�������ýҕ�l

It was April 1 — a week before California Congressman Eric Swalwell officially announced he would run for president — and an auditorium full of high school students in Algona, Iowa, was already grilling him about his plans for the country. “About your health care policies,” one student said into the microphone. “How would you pay for that?” Swalwell didn’t simplify his answer for the students — many of whom will be allowed to caucus on Feb. 3, 2020. The congressman spoke about his plans to reinstate the inheritance tax, overhaul capital gains taxes and reduce national defense spending. (Pfannenstiel, 5/9)

Iowa caucus-goers’ top concerns appear to be health care and climate change, according to data analysis by the Des Moines Register. An analysis of more than 300 questions asked by potential voters at 46 candidate events over the course of 30 days found 27 questions about climate or environmental issues. The candidate receiving the most climate-related questions was former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas), with seven, followed by Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) and Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.), each with four. (Budryk, 5/12)

These are three examples of a catchy talking point from the 2020 presidential hopeful — that toy guns are subject to more regulation than real guns. The Medium post is rather specific: The Consumer Product Safety Commission, because of a “loophole,” does not assess the safety of guns. But in television interviews and tweets, that nuanced point gets turned into misleading shorthand — there is “more federal regulation” of toy guns, or there are “no regulations” for guns. Booker’s point is not particularly original. Gun-control advocates have been calling for consumer safety oversight of guns for decades. But he veers off course when he compares regulatory oversight of guns and toy guns. (Kessler, 5/13)

Kaiser Health News: How Obamacare, Medicare And ‘Medicare For All’ Muddy The Campaign Trail

The health care debate has Democrats on Capitol Hill and the presidential campaign trail facing renewed pressure to make clear where they stand: Are they for “Medicare for All”? Or will they take up the push to protect the Affordable Care Act? Obamacare advocates have found a powerful ally in House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who in a recent “60 Minutes” appearance said that concentrating on the health law is preferable to Medicare for All. She argued that since the ACA’s “benefits are better” than those of the existing Medicare program, implementing Medicare for All would mean changing major provisions of current Medicare, which covers people 65 and up as well as those with disabilities. (Luthra, 5/13)