
NYT: A New Search For Consensus On Health Care
The New York Times reports on the latest efforts to find a new consensus for a pared-down health care bill: "The consensus measure would be less ambitious than the bills approved last year. It would extend insurance coverage to perhaps 12 million to 15 million people -- and provide political cover to Democrats, who said they could not simply drop the issue after spending so much time and effort on it. The pared-back approach would cover fewer than half of those who, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would gain coverage under the House and Senate bills. But it would not put the government on the hook for what critics say is a new entitlement, a change that would appeal to some Republicans."
Obama's Day Ahead
President Obama will depart form the White House at 9:35 a.m. ET and Andrews Air Force Base at 9:50 a.m. ET, arriving at 11 a.m. ET in Cleveland, Ohio. Obama will tour the Wind Turbine Manufacturing and Fab Lab facilities at Lorain County Community College in Elyria, at 1:20 p.m. ET, and hold a town hall meeting at 2:05 p.m. ET. Obama will depart from Cleveland at 4:55 p.m. ET, arriving back at Andrews Air Force Base at 6 p.m. ET, and back at the White House at 6:15 p.m. ET.
Gates: 'The United States Does Not Covet A Single Inch Of Pakistani Soil'
Speaking to officers at Pakistan's National Defense University, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates sought to assuage doubts about the American presence in the region. "I fully understand why some of you may be skeptical about the U.S. commitment to Pakistan," said Gates, also adding: "The United States does not covet a single inch of Pakistani soil."
Baucus: 'We're Going To Pass Health Care Reform"
Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) predicted that health care reform will still pass. "We're going to pass health care reform. There are lots of options, and we're just talking about the pros and cons," said Baucus, who also added that "it might take a day or two" to figure out how to do it.
Obama Bank Plan Wins Backing From Europe
President Obama's plan to put new restrictions on banks' sizes and trading activities has picked up support from Europe, including the region's conservatives. "They see that regulation, which was a taboo word that was difficult to use in financial circles in the United States, is vital to contain ... banking excesses," said French Economy Minister Christine Lagarde.
Harkin To Push Filibuster Reform -- Faces Uphill Battle
Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), a long time opponent of the filibuster is set to introduce a proposal soon to eliminate the power of the Senate minority to block legislation, noting that the frequency of filibusters has risen from once per Congress in the 1950's to 139 in the last one. However, Baucus will have a lot of problems trying to remove the 60-vote threshold -- it takes 67 votes to change the Senate rules.
Leno To Headline White House Correspondents Dinner
Jay Leno will headline the upcoming White House Correspondents Dinner. The decision was made before the recent controversies involving Leno getting The Tonight Show back, and Conan O'Brien leaving NBC, according to the White House Correspondents Association.
USgreentech
January 22, 2010 9:11 AM
Two meetings, three meetings or four. The Obama administration is a success!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Progressive Party
January 22, 2010 9:11 AM
What is the actual rule for changing Senate rules? I hear that is 67 votes or a mere 50 + 1 to change the rules. I remember the repukes threatening to change the rules before when they didn't have 60 votes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Skybolt
January 22, 2010 9:43 AM in reply to Progressive Party
You need 67 votes to change the rules during the session, but only 50+1 to set the rules at the start of the session.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Progressive Party
January 22, 2010 10:45 AM in reply to Skybolt
thanks....
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
USgreentech
January 22, 2010 9:11 AM
Round up these kids. The blue states moving towards a higher dimension. It's all together for a minute by minute account of the media.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
January 22, 2010 9:24 AM
Oh dear. Obama's bank proposal is supported by "Europe." That'll be enough to gin up fevered opposition on the right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
felix
January 22, 2010 9:25 AM
Oh dear. Obama's bank proposal is supported by "Europe." That'll be enough to gin up fevered opposition on the right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
JZ
January 22, 2010 9:38 AM
One great way to rally the base is to pass an even crappier version of HCR than many thought was too inadequate to support. Win-win!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 22, 2010 9:43 AM
Krugman is right on the money today:
Obama needs to show leadership and courage -- so far he's failing both tests. House Democrats -- including progressives who have every right and reason to be furious with the Senate -- need to sublimate their anger and deliver for the American people.
The only viable alternative that I can see is the one proposed by "JB" -- to fight for the compromise House and Senate negotiators worked out, call out Senate Republicans for being the heirs to the southerners who filibustered civil rights legislation, and force them to read the phonebook while the American people see what they're made of. At least that would prove Democrats have the courage of their convictions.
Still, I'd rather see real results than make a statement. We're inches away -- failure to bring it home would be a catastrohpe of epic and historic proportions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
whitesauce
January 22, 2010 9:53 AM in reply to Moose49
I don't want to go to war with anyone in this forum. We're not all going to agree on this. I get it: We need stronger leadership. However, the battle, as it has been played out, is over. It's time to reshape the discussion. There has to be an easier way to get a bill done. The Dems need not throw out the baby with the bath water. Pass the things that can be passed.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 22, 2010 10:00 AM in reply to whitesauce
I don't want to get in a war with anyone either and I recognize and respec the fact that not everyone feels the same way I do. Still, what you say is:
There has to be an easier way to get a bill done. The Dems need not throw out the baby with the bath water. Pass the things that can be passed.
... a sentiment I agree with. And to me, at least, the obvious answer is for the House to pass the Senate bill. As simple as can be. One vote and the law is passed. All it takes is a little political courage on the part of House Dems, leadership and head-banging from President Obama (isn't that supposed to be Rahm's forte), and a collective understanding that failure to do this will guarantee electoral disaster next fall.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
whitesauce
January 22, 2010 10:09 AM in reply to Moose49
I was one of the people who suggested that Congress "kill the bill" in December, but I would have no problem with the house passing the bill, providing they could get assurances from the Senate. However, there is a fear in the House right now. I don't know if it's justified or not, but it's going to affect what happens next. I know some people are angry at the Progressive Caucus, but I suspect that we've probably lost other votes that have not been reported (Blue Dogs). If paring it down is the only way to regain or even broaden consensus, then we should do it. We can't go into the midterms without a bill. I think we all agree on that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Moose49
January 22, 2010 10:32 AM in reply to whitesauce
We can't go into the midterms without a bill. I think we all agree on that.
Absolutely right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
whitesauce
January 22, 2010 9:44 AM
I think we all agree that paring down the health care bill stinks. I really hate how things have turned out. However, the larger bill has become so hard to define that we're starting to lose the argument. I think that if we're serious about creating change in the system, we have to pass something that's clearly understood by the public, whether they agree or not. If it means raing down the bill, let's do it and not be stubborn about pushing the larger bill.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 22, 2010 10:36 AM
As JMM points out, the pared down approach will cover fewer people, so by definition is less progressive.
Krugman is spot on. And I'm no Krugman fan. It's just painfully clear to everyone who is not blinded by ego, pride, greed, resentment (looking at you House Dems -- "who does the Seante think they are!") that we must pass HCR.
I'll repeat this just to belabor the point:
It would be a betrayal of trust not to pass HCR. That is why they were elected. If they can't or won't do the job they promised they would do, they sould GO HOME and let someone else do it. Their job is NOT to spend all year looking out for their polls numbers and career prospects. If they can't or won't do their job, there's no point in winning reelection anyway.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 22, 2010 10:37 AM in reply to AnswerFrog
"politics is supposed to be about achieving something more than your own re-election."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
cube3u
January 22, 2010 11:03 AM
There is zero "political cover" for any Democrat in Congress. The only possibility of avoiding a massacre in November is to pass a healthcare bill.
All of these calculations about taking out bits of the bill ignores the assessment of what can be passed in the Senate with 60 votes now that we have 59 votes. There is zero reason for any Republican to concede anything; there is every incentive for them to stall the process on healthcare and obstruct any changes on any other issue. Wait for the fall campaign and bask in the ads about the "do nothing" Democrats who can't govern when they have the HUGE majorities.
There's simply no reason for political stupidity right now by the Congressional Democrats.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
AnswerFrog
January 22, 2010 11:29 AM in reply to cube3u
Yes, zero political cover.
They will get hit in Nov. either way. Indeed, they already voted for it once, and that will be featured in an attack ad.
Better to pass it and have something positive to defend yourself with. Running scared now condedes the point.
Do they think the GOP and their wealthy health co friends will simply forget about this?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?