For our weekend political readers:
HEALTH CARE DEBATE SHIFTS QUICKLY INTO POLITICAL SPHERE
Obviously, the health care ruling had major political ramifications and it didn't take long for the Presidential campaigns and advocates on both sides of the political aisle to engage.
The Washington Post's politics page chronicles the day's unfolding events and highlights how national political groups altered their strategies for November.
Romney avoided criticizing the Supreme Court, taking aim instead at the Affordable Care Act and the president. Although he promised to retain some of the act’s more popular provisions, including protections for patients with preexisting conditions, he excoriated the rest and called the law a “job-killer” overall.
The 5-to-4 decision was a huge win for Obama, for whom the health-care legislation is a signature achievement. The ruling also undermined the central argument being made by Romney and other Republicans: that the act’s central provision, the individual mandate, is unconstitutional.
What will the political campaigns and special interest groups do next? Read more here.
THE JOHN ROBERTS I KNEW
Paul Barrett pens a column for Bloomberg Businessweek on his intimate knowledge of former colleague, John Roberts.
The chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, who became the swing vote on the federal health care ruling this week, raised his profile with his landmark decision. Barrett explains how Roberts' role in the case was a surprise and non-surprise based on a man he's known for decades.
During the presidential administration of George H. W. (the Elder) Bush, I knew a deputy solicitor general of peerless conservative pedigree and prudential outlook named John Roberts. He wears a black robe now, but he’s the same lawyer, more or less.
That lawyer, deeply concerned about the credibility and reputation of the judicial branch, today serves as chief justice of the U.S. Roberts surprised many people (including me) with the reasoning he used in his lead opinion upholding the core of President Barack Obama’s health-care overhaul law. He did not surprise me by seeking a means of deferring to the political branches on an important question of regulatory policy, and in so doing, defusing liberal attacks on the high court’s Republicans as a monolithic partisan force determined to undermine a Democratic president.
There's more insight into what makes John Roberts tick. Read more here.
HILLARY CLINTON: ROCK STAR DIPLOMAT
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said she is ready “to step off the high-wire of American politics”, and although she hasn't made her intentions totally clear, it's roundly speculated she may leave the administration after the presidential elections, if Obama wins.
But the New York Times in an in-depth story speculates whether she would run for president in 2016 and “that she would instantly be the presumptive front-runner, only 69 in November 2016 and more iconic than ever.”
Along the way The Times paints a glowing portrait of Clinton's statesmanship over the past four years in a job that at first she really didn't want.
n a million years,” she replied by e-mail in November 2008 when her political aide Philippe Reines first told her that President-elect Barack Obama was considering her appointment.
The Times story travels the world with Clinton as she sometimes delicately, sometimes forcefully faces one world crisis after another with tenacity and determination that has received praise across the political spectrum.
“I think that she is brilliant at connecting with people on a political level,” Madeleine Albright said. “No question, she knows how to do what I think is essential: putting herself in other people’s shoes.”
Even some Republicans in Congress acknowledge the skills she has brought to the job, though they remain critical of many administration policies. “I think she’s represented our nation well,” Senator Lindsey Graham, the Republican from South Carolina said.
Go “on-tour” with the New York Times, in this revealing essay of Hillary Clinton's “world brand” diplomatic skills, successes, failures, and legacy.
RUBIO ON ROSE
Florida's junior U.S. Senator, Marco Rubio, appeared on Charlie Rose's PBS talk show this past week to discuss a wide range of issues including immigration, presidential politics, Cuba, and the economy.
Born to Cuban immigrants, Rubio is considered a “rising star” in the Republican Party and on the “short-list” as a VP running-mate for Mitt Romney.
On the hot-topic of immigration, Rubio says he supports the Supreme Court's decision to uphold parts of Arizona's tough law on immigration.
“It's not just an immigration issue, but a gun-running and a human trafficking issue,” he says.
The 41-year old Senator was the youngest person to be elected House Speaker of the Florida legislature and the first Hispanic. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in November of 2010. He has a new book out titled “American Son, A Memoir.”
You can dial in the entire interview with Rose by clicking on this link.
WHERE ARE ALL THE TOUGH DEMOCRATS?
Why are Democrats hushing each other on vital issues that use to bring out venom, and “What the hell ever happened to populism in the Democratic Party?”
That searing question is posed in a revealing post in Politico.
The recent convergence of setbacks on the left has activists and historians alike pondering anew how the modern Democratic Party has severed its connection to its own history — a tradition that many liberals wrongly imagined was about to spring back to life in the Obama years.
Populism — with its rowdy zeal to brawl against economic elites on behalf of the working classes — was for decades the party’s defining cause.
The story turns back a page in history that populist Democrats of the future took to school. It quotes President Franklin D. Roosevelt on what he thought about his opponents. “I welcome their hatred,” Roosevelt allegedly said.
So why all the coziness across the aisle now from Democratic leaders? Is it a fear of losing more votes or is this civil approach a new strategy? Find out from Poltico at this link.