Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

U.S. President Barack Obama (L) shakes hands with his Mexican counterpart Enrique Pena Nieto after a joint news conference at the National Palace in Mexico City May 2, 2013.

President Barack Obama warned lawmakers against erecting unnecessarily high benchmarks for a pending overhaul of immigration laws, suggesting they would excuse inaction by Congress.

The president, following a meeting with Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto, said that he remained “optimistic” that Congress could produce a comprehensive immigration reform law this year – an issue of particular importance to millions of Mexicans and Mexican-Americans residing in the United States.

But, responding to Florida Republican Sen. Marco Rubio’s suggestion that the bipartisan immigration law he helped produce might need even stronger provisions on border security in order to win the necessary votes for passage, Obama warned members of Congress.

“Frankly, we put enormous resources into border security.  There are areas where, frankly, there is more work to be done,” Obama said. “But what I’m not going to do is go along with something where we’re looking for an excuse not to do it.”

In an interview on Wednesday with conservative talker Sean Hannity, Rubio, a member of the bipartisan “Gang of Eight” that authored a new immigration law, said the aspects in the law dealing with border security might need more work.

“The part we still have to do some work on is this border stuff,” Rubio said. “And as I said yesterday … this bill will not pass the House and quite frankly I think will struggle to pass the Senate if it doesn’t deal with that issue.”

Conservatives have demanded stronger border provisions as part of a broad immigration reform deal in exchange for creating a pathway to citizenship for those currently residing in the United States without any documentation.

Peña Nieto, for his part, said that the Mexican government “understands that this is a domestic affair for the U.S.” and wished its northern neighbor the best of luck in its reform efforts.

This story was originally published on Thu May 2, 2013 6:26 PM EDT

With former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton waiting in the wings, a prominent Democratic group launched an effort Thursday to pave the way for electing America's first woman president.

Marshaling new polling data of voters in battleground states, the Democratic women's group EMILY's List said Americans fully believe the country is ready to elect a woman as president, pointing to results showing almost three in four Americans "expect" the nation to elect a woman as president in 2016.

The initiative, dubbed "Madam President," comes well before the next presidential election has even begun to take shape, but has clear implications for Clinton, Democrats' favorite right now to carry the party's banner.

"There is one name that seems to be getting mentioned more than others," said Stephanie Schriock, the president of EMILY's List, which supported Clinton during her 2008 bid for the Democratic nomination. "We do not know if Hillary is going to run — but we're hopeful that she may."

So intense is the early interest in Clinton's potential candidacy that even her most benign public appearances since leaving her job as secretary of state are scrutinized for signals of her intentions. The runner-up in a bitter, drawn-out primary battle versus Barack Obama in 2008, Clinton's personal approval numbers have never been higher following her stint as the country's top diplomat.

To that end, a new national poll released separately on Thursday suggested that Clinton is the overwhelming favorite of Democrats in 2016. Sixty-five percent of Democrats said in a Quinnipiac University poll conducted at the end of last month that they would vote for Clinton in a primary; 13 percent would prefer Biden, while all other contenders register less than 5 percent.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

Former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton makes remarks after being honored with a Distinguished Leadership Award from the Atlantic Council in Washington, May 1, 2013.

"This is a wide open race if Sec. Clinton doesn't decide to do this," Schricok said, explaining that the EMILY's List campaign was not focused on any one particular candidate. She challenged pollsters to include other Democratic women among the field of candidates they test.

Among those candidates floated on Thursday: Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, Washington Gov. Christine Gregoire, Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius and Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano.

The essence of Thursday's new "Madam President" campaign involves preparing Americans to elect any of those women. EMILY's List said it would launch an online ad campaign with a six-figure price tag to target women on sites like Oprah.com, BlogHer and Feministing — and traditional outlets like the New York Times or New York Magazine.

The purpose is to lay the groundwork for any of these candidates, and in a targeted way. The campaign will also involve town hall meetings in key nominating states like Iowa and New Hampshire, which could boost or bust a candidate's presidential aspirations.

But the possibility of electing a woman seems all the more real given the polling data debuted at Thursday's event, which found that 86 percent of battleground state voters believe America is ready to elect a woman president, and 72 percent of those voters expect that milestone to be reached in the next presidential election.

Getting more into the brass tacks of politics, the poll found that a well-qualified, generic Democratic woman candidate might get a slight boost versus a male, Republican opponent — "not a gigantic difference, but it could be meaningful," according to pollster Lisa Grove.

The prospect is tantalizing for a group like EMILY's List, which has dedicated itself to electing Democratic women candidates for decades now. A more established and influential group in Washington, EMILY's List joins upstarts like the group "Ready for Hillary" in putting more pressure on the former New York senator and first lady to take the plunge — again — in 2016.

"We're still in a country that has never done this," Schriock said. "So I feel the 'Madam President' campaign is really one to ignite this national conversation about how it's going to be beneficial to all Americans to see a woman in the White House."

This story was originally published on Thu May 2, 2013 10:35 AM EDT

It takes two to make an agenda go right… Partisan gridlock is the norm during divided government… Polls: Boston bombings haven’t significantly impacted the immigration debate… Updated cabinet shuffle: Pritzker to Commerce, Froman to USTR… Under Pressure: Emily’s List unveils national campaign “to put a woman in the White House” (hint, hint, Hillary)… Tapping the brakes on the ’16 Cruz speculation… And Buzzfeed’s bomshell on Terry McAuliffe. 

J. Scott Applewhite / AP

Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, D-W.Va., left, and Sen. Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., arrive at a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, April 10, 2013, to announce that they have reached a bipartisan deal on expanding background checks to more gun buyers.

*** It takes two: For all the questions and scrutiny President Obama has recently received when it comes to his stalled agenda -- especially on the topics of budget and guns -- it’s important to quote the immortal philosopher MC Rob Base: It takes two to make a thing go right. And Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), who partnered with Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) on the compromise background-check measure, admitted as much when explaining why that bipartisan gun-control amendment was defeated. "In the end it didn’t pass because we’re so politicized," Toomey told editors from Digital First Media in an interview published Wednesday by the Norristown Times Herald, per NBC’s Mike O’Brien. "There were some on my side who did not want to be seen helping the president do something he wanted to get done, just because the president wanted to do it," Toomey added. That also was the conclusion a recent New York Times/CBS poll: Americans largely retreat to their partisan camps, even if they overwhelmingly support background checks or a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. “Yes, I believe the Republicans should have voted for background checks,” a respondent told the New York Times. “But it’s like marriage. You stick with your wife no matter what, and you don’t just ditch your political party on one issue.”

*** Partisan gridlock is the norm during divided government: Of course, this is hardly something that’s new when it comes to American politics. As one of us wrote yesterday, partisan gridlock -- even on what would seem the simplest of issues -- is the norm, particularly in times of divided government. The exceptions have come when at least one party has had an incentive to compromise. Think Bill Clinton signing welfare reform into law before his re-election, or the tax cuts under Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush (who doesn't like tax cuts?), or maybe immigration reform this year. The exceptions have also come when it's an absolute necessity to compromise. Think the Social Security fix during the 1980s, the debt-ceiling deal in 2011, and the fiscal-cliff deal at the end of 2012. But that's about it under divided government. Conversely, the greatest legislative achievements have occurred when one party controls the White House and Congress -- usually by overwhelming numbers. In the 1930s, as Congress was passing Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal, Democrats held between 69 and 75 Senate seats, as well as 300-plus House seats. In 1965, during Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, Democrats controlled 68 Senate and 290-plus House seats.

*** Polls: Boston bombings haven’t significantly impacted the immigration debate: So will immigration reform be one of those historic exceptions to gridlock during divided government? We won’t find out for sure until later this summer, but two new polls show that the Boston bombings haven’t significantly impacted the debate. Per a national Quinnipiac survey, 70% of registered voters said that the bombings haven’t changed their opinion about whether there should be a path to citizenship for undocumented immigrants. And a separate Pew poll finds that nearly six-in-10 (58%) see the bombings as mostly a separate issue from the immigration debate. That said, the same Pew survey shows that Republicans (46%) are more likely to say that bombings should be a factor in the debate than Democrats (33%) or independents (34%).

*** Updated cabinet shuffle -- Pritzker to Commerce, Froman to USTR: NBC’s Peter Alexander confirms that President Obama will name friend and donor Penny Pritzker to run the Commerce Department and international economics adviser Mike Froman to be his U.S. trade representative. Obama will make this announcement at 10:15 am ET before he departs on his trip to Mexico and Latin America. On that trip, Obama and Mexico President Pena Nieto hold a press conference at 5:10 pm ET, and they have a working dinner at 8:15 pm ET. By the way, here is First Read’s updated look at the president’s second-term cabinet.

John Kerry at State (replaced Hillary Clinton)
Chuck Hagel at Defense (replaced Leon Panetta)
Jack Lew at Treasury (replaced Tim Geithner)
Sally Jewell at Interior (replaced Ken Salazar)
Sylvia Burwell at OMB (replaced acting director Jeffrey Zients)
Lisa Jackson at EPA (Gina McCarthy nominated)
Steven Chu at Energy (Ernest Moniz nominated)
Hilda Solis at Labor (Tom Perez nominated)
Ray LaHood at Transportation (Anthony Foxx nominated)
Commerce (N/A) (Pritzker nominated)
U.S. Trade Representative (Froman nominated)

And here are the cabinet secretaries who are remaining:
Janet Napolitano (DHS)
Arne Duncan (Education)
Tom Vilsack (Agriculture)
Eric Holder (Justice)
Kathleen Sebelius (HHS)
Shaun Donovan (HUD)
Eric Shinseki (Veterans Affairs)

*** Under Pressure: At 9:30 am ET, the Democratic abortion-rights group Emily’s List is holding an event in DC today to unveil its national campaign “to put a woman in the White House.” This campaign includes Emily’s List polling that shows battleground-state voters are ready for a female president; a six-figure digital buy to reach women on popular online sites; and a new “Madam President” video. And it all has an obvious message: Hillary Clinton -- hint, hint -- we really want you to run for president. And Emily’s List President Stephanie Schriock says as much in a CNN op-ed tied to today’s rollout. “So who will it be? There's one name on all our minds: Hillary Clinton. Voters across the country are excited about her possible run. But if she decides not to run, we still have a deep bench of incredible female leaders to choose from.” And that’s perhaps the best way to view all the Hillary-related activity, whether it’s Emily’s List or that Draft Hillary campaign. These folks are putting pressure (gently but obviously) on the former secretary of state to make a 2016 bid. And by the way, a new Quinnipiac poll shows Clinton blowing away the potential Democratic field. She gets 65% of Democratic voters, Vice President gets 13%, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo gets 4%. 

*** Tapping the brakes on the Cruz speculation: In other 2016 news, National Review’s Robert Costa yesterday wrote a piece noting that freshman Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) “is considering a presidential run, according to his friends and confidants.” But as our colleague Mike O’Brien has noted, you might want to tap on those 2016 brakes -- given the conservative competition Cruz would face, concerns by the GOP establishment, and the fact that he was born in Canada. While Costa reports that Cruz “isn’t worried that his birth certificate will be a problem,” we’re not so sure. Here’s what the Constitution says: “No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President.” Is a natural-born citizen someone who was born abroad (in Canada)? Is it someone who was born to just one parent who’s a citizen? Bottom line: It all comes down to how courts define “natural born.”

*** Buzzfeed on McAuliffe: Lastly, just after Terry McAuliffe released this warm and fuzzy TV ad showing him, among other things, in the delivery room when one of his children was born came this Buzzfeed bombshell: “McAuliffe also wrote about the birth of his children in his 2007 book What A Party, noting on one instance he left his wife at the hospital to attend a party for Washington Post reporter Lloyd Grove before the birth of his daughter Sarah.” Ouch. This has become the theme of the McAuliffe-Cuccinelli gubernatorial race in Virginia: Every day, there’s an issue that seems to hurt one of these candidates. For McAuliffe, this piece of news is hurtful, because it shows that he will have the difficult task of shaking the persona that he’s a DC-establishment operator -- something that might be easier to shake if he were running in a state without a ton of Beltway media living there.

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 Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

A bipartisan proposal to expand background checks for gun sales failed in part due to Republicans' desire to prevent President Barack Obama from winning a victory on a major policy initiative, the gun proposal's chief GOP proponent said Wednesday.

Sen. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., who crafted a proposal with Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to extend background checks to firearms purchased at gun shows and online, said the measure failed to win the 60 votes it needed to win passage due to Republican politics.

"In the end it didn’t pass because we’re so politicized," Toomey told editors from Digital First Media in an interview published Wednesday by the Norristown Times Herald.

"There were some on my side who did not want to be seen helping the president do something he wanted to get done, just because the president wanted to do it," Toomey added.

His comments suggest that his fellow Republicans' votes weren't governed so much by judgment of good policy so much as a desire to deprive Obama of a political and legislative victory.

It's a phenomenon to which the president himself alluded on Tuesday when speaking at a news conference about the parts of his agenda that have stalled in Congress.

"Their base thinks that compromise with me is somehow a betrayal. They’re worried about primaries," Obama said. "And I understand all that. And we're going to try to do everything we can to create a permission structure for them to be able to do what’s going to be best for the country. But it’s going to take some time."

The sentiment could infect other second term priorities of Obama's currently before Congress, like comprehensive immigration reform or a broader agreement with Republicans on taxes and entitlements.

This story was originally published on Wed May 1, 2013 3:37 PM EDT

Conservative firebrand Ted Cruz, the Texas senator whose service in office is just four months long, is considering a bid for the Republican presidential nomination in 2016, according to a report on Wednesday by National Review.

The Texas Republican has quickly won the fervent support of grassroots conservatives since his election last November by breaking with Senate convention to aggressively challenge Democrats – and some Republicans, too. Citing anonymous sources, the National Review article suggested Cruz might look to quickly capitalize on his newfound fame, and rally conservatives behind his candidacy.

But there are significant barriers to Cruz winning the GOP nod in 2016, let alone winning the White House. Here are a few of them:

Mark Wilson / Getty Images file photo

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas

Cruz would face tough conservative competition
While Cruz has charmed figures ranging from conservative bloggers to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, he could encounter a Republican primary field that would hardly cede the most conservative bloc within the GOP to Cruz. 

It’s easy to conceive of a series of Republican presidential hopefuls – Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (and possibly more) – vying for the same segment of the Republican primary vote as Cruz. Any one of those candidates will almost encounter difficulty in harnessing the political power of the Tea Party, a movement that has never been particularly well-known for acting in concert.

Fantasy vs. reality
If Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s bid for the Republican nomination in 2012 taught political observers anything, it’s that being a potential candidate is always easier to execute than being an actual candidate.

Conservatives, searching for an alternative to the establishment-backed favorite, Mitt Romney, practically begged Perry to make a late entry into the primary. They extolled his conservatism and the positive jobs situation in Texas, arguing that his record, combined with a top-notch team of consultants, would make Perry the new favorite for the GOP nomination.

Of course, things didn’t turn out that way. Perry withered under the national spotlight and the scrutiny of rival Republican candidates. Recent history is littered with examples of similar primary candidates, like Democratic hopeful Wesley Clark in 2004, and former Sen. Fred Thompson’s foray into the GOP primary of 2008. Their candidacies fizzled after having won broad acclaim at their outset.

Cruz would almost certainly face stiff opposition in a Republican primary that could expose any of his flaws as a politician. Wednesday’s National Review article cited Cruz’s experience as an award-winning debater, but his performances in those contests have never been filtered through the prism of rival campaigns or the national media.

The establishment would strike back
Cruz’s path to the GOP nomination would almost certainly rely on an outside strategy in which he courts conservative activists and rails against the party establishment in Washington. But would the D.C. establishment necessarily take that kind of criticism while sitting down?

In 2012, the GOP establishment quickly rallied around Romney, if only after it became apparent that there would be no other serious contenders for the presidency available. And when it seemed as though the more conservative Rick Santorum might emerge to dethrone Romney during the primaries, there were serious rumblings that GOP money men might scramble to find an alternative candidate who they regarded as more formidable versus President Barack Obama in the general election.

Given Cruz’s conservatism, it isn’t tough to imagine the GOP establishment rallying around a candidate perceived as more electable to if a Cruz candidacy  came too close to victory.

It doesn’t help Cruz that he’s forged few alliances during his short time in the nation’s capital. He most recently derided many of his congressional colleagues as “squishes,” and spoke publicly about internal Republican debates that were supposed to remain confidential. Cruz has worked with a few fellow conservatives, but two of them – Paul and Rubio – could end up being rival candidates for the GOP nomination in 2016.

Oh, Canada!
The National Review article acknowledges that Cruz advisers are prepared for a legal challenge to his eligibility to serve as president, reminiscent of the “birther” attacks conservatives had leveled against Obama for much of his first term. 

At issue is Cruz’s birthplace. He was born in Calgary, Canada, the son of a Cuban refugee father and a U.S. citizen mother. Having been born outside the continental U.S., he would have to address questions about whether he is a “natural born” U.S. citizen, which the Constitution requires of a prospective president.

But even if Cruz is able to offer up all the evidence in the world of his eligibility, it’s not tough to imagine Democratic candidates and super PACs relishing in the chance to give a Republican his comeuppance, and turn the “birther” phenomenon back against a GOP hopeful. 

He’s barely a blip in the polls right now
Cruz could certainly raise his national profile in the next few years, but the Texas senator hasn’t yet registered as a contender for the GOP nomination in any credible poll testing the 2016 field.

A Quinnipiac University poll at the beginning of last month found that Rubio was the slight, early favorite among Republican primary voters; 19 percent of them said they would favor the Florida senator as their nominee in 2016. And while other contenders like Paul, Walker, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell all registered some level of support, Cruz did not.

Cruz still faces the challenge of building his reputation outside of conservative, Washington-focused circles. But he still has plenty of upside, too; having been a figure on the national stage for such a short period of time, Cruz’s name ID among primary voters has virtually nowhere to go but up.

This story was originally published on Wed May 1, 2013 12:42 PM EDT

Battle lines are already drawn in Markey-Gomez race… Specter of Scott Brown hovers over the contest (and why that’s probably a good thing for Democrats)… Why Dems are favored to hold onto the MA SEN seat: Markey’s vote total (309,487) was almost DOUBLE the votes cast in the entire Republican contest (188,375)… Obama yesterday: My job isn’t to make Congress behave… POTUS on health-care implementation: It’s already taken place for 85%-90% of Americans… Newtown victim confronts Ayotte at NH town hall… And the McDonnell-Star Scientific story isn’t helpful to Cuccinelli.

*** Battle lines are drawn in Massachusetts: Well, we now have the match-up for the June 25 general election to fill the U.S. Senate seat that John Kerry vacated to become secretary of state. In the Democratic primary last night, Congressman Ed Markey easily defeated fellow Congressman Stephen Lynch, 57%-43%. And in the GOP race, Navy SEAL-turned-businessman Gabriel Gomez triumphed over former U.S. Attorney Michael Sullivan, 51%-36%; state Rep. Dan Winslow got 13%. The battle lines in the Markey-vs.-Gomez contest are already drawn. Markey is out to associate Gomez -- who has called himself “an independent voice” and “a new kind of Republican” -- with the GOP and the Tea Party. "This campaign is about standing up to the special interests and the extreme Tea Party Republicans who want to stop progress and send our country in the wrong direction,” Markey said last night. Senate Majority PAC, a Democratic Super PAC, has labeled Gomez “Mitt Romney Jr.” (because of his career in private equity and because of the former Romney staffers working for him).

*** Specter of Scott Brown hovers over the race (and that’s probably a good thing for Democrats): Meanwhile, Gomez is going after Markey for his 37 years in Washington. "I want to take you back in time. The year was 1976; 37 years ago. Gerald Ford was president. Al Gore had not yet invented the Internet… That was a lifetime ago. Me, I was just playing little league baseball. And that was when Ed Markey first got elected to Congress," the Republican said last night, per NBC’s Andrew Rafferty. (The National Republican Senatorial Committee even has a web video on “Ed Markey’s Worst Hits from the ‘70s, ‘80s, ‘90s, and Today.”) For Democrats, the specter of Scott Brown -- who won the special Senate election in Massachusetts in 2010 -- is hovering over this race. But don’t forget that Brown’s victory was a perfect-storm event: It took place at the height of unpopularity over the health-care legislation moving through Congress, the unemployment rate was near 10%, and no one in Massachusetts Democratic Party circles saw Brown’s victory coming. Three years later, none of those factors have that same intensity, including the fact that Democrats won’t be taking the race for granted.

Steven Senne / AP

Republican candidate for the Senate Gabriel Gomez gives a thumbs up as he takes to the stage next to his daughter Olivia, 13, left, before addressing an audience with a victory speech at a watch party, in Cohasset, Mass., Tuesday, April 30, 2013.

*** Numbers to explain why Gomez is the underdog in this blue state: Still, here’s a little more perspective for the June 25 general election: Markey’s vote total (309,487) was almost DOUBLE the votes cast in the entire Republican contest (188,375). Heck, Lynch by himself got more votes (229,594) than the entire GOP field combined (188,375). By the way, MSNBC’s “Daily Rundown” today has interviews with both Markey and Gomez.

*** Obama: My job isn’t to make Congress behave: At his White House press conference yesterday, President Obama received questions on a number of topics -- Syria, the Guantanamo Bay detainees, the Boston bombing, and even the NBA’s Jason Collins announcing he’s gay. But to us, what stood out were the president’s comments blaming Congress at almost every turn, no matter the topic. From guns to GITMO, to health care and of course the sequester and the budget. “You seem to suggest that somehow these folks over there have no responsibilities, and that my job is to somehow get them to behave,” he said. “That’s their job. They’re elected -- members of Congress are elected in order to do what’s right for their constituencies and for the American people.” He went on to say, “The only way the problem does get fixed is if both parties sit down and they say:  How are we going to make sure that we're reducing our deficit sensibly?” And there was this: “There are common-sense solutions to our problems right now. I cannot force Republicans to embrace those common-sense solutions. I can urge them to. I can put pressure on them. I can rally the American people around those common-sense solutions. But ultimately, they, themselves, are going to have to say, we want to do the right thing.” It’s not new that the president is frustrated by Congress. The question is whether voters are in such agreement with him that they get a throw-the-bums-out mentality.

*** POTUS on health care: Implementation of the health-law has already taken place for most Americans: The other interesting answer Obama gave yesterday was on health care. Republicans have done a very good job of arguing that implementing the new health-care law is so big, so complicated. And retiring Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus only gave them more fodder when he called the implementation a potential “train wreck.” But the president tried to knock that perception down yesterday. “For the 85% to 90% of Americans who already have health insurance, this thing has already happened.  And their only impact is that their insurance is stronger, better, more secure than it was before -- full stop.  That’s it. They don’t have to worry about anything else.” He added, “So all the implementation issues that are coming up are implementation issues related to that small group of people, 10 to 15 percent of Americans -- now, it’s still 30 million Americans, but a relatively narrow group -- who don’t have health insurance right now.” Until Oct. 1 (the day enrollment for health care begins), the White House and Republicans are going to be battling over trying to define the implementation. Republicans are essentially using the same playbook from 2010, but instead of attacking health care for the number of pages that are in the bill, they will attempt to stoke fear by attacking the complexities of the system. The question is whether the White House has learned their lesson from 2010.

*** Newtown victim confronts Ayotte at town hall: The town halls are back -- this time on the issue of guns and gun control. NBC’s Kasie Hunt reports on Sen. Kelly Ayotte’s town hall yesterday in New Hampshire: “Bringing the national gun debate to a tiny New England town on Tuesday, the daughter of the slain principal of Sandy Hook Elementary confronted Sen. Kelly Ayotte at the lawmaker’s first town hall meeting since she voted against expanded background checks on all commercial gun sales… ‘You had mentioned that day the burden on owners of gun stores that the expanded background checks would harm. I am just wondering why the burden of my mother being gunned down in the halls of her elementary school isn't more important than that,’ said Lafferty, whose mother Dawn Hochsprung was gunned down by Newtown shooter Adam Lanza.” While some might dismiss these town halls as nothing but activists from the outside taking over -- tell that to the Democrats in 2009 who were arguing the same thing. Grass-tops can start a real grassroots fire.

*** McDonnell-Star Scientific story isn’t helpful to Cuccinelli: Also yesterday, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R) “denied any wrongdoing in his business dealings with a family friend and donor, saying Tuesday that an FBI probe into that relationship does not impair his ability to serve as governor,” NBC’s Mike O’Brien writes. “I think it’s important for the people of Virginia to know nothing has been done with regard to my relationship with [Jonnie] Williams or his company, Star Scientific, to give any kind of special benefits to him or his company or, frankly, any other person or any other company during the time that I’ve been governor,” McDonnell said on Washington’s WTOP radio. And on the allegation that Williams paid the $15,000 catering bill for the wedding of McDonnell’s daughter: “I made the determination -- and I believe it was correct -- that it was a gift to my daughter, and therefore under the current laws it did not need to be disclosed.” Folks, this isn’t good news for GOP gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli -- due to his own ties to Star Scientific and the fact that this McDonnell/Star Scientific story isn’t going away anytime soon.

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 Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

This story was originally published on Wed May 1, 2013 9:11 AM EDT

Frank Thorp / NBC News

Erica Lafferty, daughter of Sandyh Hook Elementary School victim Dawn Hochsprung, attends a town hall meeting with Senator Kelly Ayotte in Warren, N.H., on Tuesday.

WARREN, N.H. – Bringing the national gun debate to a tiny New England town on Tuesday, the daughter of the slain principal of Sandy Hook Elementary confronted Sen. Kelly Ayotte at the lawmaker’s first town hall meeting since she voted against expanded background checks on all commercial gun sales.

Erica Lafferty, who first met with the Republican senator in Washington earlier this month after she opposed the compromise negotiated by Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., was visibly angry as she spoke into the microphone at the meeting, which drew more than 100 people who came to condemn or support Ayotte’s vote.

"You had mentioned that day the burden on owners of gun stores that the expanded background checks would harm. I am just wondering why the burden of my mother being gunned down in the halls of her elementary school isn't more important than that," said Lafferty, whose mother Dawn Hochsprung was gunned down by Newtown shooter Adam Lanza.

Ayotte responded at the Warren, N.H., meeting: "Erica, I, certainly let me just say -- I'm obviously so sorry."

"And, um, I think that ultimately when we look at what happened in Sandy Hook, I understand that's what drove this whole discussion -- all of us want to make sure that doesn't happen again," Ayotte said.

More tension followed at a larger event in Tilton, N.H., later in the day.

"Let the senator finish please!" said the moderator at the Tilton event as gun control advocates shouted from the crowd and waved signs which said "demand action to end gun violence," from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's gun control advocacy group.

Ayotte is one of a handful of senators -- others include Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., Dean Heller, R-Nev., Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., and Max Baucus, D-Mont. -- who are facing withering criticism from both sides of the debate.

Gun control proponents want the Senate to reconsider new gun laws, and pro-gun rights groups want the issue kept off the table. And they’re using ads, lobbying, and organizing at events like Ayotte’s town halls to get their points across.

Keeping center stage are the Newtown families, many of whom were on Capitol Hill for the failed gun vote, who have pledged to continue the fight for new regulations on firearms.

The senator's staff were prepared for the onslaught. Ayotte defended her vote at the top of her remarks in both towns, pointing to her background as a prosecutor. “Where we are right now, my focus has been on wanting to improve our current background check system,” she said. “Frankly, we have fallen down on actually prosecuting gun crimes and violations of our current background check system.”

She said that addressing mental health and keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill were important going forward.

Outside groups are focusing on Ayotte and others from swing states where polls show background checks are popular. From the TV and radio ads to these small events, both sides are mobilizing like it's a political campaign --  Bloomberg's group circulated printed signs reading "#ShameOnYou" at both town meetings, while Ayotte supporters held the kind of mass-hand-drawn signs often spotted at presidential events.

Poll data is also a focus -- and a point of contention. Some automated polls, which NBC News does not rely on, have shown surveys claiming dropping numbers for people who voted against expanding background checks.

But in the Granite State, Ayotte's supporters are pointing to a recent survey from the University of New Hampshire that shows just the opposite: high approval ratings in the wake of the vote.

Some Republican defenders in the state say that the controversy isn't real and say it won't matter in 2016, when Ayotte is up for reelection to the Senate.

"To the extent it's a controversial issue it's a manufactured one," said Fergus Cullen, a former chairman of the state Republican Party.

There's evidence to support the claim that some groups are using the issue to raise their profiles. In a yard nearby the Warren event, a local resident had placed a large, staked lawn sign with the handwritten message, "Thank You Senator Ayotte." Atop one corner was the Tea Party's preferred flag, the yellow snake with the words "Don't Tread On Me."

But others say it was a difficult decision that could have repercussions down the road.

"I think it was a tough vote. And it was a principled vote," said Jim Merrill, a longtime New Hampshire Republican strategist who worked on Mitt Romney's presidential campaign. "And I think she understood that there would be some blowback for it. Let's just remember it wasn't just Republicans who voted against it."

Ayotte is clearly feeling the pressure, refusing to answer questions from national reporters at the meetings. Aides working on the gun issue on Capitol Hill say she's made it clear that she doesn't want to vote on it again any time soon.

And the atmosphere back home was a big change from Ayotte's typical town meetings -- generally staid affairs that begin with a PowerPoint presentation on the budget. (She does a lot of them, as she's pledged to hold a town hall in each New Hampshire county.)

She stuck with the PowerPoint at Tuesday's meetings, but this time, the opening slides had statistics defending her gun vote.

Alex Wong / Getty Images

Members of Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America enter the office of Sen. Kelly Ayotte on April 17 in Washington, D.C.

At town halls, Ayotte typically receives notecards with the name of each questioner and their pre-submitted topic of interest. A selected moderator chooses and reads them. This time, though, that caused a stir. Right before Erica Lafferty spoke in Warren, Eric Knuffke, of Wentworth, N.H., stood and demanded to be allowed a question.

"You can't deny people the right to speak because they haven't filled out a card. I have a question," Knuffke shouted. Supporters of Ayotte shouted back at him.

As Knuffke yelled, Lafferty was sitting in the front row with her hand raised.

"Let Erica speak," said one attendee. "There's a Sandy Hook survivor here," said another.

She had submitted a question in the pile, and Ayotte made sure to let her speak. Lafferty thanked Ayotte for meeting with her the day after senators took the vote on the Manchin-Toomey before challenging her for her vote. After her exchange with Ayotte, Lafferty stood and stormed out of the town hall.

Asked afterward why she had done so, Lafferty said: "I had had enough." 

 NBC's Frank Thorp contributed to this report. 

This story was originally published on Tue Apr 30, 2013 4:05 PM EDT

President Barack Obama cautioned Tuesday against rushing headlong to take action against Syria’s ruling regime, cautioning that his administration must gather more evidence before involving itself in that country’s civil war.

The president said that while evidence suggested that chemical weapons were used in Syria – thereby crossing the “red line” Obama had established in the Syrian conflict – more details were needed, namely about who used those weapons, and when.

Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

President Barack Obama arrives to answers questions during his new conference in the Brady Press Briefing Room of the White House on Tuesday, April 30, 2013.

“When I am making decisions about America’s national security and the potential for taking additional action in response to chemical weapons use, I’ve got to make sure I’ve got the facts,” Obama said at his first press conference in two months.

"And if we end up rushing to judgment without hard, effective evidence, then we can find ourselves in a position where we can't mobilize the international community to support what we do."

The situation in Syria and other issues of national security – a hunger strike at the terrorist detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and the government's response to the terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon earlier this month – have dominated much of the president's agenda over the past month. 

The hunger strike – the military said on Monday that 100 of 166 detainees had participated in the strike protesting conditions at Guantanamo Bay – prompted the president to renew his call for closing the prison. While the president signed an order early in his first term to shutter the facility, lawmakers in both parties have stymied Obama's efforts to achieve that goal. 

"I continue to believe that we’ve got to close Guantanamo. I think it is critical for us to understand that Guantanamo is not necessary to keep America safe," Obama said. "It is expensive, it is inefficient, it hurts us in terms of our international standing, it lessens cooperation in terms of our allies in counterterrorism efforts, it is a recruitment tool for extremists. It needs to be closed."

Moreover, the president pledged to "go back at" the issue, adding that his administration was reviewing ways to achieve its goal of closing the prison, perhaps by returning to Congress for permission. 

The theme of international cooperation, though, recurred throughout Obama's remarks about these tricky foreign policy issues.

The president, for instance, stressed the need for the United States to act in concert with international allies in response to the situation in Syria, and said the U.S. and its partners were already “deeply invested” in trying to find a solution to the situation in Syria.

But Obama was reluctant to specify what actions his administration might take. “By ‘game-changer’ I mean that we would have to rethink the range of options that are available to us,” he said.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers has expressed reluctance to making a U.S. military incursion into Syria, though more hawkish Republicans have called for targeted strikes to help cripple parts of the Syrian military and assist rebels against the Assad regime.

Obama also said he'd worked with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the situation in Syria, but also the intelligence response to the April 15 bombings at the Boston Marathon.

Amid questions about whether the government failed to heed Russian intelligence warnings about the radicalization of the suspects in the bombing, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper ordered a review on Tuesday into the U.S. government's handling of intelligence in the case. 

"When an event like this happens, we want to go back and review every step that was taken," the president explained. "We want to leave no stone unturned. We want to see if, in fact, there's additional protocols and procedures that could be put in place that would further improve and enhance our ability to detect a potential attack."

Slideshow: Syria uprising

Khalil Ashawi / Reuters

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

Launch slideshow

This story was originally published on Tue Apr 30, 2013 10:54 AM EDT

Measuring the first 100 days of Obama’s second term… The president held a news conference at 10:15 am ET… An extraordinary last 12 months when it comes to gay rights… It’s Primary Day in Massachusetts’ special Senate race; polls close at 8:00 pm ET…  Sanford and Colbert Busch took off their gloves in last night’s debate… Jessica Taylor on new Dem ad hitting Sanford over his affair… NYT/CBS poll: 62% oppose intervention in Syria… And FBI examining Bob McDonnell’s relationship with donor?

Jacquelyn Martin / AP

President Barack Obama gestures as he announces he will nominate Charlotte, N.C. Mayor Anthony Foxx to succeed Ray LaHood as Transportation Secretary, Monday, April 29, 2013, in the East Room of the White House.

*** Measuring the first 100 days of Obama’s second term: You might not have been keeping track, but we’ve now reached the 100-day mark in President Obama’s second term. And possibly to mark the occasion, the president held a news conference at 10:15 am ET. Bloomberg’s Al Hunt makes a smart point about how the first 100 days of the second have fared. “The 100-day mark is a measure for first-term presidents, not re-elected ones. Yet the end of April is a propitious moment for an early evaluation of how President Barack Obama and congressional Republicans are meeting the aspirations set out in January. The answer: Both are falling short.” Indeed, outside of immigration -- and make no mistake, that’s a pretty big exception -- politics seems about as divided as it did in 2011-2012.The budget talks are back to square one (and the sequester fight only seemed to exacerbate things). Passing gun control failed in the Senate. Achieving tax reform seems like a considerable reach. And to top it off, some Republicans are beginning to flex their muscles -- again -- when it comes to raising the debt ceiling. So the idea of the “fever” breaking that the president promised during the campaign has yet to come to fruition. Of course, presidencies (and especially second terms) aren’t defined by the first 100 days. But remember, unlike first terms, second terms (at least domestically) have a shorter shelf life.

*** An extraordinary last 12 months for gay rights: What’s remarkable -- politically -- about NBA basketball player Jason Collins’ announcement that he is gay is that caps an extraordinary 12 months when it comes to the gay rights movement and gay marriage specifically. As NBC’s Chris Donovan has pointed out, just think of what’s happened in the past year:

-- On “Meet the Press,” Vice President Biden announces he’s “comfortable” with gay marriage (May 6, 2012)
-- President Obama then comes out in support of it (May 9, 2012)
-- Obama’s second inaugural address contains this line: “Our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated
like anyone else under the law” (Jan. 20, 2013)
-- Numerous other politicians announce their support before and after the Supreme Court oral arguments on Prop. 8 and DOMA
-- Supreme Court hears the oral arguments in Prop. 8 and DOMA (March 26-27, 2013)
-- Rhode Island is on track to become 10th state approving gay marriage (April 2013)
-- Jason Collins becomes the first male athlete in a major sport to announce he’s gay (April 29, 2013)

*** Three other points on Collins: We have three other points to make regarding the Jason Collins news. First, in the 20^th Century, sports often led the way on integration (think Jackie Robinson in baseball, African-American professional football players like Jim Brown in the 1950s and 1960s). But in this case, in the 21^st Century, sports was a lagging indicator. Indeed, 53% of the country in our most recent NBC/WSJ poll said they supported gay marriage before the first male athlete in a major sport announced he was gay. Second, don’t underestimate the impact that Obama’s support for gay marriage had on an African-American athlete coming out. (The president called Collins yesterday.) And third, given that Collins is now a 34-year-old journeyman center, there was a chance – before yesterday – that another team might NOT have signed him to play NBA basketball next year. Now? There will be a tremendous amount of pressure (applied by David Stern personally?) for NBA teams to sign him.

*** Primary Day in Massachusetts: If it’s a Tuesday, it means that some folks are out there casting ballots. And today, those folks are the voters in Massachusetts who are choosing party nominees to fill the U.S. Senate seat that John Kerry vacated to become secretary of state. In the special Democratic primary, Congressmen Ed Markey and Stephen Lynch are battling it out, and Markey remains the favorite. (The only question is how big a favorite is he.) Meanwhile, the Republican side features three candidates: Navy SEAL-turned-businessman Gabriel Gomez, former U.S. Attorney (and former acting ATF director) Mike Sullivan, and state Rep. Dan Winslow. Given his deep pockets, Gomez might give Republicans their best chance to compete in the June 25 general election. But also don’t forget that Gomez was the spokesman for the organization that accused Obama of politicizing the killing of Osama bin Laden. Polls close at 8:00 pm ET.

*** Sanford and Colbert Busch take off their gloves: Speaking of special elections, Republican Mark Sanford and Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch certainly made their only debate count last night in Charleston, SC. Colbert Busch whacked her GOP opponent for misusing taxpayer dollars, especially when traveling to Argentina. “When we’re looking at fiscal responsibility, it doesn’t mean you take the money we saved and leave the country for a personal purpose,” she said, per MSNBC’s Jessica Taylor. Sanford fought back by tying her to House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and national Democrats. “It’s not believable to me that someone gives you a million dollars and not expect something in return,” he said. But Colbert Busch later responded, "No one tells me what to do, except the people of South Carolina's 1st Congressional District." Politico has more on the debate, which it said “laid bare their ideological differences on a range of issues. Sanford said he opposed the gun control bill that failed in the Senate recently calling for expanded background checks; Colbert said she backed it despite her belief in 2nd Amendment rights. Sanford said he would vote against the comprehensive immigration reform plan being pushed by the ‘Gang of Eight’; Colbert Busch favors it.”

*** New Dem ad explicitly hits Sanford over affair: Also in the Sanford-vs.-Colbert Busch race, Jessica Taylor reports on a new Democratic Super PAC TV ad hitting Sanford. The advertisement features a female GOP voter from the district slamming the former governor for his disappearance from the state while in office and the disclosure that he was having an affair with an Argentinian woman. “I used to be for Mark Sanford -- but not anymore,” says Jennifer Stark of Mount Pleasant, S.C. “He skipped town to be with his mistress on Father’s Day. Sanford even asked his wife for permission to have the affair, and wasted our taxpayer dollars on himself.” “I’m a Republican. But Mark Sanford just doesn’t share our values,” says Stark.

*** Six in 10 oppose U.S. intervention in Syria: Want another reason why the Obama administration is walking very carefully when it comes to Syria? According to a brand-new New York Times/CBS poll, 62% of Americans say the United States DOES NOT have a responsibility to do something about the fighting in Syria.

*** FBI examining Bob McDonnell’s relationship with donor? Finally, this isn’t good news for the current GOP governor of Virginia, who just happens to be a 2016 presidential possibility.  “The FBI has begun examining the relationship between Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell and his wife Maureen and the chief executive of a nutritional supplements manufacturer that is the subject of a federal investigation, two people with knowledge of the review said Monday,” the AP writes. “Federal authorities began questioning people close to the McDonnells as an outgrowth of a securities probe of Virginia-based Star Scientific Inc., said the two people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because their roles in the case preclude them from speaking publicly. They said FBI agents have asked questions about gifts the McDonnells have received from company CEO Jonnie Williams and whether the Republican governor or his administration aided the company in return.”

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 Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower

Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford meets the Democrat looking to end his bid for political redemption, Elizabeth Colbert Busch, in a high-profile debate Monday evening, just one week before the May 7 special election that will send one of them to Congress.

Colbert Busch and Sanford will share a stage for their first and only debate ahead of next Tuesday's special election to fill the vacancy that occurred following then-Rep. Tim Scott's, R, appointment to the U.S. Senate earlier this year.

Mic Smith / AP

Former South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford speaks with reporters at Hay Tire & Automotive in Mount Pleasant, S.C., on Monday, April 22, 2013.

The campaign has attracted an intense amount of coverage in the national media because of the two candidates involved. Sanford, the former governor whose term ended in ignominy following an extramarital affair that resulted in his divorce and an ethics rebuke, is seeking a chance at political redemption. Standing in his way is Colbert Busch, the Clemson University administrator whose candidacy has been aided by the fame of her brother — political satirist Stephen Colbert of Comedy Central. 

While Sanford entered the showdown with an upper hand over Colbert Busch in this traditionally Republican district, the race was thrown into turmoil in recent weeks by Jenny Sanford, the former governor's ex-wife. She filed court documents accusing Sanford of trespassing on her property, thereby reviving some of the ugly, public 2009 divorce that ended the former two-term governor's possible aspirations to run for president. 

In the days following that revelation, Democrats and their allies went on the attack with television ads attacking Sanford. Republicans, meanwhile, retreated, forcing Sanford to fend for himself in the campaign when the National Republican Congressional Committee announced it would not run ads in the race. (The most recent poll, which was conducted by automated phone interviews, suggested Colbert Busch had the advantage over Sanford; NBC News does not officially recognize those polls.) Sanford has responded to his perceived slide by casting Colbert Busch as a handmaiden of Democrats' relatively unpopular leaders in Washington. Sanford went so far as to debate a cardboard cutout of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., to illustrate his point.

Still, Monday's debate might offer the candidates their best chance to affect the trajectory of the race before voters head to the poll. Perhaps in a reflection of which way things are going, Sanford's demanded more debates — that is, more opportunities to ding Colbert Busch in public. The showdown will be broadcast on C-SPAN.

This story was originally published on Mon Apr 29, 2013 3:44 PM EDT

Calling him "one of the most effective mayors" in his city's history, President Barack Obama formally nominated Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx, D, as his next secretary of transportation.

Obama named Foxx, a 41-year-old first-term mayor, as his successor to outgoing Secretary Ray LaHood, a former Republican congressman who joined the administration in 2009. Foxx joins Attorney General Eric Holder as one of two African-American members of the president's second-term status.

Obama cited Foxx's experience in spearheading various transportation projects — including a streetcar initiative and airport expansion — as a chief reason for nominating the Charlotte mayor. (Foxx was mayor during the Democratic National Convention last August in downtown Charlotte.)

"All of that has not only create new jobs, it's helped Charlotte become more attractive to business," the president said in introducing Foxx.

For his part, Foxx pledged to work with lawmakers in both parties during his confirmation process, and said there's "no such thing as a Democratic or Republican" transportation project.

Obama also paid tribute to LaHood in Monday's short ceremony, calling him maybe "the best secretary of transportation the nation's ever had."

And LaHood returned the favor, saying to the president: "If you're not the best person I've ever worked for, you're at the top of the list."

This story was originally published on Mon Apr 29, 2013 2:27 PM EDT

Washington taps the brakes on Syria… On implementing Obamacare… The FAA sequester fix -- Washington at its worst… Obama to nominate Anthony Foxx to be Transportation secretary… Sanford and Colbert Busch to debate tonight at 7:00 pm ET in South Carolina… And MA SEN primaries take place tomorrow.

George Ourfalian / Reuters

A general view shows damaged buildings in the old city of Aleppo April 29, 2013.

*** Tapping the brakes on Syria: Days after the Obama administration confirmed that Syria might have crossed President Obama’s red line -- using chemical weapons against its own people -- there’s collective agreement that something needs to be done. But there also seems to be collective agreement that the something needs to be small and limited, at least for now. On “Meet the Press” yesterday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), one of Washington’s biggest hawks, called for arming the rebels in Syria, helping refugees, and securing the stockpiles of chemical weapons. But it also was notable what he DIDN’T CALL FOR. “[T]he worst thing the United States could do right now is put boots on the ground on Syria. That would turn the people against us,” he said. So as Obama seems to be trying to buy time, Washington appears to be giving him that. And here’s one of the reasons why: The rebels, as the New York Times wrote on Sunday, have ties to Al Qaeda. It’s a very tricky situation…

*** Implementing Obamacare: When it comes to implementing the new federal health-care law, Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus called it a “train wreck.” New York Times columnist David Brooks, citing supporters of the law, said that “things are going worse than expected.” And we have spoken with Democrats who are worried, too. But as Jon Cohn writes in the New Republic, none of this should be surprising: This is a complex process -- for the government, the states, and consumers. Yet among the Obama administration’s top concerns is ensuring that enough young men and women obtain insurance. (If the healthy uninsured 18 to 35 year olds don't sign up, the numbers don't work for anyone, for the government, for health insurance companies and for those of us who pay premiums.) And that was largely the pitch the president made at Planned Parenthood’s conference in DC last Friday. “So I’m here to also ask for your help, because we need to get the word out,” he said. “We need you to tell your patients, your friends, your neighbors, your family members what the health care law means for them. Make sure they know that if they don’t have health insurance, they’ll be able to sign up for quality, affordable insurance starting this fall in an online marketplace where private insurers will compete for their business. Make sure that they know that there are plans out there right now that cover the cost of contraceptive and preventive care free of charge.”

*** Washington at its worst: Also on Friday, Congress passed its legislative fix to prevent the air-traffic-controller furloughs under the so-called sequester. And in one single episode, it highlighted all of Washington’s problems. You had a divided and often-dysfunctional Congress -- which originally passed the sequester -- take extraordinary action ONLY after the airlines and business travelers complained about the flight delays. But the Congress didn’t do anything about the other budget cuts (to things like Head Start or the Meals on Wheels programs). Then you had a White House -- which signed the sequester into law -- give up its greatest piece of leverage in this debate and cave in its demand for a complete fix that includes additional tax revenue. Bottom line: This was Washington at its worst. And what’s an even bigger takeaway from the whole FAA fix? We are a long way away from a real budget fix. The idea of a grand bargain is as elusive today as it's ever been.

*** Obama nominates Foxx to head Transportation Department: As NBC has reported, President Obama today will nominate Charlotte Mayor Anthony Foxx to be his second-term Transportation secretary, replacing Ray LaHood. The White House event will take place at 2:10 pm ET. Meanwhile, the New York Times adds that the president “also appeared close to nominating Penny Pritzker, a hotel magnate, longtime friend and fund-raiser, as the next commerce secretary, and Michael Froman, his international economics adviser, as the United States trade representative, although neither nomination was scheduled to be announced on Monday.” So here is our updated look at Obama’s second-term cabinet:

John Kerry at State (replaced Hillary Clinton)
Chuck Hagel at Defense (replaced Leon Panetta)
Jack Lew at Treasury (replaced Tim Geithner)
Sally Jewell at Interior (replaced Ken Salazar)
Sylvia Burwell at OMB (replaced acting director Jeffrey Zients)
Lisa Jackson at EPA (Gina McCarthy nominated)
Steven Chu at Energy (Ernest Moniz nominated)
Hilda Solis at Labor (Tom Perez nominated)
Ray LaHood at Transportation (Anthony Fox nominated)
Commerce (N/A) (Pritzker appears to be the leading candidate)
U.S. Trade Representative (Froman appears to be the leading candidate)

And here are the cabinet secretaries who are remaining:

Janet Napolitano (DHS)
Arne Duncan (Education)
Tom Vilsack (Agriculture)
Eric Holder (Justice)
Kathleen Sebelius (HHS)
Eric Shinseki (Veterans Affairs)

*** Let’s get ready to rumble -- South Carolina style: A week before their general-election contest, Republican Mark Sanford and Democrat Elizabeth Colbert Busch will participate in their first debate. The AP: “The two meet Monday evening at The Citadel in a debate sponsored by the Patch news service, the South Carolina Radio Network and Charleston television station WCBD. The debate is being cablecast by C-SPAN. It's their first joint appearance in the campaign that started earlier when incumbent congressman Tim Scott was appointed to the state's vacant U.S. Senate seat.” The debate takes place at 7:00 pm ET.

*** Let’s get ready to rumble -- New England style: And the special Senate primaries take place tomorrow in Massachusetts. MSNBC’s Jessica Taylor recently examined the Democratic contest between Reps. Ed Markey and Stephen Lynch, especially in wake of the Boston Marathon bombing. And MSNBC’s Sarah B. Boxer looked at the Republican race featuring former U.S. Attorney Mike Sullivan, state Rep. Dan Winslow, and Navy SEAL-turned-businessman Gabriel Gomez.

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 Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower