Pence breaks tie vote on procedural against Obamacare

Amidst shouts of “Kill the bill”  and “Shame! Shame! Shame!” the U.S. Senate agreed to begin debate on the repeal of the chief legacy of President Obama, the Affordable Care Act, which President Trump has characterized as a “nightmare” that in turn also claimed “victims.”   

In a tie vote that was broken by Vice-President Mike Pence, the procedure took held some surprise votes, including Rob Portman, of Ohio, and Rand Paul of Kentucky, who previously had been holdouts, voted yes in the procedural vote to begin the debate. They were joined by Dean Heller of Nevada, who previously had said, no to the Senate version, the Better Care Reconciliation Act, but perhaps in a nod to his vulnerability in 2018, said yes.

Saying no was Susan Collins of Maine, who has decried the effect on many rural and community hospitals, as in her own state, and who had questioned aloud, what was being voted on. As she said,  I “don’t known whether we’re going to be voting on the House bill, the first version of the Senate bill, the second version of the Senate bill, a new version of the Senate bill, or a 2015 bill that would have repealed the Affordable Care Act now and that said somehow we’ll figure out a replacement over the next two years”, she remarked.

Minority leader, Chuck Schumer, argued that repeal without replacing would lead to legislative failure.

One of the more vocal critics, Shelley Moore Capito capitulated, and said yes to the vote but noted that she was determined “to make decisions that are in the best interest of West Virginians,” and those who were on Medicaid, and also struggling with drug addiction; a reference to the growing opioid addiction problem, facing her state, that needs a well-funded intervention.

Adding drama to the procedure was the appearance of John McCain,who had recently undergone neurological surgery to vote and who had, while assenting, cautioned that everyone needed to refocus on the procedures.

He urged Senators to "stop listening to the bombasting loud mouths on radio and television, to hell with them!"  But, he also said, "I will not vote for this bill as it today, it's a shell of a bill right now we all know that." Most significantly, he noted that there is a need to work across the aisle to pass "something full of compromises."

The real work begins when it is time to give amendatory proposals and fashion them into something that looks like a bill - preceded by a floor vote, not an easy task with the majority of  Americans who are happy with the colloquially named Obamacare, which has given most people health care, especially preventive measures, that they had long lacked due to low incomes or a menu of options that preceded the ACA.

With ranks of healthcare organizations, including the AMA and American Nurses Association lined up against it, not to mention state governors and congressional critics, then the beginning will be as important as the end.

As this blog has noted, earlier, It cannot be ignored that the White House has three goals in what is essentially a wealth transfer bill: decrease coverage, remove consumer safeguards (in the insurance business), and gut Medicaid.

Any attempt to repeal the ACA without replacement is doomed to failure, and with a seven year desire for repeal, the GOP has refused to work in a bipartisan manner, despite a recent poll that had 71 percent of people wanting just that.

A newly touted so-called “skinny” bill would raise the average premium by $1,238, and is predicated on the repeal of the coverage mandates, and also the medical device tax; and it would also decrease those younger people from signing up for coverage, and those that are healthy, might entirely forgo coverage, reported the American Center for Progress.

This version would also destabilize markets and some insurers would simply withdraw from the marketplace, decreasing options for thousands of people.

Fueled by a none too subtle racism against a program by America’s only black president, Republicans ironically face legislation that was crafted mostly by a white politician, Mitt Romney, the Republican governor of Massachusetts.

This repudiation, as we have seen, has drawn fired from both moderate Republicans who see its deleterious blow to working-class people, and also the self-employed, as cited by the Congressional Budget Office.

On the other hand are those hard-liners who say that the subsequent revisions contain far too much of the ACA, what some have labelled “nanny-state” sections.

As with any legislation,  “A key factor is time: the longer the bill languishes, the less likely it will pass,” said Greg Valliere, chief global strategist at Horizon Investments. “And there won't be much time left after Labor Day as Congress shifts its focus to budget and tax issues.” As the Wall Street Journal noted, this gives supporters of the ACA more time to continue their fight.

Already, firms that have given support to assist people who want to enroll in the ACA, have not had their contracts renewed by the Trump administration. If the individual mandate is removed, as noted with the “skinny” plan, the system would truly collapse, with the result of skyrocketing premiums, even more than it did last year for some people who bought insurance on the Obamacare marketplaces.

A March editorial for the Chicago Tribune noted, there will also be more “insurers that have not already bolted for the exits will soon decide whether they will offer coverage next year. Already nearly a third of American counties have but one carrier. What happens if there is none?”

Continuing, they noted that Trump may feel that if the system implodes, or collapses, then Americans will blame the Democrats who passed the law; “No voters will blame the person in charge. That’s you, Mr. Trump. This is your watch. So be careful what disaster you anticipate.”

Trump crashes once more with healthcare failure

With the defeat of the new, and improved health care bill from the Senate, it’s obvious that the Trump administration has deep problems crafting successful legislation, as the GOP, despite its federal trifecta, is unable to make good on campaign promises from last year’s election.

The travel ban was knocked down by appeals courts, has only been given a mild lifeline, of sorts, by the United States Supreme Court, as it extended the reasons for foreign visitors from predominantly Muslim countries, to their grandparents; something that probably irritates President Trump, even more than the media’s constant focus on Russian collusion, from he, and his family.

Awhile back, in the not too distant past, the House passed a health care proposal that, oddly enough, Trump ironically labelled as “mean,” in what was to be short lived euphoria, at least for the press, and its photographers.

Having a non-politician as chief executive, might have played well during the campaign, but it’s clear that this is not an asset in the Oval Office, as the president seems unaware of the great diversity, of thought, in the Republican party.

It was easy with President Obama, they could handily be the party of “no” - as they steadfastly said that to any, and all, proposals coming from the Obama administration, causing one wag to note, that he would be criticized by the GOP for making even a peanut butter sandwich.

Now that they are the ruling party, the effort to agree, or even speak with one voice, is problematic. Case in point the defections by Senators Mike Lee and Jerry Moran, who neatly pulled the political rug from the bill, and easily blindsided Trump, with their refusal to support it, and furthermore providing political cover for even more in the Senate.

It’s safe to say that Trump is no Lyndon Johnson, who could have mustered the votes with every bit of effort, be it a phone call, or an interview; but then he knew the Senate inside and out, the value of a seasoned politician, in the White House.

Providing legislative seasoning, on the other hand, was Mitch McConnell, who as majority leader did an old-school game: build the opposition platform and then throw a few bones to the dissenting dogs, in this case Lisa Murkowski and Shelley Moore Capito, for their large swaths of rural communities. Yet, this was not enough, as the endgame proved.  In fact, it was McConnell who had to walk up Executive Drive, tail between his legs.

The one option, now, is to work with the Democrats in a bipartisan effort, but this is political anathema to many in the party, and yet in a recent poll 71 percent of those polled want the Republicans to do just that.

Add to it their long term opposition to the Affordable Care Act, any work with the Dems might be seen as betrayal to their long standing opposition to the ACA, colloquially known as Obamacare; which ironically has its origins as a Republican compromise promulgated by Mitt Romney, as governor of Massachusetts.  It was certainly not the intent of the Obama administration to protect and preserve the nation’s health insurance industry. At that time, there was not as much support for the single-payer option that there is now, and as Obama said later, it would not have passed.

Sensing defeat, and the weak strains of reveille, the GOP in a last ditch measure tried to foster a repeal without replacement, an effort that went straight down the pipes, as it had no support, and the spectre of even more senatorial defections.

The White House chefs made a dream menu for lunch, the other day, and the president, assumed that culinary seduction might pry some sort of victory from the ashes, but even seasonal veggies and rosemary sauce made the effort sour, and now all that we hear from Trump is to let Obamacare fail, and then, to the press, “We’re not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you that the Republicans are not going to own it. We’ll let Obamacare fail, and then the Democrats are going to come to us.”

Somehow the image of Chuck Schumer, trudging to the North Portico, hat in hand is in doubt, but the president’s chutzpah, and naivety, bring a certain sort of charm to the dilemma.

To be fair, Trump did have some success, he led the U.S away from the Paris Climate Accord, and the TPP, but the latter was like a dying patient, so that required little effort, on his part. But, the defeat of Obamacare seems doomed, and he was “forced to certify that Iran continues to comply with the biggest foreign policy accord of Obama’s second term,” as the Chicago Tribune reported.

Deeply opposed to the DACA, by Trump the DACA is til intact with 750,000 recipients, and the tax hike on upper incomes is still on the books, much to the chagrin of its detractors. And, of course, the wall separating Mexico from the Unites States seems like only a distant memory.

A huge problem is that there is no one to deliver the message and do outreach in statesman like manner, (tweets don’t count), much like that first press conference where the president attacked one and all, shooting wisecracks, disclaimers and accusations, that seemed more reminiscent of something from ‘The Three Stooges.”

But, ‘so long as he remains more focused on unwinding Obama’s work than building [one] of his own,’ noted the Tribune, then these legislative failures will continue.

Repeal and delay for the health care proved disastrous, another myopic move by Trump, with the same objectors, this time joined by old-guard Republican Susan Collins of Maine. It’s as if he cannot learn from previous errors, or the consequences of millions of Americans losing their health insurance.

Trump has said, as if to bad employees, that their vacations have been cancelled until they pull up a solution in a rudderless ship. Yet, in true reality television style, he jabbed Dean Heller about him remaining in the Senate; perhaps he really wanted to uttler his, by now, infamous line: “You’re fired.”

It cannot be ignored that the White House has three goals in what is essentially a wealth transfer bill: decrease coverage, remove consumer safeguards (in the insurance business), and gut Medicaid.

The option remaining for the White House is to delete the ACA mandate, crucial to maintaining health insurance markets, since it encourages healthy people to sign up for coverage, since healthy people offset the cost of sicker people, which keeps premiums in check.  if that is loosened then the system would truly collapse, with the result of skyrocketing premiums, even more than it did last year for some people who bought insurance on the Obamacare marketplaces.

While it can be argued that the government wants to leave health care, can it also rob children of dedicated healthcare in over 220 children's hospitals, where 60 percent of American children receive their care? Can it ask millions of Americans to see, as the Congressional Budget Office, analyzed, 32 million people to lose their healthcare plans by 2026?

DeVos cuts to civil rights make college students less safe

Updated Sept. 9, 2017

In a few short weeks, the campuses of American colleges will be full of new and returning students, as they rush to and fro, from the student bookstore to their classes, pausing, no doubt, to check their text and email messages. There will also be parties (keggers in my day) and the inevitable exchange of gossip and evaluations on both their peers, and teachers. Yet, for many of them, the flirting between the sexes could take a nasty turn in unwanted sexual advances that could end in assault charges.

During the Obama administration many of these young women, and some men, had gained a measure of protection, but with the Trump administration, and the new education cabinet head, Betsy DeVos, of Michigan, they will be a lot less protected.

In what might regrettably fall into one of the many embarrassing moments in the lives of public officials, NPR reported last week that “Candice Jackson, whom DeVos appointed as the top enforcer of sexual assault cases at the Department of Education, seemed to agree with that position in remarks to The New York Times on Wednesday. Campus rape "accusations — 90 percent of them — fall into the category of 'we were both drunk,' " she said in part. She apologized later that same day, calling the remarks "flippant."

Amongst the many moments that President Trump and his cabinet members, and staff, may have wished that they had been drinking,when they spoke, this was one that seems the most regrettable, not to mention insensitive.  Yet, it also seems to be part of this administration's goals, not only to reverse anything that President Obama legislated, but also to be even less, than sympathetic towards women, than has been previously acknowledged.

But, if the proof of the pudding is in the eating, then putting her foot in her mouth was Jackson’s boss, De Vos, who in her remarks to reporters, sent a mixed message: "lives have been ruined" by allegations of sexual assault. She also added, in a remark that could be also be read in two ways: "No student should be the victim of sexual assault," she added. "No student should feel unsafe ... and no students should feel like the scales are tipped against him or her."

Here are the uncomfortable statistics: “11.2% of all students experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation (among all graduate and undergraduate students). Among graduate and professional students, 8.8% of females and 2.2% of males experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation. Among undergraduate students, 23.1% of females and 5.4% of males experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence, or incapacitation; and 4.2% of students have experienced stalking since entering college.”

In one of those ironic, and straight from the pages of “Ripley’s Believe It Or Not” moments, it was also reported by Mic.com that “Jackson is the self-described "libertarian feminist" formerly best known for accusing 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton of being a "rape enabler." As the Washington Post noted, Jackson's connections with women who had accused Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton, of sexual misconduct "became an asset" for Donald Trump's campaign after video surfaced of Trump bragging about assaulting women.”

Perhaps even more disturbing is that despite definitive moves by the Obama administration to strengthen the hands of the Office of Civil Rights, “according to an internal memo issued by acting DOE office of civil rights director Candice E. Jackson, the [New York] Times wrote, investigators at the agency will no longer be required to "broaden their inquiries to identify systemic issues and whole classes of victims." They have also been instructed it is no longer mandatory to alert D.C. officials of "all highly sensitive complaints" like allegations of racial discrimination or failure to properly investigate campus sexual assaults.

President Trump's budget proposes cutting more than 40 jobs at the DOE civil rights division, and cut more than $ 2million, adds further fuel to the fire. And, to that effect, “Jackson also recently defended new policies on the rights of trans students after one employee told the Huffington Post "officials should investigate issues of discrimination just as they would have before the Obama-era rules were implemented.”

“During the Obama administration, the department's Office for Civil Rights named colleges that faced scrutiny for mishandling sexual assault; outlined protections for transgender students (which recently have been revoked) and identified patterns of discrimination in school districts and universities,” noted the Los Angeles TImes.

Key to the Obama policies was “that certain types of complaints could automatically trigger broader investigations that looked into more than just the particular instance of discrimination highlighted in a complaint.”

"It was something I created after resolutions that were insufficiently comprehensive, and realizing we needed to be more thorough," said Catherine Lhamon, who led the office under President Obama.

As most people are aware, the cost of a college education, at both private and public schools is rising, and with that most students need some form of financial aid to complete their degrees. For some, notably the more egregious for-profit schools, raiding the coffers of federal financial aid became a habit, much like the infamous episode at Corinthian Colleges, considered the poster child for fraudulent behavior.

The Obama Administration was aggressive in protecting students from schools like Corinthian (now forced to pay students delinquent loans) and last month, DeVos “walked back two Obama-era regulations aimed at protecting student borrowers. Beginning with two public hearings this week, in Washington, D.C., and in Dallas, the Education Department has reopened the "negotiated regulation" process, or "neg reg" as insiders call it.”

The "gainful employment" rule sanctions individual programs at colleges and universities based on how many students are able to payback their loans. Specifically, their "borrower defense to repayment" rule paved the way for students “to get their loans forgiven if their college is found to engage in fraudulent behavior, a situation that has befallen tens of thousands of students,”  at not only Corinthian Colleges but ITT Technical Institute, “among others, in the last few years,” noted National Public Radio.

The rollback by DeVos has sent waves of discontent among elected officials, and notably, “Several lawmakers and observers saw the department's withdrawal of the borrower-defense rule as unfairly tipping the scales in favor of for-profit colleges. Senate Democrats sent a letter to Ms. DeVos last week asking her to keep the regulations in place. "Delaying the borrower-defense rule would be a monumental dereliction of the duty you have to protect students and taxpayers," the senators wrote, "and would increase the risk of repeating the recent history of students left holding the bag while executives at collapsing institutions made away with millions in profits,” reported The Chronicle of Higher Education.

As reported, on this blog, and elsewhere in the media, DeVos has established herself as a clear and present danger to vulnerable college students. "At best, this administration believes that civil rights enforcement is superfluous and can be easily cut. At worst, it really is part of a systematic agenda to roll back civil rights," Vanita Gupta, the former acting head of the DOJ [Department of Justice] civil rights division under President Barack Obama, told ProPublica.

Thursday’s news that Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has decided to rescind the basic principles of Title IX protection for sexual assault victims, and its adjudication, on American college campuses, and to go beyond the guidelines established by the Department of Civil RIghts, should, perhaps not come to the surprise of anyone, considering the statements that she made in July.

Now coming towards the beginning of a new Fall semester makes most, including students, parents and school administrators, look askance, at what might surely  damage to the process of adjudication.

"Every survivor of sexual misconduct must be taken seriously. Every student accused of sexual misconduct must know that guilt is not predetermined," she said.

Most observers, critics, and even pundits, recognize that this is a nod to a view that supports the male as perpetrator, and shoves the mostly female view to the side.

In the, by now, established, Obama trashing, the Secretary unequivocally stated The truth is that the system established by the prior administration has failed too many students," she said during remarks at George Mason University in Virginia.

"Survivors, victims of a lack of due process and campus administrators have all told me that the current approach does a disservice to everyone involved."

While claiming that there will be solicitation of public comments, that is an old Washington ploy, that fools no one and, and involves no one, and might include, at best a small hand picked sample, to which the press would be invited: in short a photo-op, or what used to be called a “dog and pony show.”

In the vein of many Trump Administration cabinet heads, she seems determined to kill the very institutions that she purportedly protects, much like Ben Carson at HUD, and RIck Perry at Energy.

As NBC News reported, “DeVos' announcement drew criticism from advocates for survivors, who feared any impending changes would roll back key gains made by the Obama administration to prioritize combating campus sex assault.”

“Alexandra Brodsky, a legal fellow at NWLC, told NBC News she felt DeVos made "false equivalencies between the experiences of survivors and the experiences of accused students" and "misrepresented" Obama-era guidance,”  in her reaction to the news.

Feeling elated were, “advocates who have argued that the accused do not always receive fair investigations under the previous administration's guidance welcomed DeVos' new approach, the station reported.

"One of the reasons why we've been so concerned about this is because the current approach has really badly undermined due process on college campuses," said Joe Cohn, legislative and policy director for the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

"I think that here we have for the first time in my memory an education secretary who acknowledges that this is an issue that requires us to care about everyone on all sides of it," he added.

Huffington Post noted that “she did not announce any large policy changes to Title IX other than implying that the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter would be rescinded when she told the crowd “the era of rule by letter” has ended.

“The Obama-era Dear Colleague Letter, which was created by then-Vice President Joe Biden in 2011, is a comprehensive set of guidelines that essentially serve as a reminder to universities and Title IX administrators that schools need to follow the Title IX law.”

Echoing President Trump’s remarks in the aftermath of the Charlottesville violence, about blame on both sides, DeVos shared her own false dichotomy, since “Although just between 2 and 10 percent of reported rapes turn out to be false claims, DeVos devoted equal time to the stories of sexual assault survivors and those wrongly accused as if the group is the same size as survivors of sexual violence.”

“This campus official, who may or may not have any training in adjudicating sexual misconduct, is expected to render a judgment,” DeVos said, walking the crowd through the Title IX process. “A judgment that changes the direction of both students’ lives. The right to appeal may or may not be available to either party and no one is permitted to talk about what went on behind closed doors. It’s no wonder so many call these proceedings kangaroo courts.”

That term is used by certain men’s groups that claim, much like old-school gangsters that they were framed, or as Jackson noted, that it was a case of both students being drunk.

Another unknown fact is that since most sexual assault goes unreported, making most observers, who while not surprised, by her remarks, wonder why this emphasis on parity between victim and assailant?

Fed Chair Yellen gives rosy picture of U.S. economy

Fed Chair Janet Yellen gave a far rosier expected picture of the U.S. economy, than may had expected, as she cited “continued job growth” as a factor for a more stable economy, and expected increases in its benchmark interest rate, in her required reports to Congress.

One factor in the upbeat report was that 180,000 jobs were added to the nation’s economy during the first half of this year, giving credence to her cautious, some say, dovish, path to Capitol Hill, in what is not always an enviable duty. Case in point, was her, by now, infamous tongue lashing by the House Financial Services Committee chair, Jeb Hensarling, the Texas Republican who, previously, and practically demanded a formula for the establishment of future rate increases and when she would begin to decrease the bond portfolio, that it had held during the Great Recession.

Much like a benevolent mother, she decided that she would give him what he wanted and in her advanced published reports, she gave several formulas that might be used to establish future increases. While this seemed to placate him, she also refused, gently, to commit the Federal Open Markets Committee to one that would be definitively used, a frequent Republican demand, noting that there would be “no clear way to decide which one would be better than others,” noted The New York Times.

Adding to the peaceful air was the June Jobs report which gave an unemployment rate of 4.4 percent, the lowest pre-recession figure, but one that is tempered, once again by weak wage growth, this time, only by 2.25 percent, ending in March of this year. This has been a trend for several months, and one that may not see a significant change.

More worrisome is that the African American unemployment rate is 7.1 percent, lower since April 2000, but still higher than the national rate, a mixed report but one that does offer some level of comfort.

Labor participation is still an issue with only 62.8 participation in the labor force, compared to 66 percent a decade ago.

Part of the Fed mandate is to monitor inflation, and as it has struggled beneath 2 percent, it does give cause, to some, that if not watched closely, any future increases could be skewed, incorrectly, and some observers are in agreement.

With the economy in its ninth year of expansion, most observers are feeling optimistic, if not cautious, about the future. And, in her later remarks to the Senate she said much the same, and that "the risk of inflation" was two-sides, and that the Feds would be monitoring the "inflation trends" that would "fall below" their 2 percent target, "even though price gains have slowed in recent months."

Some observers feel that it will not take them that much longer to get to a neutral policy stance, for neutral rate quotes. But, most agree that the next rate increase, even if it is lower, won't take place until December. And, most are certain, including the chair that a 3 percent overall, is unlikely despite President Trump's assertions.

Trump returns to U.S. after a weak stance with the G20

Donald Trump, America’s 45th president began his second trip abroad, with a successful visit to Poland, where he was enthusiastically cheered, and welcomed as a hero, but as many observers have noted, by a government that has increasingly become anti-immigrant, and even anti-European Union, led by President Andrzej Duda; fairly standard stuff with Trump. But, some have said that Polish workers were paid to attend, and even told that they could not go home until they were told to do so. If this is the truth, then it seems that the president may have found his element.

More importantly, he, like his predecessors before him, used a foreign stage to stake out a policy stance, and personal theme. Think Ronald Reagan, and “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” or John F. Kennedy’s famous Berlin Wall Speech, “Ich bein ein Berliner,” and others.

Trump likewise made his stance: western civilization, as we know it, is doomed to failure without enacting policies to protect it from a) immigrants and b) “radical Islamic terrorists”, thereby playing not only to his base back home in the United States, but also as a support to Poland’s increasing nationalism, and its unprecedented crackdown on journalists and judges, and a “refusal to accept more migrants”, noted The New York Times.

In his speech, Trump said, "The fundamental question of our time is whether the West has the will to survive? Do we have the confidence in our values to defend them at any cost? Do we have enough respect for our citizens to protect our borders? Do we have the desire and the courage to protect our civilization in the face of those who would subvert and destroy it?”

It was obvious to those listening that his speechwriters had used the occasion, not only to drive home the message, but also to polish his speaking style, and to give it the cadence of a statesman, and not that of a New York businessman, turned reality TV star, turned president. While there are those who might argue the opposite, it was clear that Trump was taking his message, to the world’s stage, using this time honored framework by U.S. presidents, and not that of a late night tweet.

Back in the U.S. things are not as neatly framed as the president would have it. He and most of his team have hired lawyers to help defend them against accusations of cronyism, at best, and “Russia’s stooge,” at worst, as Bob Muller assembles a dedicated, and professional team of investigators to help determine what has happened - did Trump and his associates know about allegations of pre-inaugural conversations with the Russians, and when did they occur?

Oddly enough, Trump said,"Well, I think it was Russia, and I think it could have been other people in other countries. Could have been a lot of people interfered,"  and even this - “nobody really knows for sure” on whether Russia hacked into the American electoral data system, despite evidence that they did exactly that, thus earning him the tag of dereliction of duty by former State Department, and former ambassador to NATO Nicholas Burns.

In no small measure, the president, has now come full circle in alienating the international intelligence community - not just long held allies, such as Britain, but that of his own country; a move sure to make his near six month presidency, a continuing nightmare. Some critics are saying, it is a nightmare, of unintended consequences. With the rejection of the Paris Climate Accord, and a possible tariff on imported steel, with a possible counterattack by European leaders, the label seems to stick.

Add to this a steadily eroding poll rating, currently with a disapproval rate at, or just above 55 percent, some have said, including former White House economic advisor, Robert Reich, that if he falls below 30 percent, he will be abandoned by the GOP. That has yet has to happen, and recent news that Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, instituted a dress code for reporters, especially women, including a ban on sleeveless dresses, (worn to combat the typical sub tropical summer heat of Washington, D.C.), suggests that Ryan is otherwise preoccupied.

With all eyes on the meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Trump, and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, claimed that he pressed Putin on the meddling, yet there was a conflicting report from the Russians, who said, "U.S. President Trump said that he heard firm assertions from Russian President Putin that it is not true and that Russian authorities have not meddled in the elections," Lavrov said. “[Trump] said that he accepts these assertions. That's it.”

“In response, White House officials are pointing to Tillerson’s briefing with reporters, in which he detailed how the U.S. and Russia appear to be at an impasse on the issue because Putin will not acknowledge wrongdoing,” reported the The Hill, a website acknowledged for its general “inside the beltway” reliability.

“The two leaders agreed that this is a substantial hindrance on the ability of us to move Russian-U.S. relationships forward and agreed to exchange further work 
regarding commitments of noninterference in the affairs of the United States and our democratic process as well as those of other countries,” Tillerson said. “So more work to be done in that regard.”

That meeting lasted over two hours, way beyond their scheduled thirty minutes, and First Lady Melania Trump was sent in to hurry them along, with no success, as the two leaders obviously enjoyed each other’s company, as shown in one Russian media video which had, Putin, pointing to reporters, and saying, to Trump, “Are these the ones that disrespected you?”

There is an old expression that the truth lies in the middle when it comes to conflicting reports, yet, with the continuing “bromance” between the two leaders, doubt remains, despite Tillerson’s assertion, that further contact and discussions will be ongoing. Whether this is restricted to a part-time ceasefire in Syria, fights against terrorism, remains to be seen.

When AIr Force one touches down at Andrews Air Force base, the president will confront a myriad of domestic issues, including growing dissatisfaction with his Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos who continues to chip away at standards set by the Obama administration to protect students from sexual harassment, unfair lending practices and current both staff and civil rights complaints by students.

Despite the failure of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to secure votes for the Senate version of the Affordable Healthcare Act, GOP lawmakers are now pessimistic about support with many backing away from the idea, and some, like Rand Paul, insisting that there should be a repeal, and then a later replacement of the Affordable Care Act, colloquially known as Obamacare; a move that is certain to create a backlash among voters, and a surefire way to erode the GOP in the 2018 mid-term elections.