With one of President Barack Obama’s key nominees on the verge of being confirmed by the Senate on Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid appeared to edge away Wednesday from an idea that some Democrats are calling for: enacting a change in Senate rules to stop filibusters which delay votes on Obama appointees.

During a debate on the Senate floor with Republican Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, Reid said, "I'm not saying we're going to change the rules" regarding the filibuster, but argued that the Senate must move faster to confirm Obama nominees.

He accused Republicans of “slow-walking” nominees and bogging them down by submitting hundreds and, in one case, a thousand written questions to the nominee before the confirmation vote could occur.

Alex Wong / Getty Images

Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid speaks after a weekly Senate Democratic caucus meeting May 21, 2013 on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC.

McConnell accused Reid of using the threat of a unilateral change in in Senate rules – the so-called “nuclear option” – to create “the majority’s own culture of intimation right here in the Senate.”

The roles were reversed back in 2005 when the Republican majority, including McConnell, threatened to use the “nuclear option” to stop Democratic filibusters, supported by Reid at the time, of President George W. Bush’s judicial nominees.

McConnell noted Wednesday that Republicans had agreed to an up-or-down vote on Obama’s nomination of Sri Srinivasan to serve on the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, with that vote to occur the Tuesday after the Senate returns from its one-week Memorial Day recess.

“Instead the majority leader chose to jam the minority,” McConnell complained, accusing the Democrats of “manufacturing a crisis to justify their heavy-handed behavior.”

Reid moved on Tuesday to limit debate on Srinivasan and have his confirmation vote Thursday.

McConnell called Srinivasan "a nominee we all agree on.... we like him" and argued that speeding up his nearly certain confirmation was Reid gratuitously using his power.

Srinivasan is crucial because so far in the four and a half years of his presidency, Obama has gotten no one confirmed to that court, which handles most legal challenges to regulations issued by the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory bodies and serves as a major stepping stone to the Supreme Court.

In March, Republicans blocked a confirmation vote on another Obama nominee to that court, Caitlin Halligan.

 “You have a majority on that court that is wreaking havoc with the country,” Reid said, adding that with further GOP delays perhaps the judges on that court will issue more opinions in the next couple of weeks favorable to the Republicans – as that court did in January when it ruled that Obama’s recess appointments to the National Labor Relations Board were unconstitutional since he had made them when there was no Senate recess.

Reid also reminisced Wednesday about the agreement that he and other Democrats had struck with Republicans in 2005 on confirming Bush’s judicial nominees, an agreement that was made under the threat of the Republicans using the nuclear option.

He said, “We agreed to put some people on the bench that we have regretted since then -- Janice Rogers Brown, Thomas Griffith, Brett Kavanaugh” – all of whom are judges now serving on the D.C. Circuit appeals court.

Awaiting Senate action after the Memorial Day recess are other nominees such as Thomas Perez to be labor secretary, Gina McCarthy to head the EPA, and five Obama nominees to serve on the National Labor Relations Board.

George Kohl, senior director for the Communications Workers of America, a labor union, said he didn’t interpret Reid’s comment Wednesday as him ruling out any future use of the nuclear option.

For the CWA, the NLRB nominees are crucial. “If they don’t get that (floor) vote in July, the Labor Board will cease to function on Aug. 27 when the chairman’s term expires. We think that’s a crisis for America.”

If McConnell doesn’t allow a vote on the NLRB nominees, “we think the rules (on ending debate) need to be changed” so the NLRB can protect workers’ right, Kohl said.

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 3:36 PM EDT

Lawmakers expressed both anger and bewilderment that IRS leaders had not told Congress sooner about indications that the tax agency had improperly singled out conservatives and Tea Party groups seeking tax-exempt status.

A highly anticipated hearing by the top investigative committee in the Republican-controlled House delivered on the drama that was expected. Lois Lerner, the IRS official in charge of the division accused of wrongdoing, invoked her Fifth Amendment right against testifying, and defiantly asserted her innocence.

"I have not done anything wrong. I have not broken any laws," she said. "I have not violated any IRS rules or regulations and I have not provided any false information to this or any other committee."

But her refusal to testify left the hearing on an uncertain note. Republicans only recessed the meeting – versus formally adjourning it – and threatened to re-call Lerner, whom they asserted had waived her Fifth Amendment privileges by making her brief statement.

"I am looking into the possibility of recalling her and insist she answer questions in light of a waiver,” said Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., the chairman of the committee.

But much of lawmakers' ire was trained on the IRS leadership for failing to disclose any indication of IRS wrongdoing to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, whose inquiry into the matter prompted an inspector general inquiry into targeting of conservative groups. Both Democrats and Republicans voiced outrage that Douglas Shulman, the commissioner of the IRS during much of the abuses, did not tell lawmakers that an internal IRS investigation had suggested improper action by the IRS to single out conservative groups.

"At that point, I didn’t have anything concrete," Shulman responded. "I didn’t have a full set of facts to come back to Congress or the committee with."

His answered angered Democrats as much as Republicans.

"If you didn’t know, you were derelict in your duty," said Issa.

Carolyn Kaster / AP

House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif. holds up a document as he speaks to IRS official Lois Lerner on Capitol Hill, Wednesday, May 22, 2013, during the committee's hearing to investigate the extra scrutiny IRS gave to Tea Party and other conservative groups that applied for tax-exempt status.

"You misled Congress. Make no question about it … When you learned there was a list, you did nothing," said Rep. Stephen Lynch, D-Mass., who raised the prospect of appointing a special prosecutor in his opening remarks. "You abdicated your responsibility and you allowed Congress to proceed under your prior information that was false, that was untrue."

And for the first time, the IRS inspector general who generated the report that laid out the explosive allegations, J. Russell George, came under scrutiny from lawmakers. Issa pressed George as to why his office hadn't told Congress about indications of targeting at an earlier point during the investigation.

"I think it would behoove all of us to make sure that accurate information is given to Congress so we don’t act precipitously," George responded in reference to his office's actions.

The tense exchanges followed a somewhat explosive opening to the hearing, in which Lerner refused to answer lawmakers’ questions. But she delivered a brief statement explaining her role at the IRS and denying any wrongdoing.

That statement angered committee conservatives, who said that Lerner had essentially offered testimony, and thus had waived her ability to invoke her constitutional right to not testify. Issa dismissed Lerner nonetheless, but warned that his panel might again seek her testimony in the future. Following her dismissal, Lerner’s role remained largely absent through the questioning of the other witnesses.

The scrutiny of the IRS witnesses was characteristic of a hearing that focused far more on the actions of the agency and the subsequent investigation than whether the IRS came under undue influence from the Obama administration to single out conservatives.

The one administration witness, Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin, denied that he had ever directed the targeting of conservative groups. "Absolutely not, congresswoman," he said in response to a question on that matter, one of the few questions he faced during the hearing.

While Republicans have insinuated for much of the last two weeks that the IRS abuses were part of a "culture of intimidation" within the Obama administration, that line of inquiry generally took a backseat during Wednesday's hearing. (By contrast, Republicans focused on finding ties to Obama much more during a hearing last Friday by the House Ways and Means Committee and a hearing Tuesday before the Senate Finance Committee.)

An exception to that came when Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, linked the Obama administration’s assertion that the IRS abuses were limited to rogue employees to its initial assertion following last year’s terror attack in Benghazi that it was the outgrowth of a spontaneous protest. (This assertion about Benghazi was eventually proved wrong, and has become another point of contention between the White House and congressional Republicans.)

Related Stories:

• Ex-Cincy IRS official doubts agency's explanation for Tea Party scandal

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 10:41 AM EDT

The White House finds itself in a public relations mess… Even as it argues that the press is seeing the trees (like the IG report) but missing the forest (Obama had no role in IRS controversy)… Issa’s committee knew about the IG report, too?... Senate Judiciary Committee clears immigration bill, which now moves to the Senate floor… NYT: The number of drone strikes declines… WaPo on Petraeus’ role in the Benghazi talking points… Florida shooting connected to Boston bombing… Will Weiner get his second chance?... And Garcetti wins LA mayoral run-off.

Jacquelyn Martin / AP

President Barack Obama meets with Myanmar's President Thein Sein in the Oval Office of the White House, Monday, May 20, 2013.

*** The White House’s public relations mess: While there is still no evidence connecting the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups directly to the White House or to the president personally, or to his re-election campaign, it doesn’t mean the White House doesn’t have a PR problem on its hands. And this PR mess is largely self-inflicted. For starters, its explanation about when it learned of the inspector general’s IRS investigation keeps changing. “Just a day after telling reporters that chief of staff Denis McDonough and other senior White House staff learned of the situation nearly a month ago, press secretary Jay Carney revealed Tuesday that White House officials had consulted with the Treasury Department on how to make the findings public,” Politico writes. Then we discover that the IRS official Lois Lerner plans to plead the 5^th Amendment at today’s House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Both developments make it SEEM like the White House or the administration has something to hide -- even if the evidence (so far) is that Team Obama wasn’t directly connected to this IRS story. And speaking of a PR mess, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney didn’t help things when he compared a question about HHS’s fundraising to questions about the president’s birth certificate. That’s the way a White House acting as if it’s in a bunker mentality responds to legitimate questions.

*** White House: Press is seeing the trees but missing the forest: All that said, the White House believes reporters are seeing the trees but missing the forest. According to an administration official, its P.R. priorities were 1) demonstrating that the president had NO role in this controversy and 2) demanding accountability and new hires immediately. And this official believes both of those priorities have been met. For the White House, all other questions -- including who knew about the IG report and when they knew it -- are secondary, and it has taken them time to get their facts straight. But that explanation also assumes that the White House’s story won’t continue to change. And that gets at the issue of a credibility problem. And right now, the White House press shop has a credibility problem with many reporters in that press room. And assuming they have nothing to hide, it’s a self-inflicted credibility problem.

*** Issa’s committee knew about the IG report, too? Speaking of the IG report, the inspector general who investigated the IRS’s targeting of conservative-sounding groups testified at the Senate Finance Committee yesterday that Rep. Darrell Issa’s House Oversight Committee also knew about the report back in 2012 and communicated with the IG’s office. So Democrats argue something along the lines of, “Issa’s committee knew about it, too, and didn’t say anything public!!!” But an Issa spokesman tells First Read, “The administration is trying to draw a false a parallel between its own responsibilities and an Oversight Committee that requested the IG audit. This includes a false characterization that the Committee voluntarily waited for [the IG’s office] to complete its investigation. In reality, the committee made extensive efforts to ask [the inspector general] if wrongdoing had been found but was rebuffed on multiple occasions. Administration officials drawing a false parallel have offered no evidence that they made a similar effort to learn all that they could about wrongdoing.” 

*** Senate Judiciary Committee clears immigration bill: Despite everything else happening (IRS, the Oklahoma disaster, etc.), the immigration train keeps moving forward. By a 13-5 vote, the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday approved the sweeping bipartisan immigration-reform legislation, which now heads to the Senate floor. Per NBC’s Carrie Dann, “Three Republicans -- Sens. Jeff Flake of Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Orrin Hatch of Utah -- joined the panel's 10 Democrats to vote in favor of the bill. Flake and Graham are both members of the bipartisan "Gang of Eight" that originally drafted the 844-page immigration legislation. Hatch's support was won after the Utah lawmaker secured changes to the bill's provisions for the hiring of high-skilled foreign workers.” But there also was some drama, Dann notes. “In an emotional moment shortly before final passage, committee chairman Patrick Leahy of Vermont announced that he would not call for a vote on an amendment that would have recognized the marriages of same-sex spouses in immigration law. Republicans in the bipartisan Gang of Eight said the LGBT measure would have broken apart the fragile coalition crafted by the bill's drafters.” The decision to pull the same-sex amendment only highlights the fact that Leahy wasn’t in charge of his own committee hearing; Chuck Schumer was.  

*** NYT: The number of drone strikes decline: A day before Obama’s speech on national security at the National Defense University, the New York Times reports that the number of drone strikes overseas has declined. “Strikes in Pakistan peaked in 2010 and have fallen sharply since then; their pace in Yemen has slowed to half of last year’s rate; and no strike has been reported in Somalia for more than a year.” We expect that the president will discuss the drone wars, as well the Guatanamo Bay prison. But it would also be a smart place for Obama to discuss and either defend, denounce, or explain the Justice Department tough actions against national-security leaks, which seem to have infringed on press freedoms. If he fails to use tomorrow’s speech to deal with the press’ growing anger about the targeting of individual journalists, it could be a missed opportunity.

*** On Petraeus’ role in the Benghazi talking points: We’ve told you that the fight over the Benghazi talking points seemed to be more bureaucratic politics than electoral politics. And this Washington Post article seems to further confirm that. “A close reading of recently released government e-mails that were sent during the editing process, and interviews with senior officials from several government agencies, reveal [former CIA head David] Petraeus’s early role and ambitions in going well beyond the committee’s request, apparently to produce a set of talking points favorable to his image and his agency. The information Petraeus ordered up when he returned to his Langley office that morning included far more than the minimalist version that [Rep.] Ruppersberger had requested. It included early classified intelligence assessments of who might be responsible for the attack and an account of prior CIA warnings — information that put Petraeus at odds with the State Department, the FBI and senior officials within his own agency.” 

*** Florida shooting connected to Boston bombing: Don’t be surprised if this story grabs a lot more attention later today. “An FBI agent was involved in a fatal shooting in Orlando early Wednesday that a local TV station says may have ties to the Boston Marathon bombings,” USA Today writes. “FBI officials have confirmed that a man died while one of its agents was "conducting official duties," the Orlando Sentinelreports, but would not elaborate. WESH-TV [an NBC affiliate] identifies the victim as 27-year-old Ibragim Todashev.” NBC’s Richard Esposito reports that the shooting IS connected to Boston bombing case. “It is connected in that the person shot is linked to Tsarnaev and has associates who are extremists overseas. They were interviewing him regarding his connections to Tsarnaev. He had been interviewed before. He started out cooperative. Flipped out. Went to attack agent. Then was shot.”

*** Will Weiner get his second chance? Anthony Weiner has released a slick two-minute video announcing his bid for New York mayor. "Look, I made some big mistakes, and I know I let a lot of people down,” he says in the video, which also features his wife Huma Abedin and young son. “But I've also learned some tough lessons. I'm running for mayor because I’ve been fighting for the middle class and those struggling my entire life. And I hope I get a second chance to work for you." Later in the video, wife Huma adds, “We love this city, and no one will work harder to make it better than Anthony.” While we still have our doubts that Weiner becomes NYC’s next mayor, his presence in the race likely means that front-runner Christine Quinn would face a run-off -- one in which she could struggle.

*** Garcetti to become LA’s next mayor: And in Los Angeles’ mayoral run-off, City Councilman Eric Garcetti defeated City Comptroller Wendy Greuel by eight percentage points, 54%-46%, succeeding outgoing Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The Los Angeles Times: “Garcetti will be the first elected Jewish mayor of the city. At 42, he will also be the youngest in more than a century. He is scheduled to take office July 1.” More: “At $33 million, the mayoral campaign was the most expensive in city history. The flood of money and advertising from those groups largely went toward tearing down the two contenders, alienating many Angelenos who hadn't already been left cold.”

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

Yuri Gripas / Reuters, file

Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin testifies before a Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs committee hearing on December 6, 2011. Wolin was the Treasury official who learned about the investigation into the IRS in 2012.

Capitol Hill readied Wednesday for perhaps the most explosive -- or at least dramatic -- of the three hearings into IRS abuses of conservative and Tea Party groups in the past week, with one of the key witnesses expected to invoke her constitutional right to remain silent.

The Republican-controlled House Oversight and Government Reform committee was set to convene its own hearing on the revelations that the tax-collecting agency had singled out conservative groups for additional scrutiny in their applications for nonprofit status. Though the panel will hear from two of the same witnesses who appeared at hearings of the House Ways and Means Committee last Friday and the Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday, two witnesses who have not yet appeared before Congress could make Wednesday’s hearing into the most eventful yet.

Those two witnesses are Neal Wolin, a deputy Treasury secretary, and Lois Lerner, who oversees the tax-exempt division within the IRS. Wolin was the Treasury official who learned about the investigation into the IRS in 2012; Lerner was the official who planted a question at an American Bar Association conference with the purpose of disclosing the IRS’s targeting of conservatives in public for the first time and who is in charge of the agency’s division in charge of overseeing tax-exempt status for such groups.

In perhaps an ominous precursor for the hearing, Lerner’s attorney said Tuesday that her client would invoke her Fifth Amendment rights against having to offer self-incriminating testimony. She will still appear, though, to voice that claim.

The oversight panel has been one of the most doggedly critical of the White House, providing Republicans with an ideal platform to ding President Barack Obama and his team. The committee, for example, hosted a hearing earlier this month featuring whistleblowers that helped breathe new life into Republicans’ questions about the administration’s handling of last year’s terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

The two other witnesses, former IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman and IRS Inspector General J. Russell George, featured Wednesday have appeared in previous congressional hearings.

Throughout these hearings, IRS officials have blamed “foolish mistakes” for the abuses at the IRS, but have denied that partisan motivations or influence from outside the agency fueled IRS officials’ targeting of conservative groups. That hasn’t stopped Republicans from insinuating otherwise; GOP lawmakers have spent much of the last two hearings probing whether the Obama administration had any role in directing the efforts to single out its ideological adversaries.

This story was originally published on Wed May 22, 2013 4:39 AM EDT

Anthony Weiner, whose career as a congressman collapsed after he posted sexually suggestive pictures of himself on Twitter, has announced that he’s running for mayor of New York City.

“I made some big mistakes and I know I let a lot of people down. But I've also learned some tough lessons,” the Democrat said in a video posted on his website late on Tuesday.

"I'm running for mayor because I've been fighting for the middle class and those struggling to make it my entire life," he added. “I hope I get a second chance to work for you."

The video, which features his son and wife Huma Abedin, an aide to former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, focused on his middle-class roots in Brooklyn. 

With this bold attempt at a comeback ahead of the primary in September, Weiner is hoping to erase the image of a tweeted crotch shot that precipitated his resignation. 

He at first claimed that his Twitter account had been hacked after a photo of an underwear-clad groin appeared on his feed in 2011. But when more pictures came out, the congressman admitted he had exchanged risqué messages with a number of women and soon resigned.

Prior to his 2011 unraveling, Weiner had begun to plan for a 2013 campaign, NBCNewYork.com reported, and he still has more than $4 million in his campaign account.

Read more on NBCNewYork.com

The video announcing his run is set around New York City and highlights his mother’s career as a public school teacher and father’s as a lawyer who trained under the G.I. Bill.

“Theirs was a classic New York story,” he said. “You work hard, you make it into the middle class and make life a little bit better for your kids. That’s how this city was built. But it is getting harder and harder every day.”

Weiner said he would tackle a slew of issues facing the middle class, including rising rents and house prices and regulations stifling small businesses, and champion education, safety, and “real” health reform. 

“The very people who put everything they had into this city are getting priced right out of it,” he said in the video.

Elsa / Getty Images, file

Anthony Weiner, seen at a Brooklyn Nets-Toronto Raptors game in November, hopes people will give him a "second chance."

Weiner’s Democratic opponents include City Councilman Sal Albanese, Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, Comptroller John Liu, City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, the Rev. Erick Salgado, a pastor, and former Comptroller Bill Thompson, The Associated Press reported.

On the Republican side, he is likely to face billionaire businessman John Catsimatidis, former Metropolitan Transportation Authority Chairman Joseph Lhota and homelessness-aid organization head George McDonald.

Former White House housing official Aldolfo Carrion Jr., a Democrat who recently dropped his party affiliation, is running on the Independence Party line and also interested in the Republican nomination, the AP said.

A recent poll found that if Weiner entered the race, he would get 15 percent of Democratic votes, putting him in second place after City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, but much less that he would need to achieve an outright victory, according to NBCNewYork.com.

Weiner ran for mayor in 2005, and came close to forcing a runoff against Fernando Ferrer – his party’s eventual nominee. He was considered a main contender in 2009 but quit the race after current Mayor Michael Bloomberg decided to run for a third term.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related:

Off to the races: Weiner could jump into NY mayor’s race next week

Weiner 'can't say with certitude' that lewd photo isn't of him

Weiner admits to 'several' racy online relationships

A top IRS official scheduled to testify Wednesday before the House Oversight committee has notified Congress that she will invoke the Fifth Amendment and refuse to answer questions.

Lois Lerner, head of the IRS unit which handled tax-exempt organizations, won't answer questions about what she knows about the improper screening of conservative groups or about why she repeatedly failed to tell Congress that such targeting was going on, according to a letter from her lawyer, William W. Taylor 3rd. 

The news of Lerner's intention to invoke the Fifth Amendment was first reported Tuesday by the L.A. Times.

Some members of Congress have called for Lerner to be relieved of her responsibilities. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) alleged that she gave false and misleading testimony to Congress.

Her lawyer wrote, "She has not committed any crime or made any misrepresentation, but under the circumstances she has no choice but to take this course."

A spokesman for the House committee said: "The Committee has been contacted by Ms. Lerner's lawyer who stated that his client intended to invoke her Fifth Amendment right and refuse to answer questions. Ms. Lerner remains under subpoena from Chairman Issa to appear at tomorrow's hearing -- the Committee has a Constitutional obligation to conduct oversight. Chairman Issa remains hopeful that she will ultimately decide to testify tomorrow about her knowledge of outrageous IRS targeting of Americans for their political beliefs."

An FBI criminal investigation has been launched into whether any of the IRS actions were illegal and potentially into whether senior officials lied to Congress. Given that, testifying under oath carries added legal risk. 

The Oklahoma tornadoes that killed at least 24 people Monday have restarted the debate in Washington over emergency spending and whether it should be offset by cuts elsewhere in the  federal budget. 

It’s an ongoing battle for dollars that most recently flared in the wake of Hurricane Sandy last fall and resulted in a highly public and angry spat between New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and his fellow Republicans in Congress (including both senators from Oklahoma), who opposed some of the funding in the Sandy disaster-aid bill. 

On Tuesday, President Barack Obama declared a disaster in Oklahoma, making people in five counties eligible for federal aid such as temporary housing and low-cost loans to pay for uninsured property damage. He pledged federal support for “as long as it takes.”

Some of the aid will flow from the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Disaster Relief Fund, but it is not yet clear whether Congress will decide that an emergency spending bill is needed to refill that fund's account. 

At a press briefing Tuesday, House Speaker John Boehner repeatedly said, "We'll work with the administration on making sure that they have the resources they need to help the people of Oklahoma." He sidestepped reporters' questions on whether spending cuts would be made to offset an emergency spending bill and why House Republicans from Oklahoma had voted against funding after Hurricane Sandy.

Within hours of the town of Moore, Okla., being slammed by the tornado Monday, some Twitter commentators were criticizing Oklahoma Sens. Tom Coburn and Jim Inhofe, both Republicans, for voting last January against a $50.5 billion bill to provide funding for Northeastern states hit by Sandy in October.

Coburn was on his way to Oklahoma on Tuesday but his spokesman John Hart said, “We don't know if an emergency aid package will even be necessary. We do know that FEMA has $11.6 billion in its Disaster Relief Fund as of this morning. We don't know if that will be enough.”

He added that “officials won't be able to do a detailed damage assessment until rescue and recovery operations are complete. We don't know when that will occur.”

And Hart noted that “If an additional emergency aid package is necessary Dr. Coburn will not change his longstanding position on offsets. Since the Oklahoma City bombing, Dr. Coburn has argued that supplemental bills should be paid for by reducing spending on less vital priorities.”

Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo. told reporters Tuesday, “The problem I had, and others may have had, with (the) Sandy (emergency spending

bill) was that it was, ‘OK, here’s a number. We think it’ll probably be that much.’ Nobody should be flying over Moore, Okla., today in a helicopter and coming back here and saying ‘We flew over and we think it’s going to cost X billion dollars and let’s just appropriate that amount of money.’ Nothing says this has to be done all at once and the best way to respond to these (catastrophic events) is to always be responding to what you know to be the need, rather than what you think the need might be.”

Blunt said that after the 2011 Joplin tornado in his state, Congress sent disaster aid in “about four different appropriations processes, one of which was just the normal appropriations bill with some targeted CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) money…. but it was in the regular appropriations bill under the (spending) limit.”

Last January, Coburn voted for, and Inhofe against, an amendment to the Sandy bill offered last January by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, that would have offset the new Sandy outlays by reducing discretionary spending (including defense) by 0.5 percent over the next nine years. The Senate defeated Lee’s amendment, 62 to 35.

And last December, Coburn joined Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., in criticizing the Senate’s original $60.4 billion version of the Sandy relief bill for its inclusion of unrelated funds such as $150 million for restoration of fisheries in Alaska, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine.

Rep. Cory Gardner, R-Colo. and other Colorado members proposed adding $125 million for watershed protection and flood mitigation projects, including about $20 million for areas in Colorado burned by last summer’s wildfires.

Their argument was that the emergency spending bill should not be limited to areas hit by Sandy. And in the past emergency spending bills designed to deal with one disaster have tended to become vehicles for a variety of other disaster outlays and other spending.

Hurricane Katrina hit Louisiana on Aug. 29, 2005. But after the original Katrina emergency spending bill in 2005, Congress subsequently passed more Katrina funding in a bills in 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2010 – all as part of other disaster-relief legislation which addressed events from Midwest flooding to California wildfires.

Coburn and McCain said last December, “As Congress considers the $60.4 billion Hurricane Sandy supplemental spending bill this week, it is critical that we ensure taxpayer dollars go to help those impacted by this devastating storm and not to wasteful spending projects.”

The quarrel over the added funding for projects unrelated to Sandy helped to delay the emergency spending bill – leading to Christie denouncing Boehner for not allowing a vote on the bill on New Year’s Eve.

Ultimately both the House and the Senate did pass an emergency spending bill – but only after many condemnations of House Republicans by Democrats and by some Northern Republicans who said emergency funds should not be offset by cuts elsewhere in the budget.

Even though most annual spending which doesn’t go to entitlement programs such as Medicaid is subject to the discretionary spending limits, or sequester, in the Budget Control Act, that law does allow for adjustments in the spending caps in certain cases including when Congress considers emergency spending.

This story was originally published on Tue May 21, 2013 2:19 PM EDT

U.S. senators of both parties directed outrage at top IRS officials over not being informed earlier as to the tax agency’s work to target conservatives and demanded answers Tuesday as to why action was not taken more quickly to halt the abuses. 

Senators voiced their dismay at the IRS leadership’s efforts to respond to indications that officials in the agency’s Cincinnati office had singled out conservative and Tea Party advocacy that had applied for tax-exempt status. 

Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont. demanded to know, “Why wasn't more firm action taken by people, either the commissioner himself or by people at the top?  It's outrageous. Any person can figure out this is unacceptable conduct.” 

Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch, the ranking Republican, said there was no doubt the episode constitutes a “scandal,” saying it “undermines Americans' trust that their government will enforce the law without regard for political beliefs or party affiliation.” 

A former IRS commissioner who presided over most of the time in which the IRS targeted conservatives, Douglas Shulman, told members of the committee that he was not aware of the full facts surrounding the abuses until earlier this month. 

And Steven Miller, the acting IRS commissioner who resigned from that position last week, took responsibility for the controversial manner in which the IRS sought to first publicize the agency’s abuses ahead of the release of an inspector general report on the matter. Miller said he was responsible for a plot to plant a question for an IRS official, Lois Lerner, at an American Bar Association panel discussion to allow her to publicly reveal the IRS targeting. 

“Obviously, the entire thing was an incredibly bad idea,” said Miller about the strategy, explaining that the IRS had failed to follow through with its plan to simultaneously brief Capitol Hill about the forthcoming report.

Those revelations hardly comforted Democratic or Republican senators alike, whose hearing marked the second official inquiry into the IRS controversy. Baucus openly wondered why IRS employees who engaged in or oversaw the abuses were not fired.

The revelations about the work by IRS officials to single out conservatives have become enmeshed with partisan politics. Though President Barack Obama has condemned the abuses and vowed to cooperate with congressional investigations into the matter, that has hardly silenced Republicans’ criticism of the controversy.

The GOP has focused heavily on the question of when Obama was made aware of the IRS’s practices, and whether he should have been briefed on the matter sooner. A hearing last week found that senior Treasury Department officials were notified of the existence of the investigation as early as last summer. And White House press secretary Jay Carney disclosed Monday that the White House counsel, Kathy Ruemmler, was notified of the details of the forthcoming report in late April. She, in turn, briefed White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and other senior officials, though they decided against personally briefing Obama.

But much of senators’ ire on Tuesday focused on the IRS leadership’s awareness of the singling out of conservatives as it unfolded, and their disclosure of those abuses to Congress during the subsequent investigation.

Shulman defended his performance by explaining that he did not know the full facts of the inspector general’s findings. He said he found out sometime during the spring of 2012 that there was a list including the word “Tea Party” being used by the officials in the tax-exempt office. But Shulman maintained he did not know what other words were on that list, nor was he aware of the severity or scope of the abuses.

Gary Cameron / Reuters

Senator Max Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and Senator Orrin Hatch, the ranking Republican, confer during testimony in Washington May 21, 2013.

“When I left, the I.G. was looking into this to gather all of the facts,” he said. “I've now had the benefit of reading the report and that's the full accounting of facts that I have at this point.”

Republicans voiced outrage that no IRS official had disclosed their awareness of potential abuses or an investigation into the controversy during lawmakers’ efforts to get answers to that very question during the past few years.

“That is a lie by omission and you kept it from the people who are required to oversee this matter,” Hatch angrily told Miller, the outgoing IRS chief who had declined to previously reveal the IRS targeting.

This story was originally published on Tue May 21, 2013 12:15 PM EDT

President Barack Obama pledged the full resources of the U.S. government to assist the community of Moore, Okla., in its recovery following devastating tornadoes that hit the town on Monday. 

“The people of Moore should know that their country will remain on the ground -- for them, beside them -- for as long as it takes,” Obama said in a statement Tuesday morning at the White House, calling the storm “one of the most destructive tornadoes in history.” Obama said the prayers of the nation are with the people of Oklahoma, adding “as a nation, our full focus right now is on the urgent work of rescue, and the hard work of recovery and rebuilding that lies ahead.”

Noting that process will be long, the president assured that those affected “will not travel that path alone, your country will travel it with you.” 

The president said that he had spoken with Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin, R, to coordinate the federal government’s assistance to Moore, and had dispatched FEMA Director Craig Fugate to Oklahoma. Obama also signed a disaster declaration on Monday evening opening avenues for federal assistance to those affected by the hurricane. 

Moore, a town which had also suffered a serious tornado in 1999, was damaged heavily during last night’s storm. The president said that it was too early to assess the extent of the damage, death and injuries.

“But if there is hope to hold on to, not just in Oklahoma but around the country, it's the knowledge that the good people there and in Oklahoma are better prepared for this type of storm than most. And what they can be certain of is that Americans from every corner of this country will be right there with them, opening our homes, our hearts to those in need.  Because we're a nation that stands with our fellow citizens as long as it takes.”

Obama urged Americans who are interested in helping the tornado victims to donate to the American Red Cross, which he said is already on the ground in Moore.

Oklahoma disaster puts current Washington politics into perspective… Obama delivers statement on tragedy at 10:00 am ET… That said, there will be an inevitable fight over disaster relief… Three polls, three matters of consensus on the three controversies hitting the Obama administration… 1) The public believes there was wrongdoing; 2) that hasn’t affected Obama’s political standing; and 3) there’s a huge partisan divide… Senate Finance Committee holds IRS hearing at 10:00 am ET… Conservatives come out against immigration reform… And two stories to watch in tonight’s LA mayoral run-off.

Gene Blevins / Reuters

People walk near destroyed buildings and vehicles after a tornado struck Moore, Okla., near Oklahoma City, May 20, 2013.

*** Putting things into perspective: The massive and powerful tornado that ripped through Moore, OK on Monday afternoon puts so much of Washington’s focus over the past two weeks -- on the IRS, Benghazi, and the leak investigations -- into perspective. Oklahoma officials, for now, have put the death toll at 51 individuals (at least 20 of whom are children). “To me, this is bigger than anything I’ve ever seen,” Gov. Mary Fallin (R) said on “TODAY” this morning, and she added that includes past tornados and the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. (This is an area of the country that has seen its share of destruction over the last 20 years.) President Obama, who already signed a disaster declaration for Oklahoma, delivers a statement around 10:00 am ET on the devastation, per NBC’s Kristen Welker. And the politics of disaster relief and federal assistance has already made an appearance. Yes, there are still legitimate questions to ask regarding the three controversies facing the Obama administration. And, yes, those stories aren’t going away (in fact, the Senate Finance Committee holds a hearing at 10:00 am ET on the IRS’s targeting of conservative-sounding organizations filing for tax-exempt status). But right now, they take a pause.

*** The inevitable battle over disaster relief: Given the previous fight over federal-relief funding after Hurricane Sandy, it was inevitable that the politicization of this Oklahoma disaster would take place. And it has already begun. CQ Roll Call: “The tornado damage near Oklahoma City is still being assessed and the death toll is expected to rise, but already Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., says he will insist that any federal disaster aid be paid for with cuts elsewhere. CQ Roll Call reporter Jennifer Scholtes wrote for CQ.com Monday evening that Coburn said he would ‘absolutely’ demand offsets for any federal aid that Congress provides.” Coburn’s position is consistent with his vote on Sandy relief -- he voted no on federal funding late last year, as did Oklahoma’s other senator, James Inhofe. And three of the state’s five congressmen voted no, too (Bridenstine, Mullin, Lankford), while the other two voted for the relief (Cole, Lucas). Keep an eye on Rep. Tom Cole (R-OK) in this. He has been a bridge between the establishment and conservatives on issues like Sandy relief and the fiscal cliff. He’s got a lot of credibility with a bipartisan swath of members, and he may end up having to do a lot of political legwork to de-politicize this issue.

*** Three polls, three matters of consensus: Turning to the controversies facing the Obama administration, we now have the results from three different polls (CNN, Pew, WaPo/ABC) released in the last 36 hours. And they provide a consensus on three different stories. One, the public believes there was wrongdoing by the IRS and in the aftermath of the Benghazi attack. Two, this belief of wrongdoing hasn’t affected President Obama’s standing (WaPo/ABC has his approval rating at 51%; CNN has it as 53%). A big reason why is the economy: “For the first time since the 100-day mark of Obama’s first term, most say they are optimistic about the direction of the economy. More than half, 56 percent, say the economy is on the mend, the most to say so in polls since 2009,” the Washington Post writes. And three, there is a HUGE partisan divide when it comes to these controversies. According to the Pew poll, 37% of Republicans are following the IRS story very closely (compared with 21% of Democrats and 25% of indies), while 34% of Republicans are following the Benghazi investigation closely (versus 18% of Democrats and 26% of indies). As Pew adds, this level of interest and partisan divide is consistent with past controversies impacting the George W. Bush and Clinton administration; the folks out of power who didn’t like the president in office were always more interested in these controversies. The one exception: The Lewinsky sex scandal, which had more people paying closer attention and almost no partisan divide.

*** Senate Finance Committee holds IRS hearing: As mentioned above, the Senate Finance Committee holds a hearing on the IRS story at 10:00 am, and the witnesses are outgoing IRS Acting Commissioner Steven Miller, former Commissioner Douglas Shulman, and the inspector general. Given the tragedy in Oklahoma -- and given the president’s remarks around the same time -- this hearing won’t receive the attention it might have. But the Obama White House had it rough yesterday when it dribbled out new information about who knew of the inspector general’s report and when they knew about it. Make no mistake: It’s over something that’s relatively small, when (and who inside) the White House was given a heads up about the IG audit -- after all, there was little the White House could do with the report -- but it made the White House seem not very forthcoming with the press. The White House is acting as if it has a bunker mentality; it’s only dribbling out information if extracted with a specific question. And it’s giving off an impression staffers have more to hide.

*** Bunker mentality and not telling the president: Then there’s the issue that many members of the senior team in the White House knew about the report without telling the president. While it’s understandable they want the president to have plausible deniability about what he knows in the case of an IG report, it feeds the perception that the president is not very hands-on right now. Yes, it’s damned if they do, damned if they don’t -- which is probably why it’s imperative they begin to own these controversies on their terms.

*** Conservatives come out against immigration reform: Per NBC’s Carrie Dann, “Several prominent conservative media figures are backing a new effort by groups who oppose bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform, signaling growing willingness from conservative outlets to marshal their audiences against the bill. Signatories on a new open letter to Congress titled ‘The Wrong Way to Reform Immigration” include RedState editor Erick Erickson, radio hosts Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin, and columnist Michelle Malkin. ‘No matter how well intentioned, the Schumer-Rubio bill suffers from fundamental design flaws that make it unsalvageable,’ the letter states. ‘Many of us support various parts of the legislation, but the overall package is so unsatisfactory that the Senate would do better to start over from scratch.’”

*** Two stories to watch in today’s LA mayoral run-off: And there are two stories to watch in today’s run-off contest for LA mayor between City Controller Wendy Greuel (D) and City Councilman Eric Garcetti (D). The first is that Greuel COULD become the city’s first female mayor, although polls (here and here) have shown that Garcetti has a slight lead. The second story is the expected low turnout. As Jessica Taylor writes, "[T]he runoff race between two Democratic candidates isn’t drawing much interest as turnout could reach a record low despite the more than $33 million that’s been spent on the nearly two year-long contest to succeed outgoing Mayor Anthony Villagarosa." In fact, just 21% turned out in the first round of voting. Now this could just be LA being LA, but the low turnout might be something to keep an eye on. Polls close at 11:00 pm ET.

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

Los Angeles will make history when voters elect a new mayor on Tuesday but the runoff race between two Democratic candidates isn’t drawing much interest as turnout could reach a record low despite the more than $33 million that’s been spent on the nearly two year-long contest to succeed outgoing Mayor Anthony Villagarosa. 

The race pits City Controller Wendy Greuel, who would be the city’s first woman elected to the post, against City Councilman Eric Garcetti, who would be the first elected Jewish mayor.   

Garcetti, the son of former Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garcetti, has maintained a lead in the polls throughout the race, but most expected the runoff contest between the two to tighten. 

Greuel has racked up the most high-profile endorsements in the race, including ones from former President Bill Clinton, Sen. Barbara Boxer and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and six members of the state’s congressional delegation.  Garcetti has been endorsed by former DNC Chairman Howard Dean and two California members of Congress. 

Greuel has also been the biggest beneficiary of outside money in the race, with groups combining to spend $7.7 million on her behalf, compared to juts $2.7 million for Garcetti. $5.6 million of that cash for Greuel has come from unions, with just $1 million from labor groups for Garcetti. 

Despite the high-spending contest, few people in Los Angeles seem to be paying very close attention. In the March primary, only 21% of 1.8 million registered voters went to the polls, and runoff turnout is typically much lower than that. According to a Los Angeles Times review, the winner may not even exceed the vote totals of the city’s 1938 contest. 

Los Angeles County Democratic Party Chairman Eric Bauman  said based on early absentee returns, he believes runoff turnout will actually exceed the primary.

But that doesn't mean that voter turnout won't still be low. 

"Voters in Los Angeles have voter fatigue," said Bauman, pointing to a string of not just statewide and congressional elections, but also numerous ballot measures and city and county elections. 

But as Los Angeles has also found itself in financial straits in recent years, Bauman said the race has dealt more with how to just maintain city services, instead of big ideas Villagarosa campaigned on during the last open seat race twelve years ago. 

"You don't have that dramatic flair to drive people to the polls," said Bauman. 

Still, Greuel hasn’t been able to overtake the city councilman in the race, and a USC Price/Los Angeles Times poll released this weekend showed her still trailing seven points, 48%-41%. Garcetti also leads among several critical constituencies – women, Latinos and Democrats, though Greuel has made small gains with each. In the race’s waning days, Greuel has said she remains optimistic the remaining undecided voters will break her way. With African-American voters still breaking nearly even, both candidates spent the weekend visiting black churches in the city’s South side to get voters to the polls.

One of the main reasons Greuel hasn’t been able to overtake the lead – her main labor backer, the city-controlled Department of Water and Power is highly unpopular in the area, especially in the crucial San Fernando Valley, even though she represented the area for seven years on the city council. Garcetti has painted her as a puppet of the city’s public works sector, while Greuel has hit back that Garcetti supported raises for the DWP.  

This story was originally published on Tue May 21, 2013 7:41 AM EDT

As the White House works to contain the political fallout over its knowledge that the IRS had targeted conservative groups applying for nonprofit status, the outgoing agency chief and IRS inspector general will join former Commissioner Douglas Shulman in an appearance Tuesday before the Senate Finance Committee.

Republicans hope the hearing – along with a separate hearing before a House committee on Wednesday – will provide them new tinder to keep alive public outrage toward the IRS abuses, which has in turn helped offer the GOP a unifying moment in its opposition to Obama and his agenda. The disclosure of new details about when the White House first found out about the IRS misconduct was likely to arm Republicans with new information heading into those high-profile hearings.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that Chief of Staff Denis McDonough and other senior administration staff first learned about the details of the forthcoming report after April 24, when White House counsel Kathy Ruemmler was told about the report, which was still an unfinished draft.

“To be clear, we knew the subject of the investigation and we knew of the nature of some of the potential findings, but we did not have a copy of the draft report,” said Carney, who emphasized that no member of the White House staff sought to intervene with the report. “We did not know the details, the scope or the motivation surrounding the misconduct, and we did not know who was responsible.”

Those details speak to Republicans’ questions about whether Obama or other members of the administration knew about the IRS abuses sooner than they have let on. The witnesses at Wednesday’s House committee will feature two officials who could offer further detail. The first, Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin, will certainly be pressed on whether he shared his knowledge of the IRS investigation, about which he was first briefed in the summer of 2012. The second, Lois Lerner, leads the department within the IRS overseeing tax-exempt organizations, and has become an increasing target of criticism as lawmakers look to assign blame for the agency’s abuses.

But first comes Tuesday’s Senate hearing, which will be controlled by Democrats who enjoy the privileges of being in the upper chamber’s majority party. But that hardly means that the morning’s Senate Finance Committee hearing will be a cakewalk for the three witnesses.

Shulman, who served as IRS commissioner during much of the span in which the targeting of conservatives was said to have taken place, will make his first appearance before Congress since revelations of the controversy emerged earlier this month. Joining him will be Steven Miller, the IRS commissioner who was forced to resign last week, and J. Russell George, the inspector general whose report brought to light the charges against the IRS.

Both Miller and George appeared at last Friday’s hearing before the House Ways and Means Committee looking into the IRS scandal. But while Miller apologized for the targeting of conservatives, which he blamed on “foolish mistakes” by IRS officials, he defied Republican lawmakers’ suggestions that the abuses were deliberate, or fueled by partisan motivation.

That hasn’t stopped Republicans, though, from trying to use the IRS fiasco – along with simultaneous controversies involving the terrorist attack last year in Benghazi, Libya and revelations that the Justice Department had seized journalists’ phone records – to gain political traction against the Obama administration.

Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, Ky., said Sunday that the controversies amounted to evidence of a “culture of intimidation” being perpetuated by the administration. But he and Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., the Ways and Means Committee chairman, admitted they had no evidence to support their insinuations that the president or his aides had ordered the extra scrutiny for conservative groups.

“We don't have anything to say that the president knew about this,” Camp said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

And new polling suggests that the public – so far – is inclined to believe that is the case. A CNN/ORC poll conducted toward the end of last year found that 55 percent of Americans believe that IRS officials acted on their own in the controversy, versus 37 percent who said they think the White House ordered the singling out of conservatives. Furthermore, 61 percent of Americans said in the same poll that they regarded what Obama as said in public about the scandal to be either mostly or completely truthful.

Republicans’ ability to undermine those numbers and build political momentum for themselves could depend upon their ability to unearth new revelations about the scope of the abuses during this week’s hearings. GOP lawmakers have made an issue of when Treasury officials and the White House counsel’s office were made aware of allegations of IRS abuses, though the administration has countered by pointing out that a House committee headed by a top Republican critic, Rep. Darrell Issa, Calif., was aware of the investigation into the IRS well before last year’s election.

It could be the case that Wednesday’s hearing, conducted by the Issa-led House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, could be the source of more explosive details about the IRS scandal, if more are to be known.

Related stories:

• White House aides learned of IRS details in April, but didn't tell Obama
• First Thoughts: Scandal or bureaucratic incompetency?
• White House defends IRS handling, McConnell asserts 'culture of intimidation'

This story was originally published on Tue May 21, 2013 3:34 AM EDT

Several prominent conservative media figures are backing a new effort by groups who oppose bipartisan comprehensive immigration reform, signaling growing willingness from conservative outlets to marshal their audiences against the bill.

Signatories on a new open letter to Congress titled “The Wrong Way to Reform Immigration” include RedState editor Erick Erickson, radio hosts Laura Ingraham and Mark Levin, and columnist Michelle Malkin.

“No matter how well intentioned, the Schumer-Rubio bill suffers from fundamental design flaws that make it unsalvageable,” the letter states. “Many of us support various parts of the legislation, but the overall package is so unsatisfactory that the Senate would do better to start over from scratch.”

The letter, originally circulated by Eagle Forum president Phyllis Schlafly, is also signed by over 100 individuals and grassroots organizations, including former Rep. Allen West, Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin, and author David Limbaugh, the brother of famed conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh.

While the influence of conservative radio hosts was widely credited for the collapse of a 2007 effort to overhaul the nation’s immigration system, a trio of controversies – the IRS targeting scandal, the Justice Department leak probe and the Benghazi talking points spat – have largely dominated the airwaves as the current bill works its way through the Senate Judiciary Committee.

While activists working against the bill believe that grass-roots support can again topple the effort to create a pathway to citizenship for the nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants, most concede that the overwhelming Hispanic support for President Barack Obama in the 2012 election made vocal opposition to the bipartisan bill far less politically palatable for Republican lawmakers this time. Additionally, several major groups are still sitting out the fight, like the anti-tax Club for Growth and grass-roots clearinghouse FreedomWorks.

The opposition letter comes after a pledge of support for immigration reform from a coalition of conservative groups that called the bill "an important starting point" and urged Republicans in the Senate to "work to improve the legislation." That letter, organized by the American Conservative Union, was signed by a variety of Latino, faith and public policy groups -- many of which met  earlier this month with Florida Republican Marco Rubio, the key Senate negotiator working to build conservative support for the bill. 

Still, despite steady progress for the Senate legislation and a breakthrough compromise from a bipartisan House group last week, opponents of the legislation feel emboldened by what they see as renewed mistrust of the federal government – particularly in the wake of the IRS controversy.

On Monday, foes of the legislation got an additional boost when the union representing 12,000 employees of the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services said it will oppose the Senate bill, in part because of an “insurmountable bureaucracy” created at the agency that processes immigration documents.

Activists also plan to hold more than 40 local events nationwide Tuesday to highlight opposition to the Senate legislation.

Related stories:

• Senate panel gives green light to test biometric exit program
• Union of immigration enforcement officers to oppose Senate bill

This story was originally published on Tue May 21, 2013 12:07 AM EDT

The White House first learned of a draft report detailing abuses by IRS officials in targeting conservative groups in late April, though the top administration spokesman maintained on Monday that President Barack Obama was not notified of the emerging controversy at that time.

White House press secretary Jay Carney, in a bid to further the administration's public response to revelations that the IRS had singled out conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status for additional scrutiny, disclosed at his daily press briefing that White House counsel Kathy Ruemmler was informed of the report on April 24. She, in turn, told senior White House staff -- including chief of staff Denis McDonough -- of the then-incomplete report, though Carney said those details were never conveyed to Obama.

“To be clear, we knew the subject of the investigation and we knew of the nature of some of the potential findings, but we did not have a copy of the draft report,” said Carney. “We did not know the details, the scope or the motivation surrounding the misconduct, and we did not know who was responsible.”

The new details first offered by Carney come amid growing Republican clamor for more information about who in the White House found out about the IRS investigation, and when. The GOP has sought to cast the administration as either less-than-forthcoming about its knowledge of the investigation, or inept in keeping tabs on such a high-profile investigation.

The press secretary sought to characterize the administration's handling of the information as fairly routine. Carney said that the White House is typically notified of similar inspectors general drafts shortly before publication, and that the details of these reports can often change before publication. Moreover, Carney argued, the abuses at the IRS had ended about a year earlier, meaning that there was no way for the president to act to halt continued misconduct at the IRS.

Obama has said that he did not learn about the IRS controversy until press reports detailing some elements of the inspector general review of the IRS emerged in the press on May 10. Obama has condemned the misconduct, and sought the resignation of the acting IRS commissioner. But his actions haven't slowed Republican criticism of his management of the situation.

Carney said Monday that Obama was not informed by senior staff who were aware of the impending report so as to not compromise the investigation before it had been completed.

"This is not the kind of thing, when you have an ongoing investigation or an ongoing audit, that requires notification to the president because what is important is we wait until that kind of process is completed before we take action," he said.

Furthermore, the press secretary said that no other member of the White House staff sought to intervene in the final stages of the IRS report, because it would have been inappropriate to do so.

This story was originally published on Mon May 20, 2013 3:18 PM EDT

Aiming to advance a sweeping immigration reform bill by week’s end, senators on the committee considering the legislation planned marathon sessions to complete its edits, including the approval Monday of a compromise measure to implement a test system for taking foreign visa holders’ fingerprints when they exit the United States. 

In an effort to win over Republicans who favor using “biometric” criteria – like fingerprinting -- to monitor when foreigners leave the country, pro-reform members of the Senate Judiciary Committee approved an amendment sponsored by Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, a Republican considered to be a swing vote on the 18 member committee.  That amendment, a less stringent version of a biometric proposal that failed last week, would require the Department of Homeland Security to establish a fingerprinting system at the 10 U.S. airports with the highest international traffic within two years. After six years, that system would have to be in place at the nation’s 30 biggest airports. 

Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images

Senate Judiciary Committee holds a markup session on the immigration reform legislation in the Hart Senate Office Building on Capitol Hill May 20, 2013 in Washington, DC.

The biometric tracking is primarily aimed at monitoring visa overstays, which account for an estimated 40 percent of the undocumented population.  

It was adopted by a vote of 13-5.

Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, a Republican who is not on the Senate Judiciary Committee but was a key drafter of the Gang of Eight legislation, has been pushing for the biometric system. 

In a statement, Rubio applauded the passage of the Hatch amendment.

"The amendment adopted today is a good start and I will continue to fight to make the tracking of entries and exits include biometrics in the most effective system we can build when the bill is amended on the Senate floor," he said. 

Prior to the vote, Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama – who sponsored an attempt last week to immediately begin implementation of a fingerprinting system at all major air, sea and land ports – slammed the amendment as inadequate, disputing the idea that finalizing a nationwide system would be costly and unwieldy.

“Why we won’t do it and do it properly within a year or 18 months – completely -- I have no idea,” Sessions said.

Congress has previously passed legislation requiring a biometric exit system but has never implemented the program, citing cost, infrastructure challenges and opposition from major airlines.

Proponents of the Hatch measure said it would provide an important step towards implementing a more complete biometric system, which senators on both sides of the aisle agreed would provide the most failsafe method for tracking visa overstays as well as individuals who pose national security threats.

“I do not look at this, Senator Sessions, as a fig leaf,” said Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California. “I look at it as a start.”

Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona, another Gang of Eight member, added that all lawmakers are “frustrated” by the fact that a biometric system has not yet been implemented nationwide but that the Hatch measure would be the most “aggressive” mandate yet to start putting one in place.

Earlier Monday, senators also approved an amendment proposed by South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, also a member of the Gang of Eight, that would void legal status for individuals who sought asylum in the United States but subsequently returned to the country from which they fled.

That measure was aimed at those like Boston Marathon suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev, whose family had been granted asylum in the United States but who had returned to Russia prior to the terrorist attack.

Senators also unanimously approved an amendment to mandate better tracking of immigrants who have overstayed visas by mandating broad data-sharing between customs officials, federal law enforcement and intelligence personnel.  

The committee was slated for a late night Monday. As it began its fourth day of edits to the bill,  Chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy said he was optimistic that the panel could complete its work as early as Wednesday night. 

This story was originally published on Mon May 20, 2013 1:25 PM EDT

What’s worse for the Obama White House: For the controversies to be full-scale scandals that go all the way to the top?... Or for them to be the result of bureaucratic incompetence?... The latest IRS developments… On Obama’s Morehouse speech… Two unions now oppose the Senate immigration bill… Getting the Hillary ’08 band back together -- or not… And Virginia, meet E.W. Jackson.

Jonathan Ernst / Reuters

President Barack Obama crosses the South Lawn as he returns from travel to Atlanta via Marine One, at the White House, May 19, 2013.

*** Scandal or bureaucratic incompetency? Here’s a question for the Obama White House to ponder: What’s worse, for all the controversies -- especially the IRS targeting conservative-sounding groups -- to be a full-fledged scandal that goes all the way to the top? Or for them to be the result of bureaucratic incompetence? You could make an argument that the latter outcome could be just as damaging to the president, because it raises doubts about his competency and the public’s trust in government. As Time’s Joe Klein wrote last week, “It can, and will, be argued that the president is to blame for lousy management… Some in the Administration are saying that civil-service rules prevent Obama from firing the midlevel bozos. But what about the higher-ups? Why haven't the Democrats proposed a full-scale review of civil-service laws…? Such laws certainly hinder effective governance, which the Democrats are supposedly selling.” Of course, there are plenty of examples where you can argue that government has worked. Think of the rebuilding after Hurricane Sandy. Or the response to the Boston bombings. But government working in a crisis vs. government working every day are two different issues. And it’s never a good story when a White House has to respond to examples when the government ISN’T working for the American people.

*** Competency questions pile up: After all, the Democrats are the party of government, and Obama got elected, in part, by pushing competency (at least compared with the previous administration). The White House should hope its problems are political in nature, because that’s something they’ve proven adept at dealing with. But the competency questions for this administration are piling up: The Veteran’s Administration is a mess; their explanation on Benghazi is about the lack of communication and security procedures; and the IRS explanation is overworked and mistake-prone bureaucrats in Cincinnati. Right now, the White House is benefitting from those congressional Republicans who are desperately searching for “scandal.” What the White House should fear more is if Republicans use their “government is too big” argument to go to core of competency. 

*** The latest IRS developments: It’s worth noting that today’s “news” about the White House counsel being informed of the IRS audit was first confirmed at a Jay Carney press briefing last week. A senior administration also confirms to NBC News that White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler did NOT inform the president. What’s not clear is if she gave a heads up to the rest of the senior staff. And what’s also not clear is how much detail Ruemmler was offered about the audit itself. Meanwhile, the Sunday New York Times offered a lengthy piece tracing what went wrong in that Cincinnati IRS office. “While there are still many gaps in the story of how the I.R.S. scandal happened, interviews with current and former employees and with lawyers who dealt with them, along with a review of I.R.S. documents, paint a more muddled picture of an understaffed Cincinnati outpost that was alienated from the broader I.R.S. culture and given little direction. Overseen by a revolving cast of midlevel managers, stalled by miscommunication with I.R.S. lawyers and executives in Washington and confused about the rules they were enforcing, the Cincinnati specialists flagged virtually every application with Tea Party in its name. But their review went beyond conservative groups: more than 400 organizations came under scrutiny, including at least two dozen liberal-leaning ones and some that were seemingly apolitical.”

*** Obama’s Morehouse speech: Also on Sunday, President Obama delivered a very personal commencement address at Morehouse College in Atlanta, GA. “Keep setting an example for what it means to be a man,” he told the graduates at the historically black college. “Be the best husband to your wife, or you’re your boyfriend, or your partner. Be the best father you can be to your children. Because nothing is more important.” The president added, “I was raised by a heroic single mom, wonderful grandparents -- made incredible sacrifices for me… But I sure wish I had had a father who was not only present, but involved. Didn’t know my dad. And so my whole life, I’ve tried to be for Michelle and my girls what my father was not for my mother and me. I want to break that cycle where a father is not at home, where a father is not helping to raise that son or daughter. “I want to be a better father, a better husband, a better man.” And pair Obama’s commencement address with the one his wife delivered on Friday at another historically black college (Bowie State): “Instead of dreaming of being a teacher or a lawyer or a business leader, they’re fantasizing about being a baller or a rapper… Please reject the slander that says a black child with a book is trying to act white.”

*** Two unions now oppose Senate immigration legislation: On the topic of immigration… The National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council, a union representing 12,000 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers, “will publicly oppose the Senate Gang of Eight immigration plan Monday, giving critics of the overhaul effort additional political ammunition as they work to defeat legislation working its way through the Senate Judiciary Committee,” NBC’s Carrie Dann reports. The reason for the opposition: The union believes the legislation “would fail to address an ‘insurmountable bureaucracy’ at the federal agency overseeing immigration documents.” Dann adds that this union joins the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council in its opposition to the Gang of Eight measure.

*** Getting the band back together -- or not: It should be hardly surprising that folks like Howard Wolfson, Patti Solis Doyle, and Mark Penn would NOT work on a Hillary Clinton presidential campaign if she decides to run in 2016, as the Washington Post reports. After all, none of these people went on to join her at the State Department like other trusted Hillary Inc. aides did. What’s more, Solis Doyle was sacked as campaign manager after Clinton lost Iowa. If Clinton runs, it would likely be a combination of trusted former aides, as well as some new blood. That’s often true for plenty of repeat presidential candidates. Yet there’s another way to look at this Washington Post piece: It’s a message to many outside of Hillary World, especially those who were critical of the ’08 Hillary campaign, that the whole band won’t be getting back together if she runs in ’16. And those folks might see this as a positive development.

*** Meet E.W. Jackson: Virginia Republicans this year are conducting an intriguing experiment in Virginia, a state Obama has twice carried in presidential contests, that’s elected Democrats to U.S. Senate seats the last three times senate elections have been held: Can it win in 2013 with a ticket of candidates who are best known for being VERY conservative and VERY outspoken on social issues? Well, here is E.W. Jackson, a black minister who was nominated to be the GOP’s Lt. Gov. nominee joining Ken Cuccinelli at the top of the ticket. “The newly minted Republican nominee for lieutenant governor of Virginia once compared Planned Parenthood to the Ku Klux Klan and bemoaned black voters’ ‘slavish devotion’ to the Democratic Party — past statements that are likely to inflame the culture-war politics of the state’s 2013 elections,” Politico writes. Indeed, Jackson makes Cuccinelli look moderate on social issues. And this is what happens when you nominate candidates via a convention rather than a primary. Does anyone think that Jackson would have won the GOP’s Lt. Gov. primary? For what it’s worth, the nomination of Cuccinelli as attorney general four years ago was seen by some Republicans as a problem (and a potential opportunity for the Democrats). As it turned out, the top of the ticket could shield itself at the time. Of course, “LG” is more of a “running mate” feel and will be more difficult for Cuccinelli to shield himself from Jackson.

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 union representing 12,000 U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services officers will publicly oppose the Senate Gang of Eight immigration plan Monday, giving critics of the overhaul effort additional political ammunition as they work to defeat legislation working its way through the Senate Judiciary Committee.  

In a release announcing the group's opposition to the bill, National Citizenship and Immigration Services Council president Kenneth Palinkas writes that the bill would fail to address an "insurmountable bureaucracy" at the federal agency overseeing immigration documents and argues that USCIS personnel are currently "pressured to rubber stamp applications instead of conducting diligent case review and investigation."

"The culture at USCIS encourages all applications to be approved, discouraging proper investigation into red flags and discouraging the denial of any applications," he wrote in the release. 

The union joins the National Immigration and Customs Enforcement Council, which represents a majority of the nation's deportation agents and is one of the most vocal opponents of the bill - in its opposition to the Gang of Eight measure. 

National ICE Council president Chris Crane, an outspoken ally of bill opponents like Republican Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, circulated a letter to Congress earlier this month arguing that the bill as written "fails to meet the needs of the law enforcement community" and would harm its public safety and national security objectives.

Palinkas writes in his organization's release that it will join as a signatory of that letter. 

The sweeping Senate legislation would create a Registered Provisional Immigrant status for which qualified undocumented immigrants would be eligible to apply after a series of border security and employment verification criteria are achieved. Critics of the bill say those security benchmarks are not stringent enough to discourage more illegal immigration to the United States. 

President Barack Obama's team emerged on Sunday to defend his handling of revelations that the IRS had targeted conservative groups for scrutiny, as senior Republicans conceded they lacked evidence — so far — that the president directed the abuses.

Republicans appeared on the Sunday talk show circuit with hopes of sustaining their political momentum generated during this past week, one of the toughest weeks of Obama's presidency. A series of controversies — that the IRS had targeted conservative groups, new questions about the administration's response to last year's terrorist attack in Benghazi, and news that the Department of Justice seized phone records of Associated Press journalists as part of an investigation regarding national security leaks — have forced the White House onto the defensive.

Senate GOP Leader Mitch McConnell said the IRS controversy amounted to evidence of a "culture of intimidation" by the administration. But he and Rep. Dave Camp, R-Mich., admitted they lacked evidence that the targeting of conservatives was ordered by the White House.

"We don't have anything to say that the president knew about this," said Camp, who chairs the House committee looking into the IRS controversy, on NBC's "Meet the Press."

McConnell also could not point to evidence of presidential involvement in the IRS's scrutinizing of conservatives, though the Kentucky senator argued that a need for more information justified emerging investigations into the controversy.

"I don't think we know what the facts are," he said, appearing separately on "Meet the Press" on Sunday. "The investigation has just begun, so I'm not going to reach a conclusion about what we may find."

Republicans have used the IRS controversy, along with the administration's other struggles as of late, to unify their party in Congress, and gain political traction against Obama. But their ability to sustain this momentum hinges on their ability to weave together these missteps into a more damning, overarching story about the administration.

But the White House has begun to push back. A top White House adviser, Dan Pfeiffer, emerged on Sunday to assert that the administration had handled the IRS fiasco properly.

 "There is no question that Republicans are trying to make political hay here," Pfeiffer said on "Meet the Press" of the IRS controversy.

Pfeiffer sought to undercut Republicans' criticism by asserting that Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., a top GOP critic of the administration who is in charge of White House oversight, was actually aware of an inspector general's investigation into the IRS abuses as early as last fall. To that end, Pfeiffer argued that even if the president were aware of the investigation of the IRS at an earlier point, it would have been inappropriate to become involved with or interfere with the inquiry.

Pfeiffer also sought to push back on Republican criticism of the administration's response to last year's terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, which left four Americans dead, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. The White House aide argued that Republicans had essentially circulated "doctored" versions of emails — original copies of which the administration released this week — that they had known about for months in order to ding the administration. Pfeiffer said the ploy was a sign that Republicans were "getting desperate."

McConnell said he thought it was clear that the administration had "made up a tale" about Benghazi last fall, so close to the presidential election, because admitting to having presided over a terrorist attack would have been politically inconvenient for Obama.

"The talking points clearly were not accurate, and I think getting to the bottom of that is an important investigation," he said.

This story was originally published on Sun May 19, 2013 7:55 AM EDT

As the House Ways and Means Committee conducted a hearing Friday on targeted scrutiny of conservative advocacy groups by the Internal Revenue Service, Republicans reacted with dismay to news that the IRS official in charge of the conservative targeting is now leading the IRS office responsible for administering the tax provisions in the Affordable Care Act.

“Absolutely outrageous,” said Sen. Roy Blunt, R- Mo. in his Twitter account.

The IRS official, Sarah Hall Ingram, served as head of the office that determined whether certain groups would be eligible for tax-exempt status between 2009 and 2012 and is now director of the IRS Affordable Care Act office.

According to an estimate last year from the Government Accountability Office, total IRS implementation costs for the health care law would reach $881 million through September of this year, with most of that money coming from a fund in the Department of Health and Human Services.

In his budget proposal for the new fiscal year, President Barack Obama requested $44 million in new funding for the IRS to implement the health care law.

While the Department of Health and Human Services is the lead agency for issuing regulations under the new law, the IRS and the Department of Labor have key roles in carrying the law.

Obama’s budget proposal said, “Tax provisions play an important role in the health care law’s implementation, and many of its provisions are scheduled to take effect in 2014. The Budget provides funding for the IRS to implement these tax provisions and to respond effectively to public inquiries about the Affordable Care Act’s new benefits and standards.”

Starting next year, the Affordable Care Act will impose penalties for noncompliance on those uninsured people who do not purchase health insurance. It will be the job to of the IRS to determine and collect those penalties.

Also certain individuals, who purchase coverage through the new insurance marketplaces, or exchanges, will be eligible for subsidies or premium assistance in the form of federal tax credits. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 19 million people will receive premium tax credits.

This story was originally published on Fri May 17, 2013 10:31 AM EDT

IRS scandal takes center stage on Capitol Hill. What new comes out? … The White House is in damage-control mode – how they’re managing the three controversies … GOP tries to tie IRS to health care … Obama needs to fix IRS because credibility of government and his second-term agenda is at stake … From New York to L.A., two mayor’s races will be a focus next week – one because another scandal-ridden ex-congressman tries to make a comeback. … Bloomberg group goes after AZ Sen. Flake (R).

Charles Dharapak / AP

Ousted IRS chief Steve Miller arrives on Capitol Hill, Friday, May 17, 2013, to testify before the House Ways and Means Committee on the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) practice of targeting applicants for tax-exempt status based on political leanings.

*** And the venting begins: One thing is fairly certain: there will be fireworks today on Capitol Hill when ex-IRS Commissioner Steve Miller and Treasury Inspector General Russell George testify before the House Ways and Means Committee beginning at 9:00 am ET. But the question is what new information comes from the hearing? There will be plenty of bloviating, but it could also clarify what we don’t know, like: (1) The missing why? Was there political motivation on any level, and (2) What took so long for this to come out? Was this really simply a sloppy shortcut? It was clear in timeline that this was all discovered to be a problem early in 2012 and perhaps as far back as 2011, so what took so long for the IRS to admit it? Expect these to be among the most intriguing questions that get asked but dodged. And, of course, this is only the beginning of what’s going to be a busy season of IRS hearings.

*** The White House reboot: Damage-control mode continues for the White House. Today, it’s trying to stay the course and make that pivot back to jobs with another leg of the president’s Middle Class Jobs and Opportunity Tour. Today, the president heads to Baltimore, where he stops by an elementary school at 11:35 am ET, then makes remarks at 1:20 pm ET at Ellicott Dredges. At 2:15 pm ET, he’ll head to a community center that works with families on job training. They’ve been trying to make this pivot for a while. The first event last week in Austin was overshadowed by the Benghazi hearing. Today, it’ll be overshadowed by the IRS hearing. After sitting on its hands for a few days, the White House is now in overdrive when it comes to damage control. Not just announcing new actions on IRS and on diplomatic security, but it was hard to watch TV after 3 p.m. yesterday and not see a key White House political aide on the tube: Carney, Palmieri and Pfeiffer all blitzing the airwaves.

*** How the White House is trying to fix the three fronts: On Benghazi, the White House is pushing that it’s all political and the president will talk about security at embassies. That was the point he attempted to drive home yesterday. Of course, his pronouncement regarding diplomatic security begs the question, where was this response last week, last month, last year. Clearly, the White House wants to put the issue of funding diplomatic security (something that’s been cut) back in Congress lap. It was a fairly transparent rhetorical move by the White House yesterday. On the IRS, they’re trying to show they’re on top of it…now. Naming Daniel Werfel is putting someone there who seems to have a non-partisan resume. He worked for George W. Bush, for example. But he’s no household name. Werfel’s appointment won’t have the impact on the public psyche that a more high-profile nominee would have had. But he checks the boxes of competency, bipartisanship, and he can vet. On the AP, it’s striking how much Obama went out of his way to stand by Attorney General Eric Holder. There’s no wiggle room there, and it’s because the Holder issue has been personal to him. The president has always felt that Holder’s unpopularity on the hill was a proxy for the president himself. The president believes Republicans on the hill have used Holder as a punching bag, believing they can attack Holder in ways they can’t with Obama. That’s why Obama’s been more sympathetic to Holder -- even though many White House aides, past and present, believe Holder’s been very politically naïve in how he’s run the Justice Department and has made himself an easy target.

*** GOP tries to tie IRS scandal to health care: It’s been a tough week for the White House, perhaps the worst of Obama’s second term. And we know exactly where GOP’s headed to try and advance the story more broadly. They’re headed to health care. Two IRS officials are already exiting the IRS, and now a third person has become a target. NBC’s Lisa Myers confirms this story that Sarah Hall Ingram, who was in charge of the tax exempt office from 2009 to 2012, is now in charge of the IRS’s Affordable Care Act office. The blaring headline Republicans want out of this is the person involved in targeting the Tea Party at the IRS is now in charge of running health care (!!!). That’s not exactly the case, however, as the IRS has a relatively small role in implementing health care as compared to Health and Human Services, which is the agency setting up the exchanges to be rolled out this fall. But why let an inconvenient reality get in the way of a good political talking point.

*** Bigger picture – the IRS scandal is important because it’s all about the credibility of government: At the heart of this IRS scandal and why it matters is how important the credibility of government is to Obama second-term agenda. Democrats want to show government run correctly can make your life better; Republicans want to say government stands in the way. The IRS scandal cuts right to that argument and extends out to health care (as noted above) and immigration. The IRS, on a good day, isn’t well liked by the public. It’s feared. But if it’s proven to be inept or corrupt, it will only harm the public trust even more than Washington’s done for so long as it is. And it’ll be easy to sell a swing voter on the idea that while, say, immigration reform is a good idea, do you have confidence Washington can make it work? Ditto with health care? That’s why it is so important for Obama to be on top of the IRS from here on out and restore credibility to the agency. Whatever comes out on IRS, with reporters turning up every stone and Republicans picking at every piece of carcass, the White House and Treasury better be first or it will undermine even further credibility.

*** New York to L.A.: Two mayors races in the two biggest cities in the country will be big next week – one because there will be a result (in L.A.) and second because of Anthony Weiner. In Los Angeles, voters head to the polls Tuesday to pick between two Democrats to be the next mayor – Eric Garcetti and Wendy Greuel. Garcetti continues to be the slight favorite and Greuel appears to be running out of money. She had to loan herself $100,000. Meanwhile, Weiner might jump into the mayor’s race next week. WNBC reported spotting Weiner shooting a campaign-style video at his childhood home in Brooklyn. And Weiner’s entry will transform the race into a circus, at least next week, and who knows, maybe for the rest of the campaign. By the way, with Weiner’s wife as close to Hillary Clinton as anyone, how do the Clintons keep their distance from Weiner, or do they? Either way, nobody benefits more from Weiner’s entry than the headline writers at the Daily News and the Post.

*** Bloomberg gun group targets AZ senator: Mayors Against Illegal Guns is going up with an ad campaign hitting Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake (R), NBC’s Kasie Hunt reports. It features an Arizona couple, whose son was killed in the Aurora, CO, theatre shooting, who say Flake didn’t keep his word to them that he would vote in favor of tougher background checks. Republicans, though, believe that by voting for the Lindsey Graham (R-SC) alternative bill, they did vote for some background-check strengthening. The group has gone up against New Hampshire Republican Sen. Kelly Ayotte, and has also pledged – though notably they have not yet -- to go up against Democrats in Alaska, Arkansas, and North Dakota, despite Democrats urging them not to.

*** 2016 roundup – Going after Hillary: Republicans tried to pin Benghazi on Hillary Clinton (here, for example). Democrats see 2016 politics at play. Opponents are readying a scandal-filled movie about her life. She still leads by a lot in a New Hampshire poll. … Vice President Joe Biden appears to be continuing preparations for a run in 2016, but he not only trails Clinton by a lot in early polling, he also remains a punch line for late-night comics. … Rand Paul heads to New Hampshire Monday … Bobby Jindal was in New Hampshire over the weekend …  Marco Rubio accused the White House of creating a “culture of intimidation” on MSNBC’s The Daily Rundown, yet some conservatives are still hammering him for his pursuit of comprehensive immigration. … Chris Christie was showing Prince Harry around the Jersey Shore. He also went negative despite huge leads in his bid for reelection this year. … Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) signed one of the toughest gun laws in the country.

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

The outgoing head of the IRS disputed Republicans’ suspicions that the tax-collecting agency’s targeting of conservatives was motivated by partisanship at the first congressional hearing on the scandal.

Steven Miller, the acting commissioner of the IRS who submitted his resignation from that role earlier this week, appeared on Friday to face lawmakers’ pointed questions about the revelations that IRS officials had inappropriately singled out conservative groups for extra scrutiny.

But he and J. Russell George, the IRS inspector general whose report unearthed the controversy that has dominated Washington this week, testified that there was no evidence of political motivations among IRS employees who targeted conservative advocacy groups applying for nonprofit status. They instead blamed incompetence.

“I do not believe that partisanship motivated the practices of the people described in the IG report,” Miller said. “I think that what happened here was that foolish mistakes were made by people who were trying to be efficient in their work.”

GOP lawmakers also repeatedly sought to ferret out any information as to whether Miller had talked with White House officials about the targeting of conservatives, or – more ominously – had shared confidential tax information with the administration. (The implication of that line of questioning involved last year’s presidential election, when Republican nominee Mitt Romney’s own tax practices became an issue in the election.)

To that end, George testified that he told the Treasury Department's general counsel and deputy secretary Neal Wolin of the investigation before the 2012 election.

In the week following the first revelations of the inspector general report, conservatives have seized upon the scandal to ding President Barack Obama, demanding criminal prosecutions of IRS officials, and accusing the president (as Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., did Thursday) of a “culture of intimidation.” GOP members of the committee spent much of the hearing trying to advance that narrative

But Miller repeatedly – and, at times, tersely – disputed speculation that IRS officials were deliberately targeting ideological opponents of the Obama administration, and denied that he had misled Congress in previous testimony about the IRS’s actions. When asked sharply by Committee Chairman Dave Camp, R-Mich., how he would characterize his previous, inaccurate testimony to Congress, Miller shot back: "I always answer questions truthfully, Mr. Camp."

Miller, the ousted acting commissioner of the IRS, was the primary object of lawmakers’ scrutiny at Friday’s hearing, particularly Republicans who expressed incredulity and outrage at the IRS fiasco.

“Is this still America?” asked Rep. Kevin Brady, R-Texas, who said the IRS controversy were evidence of a government “drunk on power.”

Republicans came to the hearing armed with plenty of outrage and examples of Tea Party groups from their home districts running into red tape in their nonprofit applications, which they used to pummel Miller throughout the hearing. The outgoing commissioner parried their attacks by responding that he was not permitted to comment on specific cases.

Democrats spent the bulk of the committee’s hearing, though, warning their GOP colleagues against cultivating evidence of a scandal where there is none. Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., asked both Miller and George, the inspector general, whether they had unearthed any evidence of political motivation in IRS officials’ scrutiny of conservatives.

They replied identically: “We did not, sir.”

Those answers scarcely satisfied Republicans, who have sensed a major opportunity – combined with simultaneous controversies this week involving the Obama administration’s handling of last year’s terror attack in Benghazi, and the Department of Justice’s seizure of Associated Press journalists’ phone records – to play offense against the White House.

For their part, Democrats have largely tried to match Republicans in their outrage at the IRS controversy, led by the president himself. Obama said this week that he was “angry” at the IRS for its actions, and asked for Miller’s resignation. Obama named Daniel Werfel, who currently serves as controller of the Office of Management and Budget, as the new acting IRS commissioner on Thursday.

Jason Reed / Reuters

Outgoing acting IRS Commissioner Steven Miller listens at a House Ways and Means Committee hearing on the Internal Revenue Service targeting conservative groups on Capitol Hill, May 17, 2013.

The president has said he didn’t learn about the actions taken by the IRS to target conservative and Tea Party groups until details of the inspector general report leaked to the media last Friday.

But while the controversy will likely spur plenty of future hearings into the IRS wrongdoing, Friday’s testimony – for now – could help limit the political fallout to the IRS itself.

“As acting commissioner I want to apologize on behalf of the IRS for the mistakes that we made and the poor service that we provided,” Miller said in his opening statement. He said later in the hearing that he should ultimately be held accountable for IRS employees’ missteps, but denied that meant he was personally involved in directing political targeting.

Related stories:

Obama names acting IRS chief, denies knowledge of IRS report

This story was originally published on Fri May 17, 2013 7:43 AM EDT

The House voted Thursday to repeal the Affordable Care Act, with Republicans using this week’s furor over the Internal Revenue Service targeting conservative advocacy groups to warn against the power the IRS will have to help administer the health care law’s new insurance coverage requirements.

The vote was 229 to 195, with two Democrats crossing party lines to vote with Republicans for the repeal effort.

The two Democrats who voted to repeal the law were Rep. Jim Matheson of Utah and Rep. Mike McIntyre of North Carolina, both of whom represent very Republican-leaning districts.

It marked the 37th time the House has voted to repeal all or part of the law, but the vote allowed new members elected last November to take a symbolic stand on the law. The bill stands no chance of passage in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that repeal of the law would cause an increase in budget deficits of $109 billion over the next ten years.  If the law were rescinded, spending would be cut by $890 billion and revenues by $1 trillion over the ten-year period.

Much of the debate Thursday revisited polemical points both sides have made since the law was first debated in 2009 and 2010.

House Ways and Means Committee chairman Rep. Dave Camp, R- Mich., said the law “puts the federal government precisely where it doesn’t belong: between Americans and their doctors. Instead of families deciding what coverage is best for them, or families and employers deciding how much they can afford, this law has the secretary of health and human services and the IRS making those decisions.” 

But Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., the senior Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, called Thursday’s vote “a Republican obsession” and “an embarrassing spectacle that has consumed House Republicans for more than two years, to the detriment of our economy and millions of Americans looking for work.”

Other Democrats such as Senate Finance Committee chairman Sen. Max Baucus, D- Mont., an architect of the law, have in recent weeks fretted about the way in which the Obama administration is moving to implement the law, inform the public, and sign up uninsured people.

Baucus told Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius at a hearing of his committee last month, “Small businesses have no idea what to expect ... . I just see a huge train wreck coming ... .” 

Sebelius herself has become a Republican target in recent days after the Washington Post reported that she has made phone calls to health industry executives and others urging them to contribute money to nonprofit groups such as Enroll America, which is headed by a former Obama administration official, which are working to inform the uninsured about how to sign up for coverage.

Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., said “Secretary Sebelius’s fundraising for and coordinating with private entities helping to implement the new health care law may be illegal, should cease immediately and should be fully investigated by Congress.”

He charged that her fundraising circumvents the requirement that only Congress may spend money to implement a law or run a federal program.

President Barack Obama on Thursday vowed a “sustained effort” to crack down on sexual assault in the military, saying that the rash of violence is “dangerous to our national security.”

“The reason we are so good is not because of fancy equipment, it’s not because of our incredible weapons systems and technology, it’s because of our people,” he said, according to a pool report. “It comes down to do people trust each other and do they understand that they’re all part of a single system that has to operate under whatever circumstances effectively. The issue of sexual assault in our armed forces undermines that trust.”

The president’s remarks came after a meeting with Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Martin Dempsey and the military service chiefs to address the issue of sexual assault in the armed forces.

Obama said that those military leaders are “ashamed by some of what’s happened” and that he has asked Hagel and Dempsey to lead an effort to overhaul the military’s system.

Public pressure to change the military’s policy has mounted since two military officials charged with preventing such cases have been accused of committing acts of sexual violence. 

A bipartisan group of lawmakers on Thursday unveiled a bill that would prevent military commanders from handling sexual assault cases involving their subordinates.

This story was originally published on Thu May 16, 2013 5:51 PM EDT

The Internal Revenue Service doesn't want to play ball with Republican senators these days -- at least not softball.

The tax agency's softball team, called the Cheetahs, has canceled its scheduled game with the team from Republican Sen. John Cornyn's office.

"We contacted them to confirm our game which was scheduled for tomorrow [Friday] night and they said they needed to reschedule," said Cornyn spokesman Drew Brandewie.

The matchup was supposed to be the first game of the season for Cornyn's office team.

Cornyn and other GOP senators have hammered the IRS in recent days for targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny. The acting IRS commissioner, Steven Miller, resigned Wednesday at President Barack Obama's request.

The IRS did not immediately return a request for comment.

So far, the game hasn't been rescheduled.

"Guess they needed an extension," Brandewie said.

Related: 

Obama denies knowledge of IRS targeting

President Barack Obama will appoint a White House budget officer to the be the new acting Internal Revenue Service commissioner, an announcement made following a fresh declaration from the president that he knew nothing about the inspector general’s report detailing improper IRS actions until it was leaked.

After announcing the resignation of acting IRS Director Steven Miller on Wednesday evening, the president emerged Thursday afternoon to answer questions from the press about actions taken by IRS employees to single out conservative and Tea Party advocacy groups for extra scrutiny in their applications for nonprofit status.

"I can assure you that I certainly did not know anything about the I.G. report before the I.G. report had been leaked ... through the press," said Obama. "Typically, the I.G. reports are not supposed to be widely distributed or shared. They tend to be, you know, a process that everybody's trying to protect the integrity of. But, what I'm absolutely certain of is that the actions that were described in that I.G. report are unacceptable."

The president declined to endorse appointing an independent counsel to investigate the controversy -- an idea that some Republicans have demanded. The criminal investigation initiated by the Justice Department, combined with the administration's efforts to cooperate with lawmakers in their investigations, Obama argued, should be sufficient.

"I think it's going to be sufficient for us to be working with Congress," he said.

Just hours after that event, the White House said that Daniel Werfel, current controller of the Office of Management and Budget, would be named acting IRS chief, effective May 22.

In a press release, Obama said, "The American people deserve to have the utmost confidence and trust in their government, and as we work to get to the bottom of what happened and restore confidence in the IRS, Danny has the experience and management ability necessary to lead the agency at this important time."

Later Thursday, NBC News confirmed that a second top Internal Revenue Service official has announced plans to leave the agency. An internal IRS memo says that Joseph Grant, commissioner of the agency's tax exempt and government entities division, will retire June 3.

Of the three controversies that dominated Washington this week, the IRS issue has proven the most politically noxious for Obama.

The White House has also been besieged by new questions about its response to last year's terrorist attack against a diplomatic installation in Benghazi, Libya, along with revelations that the Justice Department had monitored Associated Press journalists' phone records.

The IRS and AP cases have been particularly thorny politically for one of Obama's top allies in the cabinet, Attorney General Eric Holder, who on Wednesday faced grilling on Capitol Hill for his role in both controversies. Republicans renewed some of their longstanding demands that Holder resign his position, demands which the president rejected on Thursday.

"I have complete confidence in Eric Holder as attorney general," Obama said.

After weathering blistering criticism from Republicans, the administration has begun trying to craft its response to all three issues.

To that end, Obama on Thursday announced new measures meant to enhance security for U.S. diplomatic postings abroad as part of the administration's continued reaction to the Benghazi incident.

"I am intent on making sure we do everything we can to prevent another tragedy like this from happening again," Obama said at the White House.

His remarks come amid intensified efforts by Republican members of Congress to probe the Obama administration's reaction to the Sept. 11, 2012 attacks, which left four Americans dead, including U.S. ambassador Christopher Stevens.

The administration has sought to turn the narrative on that matter in its favor beginning Wednesday, when it released emails documenting how the administration crafted its first public responses to the attack.

Obama called on members of Congress in both parties to "come together" and work to authorize legislation to help fortify embassies and other diplomatic installations as a tribute to the deceased in Benghazi.

Jason Reed / Reuters

President Barack Obamaand Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan arrive for a joint news conference in the White House Rose Garden in Washington, May 16, 2013.

Still, the controversy involving the AP helped prompt the administration to renew its efforts to have Congress authorize a federal shield law that would protect journalists from having to disclose confidential details of their work in court.

"To the extent that this case has prompted renewed interest with respect to how do we strike that balance properly, I think that now's the time for us to revisit that legislation," Obama said. "I think that's a worthy conversation to have."

Whether any of Obama's actions will placate Republicans, who are eager to use these controversies to gain political traction and slow or halt the president's second-term agenda, remains to be seen.

Lawmakers in both parties plan a series of high-profile hearings, beginning on Friday, on each of the controversies. And Republicans in particular have been eager to make political hay of the administration's recent missteps.

Speaking before the president this morning on Capitol Hill, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said the controversies were a mark of “remarkable arrogance” by the president and his administration, though Boehner said that the Republican-controlled House was still primarily focused on the business of legislating.

NBC's Peter Alexander and Kelly O'Donnell contributed to this report.

Related stories:

• First Thoughts: White House makes moves to stop the political bleeding
• Obama calls IRS flap 'inexcusable,' announces resignation of acting IRS chief

This story was originally published on Thu May 16, 2013 12:06 PM EDT