H. Cartoon

Attention, pundits: If the polls confirm Hillary’s slide, it must be true

The conventional wisdom on Hillary Clinton turned in an instant.
But the evidence was hidden in plain view.
For many weeks now, it’s been clear that Hillary has had an awful campaign launch, that she has been submerged by an array of negative stories, and that her message has been underwater as well.
But when I’ve brought this up—on the air, in print, at social gatherings—what I’ve heard again and again is: It doesn’t matter. It’s not a problem. This is media-bubble stuff. She’s emerged unscathed. It’s not hurting her in the polls.
But now it is.
The pundit class is so poll-addicted that if something doesn’t show up in fav/unfav, or right track/wrong track, or cares-about-people-like-you, it didn’t happen. I know that journalists were just as aware as I was that Hillary has been hammered since the day her listening tour began. But most of them couldn’t believe their own eyes because, well, it wasn’t there in the data.
Of course, polls can be a lagging indicator, and the barrage had to be chipping away at Clinton’s image—especially among independents. And that’s exactly what happened.
In the CNN poll, 57 percent say she’s not honest and trustworthy, compared with 42 percent who say she is.
In the Washington Post/ABC poll, 52 percent say she’s not honest and trustworthy, compared with 41 percent who think she is.
Now polls bounce around, of course, but those are troubling numbers.
They show the combined impact of the private emails scandal, the ethical questions swirling around the Clinton Foundation, the six-figure speaking fees, and one more thing: the constant avoidance of the press.
It’s not that people are up in arms about journalists getting stiffed. We aren’t very popular either.
But by barely responding to questions about the negative stories, she ceded the turf to all the damaging headlines. Her operation seemed antiseptic and orchestrated. And by having bland conversations with small groups of voters, Hillary made no competing news. She left a vacuum filled by all the financial and email stories.
Perhaps that will change after Hillary does her Roosevelt Island kickoff in New York next week. But impressions about trustworthiness are hard to change, especially with a figure as well known as Hillary Clinton.
There is some truth to the spin that Hillary was always going to slip in the polls when she descended from the lofty perch of secretary of State to the grubby reality of campaigning. But that doesn’t fully explain her slide on the honesty question in just the last couple of months.
Most political journalists are smart. They can see when a presidential candidate is struggling. And they don’t need the latest pollster’s survey to report what they’re seeing and hearing.

Obama struggling to sway Dems on trade push, as unions crank up opposition

President Obama, despite launching a full-court press to woo skeptical Democrats, is struggling to cobble together the votes for his trade agenda in the House -- as union leaders ramp up their own pressure campaign to kill it. 
The so-called fast-track trade bill -- which would limit Congress' ability to amend future trade deals negotiated by the White House -- cleared the Senate last month with the help of 14 Democratic senators.
But the White House faces an even bigger lift in the House, where progressive lawmakers aligned with labor groups are urging their colleagues to oppose the Trade Promotion Authority bill. The issue has flipped the script in Congress, with Republican leaders backing it and rank-and-file Democrats largely opposed. Democratic leaders remain officially undecided, as the president fights for the 218 votes needed to pass.
House GOP leaders have said they are confident they'll be able to push TPA through this month. But even Speaker John Boehner acknowledged this week that supporters are still short of the necessary votes.
"I don't think we're quite there yet," the Ohio Republican said Wednesday in an interview on Fox News Radio's "Kilmeade & Friends," adding that he expects to see TPA on the floor in the next couple weeks and predicting it will eventually pass.
While Republican leaders expect most of their caucus to vote for fast-track, they stand to lose several dozen votes and are relying on House Democrats to make up the difference.

More on this...

• Rep. Ryan working with Dems to approve Obama trade deal

"The president could have done more over the past couple of years to bring Democrats along, but the unions, frankly, have outflanked him," Boehner said.
"Fast-track" is a major priority for the president, who hopes to soon complete work on the Trans-Pacific Partnership, a 12-nation free-trade agreement that would need to be ratified by Congress. Obama has been burning up the phone lines and top administration officials have lobbied Hill Democrats in person during repeated briefings.
While House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi remains officially undecided on TPA, she has not whipped her members against the bill.
But her members are facing heavy pressure from labor groups, including public criticism by AFL-CIO chief Richard Trumka.
The AFL-CIO has been particularly critical of California Democratic Rep. Ami Bera, who has come out in favor of fast-track. The group is running a television ad against the two-term lawmaker, accusing him of being willing "to do anything to keep his job, including shipping your job overseas."
In a statement, Trumka said the ad is "a message to Ami Bera and every other politician that the trade debate is enormously important to working families ... we expect our representatives in Congress to vote against rubber stamping a corporate-driven trade policy that delivers extra profits for global corporations at the expense of good-paying jobs for working people."
The pressure, though, is starting to stir a backlash among Democrats.
"I think labor is going a little overboard," Rep. Cedric Richmond, a Louisiana Democrat, told reporters Wednesday. "The more Trumka talks, the more I lean yes."
House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., earlier this week said he and Pelosi have asked "our friends in labor to have respect for the decisions of members," noting that Democratic lawmakers have been strong supporters of workers. The Maryland Democrat has said he is still undecided on the measure.
According to a whip list being maintained by The Hill, 112 House Democrats oppose fast-track, while 60 won't say which way they are voting.
Rep. Jim Himes, a Connecticut Democrat being lobbied by Obama, said the president believes he has the support of 20 House Democrats, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The exact number of Democratic votes that will be needed depends on how many Republican defections there are.
For their part, GOP criticism of fast-track has involved arguments ranging from an alleged encroachment on legislative power -- TPA would guarantee an up-or-down vote on a free-trade deal with no amendments -- to fears that future deals could include immigration provisions. Republican leaders have done their best to assuage those concerns by stressing that the streamlined negotiating authority lasts six years and will benefit a future administration, not just the current one.
"We've got some Republicans that don't trust the president to do anything and don't want to give him any authority at all for anything," Boehner told Fox News host Brian Kilmeade. "This isn't about the president, frankly. This is about the country."
The business lobby and GOP-aligned political groups are also pitching in to help Boehner and other leaders limit Republican fallout. The American Action Network on Thursday announced a $900,000 ad blitz in favor of TPA.
"If we don't pass a bill that allows America more access to trade, then China will have a bigger share of the market and keep rigging international trade," the group's president, Mike Shields, said in a statement announcing the campaign. "It's a question of who you want to lead: the U.S. or China."

Medicaid enrollment under ObamaCare soars, raising cost concerns

Several states that chose to expand Medicaid eligibility under ObamaCare now are facing deadline pressure to pay for it, the result of more signups than anticipated -- and, a looming reduction in how much of the bill the federal government will cover. 
At least seven of the 29 states (and the District of Columbia) that expanded coverage have experienced significantly higher-than-expected enrollment. The expansion of Medicaid, the government health care program for low-income people, now allows most low-income adults making up to 138 percent of the federal poverty level to qualify. An estimated 1.4 million more people than expected have signed up in those seven states since enrollment opened in October 2013 -- with Illinois, Kentucky and Washington state more than doubling their projected numbers.
The experience is serving as a cautionary tale for states, including Florida, still debating whether to take the plunge and green-light the Medicaid expansion, which is optional.
The enrollment interest is definitely there -- but so is a ballooning taxpayer bill.
Florida Republican state Rep. Paul Renner told the Florida Times-Union he worries about the potential, long-term effects expanding Medicaid might have on the state budget.
"It's really not a free proposition for us to expand coverage here," Renner told the newspaper. "We're going to have to give up things that are very important, like education."
Right now, federal funds cover 100 percent of the costs through 2016 for people now eligible for insurance through the Medicaid expansion.
However, the federal commitment decreases to 95 percent in 2017, 94 percent in 2018, 93 percent in 2019 and 90 percent in 2020 and beyond.
Florida is fiercely divided over the potential expansion, and Republican Gov. Rick Scott -- a former supporter, now foe, of the move -- told Politico it would cost his state $5 billion over a decade. A new, Senate-approved plan calls for using federal money to buy private insurance for poor residents who agree to work or attend school and share in the coverage costs -- it's unclear whether the federal government would go along.
States that already expanded enrollment and are seeing a surge, meanwhile, are trying to deal with the challenge. In Washington state, officials are optimistic they can meet budget costs, despite the growing rolls and the prospect of less federal money in the coming years.
"The decision ... was a bipartisan decision," Washington state Medicaid Director MaryAnne Lindeblad told FoxNews.com on Tuesday. "It has been an unqualified success. Expansion enrollment surpassed our 2018 projections within months of implementation."
Lindeblad added:  "Our state saved about $350 million in state funds the first 18 months of expansion, and even with the move to a 90/10 match level, we continue to project continued savings in the out years."
The Affordable Care Act, or ObamaCare, initially enacted the Medicaid expansion for all 50 states. It was expected to insure roughly 17 million more Americans that way.
However, a June 2012 Supreme Court ruling found the mandate unconstitutional, which then gave states the option to expand Medicaid.
With 29 states and D.C. opting to take the federal money to expand Medicaid through ObamaCare, 12 million Americans have signed up since open enrollment started nearly two years ago.
The other states, largely with either a Republican governor or GOP-controlled legislature, have said no.
In Illinois, more than 540,000 people have enrolled under the Medicaid expansion, nearly 342,000 more than projected for the first year, according to state records.
In Washington state, roughly 530,000 adults have enrolled in Apple Health Medicaid, more than double the 245,000 projected in 2012, which has increased total enrollment in the state program to 1.8 million, a state official told FoxNews.com.
Kentucky estimated that 161,055 newly eligible residents would enroll in the Medicaid expansion by June 30, and enrollment is already at roughly 375,000, according to state records.
As a result, Kentucky cut its uninsured rate more than any other state except Arkansas, according to a 2014 Gallup survey, with Washington state coming in fourth.
"Can we afford not to do this?" Audrey Haynes, secretary of Kentucky's Cabinet for Health and Family Services, which made the early projection, asked during a recent interview with Politico.
Colorado, Maryland, Michigan and Ohio also have reported enrollment exceeded projections.
A major ObamaCare objective was providing health coverage for more Americans so that others will pay less for the uninsured, including the cost of expensive but sometimes unnecessary urgent-care visits.
A Department of Health and Human Services report shows that the ObamaCare and Medicaid expansion as of last year had reduced the cost of "uncompensated" hospital visits by $7.4 billion, or 21 percent.
Heritage Action, the conservative group that often leads the charge to repeal ObamaCare, suggested states that expanded Medicaid should have expected the double-whammy of less federal money and increased costs associated with increased enrollment.
"From our vantage point, states that accepted [federal money] made a mistake," group spokesman Dan Holler told FoxNews.com. "But there's no way to really fix this except to get rid of the law that created the expansion."

US believes China behind cybersecurity breach affecting at least 4M federal employees

Hackers based in China are believed to be behind a massive data breach that could have compromised the personal data of at least 4 million current and former federal employees, U.S. officials said late Thursday.
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, told the Associated Press that investigators suspect the cyberattack was carried out by the Chinese. She said the breach was "yet another indication of a foreign power probing successfully and focusing on what appears to be data that would identify people with security clearances."
If confirmed, the incident would be the second major breach by Beijing in less than a year. A spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington called such accusations "not responsible and counterproductive."
"Cyber attack is a global threat which could [sic] only be addressed by international cooperation based on mutual trust and mutual respect," Zhu Haiquan said in a statement late Thursday. "We hope all countries in the world can work constructively together to address cyber security issues, push forward the formulation of international rules and norms in ... cyberspace, in order to build a peaceful, secure, open and cooperative cyberspace."
On Friday, a spokesman for China's foreign ministry said the allegations were "irresponsible and unscientific." Hong Lei said at a regularly scheduled news briefing that Beijing hoped that the U.S. would be "less suspicious and stop making any unverified allegations, but show more trust and participate more in cooperation."
China routinely dismisses any allegation of its official involvement in cyberattacks on foreign targets, while invariably noting that it is often the target of hacking attacks and calling for greater international cooperation in combating cybercrime.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued a statement confirming the breach Thursday, saying that it had concluded at the beginning of May that data from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) and the Interior Department had been compromised.
DHS said its intrusion detection system, known as EINSTEIN, which screens federal Internet traffic to identify potential cyber threats, identified the hack of OPM's systems and the Interior Department's data center, which is shared by other federal agencies.
It was unclear why the EINSTEIN system didn't detect the breach until after so many records had been copied and removed.
"DHS is continuing to monitor federal networks for any suspicious activity and is working aggressively with the affected agencies to conduct investigative analysis to assess the extent of this alleged intrusion," the statement said.
The OPM, which acts as the human resources department for the federal government and conducts more than 90 percent of federal background checks, said in a statement that it detected a “cyber-intrusion” into its systems in April.
A well-placed intelligence source told Fox News that names, addresses and social security information were compromised, and that the breach involved an "advanced persistent threat" designed to harvest information covertly without crippling systems.
Sources told Fox News that the investigators were considering the possibility the attack was linked to another attack in October involving the White House. Fox News has also learned that the attack bears similarities to those carried out by nation-states, not by criminal syndicates.
The OPM announced Thursday that it was sending notifications to approximately 4 million individuals whose personally identifiable information (PII) may have been accessed. However, the agency acknowledged that more individuals could have been affected.
“Since the investigation is on-going, additional PII exposures may come to light; in that case, OPM will conduct additional notifications as necessary,” the agency said in a statement.
“Protecting our Federal employee data from malicious cyber incidents is of the highest priority at OPM,” OPM Director Katherine Archuleta said in a statement. “We take very seriously our responsibility to secure the information stored in our systems, and in coordination with our agency partners, our experienced team is constantly identifying opportunities to further protect the data with which we are entrusted.”
The agency advised those affected to monitor their bank accounts for unusual activity, and to request a credit report along with other safeguards against fraud.
The Associated Press, which first reported the breach, cited officials saying that the breach could potentially affect every federal agency. One key question is whether intelligence agency employee information was stolen.
"This is an attack against the nation," said Ken Ammon, chief strategy officer of software security company Xceedium, who added that the stolen information could be used to impersonate or blackmail federal employees with access to sensitive information.
The FBI said in a statement that it was working with interagency partners to investigate the breach, while the DHS said it was continuing to monitor federal networks for suspicious activity and is "working aggressively" to investigate the extent of the breach.
Responding to news of the breach, Congressman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., called on the Senate to pass cybersecurity legislation passed by the House earlier in the year.
"This bill will not be a panacea for the broad cyber threats we face, but it is one important piece of armor in our defenses that must be put in place – now,” Schiff said.
In November, a former Department of Homeland Security official disclosed another cyberbreach that compromised the private files of more than 25,000 DHS workers and thousands of other federal employees.