Hoyer Warns GOP: Tone Down Rhetoric, Senate Fight Looms

GOP Gears Up For Senate Theatrics




So much for the “Nuclear” Senate showdown.

After President Barack Obama’s showy Tuesday signing ceremony, the Senate’s cleanup work this week on health care is looking more like a political strategy session, as each party tries to cement public impressions of the bill.

“It’s going to pass here,” Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) said matter-of-factly. “It’s a matter of what amendments [Democrats] want to be for and what they’re not.”

To be sure, Republicans have lined up a bundle of politically embarrassing amendments and plan to wreak all sorts of procedural havoc.

“I think there’s going to be long nights, and there’s going to be anger and demagoguery from the Republicans,” said Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio). “But I think the outcome is pretty clear.”

So at this point, Republicans are simply going to continue with their key themes: that the new law will drastically cut Medicare, increase taxes and expand the government’s ballooning budget deficit.

And as Democrats try to downplay the bill as mere “fixes” to the law and vow to kill all GOP amendments, Republicans are inflating the measure’s importance by arguing it would make even more draconian changes to the newly enacted law.

Republicans are challenging several provisions with the Senate’s parliamentarian, Alan Frumin, on the grounds that they violate the so-called Byrd rule — named after Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) — which prohibits the addition of extraneous items to budget legislation. Republicans are also pushing uncomfortable amendments, including one by Coburn that prohibits sex offenders from being prescribed drugs for erectile dysfunction.

And Republicans are planning unusual procedural tricks to ensure their objections are heard; the GOP on Tuesday forced committee work in the Senate to essentially come to a halt.

But even if the GOP is successful in delaying action in the Senate and forcing changes to the bill, House Democratic leaders may bring the chamber back to session during the upcoming spring recess to pass the reconciliation bill one last time.

And that fact is not lost on some.

“Obviously, the damage has been done,” said New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, ranking Republican on the Budget Committee, who is leading the fight over the reconciliation bill. “But we have not had an opportunity to address some of the substantive policy questions which are out there that should be discussed in an amendment-type atmosphere.”

Since they began the health care debate last year, Democrats had kept the reconciliation process — a filibuster-proof way to make changes in tax laws and entitlement programs — firmly on the table. Nearly every time the strategy came to the fore, Republicans likened the idea to the “nuclear option” that nearly shut down the Senate in 2005, when the GOP tried to end filibusters for George W. Bush’s judicial nominees.

Gregg said the nuclear option was being referred to in the context of moving the whole health care bill through reconciliation — rather than the smaller set of items now being considered.

“This bill was used to buy votes; it’s a much smaller bill,” Gregg said.

In fact, it was House Democrats who pushed for the reconciliation bill to clean up some of the more politically problematic provisions in the Senate bill, including closing the doughnut hole on Medicare prescription drug coverage, delaying an excise tax on high-end insurance plans and killing the so-called Cornhusker Kickback. The Senate bill also includes a sweeping rewrite of student loan laws that most Republicans strongly oppose.

Democrats, feeling confident, are making fun of Senate Republicans for actually holding up the bill that removes some of the most controversial items.

“I don’t understand what they’re doing, because they’re all going to be for supporting the Nebraska cornhusker provision and will be voting against all the things this bill cleans up,” Brown said.

There is one potential area that could blow up the debate. If Vice President Joe Biden uses his authority to overrule a decision by parliamentarian Frumin, it could cause chaos in the chamber because that is so rarely done.

“They would be very loath to do that because it would clearly be a political act,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah). “And the Democrats have already said they’re going to abide by the parliamentarian, which means they must have some confidence that whatever they said is going to work out their way.”

Democrats downplay the likelihood of such a scenario, and Jim Manley, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), declined to comment on the possibility.

Republicans aren’t sparing Frumin, who is supposed to be an impartial referee on Senate procedure.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) refused to say Tuesday whether he believes the parliamentarian has been a fair arbiter of the Senate rules.

“We’ll have views about that, I suppose, as we move along,” McConnell said Tuesday. “We’ll see what the parliamentarian rules and whether he becomes a player in this exercise or truly a referee, an umpire.”

The theatrics may go beyond rhetoric as well. Republicans could go to lengths to keep the Senate in session by trying to extend the freewheeling amendment process indefinitely — even though Democrats said they may push Frumin to rule such a tactic dilatory and prevent them from doing that.

“Realistically, I think the answer to that question is how long can senators stay awake continuously,” said Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). “We may see.”

But most Senate insiders don’t think the GOP will go to such lengths, as the real battle is now on the campaign trail.

“I’m not sure the public really differentiates between the [comprehensive] bill and the reconciliation bill,” said Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee. “It’s all part of the machinations; it’s part of the process here.”


Sources: AP, Politico

GOP Announces Dems Don't Have The Votes Yet

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Sources: MSNBC, Meet The Press, Fox News, Youtube

Obama Pressures House Democrats To Vote "Yes"

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

House Dems Under Pressure To Deliver On Health Care


As health care lobbying heats up, some members are getting calls from President Barack Obama, like the three Rep. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.) got in the past two weeks.

“He believes that the economy will turn around, that people will be in a better position to judge the effects of this bill later on, that while it may not be a politically popular vote today, a year or two or three from now, it will be viewed as something the American people want,” said Altmire, who voted no last time on health reform but is undecided now.

Others in the House said the lobbying can be much less friendly. Aides to conservative Democratic lawmakers describe intense pressure tactics, including one who said his office has received calls from donors. Those calls are taken as a thinly veiled threat to withhold future financial support if the member doesn’t vote as the donor wishes.

“We’re having donors, even donors outside of our district, that are being called and asked to urge support” for the bill, said a senior aide to one conservative Democrat, who indicated the tactics could backfire on the health care bill. “If you want to play Chicago-style politics, and that’s what this is, then we will come out firmly against it.”

The aide also targeted the Democratic National Committee, where Vice Chairwoman Donna Brazile used her Twitter account to encourage primary challenges to Democrats who vote against the bill.

“If a handful of Democrats decide to defeat this bill, they deserve to get a primary challenge to defend the status quo and insurance industry,” Brazile tweeted.

The White House said no one there is telling donors to call members, and Brazile later clarified that she wasn’t speaking for the DNC.

Nonetheless, the comments fueled frustration among moderate Democrats who believe their party is working against them.

Rep. Chet Edwards, a Texas Democrat who remains a firm “no,” said he’s getting calls spurred by Organizing for America, the president’s unofficial outreach arm. He said he’s fine with constituents expressing their opinions — and even with the right of OFA to engage — but noted of the Obama organization, “It’s clear to me they could care less about my political future.”

With the fate of Obama’s top legislative goal in the balance, the president and his Cabinet are doing everything in their power to help Speaker Nancy Pelosi lock down the 216 votes she needs to get health care out of the House — and very likely onto his desk. But it will take plenty of work by both to get there.

“When people come up to me, there is a decided anti-health-reform view,” Altmire said, referring to the conversations he has with people at fairs, restaurants and church festivals in his Pittsburgh-area district. “The calls to my office have been pretty negative, and it’s gaining momentum every day. I’m giving everybody a chance to be heard, but if my district’s not on board with this, I’m not going to be able to vote for this.”

That doesn’t bode well for a White House — and speaker — in desperate search of votes to do something no other president has: provide health care coverage to nearly every American.

From conference calls to member meetings, the White House has mobilized every resource at its command. Labor Secretary Hilda Solis held a call Tuesday afternoon to highlight the legislation’s benefits in the Latino community.

And several House members interviewed by POLITICO said Obama should once again postpone the departure for his looming trip to Australia, Indonesia and Guam, already moved from Friday to Sunday. While creating a natural deadline for eleventh-hour health care talks, that’s once again becoming a problem as Obama tries to sell reluctant members of his party on the reform legislation.

“For the first time in eight months, the president is finally getting his hands dirty, and now he’s going to hop on the plane? Please,” said a Democratic congressman, requesting anonymity.

Whether or not Obama sticks around, Pelosi is clearly relishing her role as the Democrats’ top vote counter — even though she relinquished the official title back in 2003.

“I never stop whipping,” a beaming Pelosi told reporters Tuesday. “There’s no beginning, there’s no middle, and there’s no end. ... We have a massive whip operation, and we’ll be ready.”

She later added, “I think we’ll be in pretty good shape.”

But her No. 2, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, said Democrats were still shy of getting the votes needed to pass reform. And another day passed without a Congressional Budget Office score or language on a reconciliation bill — raising the prospect that the vote might slip past the weekend and into next week.

That means folks like Altmire can expect to hear plenty from the speaker, the president and outside groups in the coming days. And for every person prodding lawmakers to vote yes, it’s easy to find someone else asking them to vote no.

Ohio Rep. Marcy Kaptur, who backed Michigan Rep. Bart Stupak’s abortion restrictions, said she is still undecided but that the abortion language in the Senate bill is unacceptable.

She has not talked with the president but did receive calls from “several” Cabinet members. “They have the Cabinet secretaries very busy. I think different interest groups on the outside have been very, very busy,” she said. “They shouldn’t waste their time on burdening members’ offices with a crescendo of phone calls because what we need is work on the language.”

Rep. Mike McMahon, a first-term New York Democrat who voted against the House bill, played coy when asked whether he’d heard from Obama, saying, “He has a very able staff, and they are making sure their side is well-explained.”

Altmire has become the quintessential swing vote and seems to be on Obama’s speed dial. Obama tried to reach him Monday on a flight back from Ohio. Altmire was in the car, driving back to Washington for another week of votes, and the two didn’t connect.

When Obama finally tracked him down, after both had returned to their respective offices, the two spoke for about 10 minutes. The conversation focused on Altmire’s reservations about the House bill and what party leaders have done to change it.

Altmire said he’s keeping an open mind, but his distaste for the process is obvious, particularly the prospect that House members may not even vote on the Senate’s bill.

“I’m against that, and I think that’s really hurting the argument for health care reform when you give the public the appearance that you’re not even willing to go on record supporting it,” Altmire said. “I’m trying to be open, but I will be honest that, as this process continues, there is a greater level of unease every passing day, and the process is a part of that.”

Altmire said his conversations with Obama revolved almost entirely around policy, not politics, but that the president did address his constituents’ concerns, urging him to take a long-term view. Does that logic make sense to the congressman?

“I’m listening to my constituents,” he said. “I think I’d be doing a disservice to my constituents, with all of them coming down here making special trips, for me to say, ‘You know what, I appreciate you coming, but I’ve already made up my mind.’ I’m not, I don’t think, going to make a definitive statement until the vote because I want to give them an opportunity to weigh in.”


Sources: Politico, MSNBC

Eric Massa Resigns Amid Sex Scandal; 1 Less HC Vote

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Rep. Eric Massa To Resign


Democratic Rep. Eric Massa will resign from Congress on Monday, only days after reports first surfaced that the freshman New York lawmaker was under investigation by the House ethics committee for allegedly sexually harassing a male staffer.

Massa was preparing the news in the Corning Leader, his local newspaper, but several media outlets were already reporting the news Friday afternoon.

In a statement released Friday, Massa directly addressed the ethics issue for the first time, acknowledging that he used language that might have made staffers uncomfortable. But he did not specifically address any specific sexual harassment allegations.

“I own this reality. There is no doubt in my mind that I did in fact, use language in the privacy of my own home and in my inner office that, after 24 years in the Navy, might make a Chief Petty Officer feel uncomfortable,” Massa said. “In fact, there is no doubt that this Ethics issue is my fault and mine alone. But in the incredibly toxic atmosphere that is Washington D.C., with the destruction of our elected leaders having become a blood sport, especially in talk radio and on the internet, there is also no doubt that an Ethics investigation would tear my family and my staff apart.”

Massa, who was elected in November 2008, announced earlier in the week that he would not be seeking a second term following a cancer scare in December.

He initially dismissed as “unsubstantiated” a POLITICO report that he was being scrutinized for improper advances to a junior aide in his office. In fact, he mentioned this report in his resignation statement Friday afternoon.

“At no point prior to this had any member of the Ethics Committee communicated with me directly - if fact I first read it on the internet,” Massa said.

The ethics committee formally announced on Thursday night that Massa was under investigation by the panel, although Reps. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) and Jo Bonner (R-Ala.), the chairwoman and ranking member of the committee, did not announce the reason for their probe.

Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) also publicly acknowledged that his staff had told a former Massa aide that he should report the Massa harassment allegation to the ethics committee or else Hoyer would take it to the ethics panel himself. Ronald Hikel, Massa’s former deputy chief of staff and legislative director, was then interviewed twice by ethics committee investigators.

Massa’s assertion that he did not learn that he was under investigation by the ethics committee until after making his retirement announcement appears to contradict the facts of the case.

Joe Racalto, Massa’s chief of staff, told a Rochester TV station on Thursday that he was interviewed by ethics committee investigators several weeks ago in regards to the sexual harassment allegations against Massa, well before the case became a public scandal or Massa announced his intentions to leave the House.

“Racalto [Massa's Chief of Staff] also said that he was interviewed by the Ethics Committee about two and a half weeks ago ‘about this matter, but he said he couldn't discuss that in further detail,” said a blog post by a WHAM-TV reporter on Thursday night.

Several other Massa aides also meet with the ethics committee prior to this week, a former Massa staff and House insiders said.

Ronald Hikel, Massa’s former deputy chief of staff and legislative director, went to Hoyer’s office on Feb. 8 with an allegation that Massa had harassed a junior male staffer in the New York Democrats personal office.

Hikel was told by Hoyer’s staff that he should report the allegation to the ethics committee himself or Hoyer would. Hikel did as told by Hoyer’s staff, and he was twice interviewed by panel staffers, Hikel confirmed.

Hoyer's office released a statement on Wednesday confirming Hikel's account.

Massa’s resignation is another blow to Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other top Democratic leaders. Democrats won control of the House in 2006 on a vow to clean up the “culture of corruption” on Capitol Hill.

However, Rep. Charlie Rangel, the longtime Democratic lawmaker from Harlem, was forced out of his post as chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee earlier this week following a public “admonishment” by the ethics committee for taking corporate-funded trips to the Caribbean in 2007 and 2008.

The ethics committee is continuing a broader investigation into Rangel’s personal finances.

And two other Democrats lawmakers – Reps. Maxine Waters (Calif.) and Laura Richardson (Calif.) – remain under investigation as well.


View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Politico, Google Maps

Eric Massa Steps Down Amid Sex Scandal, Hoyer Knew

Eric Massa To Retire Amid Allegations He Sexually Harassed A Male Staffer


First-term Rep. Eric Massa announced Wednesday that he will not seek reelection, saying his doctors have told him that he can’t continue to “run at 100 miles an hour.”

But several House aides told POLITICO that the House ethics committee has been informed of allegations that the New York Democrat, who is married with two children, made unwanted advances toward a junior male staffer.

A more senior staffer — Ronald Hikel, Massa’s former deputy chief of staff and legislative director — took the complaints to the ethics committee and was interviewed about them twice.

Hikel declined to comment about the situation, but House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) confirmed that the Democratic leadership had been informed of the allegations before the news broke.

“I’ve heard of that allegation before,” he said. “I had some indication, yes, but I don’t want to go beyond that. And my presumption [is] it’s being pursued in the course of business.”

Massa told POLITICO early Wednesday afternoon that no one has brought allegations of misconduct to him.

Asked specifically about the sexual-harassment allegations, he said: “When someone makes a decision to leave Congress, everybody says everything. I have health issues. I’ll talk about it [later].”

Massa has suffered from Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. On a conference call with reporters Wednesday afternoon, he said he was hospitalized in December and that his doctors made it clear to him that he needed to slow down. He denied that he was retiring because of a sexual-harassment claim.

“Do I or have I ever used salty language when I’m angry, especially in the privacy of my inner office or even at home? Yes, I have, and I have apologized to those where it’s appropriate,” Massa said. “But those kinds of articles, unsubstantiated without fact or backing, are a symptom of what’s wrong with this city.”

A 20-year Navy veteran, Massa serves on the Agriculture, Armed Services and Homeland Security committees. His departure endangers Democrats’ hold on his competitive upstate New York seat.

Hoyer said news of the sexual-harassment allegation — coming on the same day Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) gave up his gavel on the Ways and Means Committee — shouldn’t give Republicans a leg up in November.

“I don’t think it helps anybody in the institution, any one of us on either side of the aisle. It certainly didn’t help Mr. Foley,” Hoyer said, referring to former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.), who resigned from Congress in 2006 amid allegations that he sent sexually explicit instant messages to underage male pages.

“When there were allegations about Mr. Foley or others, I think the institution suffers,” Hoyer continued. “And that’s why it’s so important that each of us conducts ourselves in a way that won’t bring discredit on the institution.”

Massa’s decision came as a complete surprise to several of his freshman Democratic colleagues in the New York delegation. According to the (New York) Daily News, which first reported that Massa was retiring, the congressman called party leaders and supporters in his district Wednesday to tell them of his plans.

“I don’t think it helps anybody in the institution, any one of us on either side of the aisle. It certainly didn’t help Mr. Foley,” Hoyer said, referring to former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.), who resigned from Congress in 2006 amid allegations that he sent sexually explicit instant messages to an underage male page.

“When there were allegations about Mr. Foley or others, I think the institution suffers,” Hoyer continued. “And that’s why it’s so important that each of us conducts ourselves in a way that won’t bring discredit on the institution.”

Massa’s decision came as a complete surprise to several of his freshman Democratic colleagues in the New York delegation. According to the New York Daily News, which first reported that Massa was retiring, the congressman called party leaders and supporters in his district Wednesday to tell them of his plans.

Massa has played a gadfly-like role in the House, calling for a single-payer health care system at a conference of liberal activists last year, despite representing a Republican-leaning district. He was one of 39 House Democrats to vote against health care legislation; he said it didn’t do enough to control costs.

As a freshman representing New York’s most Republican House district, Massa was one of the most endangered Democrats in the delegation. Republicans had been aggressively targeting his seat and landed top recruit Tom Reed, the Republican mayor of Corning, to challenge him.

Massa is now the 15th House Democrat to announce retirement plans, with 11 of them leaving districts that Republicans are aggressively contesting. House Republicans face 19 retirements, but most of their departing members hail from safe seats.

Massa’s departure also adds to the woes of New York Democrats, who have been on the defensive this week amid a scandal surrounding Gov. David Paterson, who announced he wasn’t running for election, and the tribulations involving Rangel.

After news of Massa’s retirement hit, New York Rep. Steve Israel, the head of recruiting for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, headed to DCCC offices to make recruiting calls in Massa’s district. The upstate New York district is ancestrally Republican and doesn’t have a deep bench of Democratic officeholders.

“It’s yet another uphill battle,” Israel said, but he noted that Democrats have been successful in two competitive special elections held last year in upstate New York.

Massa’s departure could scramble the Republican field since the filing deadline is not until July. Former Rep. John “Randy” Kuhl, whom Massa beat by 2 percentage points in 2008, is exploring the possibility of running for his old seat, according to a source who spoke with him after Massa’s retirement announcement.

In a statement, Kuhl said he would address “political decisions in the future, but right now it is important for Eric to get the treatment that he needs to recover.”

Other potential candidates who may consider entering the race include Monroe County Executive Maggie Brooks, state Assemblyman Brian Kolb and state Sen. Cathy Young.


View Larger Map

Sources: Politico, Google Maps

Health Care Bill Debate Resumes Tomorrow...Pelosi's Caving In

Health Care Debate Resumes With WH Meet


The health care debate resumes in earnest on Tuesday after more than a week of quiet following Senate passage of its landmark bill on Christmas Eve.

The four relevant House chairmen will meet with Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her leadership team at 1 o'clock in the speaker's Capitol office to start setting the parameters for negotiations with the Senate.

Then, Pelosi and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Nev.) will head to the White House for an early-evening meeting with President Barack Obama to discuss the final bill, according to Democratic officials. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and party Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) will participate in the meeting via conference call because neither has returned to Washington from the holiday break.

House negotiators have their work cut out for them because Reid – and his wavering moderates – will be reluctant to make any changes that would upset the fragile accords that paved the way for last month's historic, hard-fought, party-line vote to approve the Senate bill. This spells trouble for the public option, but there are plenty of other substantive differences between the two bills that could give House leaders a foothold to make other changes.

Democrats in the House are expected to push for increased subsidies for the lowest-income Americans who don't qualify for Medicaid. On the eve of the Senate vote, Democratic aides in the House also suggested they would push for a blend of new taxes to help pay for the subsidies and new programs created by the bill. That could include a tax on high-end insurance plans at a higher threshold organized labor could accept along with a tax on the wealthiest Americans.





But House aides acknowledge they don't have much room to maneuver. For starters, congressional negotiators need to keep the final 10-year price tag below $900 billion, forcing Democrats to pick priorities, since the House bill costs more than $1 trillion compared with a Senate measure that would cost an estimated $871 billion over the next decade.

House leaders also want the Senate to adopt a national insurance exchange, instead of the state-by-state exchanges established under the Senate bill, and add tougher mandates for employers and individuals. And, of course, Democrats get another chance to spar over the public option, coverage for abortion and whether illegal immigrants can purchase insurance through the exchanges.

Other issues are sure to pop up. For example, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) wants to squeeze more money from drugmakers by reimbursing them at a lower rate for seniors who qualify for both Medicare and Medicaid, and a pair of senators is pushing to include more money for the state-run Children's Health Insurance Program, while the House bill would fold it into the new exchange program.

Congressional Democrats are embarking on an abbreviated negotiation to save Reid the hassle of overcoming more procedural hurdles, but that means the resulting negotiations will be held behind closed-doors as the various stakeholders push for final changes. Liberal Democrats in the House have taken exception with the revised process, but most aides argue a drawn-out conference negotiation would give Senate Republicans too many opportunities to derail the process.

The White House is expected to take a very active role in melding the two bills after keeping quiet publicly during negotiations in the House and Senate. Obama's top aides took a much more hands-on role crafting the Senate bill, so it includes administration priorities that the House bill lacks, like the tax on high-end health care plans and language giving an outside panel the authority to increase efficiency and advocate cost-containment under Medicare.

They also want to make sure congressional negotiators wrap up work as quickly as possible so the administration and its congressional allies can turn their attention to the economy and job creation. That means bartering with lawmakers on other issues. According to TalkingPointsMemo, the Congressional Hispanic Caucus might relent in their push to let undocumented immigrants buy insurance on the exchange if the president pushes a comprehensive overhaul of the country's immigration laws – one that grants immigrants who seek a path to citizenship the right to purchase this insurance.

During the Tuesday session, the speaker is expected to set loose parameters for the abbreviated conference negotiations with the four chairmen with jurisdiction over the final legislation, Waxman, Education and Labor Chairman George Miller (D-Calif.), Rules Chairwoman Louise Slaugher (D-N.Y.) and Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.).

Democrats are also scheduled to hold a caucus meeting on Thursday at noon in the Capitol. But since few lawmakers are expected to be in town to attend, party leaders are setting up a conference call that will give every member a chance to participate in the dialogue and hear how the process will work. Aides suggested Pelosi might even walk her members through some of her early priorities for the final bill. The speaker also wants to hear from her members frequently as the process moves along.


Sources: Politico, MSNBC, The Ed Show, Youtube

House GOP Refuses To Continue Raising National Deficit

House budget splits defense, jobs



A year-end budget bill taking shape in the House on Monday night would meld $626 billion in new defense spending with a set of pared-back tax- and unemployment related provisions designed to get through the Senate without a prolonged fight.

At the same time, the leadership has opted to pursue a second, more robust job-creation package that will allow the House to speak on the issue but with no anticipation of Senate action before January.

What’s evolved then is a two-bill strategy with the primary focus this week on finalizing the budget package that will carry must-pass measures to extend the estate tax and authorize billions in extended jobless benefits.

“Our whole interest in life today is what can get through the Senate,” said House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.)

Over Pentagon protests, the defense chapter in the bill is expected provide an estimated $2.5 billion for the purchase of 10 more of Boeing’s C-17 transports, and $465 million is included for the continued development of a second engine for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. But elsewhere, Defense Secretary Robert Gates largely gets his way, including a full order of 30 F-35 fighters and the terminations he wanted of funding for the F-22 and VH-71 presidential helicopter programs.

Included in the package is $128 billion in contingency funds for on-going military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. And the Pentagon is expected to seek at least $35 billion more next year to help cover the cost of President Barack Obama’s decision to add up to 33,000 more U.S. troops.

As seen in the bill now, the ripple effect of this buildup is already being felt.

There has been increased pressure to add funds for the purchase of more armored vehicles able to cope with the rough Afghan terrain. The final core defense budget is expected to include an additional $825 million for this purpose on top of the administration’s request. And as proposed by the Senate months ago, hundreds more vehicles would be purchased by trimming back on spending for the training of Afghan security forces.

Hoyer’s goal is to get the bill to the House floor by Wednesday, but it’s no longer certain that Democrats will use this measure to address the sensitive issue of expanding Treasury’s borrowing authority to finance the growing federal debt.

Just a week ago, the Maryland Democrat had hoped House and Senate leaders could join forces on the defense bill to raise the ceiling by as much as $1.8 billion — enough to carry the government through next year and the 2010 elections. But this proved nerve-racking for Senate moderates, who are insisting on the creation first of an independent commission to force Congress to do more to address deficit reduction.

Hoyer is still pursuing some resolution of the issue. Even as the House bill moves forward, he remains in negotiations with Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.) over such a task force, already championed by 33 senators including 14 Democrats.

“I haven’t given up on that,” Hoyer told POLITICO. And if agreement can be reached, a long-term increase in the debt could still be added by the Senate and sent back to the House together with a compromise on the Conrad-backed deficit commission.

The senator himself has said he is open to giving Treasury the authority to borrow what it needs for a short term period—perhaps two months. But where this goes is ticklish still.

Threading the Senate needle is complicated by the fact that some liberals oppose the defense funding itself because of their opposition to the wars overseas. So it could be that the debt debate shifts to what would be a third hastily assembled vehicle, a stop gap spending bill to keep agencies operating while the budget bills are resolved.

As these many scenarios suggest, the whole year-end exit strategy is still evolving and something of a roll of the dice.

With Christmas next week, House leaders are anxious to send their members home for the holidays — but it’s proven difficult to get a clear read from Senate Democrats, who are consumed by the ongoing health care reform debate.

To appease the Senate and hold down costs, House Democrats are prepared to pare back plans to authorize a full one-year extension of benefits for the long-term jobless. Instead, any extension will be close to six months, costing $40 billion, and this may have to be reduced further, Democrats said Monday night.

At the same time, liberals are desperate to preserve some job creation and infrastructure investments. Tempers are frayed, and the two-track approach on jobs is born of this frustration.

In a remarkable effort to force the Senate’s hand, House Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) went so far last week as to actively pursue a strategy of providing only stop-gap funding for the Pentagon, thereby freezing out billions of dollars in home-state projects added by lawmakers in both chambers.

At one level, it was an anti-pork-barrel statement in the name of helping the unemployed. On the other, it would have put Democrats in the untenable posture of freezing defense funds in the midst of two wars.

A more peaceful approach, taken by tax writers, seeks to minimize their differences with the Senate by scaling back the scope of the bill. The House will insist on perhaps a one year extension of the current estate tax, which otherwise drops to zero in January. But tax writers have agreed that they can afford to wait before renewing billions of dollars in often popular tax breaks due to expire at year’s end.

Since many won’t affect tax filings until April 2011, there is a longer window for Congress to act. But the biodiesel industry is anxious, since transactions in January would be immediately impacted by the removal of the credit to encourage the blending of diesel with biofuels.

Watching from the sidelines, California Rep. Jerry Lewis, the ranking Republican on the House Appropriations Committee, complained that Democrats were creating a “hodgepodge” and should just let the defense agreement — finalized over the weekend — stand on its own.

“Let me make it easy for my Democrat colleagues,” Lewis said in a statement late Monday. “Put a clean Defense Appropriations bill on the floor, let members and senators cast a vote they can be proud of and send our troops and their families the resources they need and deserve.”


Sources: Politico

Will Health Care Reform's Hidden Taxes Hurt America's Middle Class?

Reps. Cantor & Hoyer spar over the Health Care Reform Bill vote.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Could health care reform lead to hidden taxes?


As a candidate and president, Barack Obama has had one core message for the middle class: I won't raise your taxes. The White House has pledged that only the wealthy — families earning more than $250,000 — would face a boost in income, capital gains, or other taxes. For the 97 percent of Americans below that level, no increases are in store.

But as Congress inches closer to forging a massive package of health-care reforms, it's increasingly clear how difficult it will be to keep that pledge. To pay for the near trillion-dollar health-care system overhaul — not to mention reining in the deficit and funding other ambitious plans Obama has laid out for the years ahead — many outside the White House believe the middle class will not be spared. Republican critics contend that the White House is misleading the public about who will ultimately shoulder much of the cost of extending coverage to tens of millions of uninsured Americans.

True, most won't see direct tax hikes, per se. Few believe Obama will go back on his vow to keep income tax rates the same for all but the top brackets when the Bush tax cuts expire at the end of 2010. And top White House economic adviser Lawrence H. Summers says Obama can keep his pledge while finding more than enough cost cuts and revenue elsewhere. "There is substantial scope for expenditure reductions in health care and for raising enough revenues from people with incomes over $250,000 and from companies," he says.

A key question, though, is whether over the next couple of years, middle-income families will face a host of surcharges, fees, reduced tax breaks, or other increased costs. Daniel Clifton, a Washington-based policy analyst for Strategas Research Partners, argues that Congress has purposely loaded onto the corporate sector the increased taxes needed to pay for the reforms to avoid politically unpopular individual tax hikes. But the added costs will eventually be shifted to customers. "It all depends on what your definition of 'tax' is. Everyone is mincing words here," says Clifton. "There isn't enough money available in just extracting more from corporate taxes or rich Americans."

Consider the Senate's proposal to impose a 40 percent excise tax on so-called Cadillac health insurance plans valued at more than $21,000. The idea, say backers, is to discourage the excessive health-care spending said to result from such generous plans. The proposed tax on the plans would raise $202 billion, more than half the new funds needed to help pay for extending insurance coverage. Rather than tax policyholders directly, the hit would be on insurers who offer those plans.

Worried unions

The insurers, though, likely will cut benefits or raise premiums as a result. That point hasn't escaped union leaders, who oppose the proposal because it would target many of their members, who have negotiated generous health benefits. Richard L. Trumka, the head of the AFL-CIO, argues that roughly 15 percent of insured families and 19 percent of individuals—most solidly middle-class—have plans that would fall under the new tax. For many members, he says, the result would be higher medical costs. "What [they are] actually saying is that cost of covering the uninsured should be borne by the middle class," Trumka says.

Summers counters that the tax is intended to curb wasteful health-care spending; the goal, he says, is to get employers to offer less pricey insurance policies and raise wages instead. But labor leaders remain unconvinced, and they're lobbying to kill the measure.

GOP opponents of the reforms have also intensified their attacks. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, argues the pending bills would leave many worse off. "The vast majority of middle-class Americans would pay higher taxes and premiums," he says. He, too, cites the Cadillac tax increase, along with other changes such as a rise in the threshold on deductions for medical expenses from 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income to 10 percent. Quoting figures compiled by the bipartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, he says that by 2019, when the bill would be fully in effect, families earning over $75,000 would see a net hike in taxes.

On another front, the Senate is counting on hefty excise taxes assessed on the different players in the medical industry for a big chunk of funding. Altogether, insurers, drug companies, and device makers could be on tap for roughly $120 billion in fees over the next decade. Problem is, a big portion of those taxes are likely to be recouped in the form of higher prices or increased premiums. "It's a fiction," says Roberton Williams, a former Congressional Budget Office official now with the nonpartisan Urban Institute's Tax Policy Center. "The excise taxes won't be paid by the companies; they'll be passed right back to their customers."

Summers disputes that notion and argues that the excise taxes "are designed so they will likely be difficult to pass on." And he points out that the estimates Grassley cites do not take into account expected cost savings and other benefits of reform. "Many of those same firms will no longer have the burdens associated with paying for uncompensated care," he argues.

However the numbers are sliced, they add up. All told, by imposing new taxes on health-care providers, the Senate Finance Committee is counting on raising some $340 billion to help pay for reforms. An additional $42 billion would come from trimming tax breaks for such things as health savings accounts and medical expenses, according to fiscal watchdog US Budget Watch. It remains to be seen how much of that tab average Americans will end up shouldering.


Sources: MSNBC, Business Week, Flickr

Senate Considers "Opt Out" Public Option Plan Too...This Stinks!

(Pelosi locks in votes for a Public Option)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Anti-Trust Laws being examined)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

(Pelosi: Bill will have a Public Option. NBC’s Andrea Mitchell talks with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi about the inclusion of a public option in the House health care reform bill. Watch the entire interview on Friday.)

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Senate bill may have Public Insurance plan

The Senate has long been seen as opposed to the federal government selling health insurance in competition with private industry, but now senior Senate Democrats and White House officials are strongly considering including such a measure in health care overhaul legislation, officials say.

The provision would permit individual states to drop out of the system, a design that could make it more palatable to moderates who have opposed the "public option."

Liberals in Congress view a public option as an essential ingredient to overhaul the nation's health care system, and President Barack Obama has said frequently he favors it. But he has also made clear it is not essential to the legislation he seeks, a gesture to Democratic moderates who have opposed it.

Plan drawing interest
Sens. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., and Kent Conrad, D-N.D., said in separate interviews they had been told the plan was drawing interest in private negotiations led by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who is merging health bills passed by two separate committees into a final package to bring to the floor.

"What I'm hearing is that this is the direction of the conversation," said Conrad, who supports an alternative approach under which nonprofit co-ops would compete with private industry.

Nelson said he'd also heard the plan was drawing favor, adding he thought that was unfortunate.

The White House declined to comment. Reid's office did likewise, and the Nevada Democrat left a meeting at the White House with other Democrats late Thursday without talking to reporters.

Several officials said no final decisions had been made, with one possibility that the idea was being circulated to see whether it could attract enough support to survive on the Senate floor.

If not, it surely would be jettisoned beforehand, with liberals urged to accept something less or risk defeat of health care legislation. There is little margin for error among Obama's allies in the Senate as they confront nearly unanimous Republican opposition.

Democratic moderates are skeptical of allowing the government to sell insurance, concerned that it would mark an unwarranted federal intrusion into the private marketplace and potentially jeopardize payment rates to doctors, hospitals and other providers.

Conrad, for example, has said repeatedly he could not accept a plan with payments tied to Medicare, the federal health care program for the elderly, because rates in North Dakota are too low to give doctors an incentive to treat additional patients.

Legislation taking shape in the House is also expected to include a public option, although it is unlikely states would be allowed to opt out.

After months of struggle, both houses are expected to vote in the next few weeks on sweeping legislation that expands coverage to millions of Americans who lack it and bans industry practices such as denial of coverage for pre-existing medical conditions.

The House and Senate measures aim to expand coverage to about 95 percent of the population, and include federal subsidies to help lower-income families afford coverage and permit small businesses to provide it for their employees.

The two bills differ at many points, although both are paid for through a combination of cuts in future Medicare spending and higher taxes.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said at a news conference she and her leadership were entering the "final stages" of assembling a health care bill to be voted on this fall. Officials have said the measure would cost $871 billion over a decade, but that total excluded a handful of items not directly related to expanded coverage that would push the total to well over $1 trillion.

Democrats hold a 60-40 majority in the Senate, counting two independents, precisely the number needed to overcome a threatened Republican filibuster. Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, voted for the health care bill that cleared the Senate Finance Committee recently, but she has long voiced opposition to a public option along the lines under consideration, as has Nelson, and other moderate Democrats have voiced skepticism. Without 60 votes, the legislation could stall even before debate began in earnest.


Sources: MSNBC