frees everyone on the island.

Or Locke, Desmond and Jack enter the cave, attracted by the bright light visible from miles away. Inside they come upon a waterfall and drop Desmond down by rope. There Desmond encounters Morpheus who says, "We've survived by hiding from them, by running from them. But they are the gatekeepers. They are guarding all the doors; they are holding all the keys. Which means that sooner or later, someone is going to have to fight them." Desmond's face turns ashen as he responds, "Good luck with that," and scampers back up the rope. Then a huge explosion destroys the island.

Or Hurley enters the cave with Locke, Jack and Desmond. They decide that since Hurley won millions at the lottery he should be the one remove the rock plugging the light below. All three of them strain to lower him by rope. Hurley wades through the pool of water, pulls the plug and is sucked into the hole. Then Hurley is awakened from a deep sleep thanks to a friend who splashes cold water on his face. Hurley is sprawled on the ground in an alley. The friend says, "Hurley, Hurley, I am sorry you didn't win the lottery." Without missing a beat Hurley says, "Dude, you won't understand, but I am thrilled I didn't win the lottery!"

Or Locke, Jack and Desmond enter the cave and are greeted by Jimmy Hoffa and Judge Crater who instruct them to take a seat. Suddenly the music begins and Elvis walks out into the bright lights, his sequined jacket ablaze, singing "Amazing Grace".

To paraphrase the final words of Jack's father, "It's time to move on."