* A terrific piece by Jonathan Bernstein detailing how the eventual decision Republicans make on immigration will be all about internal party politics. In the real world, #Obummer is entirely irrelevant to that process.
* Today the White House announced that the employer mandate will be relaxed, and Sarah Kliff puts it in policy perspective. As always, what’s striking is the absolute certainty among the law’s foes that it is in total collapse, even though this is, as Kliff notes, a relatively modest policy change.
* Danny Vinik does a nice job knocking down GOP claims that Obamacare is standing in the way of full employment. This ending nails it:
There are plenty of other things Congress can do to spur on hiring — from policies targeted at the long-term unemployed to smart infrastructure spending. Guess who is standing in the way of those?
Read the whole thing.
* The CBO clarifies yet again: No, we did not say that Obamacare will cause 2.5 million people to lose their jobs. That should put an end to this. Or, you know, not.
* Andrew Sprung has a very deep policy dive into a key question: What sort of damage can Republicans actually do if they get into a position where they can seriously change Obamacare?
* Ben Armbruster on the next fight with anti-Iran hardliners in Congress: What’s going to be in the final long term deal?
* David Dayen on how the Obama administration is shooting itself in the foot by preventing postal service reform — which could bring banking services to millions of low income Americans — from moving forward.
* A great E.J. Dionne column pinpointing a key reason for gridlock in D.C.: Some conservatives remain in thrall to crank economics, pulling the conversation way to the right of the old Keynesian consensus.
* And speaking of which, Michael Tomasky on how the Washington establishment is enabling GOP post-policy nihilism by pretending there’s nothing all that amiss about it.