In a boost for proponents of comprehensive immigration reform, a new report from the Congressional Budget Office estimates that the immigration bill currently being debated in the Senate would increase the U.S. population by 10.4 million and would decrease federal budget deficits by $197 billion between 2014 and 2023.

The much-anticipated report indicates that enacting the legislation would create new federal outlays of about $262 billion in the first decade but would increase revenues – largely from new income and payroll taxes – by $459 billion.

It also estimates that about 8 million undocumented immigrants would initially gain legal status under the bill’s provisions.

While the CBO does not typically provide estimates beyond the first decade of enactment, the report tackled estimates for the time period of 2024-2033, estimating that the federal budget deficits would decrease by an additional $700 billion over that time. By 2033, the net increase to the U.S. population as a result of the bill's enactment would be about 16 million, CBO says. 

The positive estimates are a boon for proponents of the reform effort, who argue that immigration is an economic imperative for the country as well as a moral and political one.

Bill sponsor Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., called the report "a huge momentum boost for immigration reform." 

The White House also lauded the CBO report, saying the numbers are "more proof that bipartisan commonsense immigration reform will be good for economic growth and deficit reduction."

And Sen. Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican who has worked to woo conservative support for the bill, said in a statement that the report "further confirmed what most conservative economists have found: reforming our immigration system is a net benefit for our economy, American workers and taxpayers." 

Opponents of the bill argue the influx of new foreign workers would hurt Americans still affected by joblessness. 

The Senate is currently debating the legislative language of the bill offered by the bipartisan "Gang of Eight."

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said he wants a final vote on the bill in the upper chamber by the July 4 recess. 

But lawmakers are still making amendments to the legislation, which many Republicans say cannot survive to the president's desk without substantial changes to its border security provisions. 

This story was originally published on Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:08 PM EDT

The Republican-controlled House passed legislation Tuesday that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, offering social conservatives a symbolic victory even as the bill is all but certain not to become law.

The vote was 228-196, with six Democrats and all but six Republicans voting for the measure.

But the legislation, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks of Arizona, has virtually no chance of becoming law, with the Democratic-led Senate certain to ignore it and the White House threatening in scathing language to veto it.

The bill, called the "Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act," would outlaw abortions after 20 weeks, unless the life of the mother is at risk. The legislation cites studies which indicate that a fetus feels pain starting at this gestational threshold; supporters of the bill say this medical research dictates that these fetuses should therefore not be aborted.

The vote came after Republicans – facing criticism over an alleged gaffe by bill sponsor Franks - altered their strategy to argue to bill, sidelining the Arizona lawmaker as the leader of the debate in favor of highlighting Republican women who support the ban.

House leaders also added language to the legislation last week after Franks stated that “the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low.” Democrats compared that assertion to one made by then-Senate candidate Todd Akin, who suggested last year that women who are victims of “legitimate rape” often experience a physical, biological reaction to the trauma, preventing pregnancy.

Under the changed bill, pregnancies that are the result of rape or incest -- and are reported to authorities -- are excluded from the ban.

The vote also comes in the wake of a murder conviction for Kermit Gosnell, an abortion provider found guilty of murder for performing illegal late-term abortions.

Responding to criticism Tuesday that the House should be focused on economic issues instead of the largely symbolic abortion vote, Republican House Speaker John Boehner pointed to the Gosnell trial as evidence that taking up the abortion ban is warranted.

“After this Kermit Gosnell trial and some of the horrific acts that were going on, the vast majority of the American people believe in the substance of this bill and so do I,” he said.

And Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., argued on the House floor that the bill would send the "clearest possible message to the American people that we do not support more Gosnell-like abortions."

While the vote offered a chance for members from socially conservative districts to flex their political muscles, some moderate Republicans grumbled about the leadership’s decision to hold a vote on a controversial measure with no chance of going beyond the House.

“I think a lot of people are shaking their heads and not understanding why we’re doing this,” said one GOP official, who added that votes on hot-button social issues don’t help the party maintain much-needed Republican seats in moderate districts.

Republican Rep. Charlie Dent of Pennsylvania bluntly told The New York Times that the vote is “a stupid idea.”

“The economy is on everybody’s minds. We’re seeing stagnant job numbers. Confidence in the institution, in government, is eroding,” said Dent, a moderate whose southeastern Pennsylvania district only narrowly voted for Romney last year after voting for President Barack Obama in 2008. “And now we’re going to have a debate on rape and abortion.”

Last year, the House considered a similar piece of legislation that achieved the same ban, but applied only to the District of Columbia and did not include the exception for rape or incest. That bill achieved a simple majority (220-154), but ultimately failed because it needed a two-thirds majority for passage.

Last week, the White House made clear that it would veto the legislation, calling it an “assault” on women’s rights and a direct violation of the Supreme Court’s rulings.

“Forty years ago, the Supreme Court affirmed a woman's constitutional right to privacy, including the right to choose,” the administration said in a statement. “This bill is a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade and shows contempt for women's health and rights, the role doctors play in their patients' health care decisions, and the Constitution.”

NBC’s Jessica Taylor and Frank Thorp contributed to this report.

This story was originally published on Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:15 PM EDT

House Speaker John Boehner said Tuesday that he does not “see any way” of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that does not have backing from a majority of the House’s GOP members, calling the border security provisions in the measure currently making its way through the Senate “weak” and “laughable.” 

Comprehensive immigration reform must – in some fashion – run through the United States House, and Boehner’s statement further complicates what is already a delicate process of compromise as proponents of the bill navigate political landmines on both sides of the Capitol dome. And the willingness of House Republicans to sign on to any reform efforts remains a large question mark. 

“I don't see any way of bringing an immigration bill to the floor that doesn't have a majority support of Republicans,” Boehner said during a press briefing with reporters Tuesday.

“I frankly think the Senate bill is weak on border security, I think the internal enforcement mechanisms are weak and the triggers are almost laughable,” he said of the bill drafted by a bipartisan group of lawmakers, including Republican Sens. Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham, John McCain and Jeff Flake. “So if they're serious about getting an immigration bill finished, they should reach out to their GOP colleagues to broaden support.” 

Proponents of the “Gang of Eight” bill currently being debated in the Senate have hoped that – if it garners a strong bipartisan vote for passage in the Senate – Boehner would be under enormous political pressure to bring it to the House floor for a vote. 

Republicans in the Senate, including Rubio, have pushed for additional border security provisions that could make their bill more palatable to the Republican-led House. But Democratic leaders argue that those attempting to make the bill’s “path to citizenship” contingent on the completion of stringent border provisions are hoping to derail the legalization process for undocumented immigrants. 

So far, the major GOP border security amendments voted upon in the Senate so far have failed to garner enough support to be adopted; a proposal by Sen. John Thune, R-S.D.  to build a 700-mile border fence before undocumented immigrants can obtain green cards failed 39-54 Tuesday afternoon. 

Speaking to reporters before that vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he believes popular support for the immigration measure will prevail. 

"No matter what he [Boehner] has said, there's going to be significant national pressure on the House to do something on immigration," he said. 

But on Tuesday, Boehner accused Democrats of seeking to sabotage the legislation. 

Win Mcnamee / Getty Images

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) meets with members of the press to answer questions at the U.S. Capitol June 12, 2013 in Washington, DC.

“I'm increasingly concerned that the White House and Senate Democrats would rather have this as an issue in the 2014 election rather than a result,” he said. 

Last week, Boehner told reporters that he would not bring a bill to the floor that violates the “principles” of the Republican Party. His harsh description of the legislation Tuesday made clear that he believes the Senate bill as written would be such a violation.

House committees are currently working through individual pieces of immigration legislation that are less sweeping than the Senate bill. The lower chamber will convene a special conference to discuss immigration reform next month.

This story was originally published on Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:06 AM EDT

Obama at the G-8: It could have been worse… Germany visit: 2013 vs. 2008… Obama on Syria, NSA surveillance, and Bernanke… McCaskill backs “Ready for Hillary” Super PAC… House to vote on abortion ban… Biden to talk gun control… Not-so Great Scott… And revenge is a dish best served … by running for office. 

*** It could have been worse: As President Obama today wraps up his G-8 meetings in Northern Ireland before heading to Germany later this afternoon, it’s safe to say that this hasn’t been a very successful overseas trip for President Obama. At least so far. He was hoping to get a big show of early support on a free-trade agreement with Europe (the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership), but he got some pushback (especially from France). And regarding Syria, there wasn’t much of an agreement on anything, especially from Russia. Of course, it could have been worse -- the U.S. will still host the first round of talks on the trade partnership next month in DC, and Obama’s meeting with Putin was at least cordial (yet still awkward). At least Putin didn’t make any cannibal references while sitting next to the president. That said, the White House is hoping to turn things around with a successful speech at the Brandenburg Gate in Germany tomorrow. But even that seems like an uphill climb. Der Spiegel doesn’t exactly roll out the welcome mat for Obama like they did in 2008.

Ian Langsdon / AP

President Barack Obama, left, and French President Francois Hollande attend a round table meeting of G-8 member countries at the G-8 Summit at the Lough Erne golf resort in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland, on Tuesday, June 18, 2013.

*** 2013 vs. 2008: NBC’s Andy Eckhart notes:  “Germany meets the superstar" was the headline on the cover of Der Spiegel weekly before his visit during the 2008 campaign. Some 200,000 Germans cheered him on. In this most recent issue of Der Spiegel, Eckhart notes the cover features Obama in Kennedy’s shadow with the tagline, „The Lost Friend“ and then it has an „angst-ridden report about fraying ties. "Kennedy's visit to Berlin was an almost ecstatic celebration of a protective alliance," it wrote. But it said nearly 70 years after World War II and two decades after the end of European communism, "the trip of (JFK's) no-less-charismatic successor will likely be a prosaic family gathering." Commentators note that Germans, like other ardent Obama supporters, are frustrated by impasses on slowing climate change and closing Guantanamo Bay prison.“ Needless to say, expectations are a LOT lower for Obama’s reception in Germany than they were five years ago. 

*** Obama on Syria: So what did we learn from Obama’s Charlie Rose interview from last night? Well, he outlined his Syria policy (or as some argue, his non-policy) a bit more. “We know what it's like to rush into a war in the Middle East without having thought it through. And there are elements within the Middle East who see this entirely through the prism of a Shia-Sunni conflict and want the United States to simply take the side of the Sunnis,” he said. “And that I do not think serves American interests.” He went on to say, “And we have a legitimate need to be engaged and to be involved. But for us to do it in a careful calibrated way sometimes is unsatisfying, because what people really typically want is a clean solution, a silver bullet, ‘Here's what we're going to do,’ and we just move forward.”

*** Obama on NSA surveillance: In his interview with Charlie Rose, the president also commented on the controversies surrounding the NSA surveillance programs. “The way I view it, my job is both to protect the American people and to protect the American way of life which includes our privacy,” he said. “And so every program that we engage in, what I've said is ‘Let's examine and make sure that we're making the right tradeoffs.’” He went on to say, “If you're a U.S. person, then NSA is not listening to your phone calls and it's not targeting your emails unless it's getting an individualized court order.” Obama’s comments came as a new Pew poll shows that Americans are split on the NSA surveillance story, with 49% saying that Edward Snowden’s release of the classified information serves the public interest, versus 44% who say it harms the public interest. (Strikingly, younger people strongly say that the NSA leak serves the public interest, which might not be that surprisingly given that the younger generation has a greater expectation that things are more open and transparent.) Also today, the House Intelligence Committee holds an open hearing at 10:00 am ET with NSA Director Keith Alexander. 

*** Obama closer than ever to replacing Bernanke? Perhaps the biggest news that Obama made in the Charlie Rose interview was that Ben Bernanke isn’t going to serve another term as Fed chairman. Why? Because Obama spoke of his service in the past tense. ROSE: “Some people would like to see you announce that you are reappointing Ben Bernanke as chairman of the Fed.” OBAMA: “Well, I think Ben Bernanke's done an outstanding job. Ben Bernanke's a little bit like Bob Mueller, the head of the FBI where he's already stayed a lot longer than he wanted or he was supposed to.” ROSE: “But if he wanted to be reappointed, you would reappoint him?” OBAMA: “He has been an outstanding partner along with the White House, in helping us recover much stronger than, for example, our European partners, from what could have been an economic crisis of epic proportions.”  

*** McCaskill backs “Ready for Hillary” group: In 2016 news today, the group “Ready for Hillary” announced the support of Sen. Claire McCaskill, whom it says is the first member of Congress to get on board of the Super PAC that’s supporting Hillary’s candidacy (though that doesn’t have official ties with the former Secretary of State). It’s also notable because McCaskill was an early Obama supporter in ’08. This McCaskill news comes after former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm has been assisting Ready for Hillary, too. One thing that was clear to us yesterday, there seems to be a concerted effort to recruit prominent Democratic women early to Hillary’s side. That said, let’s everybody take a deep breath and realize, the only “news” a top Democratic official can make now about 2016 is announcing their intention NOT to support Clinton.  At this point, announcing support for her is not exactly NEWS. 

*** House to vote on abortion ban: Remember when, right after the 2012 election, Republican establishment types wanted to move beyond abortion and the culture war? Well, months later House Republicans today hold a vote on a measure that would prohibit abortion after 20-22 weeks of pregnancy. The New York Times: “Aware of the risks inherent in abortion politics, Republican leaders have moved to insulate themselves from Democrats’ criticism that they are opening a new front in the “war on women.” Representative Marsha Blackburn, Republican of Tennessee, will manage the debate on the bill when it reaches the House floor, a role that would customarily go to the sponsor, Representative Trent Franks of Arizona. And in a last-minute revision, House leaders slipped in a provision that would allow for a limited exception in cases of rape or incest, but only if the woman had reported the crime.” Those limited exceptions come after Franks drew criticism for saying that the incidents of pregnancy from rape were “very low.” Per NBC’s Frank Thorp, the vote takes place around 6:00 pm ET. 

*** Biden to talk gun control: Meanwhile, at 1:00 pm ET, Vice President Biden delivers remarks on reducing gun violence. But after the administration’s defeat on the Senate background-check vote, Biden’s focus will be on the executive orders that the administration has pursued on guns. “Senior administration officials said the vice president will deliver a ‘progress report’ touting completion of a slew of executive actions — including writing emergency management plans for schools and churches and training police to respond to active shooters,” the Washington Post reports. “Sure, these steps might make communities safer and better prepared to respond to gun violence. But, gun-control advocates said, they are baby steps that do relatively little to prevent the next mass shooting.” More: “Biden plans to announce that the administration has completed or made significant progress in 21 of 23 executive actions first rolled out on Jan. 16, according to senior administration officials.” 

*** (Not so) Great Scott: Folks, the fact that this new Quinnipiac poll is being touted as good news for incumbent Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) shows just how endangered he is come 2014. Yes, his approval rating has increased from 36% to 43% from 36%. And, yes, he’s now trailing Charlie Crist by 10 points (47%-37%) instead of 16 (50%-34%) in a hypothetical gubernatorial match up. But those are rough, rough numbers for a politician facing re-election next year. You never want to see your approval rating below 45%, and you never want your ballot number to be in the 30s… 

*** Revenge is a dish best served … by running for office: After it became pretty clear that Senate Republicans wouldn’t allow Elizabeth Warren to officially head the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, Warren decided to run for the U.S. Senate, and she beat incumbent Republican Scott Brown. (It raises the question if Brown might still be in the Senate if Republicans had been willing to accept her appointment.) And now Donald Berwick -- who headed Medicare and Medicaid for the Obama administration as a recess appointee but who never even received a Senate confirmation hearing -- is following the Elizabeth Warren route. Yesterday, he announced he was running for Massachusetts’ open gubernatorial seat in 2014 as a Democrat. In addition, it’s possible that Richard Cordray, Obama’s recess appointment at the CFPB, could run for Ohio governor. As one plugged in Hill Democrat emails us, “Remember, there’s historic precedent for blocked nominees seeking revenge through future elected office.  If things had gone differently in the 80s, Jeff Sessions would currently be toiling as an obscure federal judge in Alabama, not leading the charge against the immigration bill.”   

http://is.gd/ccxyrR%22%20%5Ct%20%22_blank">Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on http://is.gd/TzuR1b%22%20%5Ct%20%22_blank">Facebook and also on http://is.gd/hkhSDT%22%20%5Ct%20%22_blank">Twitter. Follow us @http://twitter.com/#!/chucktodd">chucktodd, @http://twitter.com/#!/mmurraypolitics">mmurraypolitics, @http://twitter.com/#!/DomenicoNBC">DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

*** Tuesday’s “The Daily Rundown” line-up: The latest from the G8 with one of us… another one of us (!!!) with the political developments happening at home while the president is abroad… The Boston Globe’s Matt Viser on the final debate tonight in the final week of the Markey-Gomez fight… Plus former Gov. Bob Ehrlich (R-MD), Aisha Moodie-Mills of the Center for American Progress and CQ Roll Call’s David Hawkings join the Gaggle.

*** Tuesday’s “Jansing & Co.” line-up: Guests include Sen. Tom Udall/(D) New Mexico on NSA spying controversy and President Obama’s plan to arm the Syrian rebels, Jackie Kucinich/The Washington Post and Chris Frates/National Journal on the politics of the NSA story, Rep. Steve Israel/(D) New York – Chairman of DCCC on vote today on House Republican abortion ban bill, Victoria DeFrancesco Soto and Rick Tyler on Immigration reform bill, Howard Bragman on the future of NY Mayor Mike Bloomberg after he leaves office and David Chiu/San Francisco Board of Supervisors on his proposal to mandate that San Francisco businesses consider offering flex-time schedules for workers

*** Tuesday’s “MSNBC Live with Thomas Roberts” line-up: Fill-in Host Craig Melvin will interview Rep. Marsha Blackburn, the woman leading the floor debate on the GOP’s 20-week abortion ban.  Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will discuss President Obama’s defense of the NSA surveillance program.  Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) will talk about V.P. Biden’s new push on gun control.   Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA) will discuss the new bill she is co-sponsoring on military sex assaults.  Today’s Agenda Panel includes:  Political Wire Editor Taegan Goddard and ThinkProgress Editor-in-Chief Judd Legum.

*** Tuesday’s “NOW with Alex Wagner” line-up: Alex Wagner’s guests include former Gov. Ed Rendell, The Nation’s Katrina Vanden Heuvel, Demos’ Bob Herbert, New York Magazine contributing editor Benjamin Wallace-Wells, and Planned Parenthood’s Cecile Richards. 

*** Tuesday’s “Andrea Mitchell Reports” line-up: NBC’s Andrea Mitchell interviews former Defense Secretary Bill Cohen, former Deputy Director of CIA’s Counterterrorism Center Philip Mudd, The New Yorker’s George Packer, The Cook Political Report’s Amy Walter, Cosmopolitan Editor-in chief Joanna Coles and The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza.

*** Tuesday’s “News Nation with Tamron Hall” line-up: MSNBC’s Tamron Hall interviews Rep. James Clyburn, NARAL director of Public Affairs Samantha Gordon, Investigative crime reporter Michele Sigona, and Democratic strategist Chris Kofinis.

Here’s President Obama’s interview with Charlie Rose. It ranged from Syria and Iran to China and the NSA.

On Syria: “We know what it’s like to rush into a war in the Middle East without having thought it through.”

On Iran: "I do think that there's a possibility that they decide - the Iranians decide - to take us up on our offer to engage in a more serious substantive way," Obama said.

On China: “We had a very blunt conversation about cyber security.”

On the NSA, Obama said it “cannot and have not” listened to phone calls and “not targeting” phone calls, emails unless they get a warrant.

Asked if the program should be transparent, Obama claimed, “It is transparent, that’s why we set up the FISA court.” (Depends on your definition of transparency then.) 

The Hill: “President Obama defended his administration’s domestic surveillance programs on Monday, arguing he has not abandoned freedom and is not just ‘Bush-Cheney lite.’ In an interview with PBS’s Charlie Rose, Obama argued it’s a ‘false choice’ to suggest freedom must be sacrificed to achieve security, a phrasing that echoes comments he made on the campaign trail in 2008. ‘To say there’s a tradeoff doesn’t mean somehow that we’ve abandoned freedom,’ Obama said.” 

Obama defended U.S. action (or inaction) in Syria, per NBC’s Mike O’Brien: “[T]his argument that somehow we had gone in earlier, or heavier in some fashion, that the tragedy and chaos taking place in Syria wouldn’t be taking place, I think is wrong.”

The Hill: “President Obama failed on Monday to resolve disagreements with Russian leader Vladimir Putin about the proper international response to Syria's civil war.

Obama vowed after the two-hour meeting to not let his “differing perspectives” with Putin get in the way of closer cooperation on counter-terrorism, arms control and other issues.”

“President Barack Obama brought a campaigner’s mindset to the White House — but the roll-out of Obamacare marks the first time he’s adapted his campaign’s groundbreaking grassroots tactics to the task of turning policy into reality,” Politico writes. “A trio of Obama’s most experienced campaign operatives — one in the West Wing, two others in outside groups closely allied with Obama — are overseeing an effort to ensure that the Affordable Care Act, the president’s biggest legacy project, doesn’t turn into the failure the GOP predicts it will be.”

David Hawkings: “States may not demand proof of citizenship from people registering to vote, the Supreme Court ruled by a decisive 7-2 today. The majority signaled it would also be ready to strike down any requirement tougher than what’s set out in the 1993 federal “motor voter” law, which was designed by Congress to simplify registration. The decision, and the language behind it, is therefore a significant victory for mainstream Democrats, who want to expand access to the polls in part because they’re confident they’ll win most of the new voters. And it’s a defeat for mainstream Republicans, who express intense concern about the potential for election fraud but also know that polls show them doing poorly among groups underrepresented on the rolls — ethnic minorities, immigrants and older people.”

The court reconvenes Thursday and has 14 more decisions to hand down dealing with issues ranging from gay rights to affirmative action to voting rights.

But Ted Cruz says he’s not giving up the fight. In a tweet after the decision: “I'll file amendment to immigration bill that permits states to require ID before registering voters & close this hole in fed statutory law.” 

“The White House is reporting progress on President Barack Obama’s initiatives to reduce gun violence, but says the most important step would be getting a reluctant Congress to pass new firearms laws,” AP writes. “Vice President Joe Biden was announcing Tuesday that the administration has completed or significantly advanced 21 of the 23 executive actions that Obama ordered in January in response to the Connecticut elementary school shooting that killed 20 first-graders and six staff members.”

Lindsey Graham’s losing patience with Marco Rubio. "How do we put together a bill and then the guy who put it together says that he may not vote for it?" Graham told The Huffington Post. "I just don't get what we're doing here."

“The Republican-led House will take its deepest dive yet into immigration reform this week, rushing to play catchup with the Senate on the chief domestic policy battle this year,” Politico writes. “The House bipartisan group, which has labored for four years without releasing anything, is finally on the verge of producing a bill. The House Judiciary Committee is holding its first immigration markup on Tuesday on an enforcement-centered bill that Democrats abhor. And the all-Democratic Congressional Hispanic Caucus will huddle with Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) on Wednesday, and immigration will undoubtedly be a hot topic.”

National Journal: “John Boehner wants immigration reform to pass. To get it done, the House speaker will have to capitalize on the widening gap among conservatives, and he’s preparing the groundwork to do it. The rare split inside the conservative wing of Boehner’s Republican conference offers him an uncommon opportunity to bring a bill to the floor without facing an insurrection among his members. It also means convincing enough conservatives that passing some immigration measure won’t be preamble to the Senate using compromise negotiations to jam a more liberal version down the House’s throat.”

“The abortion wars return to Congress in a big way with House legislation to ban almost all abortions after a fetus reaches the age of 20 weeks,” AP writes. “The legislation expected to pass the Republican-controlled House as early as Tuesday has no chance of becoming law in the near future: The Democratic-led Senate will ignore it and the White House has issued a veto threat. But the measure gives social conservatives a rare chance to promote their anti-abortion agenda and lays the groundwork for what could be a future challenge to the 1973 Supreme Court decision that confirmed a woman’s right to late-term abortions.”

Roll Call: “The legislation, sponsored by Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz., and intended to be ‘scored’ by the National Right to Life Committee, is based on the belief held by some medical experts that the fetus can begin to experience pain after the 20-week threshold. As originally written, the bill would hold physicians accountable to the law for performing an abortion after that threshold and would provide exemptions only when the pregnancy poses a life-threatening risk to the mother.”

DGA memo: “Today, House Republicans are poised to vote for an extreme ban on abortions after 22 weeks. But, with a Democratic president and Senate, House Republicans’ efforts will be in vain. Unfortunately for American women, the debate in the states—particularly those with Republican governors—isn’t just about political posturing. Whether it’s in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Kansas, New Jersey, or one of several other GOP-helmed states, a woman’s right to make critical decisions about her own health is being taken away at a disturbing rate.”

The DSCC is taking aim on student loans: As July 1st quickly approaches, Paul Broun, Jack Kingston and Phil Gingrey continue to put special interests ahead of Georgia’s students and middle class families by siding with House Republicans to charge more for college loans. Champions of obstruction and gridlock in Washington, Broun, Gingrey and Kingston opposed freezing current student loan rates by refusing to sign a petition that would bring a bill directly to the floor that would prevent student loan rates from doubling, while at the same time backing the House Republican plan that would immediately raise interest rates for some students and make college more expensive for students across the country.”

The Hill: “Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) is roiling the Senate immigration debate by offering several amendments that could give him an edge in a future Republican presidential primary. Paul, who could square off against Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), one of the bill’s primary authors, in the 2016 GOP presidential primary, is taking aim at three of the most controversial areas of the bill, according to Senate aides familiar with the measures.” 

And here was Paul on Edward Snowden… Politico: “Sen. Rand Paul described NSA leaker Edward Snowden a ‘civil disobedient’ and noted that others protesting the government like Martin Luther King Jr. had only faced short jail terms.”

Paul said: “On deciding when you decide to become a civil disobedient - we’ve had famous ones in our career, but some of them only had to serve, like [Henry David] Thoreau only had to serve one day in jail, Martin Luther King served 30 days in jail. [Snowden] may be looking at life in prison. … People are saying, ‘Oh, he ought to just come home.’ But I don’t know if that’s a good or a bad idea if he’s facing life in prison.” 

Chaser: A majority believe Snowden should be prosecuted, per Pew: “54% of the public – including identical majorities of Republicans and Democrats (59% each) – say the government should pursue a criminal case against the person responsible for leaking the classified information about the program. Young people, by 60% to 34%, think that the NSA leak serves the public interest. Americans 30 and older are divided (46% serves vs. 47% harms). And while those younger than 30 are divided over whether Snowden should be prosecuted, majorities in older age groups favor the government pursuing a criminal case against him.”

“Speaker John A. Boehner faces one of his first big leadership tests of the year as he brings a farm bill to the floor this week amid opposition from a host of powerful conservative advocacy groups that have frequently bedeviled his speakership,” Roll Call writes. “It is uncommon for a speaker to pledge to vote for a bill, and the Ohio Republican’s promise last week to do so on the farm bill is even rarer, given that he has not voted for a farm bill since 1996.” 

The Hill: “A group of House Democrats has proposed legislation that would require companies around the country to give workers two hours of paid time off in order to vote in federal elections.”

It’s pot lobby day… “Legalization activists young and old will fan out across the Capitol on June 17 as part of Federal Marijuana Lobby Day, a pro-pot push poised to include food, booze and pep talks from sympathetic policymakers,” Roll Call writes. “Silver Tour founder Robert Platshorn, a convicted drug trafficker cum reform advocate — ‘I caught the first kingpin charge for marijuana,’ he shared, having served three decades of a whopping 64-year sentence — is bringing busloads of senior citizens who are interested in medical marijuana along for the congressional tour.”

Roll Call: “The Capitol community will pause for a few moments this week to honor Frederick Douglass, the abolitionist and former D.C. resident whose statued likeness will be placed in the Capitol on Wednesday.”

Rep. Joaquin Castro soon won’t be able to make his joke anymore that the way to tell between him and his twin brother Julian is that Julian’s married. Joaquin got engaged.

Ex-Rep. Jesse Jackson (D-IL) and his wife will be sentenced July 3. Lynn Sweet: “The couple pleaded guilty in February to looting their campaign funds of $750,000 over seven years. Sandi Jackson also faced income tax evasion charges.”

FLORIDA: Gov. Rick Scott (R) gets his highest approval rating since taking office – 43%/44%, per Quinnipiac, but he still trails Charlie Crist (D) in a hypothetical 2014 gubernatorial race, 47%-37% - though that is down from 50%-34% in March. 

MASSACHUSETTS: Ed Markey (D) and Gabriel Gomez (R) debate for the final time tonight in the special election. The election takes place June 25^th. 

Planned Parenthood Action Fund has released mailers (here and here) in the special Senate contest that hit Republican Gabriel Gomez on the issue of abortion. 

Donald Berwick, Obama’s former head of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, is running for governor. 

MINNESOTA: Roll Call interviews the man running as a Republican in Michele Bachmann’s district, Tom Emmer, who some have called Bachmann 2.0, and he doesn’t completely shy away from.

NEW JERSEY: GOTV will hit the Jersey Shore, Roll Call notes, given that the primary for the special election to replace Frank Lautenberg takes place Aug. 13, right in the midst of the peak summer season. 

TEXAS: Texans would rather Ted Cruz run for president than Rick Perry.

She's not a presidential candidate yet but Hillary Clinton is already starting to pile up the endorsements.  

Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill Tuesday added her support to a growing roster of Democratic activists pushing the former secretary of state to make another bid for the White House in 2016.  The nudge gives Clinton a marquee, swing-state backer and could be an early glimpse at a major source of support for any potential campaign -- Democratic women in the U.S. Senate.   

McCaskill announced her support for Clinton on the website of the group "Ready for Hillary," a super PAC which has looked to build grassroots fervor for a potential Clinton candidacy in 2016.  The group is not tied directly to Clinton but has been aggressive in gathering support for a potential candidacy.  

Larry Downing / Reuters file

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., speaks about pending legislation regarding sexual assaults in the military at a Senate Armed Services Committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, June 4, 2013.

"Hillary Clinton had to give up her political operation while she was making us proud, representing us around the world as an incredible Secretary of State, and that’s why Ready for Hillary is so critical,” McCaskill said in a statement. “It’s important that we start early, building a grassroots army from the ground up, and effectively using the tools of the Internet – all things that President Obama did so successfully – so that if Hillary does decide to run, we’ll be ready to help her win.” 

Speculation has grown in recent weeks about Clinton's political future.  Just weeks after stepping down as Obama's Secretary of State, she started to re-enter public life. While she has been deliberately coy about her intentions in 2016, Clinton launched a Twitter account last week teasing her "to be determined" future plans.  Her profile reads: "Wife, mom, lawyer, women & kids advocate, FLOAR, FLOTUS, US Senator, SecState, author, dog owner, hair icon, pantsuit aficionado, glass ceiling cracker, TBD..."  

And in a major new policy push, she outlined new initiatives involving access to education and advancing women's issues at last week's "Clinton Global Initiative," another nod at her unique position as the most high-profile woman in American politics. 

While she has endured criticism from Republicans over last fall's terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya in which four Americans were killed, Clinton received a rare send-off from the president when she left office that included a joint interview that some observers saw as a passing-of-the-torch moment.     

McCaskill is one of 16 Democratic women serving in the Senate, many of them representing key swing states like Michigan, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Minnesota.  Regarded as a relative moderate, McCaskill won re-election to her second term in 2012. Though Missouri has trended slightly toward Republicans in recent statewide and presidential elections, it is still considered a "swing state" in relative terms — a state whose 10 electoral votes are important to winning an election. 

McCaskill's early support for Clinton is even more noteworthy for the fact that she was an early supporter of Barack Obama's during the 2008 Democratic primary versus Clinton. The Missouri senator's support for Clinton reflects the manner in which a number of Obama supporters have now turned their sentiments to Clinton, who served as Obama's top diplomat during his first term.

This story was originally published on Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:29 AM EDT

Earlier action by the United States to arm rebels seeking Syrian strongman Bashar al-Assad’s overthrow would not have meaningfully slow the violence in that country’s ongoing civil war, President Barack Obama said in his first extensive comments about the situation in Syria.

Obama defended his administration’s handling of the protracted Syrian civil war following the U.S. government’s announcement late Friday that it would provide military and economic aid to rebel groups looking to oust Assad.

The decision – following Obama’s determination that Assad had used chemical weapons, crossing the president’s “red line” for U.S. involvement – has been beset by criticism that the United States waited too long to act, and faces deep resistance among most Americans.

Slideshow: Syria uprising

A look back at the conflict that has overtaken the country.

Launch slideshow

“[T]his argument that somehow we had gone in earlier, or heavier in some fashion, that the tragedy and chaos taking place in Syria wouldn’t be taking place, I think is wrong,” Obama told talk show host Charlie Rose in an interview which was taped on Sunday, but aired Monday evening.

The president went on to say, “I don’t think that anybody would suggest that somehow that there was a ready-made military opposition inside of Syria that could somehow quickly and cleanly defeated the Syrian army or Assad or overthrown it.”

The White House announced on Friday evening that it had decided to amplify its support for rebels in Syria – most notably the Supreme Military Council – after having determined with a high degree of Syria that Assad’s fighters had used weapons of mass destruction (namely, the nerve agent sarin) in its violent clashes with rebel groups.

The use of chemical weapons crosses the “red line” established by Obama in August 2012, which he said would prompt further U.S. involvement. But the administration’s pivot also follows acknowledgements earlier this year that Assad was likely to have used chemical weapons, which prompted some Republicans to push the administration to act sooner.

The issue of Syria is expected to be the central matter of discussion at this week’s G-8 summit in Northern Ireland. On that matter, the U.S. and its European allies faces stiff resistance from a lone G-8 member, Russia, whose leader, President Vladimir Putin, has been generally supportive of Assad.

In the interview on Sunday, Obama sought to defend his handling of the situation in Syria while straddle a delicate balance between committing to more involvement in Syria and justifying U.S. intervention in the first place.

“Unless you’ve been involved in those conversations, then it’s kind of hard for you to understand that the complexity of the situation and how we have to not rush into one more war in the Middle East,” the president said, describing the months of deliberations among his national security staff in the White House situation room.

Obama said that his team had long been frustrated by the lack of any “silver bullet” it could use against the Assad regime. The president explained that the U.S. lacked any discernible opposition group with which they could partner until recently.

What prompted the U.S. to act, Obama asserted, was the use of chemical weapons, as well as frustration that a political solution to the civil strife in Syria had become much less likely. But Obama argued that the new, increased involvement by the U.S. was justified on both humanitarian and geopolitical grounds.

“[T]he fact of the matter is, is that we've got serious interests there, and not only humanitarian interests, we can't have the situation of ongoing chaos in a major country that borders a country like Jordan which in turn borders Israel,” Obama said. “And we have a legitimate need to be engaged and to be involved.”

The matter of Syria is just one of the delicate topics on the agenda at the G-8, and the issue is fraught with complicated politics back home for Obama, as well. Senior lawmakers in both parties have begun to openly question whether the administration’s decision to become more involved in Syria will make much of a difference.

“Last year, Assad was isolated, he had very few friends, he was hanging by a thread,” Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a proponent of increased action in Syria, said on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday. “This year, he's entrenched with Hezbollah, Iran, and Russia.”

Said Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, on CNN: “You can't just simply send them, you know, a pea shooter against a blunder bust at the end of the day. Our vital national security interests – you know, time is not on our side, and our vital national security interests will not be pursued.”

But Obama also faces countervailing pressure from the American public, only further putting the president in a difficult spot on the matter of Syria. A whopping 70 percent of Americans – including 71 percent of Republicans, 74 percent of independents and 66 percent of Democrats – said in a Pew Research Center poll released Monday that they opposed the U.S. and its allies sending arms to anti-government forces in Syria. 

This story was originally published on Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:00 PM EDT