Harry Reid Selects Baucus, Kerry & Murray For Super Committee; Alan Simpson Disagrees

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

Harry Reid's Super Committee Picks: Patty Murray, Max Baucus, John Kerry

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will appoint Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) to the congressional debt-reduction "super committee" tasked with finding roughly $1.5 trillion in savings over the next decade. Murray will serve as one of the committee's two co-chairs, alongside a House Republican.

Reid's office announced the choices, which were first reported by Politico and the National Journal. Reid will make a formal announcement on Wednesday.

In making his picks, the Nevada Democrat becomes the first congressional leader to offer his three appointments to the super committee, who will be granted strong procedural powers to see their recommendations come to a vote. House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) still must choose three members each, in advance of an Aug. 16 deadline.

Reid's picks suggest that he favored committee chairs and senior members of the party over some of the younger, more progressive-minded senators. Murray chairs the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and will undoubtedly keep electoral implications in mind as she weighs various policy suggestions. Kerry, who chairs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is a top foreign policy voice in the party and will likely play a central role in carving out the cuts made to defense appropriations. Baucus, who chairs the Senate Finance Committee, is a leading figure on tax policy, another legislative component that falls within the committee's purview. None of the three were part of the so-called Gang of Six -– the informal bipartisan group of senators who worked to craft a debt reduction plan of their own.

The choices are not particularly trusted in liberal circles either, in part because of concerns that moneyed interests may come in to play when it comes time to negotiate. In FY 2009, for instance, companies in Murray's home state of Washington received $5.2 billion in defense contracts. Boeing Inc. is the fourth biggest contributor to Murray over the course of her career, according to data gathered by the Center for Responsive Politics.

More broadly, good government advocates were concerned that her post atop the DSCC, which comes with significant fundraising responsibilities, would influence her approach to the committee.

“Sen. Patty Murray may be a fine Senator, but putting Senate Democrats’ leading fundraiser in charge of a committee that will see a lobbying push like never before sends the wrong message to the American people,” said Nick Nyhart, president of Public Campaign, in a press release. “Instead of focusing solely on finding a balanced approach to deficit reduction, she will also be focused on raising money from the same interests hoping to influence the committee.”

Baucus, who was a major player in blocking President George W. Bush's efforts to privatize Social Security and was instrumental in crafting the Affordable Care Act, enjoys close ties to the financial sector. According to CRP data, he has received $5.2 million in campaign contributions from the finance, insurance and real estate industries since 2005.

In Kerry's home state of Massachusetts, meanwhile, the defense industry has tripled in size since 2000.

Should the committee not come to an agreement (and it would take only seven of its 12 members to reach one) or if its suggestions are not passed by Congress, then a trigger would be hit, resulting in major spending cuts and reductions in the defense budget.

On Monday, multiple Senate Democratic sources told The Huffington Post that Reid was leaning against including Baucus in his final three. Senate Democratic sources, when asked about the change of heart, said that while it didn't initially appear that Baucus would end up being picked, he was always considered an option. The two enjoy a close relationship in the Senate and even if Baucus hadn't ended up on the committee, he would have likely been expected to contribute –- either through suggestions or staff -– to its work on tax reform.

A Democratic source told The Huffington Post that Kerry "made it into the discussion" of who should serve on the committee by delivering "some powerful speeches" to the rest of the caucus. The speeches, the source added, were in defense of Democratic Party priorities, focusing on the need to protect entitlement programs and Kerry's desire to strongly push back against (what the source referred to as) "the right-wing agenda."


View Larger Map

Sources: Huffington Post, MSNBC, The Young Turks, Youtube, Google Maps

Was Max Baucus Drunk On The Senate Floor?? "Drunk With Power"

Max Baucus's Speech Under Conservative Fire


A speech by Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) on health care has been generating buzz on the Internet, as the Drudge Report and others are suggesting that Baucus was slurring his speech and possibly "intoxicated" during his remarks.

"DRUNK WITH POWER? TOP DEM SLURS ON SENATE FLOOR..." reads the Drudge Report headline.

Newsbusters.org writes: "How can one explain this incredibly bizarre performance by Max Baucus on the Senate floor? Was Baucus so intoxicated by the sound of his own voice that he went off the deep end? Or perhaps he was so drunk with power over shaping the Senate health care bill that it explains his strange rant."

On his Facebook page, former congressman Mark Foley commented on the video: "This is the senator that hired his staffer and then took her on trips...and divorced his wife....and they had me run out of town."

An email seeking comment has been sent to Sen. Baucus's office and we will update this post when we hear back.





Bizarre Baucus Behavior On Senate Floor Ignored By MSM


Politico is now covering this with reference to this very NewsBusters story. Politico's Patrick Gavin claims that Baucus's office was sent an e-mail for an explanation of his strange behavior and will update later with the reply. Come on, Patrick. Do you really expect a candid response? And who in the Baucus Senate office will reply? His military affairs aide, Captain Morgan?)

How can one explain this incredibly bizarre performance by Max Baucus on the Senate floor? Was Baucus so intoxicated by the sound of his own voice that he went off the deep end? Or perhaps he was so drunk with power over shaping the Senate health care bill that it explains his strange rant. In any event, if a conservative such as Jim DeMint or Jeff Sessions had acted this way in the Senate, the mainstream media would have featured the video over and over and over again. Instead, since this was Democrat Max Baucus, this video was almost completely ignored by the MSM.

Since the MSM has provided no information on the Baucus performance, your humble correspondent has searched the blogosphere for answers. Here is an observation from Susan Flowers at Examiner.Com:

Is this acceptable, NO. Is this behavior and lack of leadership acceptable to U.S. Citizens who are paying his salary?

Have all rules established over hundreds of years being thrown out and disregarded by the Democrat party? He should be brought before his peers and punished, if they don't, should Voters, as employers, write him up for inappropriate behavior and disorderly conduct?

Americans are paying taxes to support his career. If you disapprove, call and write the other Senators and request he be charged with disorderly conduct. No one in the Congress or Senate should be allowed to be intoxicated when officially representing the Citizens of the USA.

Ease up, Susan. Perhaps Baucus, in the spirit (or spirits) of the season, was simply full of good Christmas cheer (hic!).

Brendan Calling weighs in:

Now, i have no proof Baucus is s--tfaced on expensive bourbon. I wasn’t there, I didn’t smell his breath, and I doubt he took a breathalyzer.

But just watch that performance and tell me that Baucus doesn’t look and sound like he’s polished off a couple of pints of Old Granddad. And not just his voice: the guy seems to be having trouble standing up straight. look at him reel around like the Tin Man’s dance scene in The Wizard of Oz.

We're Off to see the Wizard, the Wonderful Wizard of Oz!

Hey, Max! Could you hand me a pint of Old Granddad. I want whatever you're having. I wanna have fun too!!!

And, finally, Glenn Reynolds at InstaPundit answers Max's question about where the courage is:

WHERE IS THE COURAGE? I think we’ve found the liquid courage, anyway.

Is that Chuck Schumer at stage left trying to get a long hook around Baucus to drag him off the scene?



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, C-Span, Newsbusters, Drudge Report, Examiner, Socialist, Pajamas Media, Insta Pundit, Brendan Calling, Youtube, Google Maps

Lobbyists Cash In Big On Senate Health Care Bill

How Health Care Industry Lobbyists Influenced Reform Bill


David Nexon had a big problem. An early version of national health care legislation contained a $40 billion tax aimed squarely at members of the medical device trade association he represents.

Nexon, a former adviser to the late Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy, went to work. He marshaled 14 people like himself -- lobbyists who were once congressional aides, many of them from staffs of congressional leaders or committees that had a hand in crafting the health care overhaul.

When Senate Democrats unveiled their bill in mid-November, Nexon's handiwork was evident. The tax on device-makers was still large -- $20 billion -- but only half what it might have been without the efforts of Nexon and his fellow lobbyists.

Nexon's team is an illustration of how deeply the health care industry has embedded itself on Capitol Hill, using former aides of lawmakers and ex-lawmakers themselves.

An analysis of public documents by Northwestern University's Medill News Service in partnership with the Tribune Newspapers Washington Bureau and the Center for Responsive Politics found a revolving door between Capitol Hill staffers and lobbying jobs for companies with a stake in health care legislation.

At least 166 former aides from the nine congressional leadership offices and five committees involved in shaping health overhaul legislation -- along with at least 13 former lawmakers -- registered to represent at least 338 health care clients since the beginning of last year, according to the analysis.

Their health care clients spent $635 million on lobbying over the past two years, the study shows.

The total of insider Lobbyists jumps to 278 when non-health-care firms that reported lobbying on health issues are added in, the analysis found.

Part of the lobbying pressure on current members of Congress and staffers comes from the powerful lure of post-congressional job possibilities.

"There's always a worry they may be thinking about their future employment opportunities when dealing with these issues, particularly with health care, because the stakes are so high and the breadth of the issues -- pharmacies, hospitals, doctors," said Emory University political scientist Alan Abramowitz.

Lobbyists' earnings can dwarf congressional salaries, which currently top out at $174,000 annually for lawmakers and $156,000 for aides, though committee staff members can earn slightly more.

In the health care showdown, insider lobbying influence has magnified the clout of corporate interests and helped steer the debate away from a public insurance option, despite many polls indicating majority support from Americans, according to Rutgers University political scientist Ross Baker.

"It imposes a kind of conservative bias on the discussion," said Baker, himself a former Senate staffer.

The lineup of insiders working for clients with health care interests includes at least 14 former aides to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and at least 13 former aides to Montana Democratic Sen. Max Baucus, the chairman of the Finance Committee and a key overseer of the health care overhaul.

Nexon, who is now senior executive vice president of the Advanced Medical Technology Association, is among at least a half-dozen former Kennedy aides lobbying on health care.

Nexon acknowledged the value of congressional connections, "but in the end, it's not who I know, it's what I know."

It makes sense to hire former staffers for the health care showdown because they tend to be "more generalists, dealing with a broad range of issues," something that is in demand for legislation that sprawls across at least a half-dozen federal agencies and encompasses issues ranging from tax policy to hospital reimbursement rates, according to Nexon. But specific issues also get specialized help. Earlier this year, the Christian Science Church hired a former Kennedy staffer, Carolyn Osolinik, and three of her colleagues at the Mayer Brown law firm, all veterans of Capitol Hill. The firm has been paid at least $110,000 so far to push a provision requiring insurers to consider covering Christian Science prayer treatments.

Phil Davis, a senior official of the church, said the church wanted access to decision makers. "The noise level goes sky high. It's hard to get in to talk to people," he said.

The largest insider lobbying cadre belongs to the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, or PhRMA, which employs at least 26 former congressional members and staffers, according to Medill/CRP research.

Two other drug interests, biotech firm Amgen Inc. and the Biotechnology Industry Organization trade group, with at least 24 and 16 insiders respectively, ranked second and fourth among reported hiring over the past two years of lawmakers' former staffers and members of committees considered in the analysis.

"The numbers shouldn't surprise anyone," said Ken Johnson, a PhRMA senior vice president. "Former staffers have a unique understanding of how the legislative process works. And when you are trying to advocate on behalf of smart public policies, you want smart people on your team."

But Bob Edgar, president of Common Cause, a nonpartisan, nonprofit watchdog group, had a harsher assessment, blaming "a toxic cocktail of insiders and money" for short-circuiting a government-run plan that would have competed with private insurers.

"We'll get a bill. And the president will sign it. But it'll be less than the country deserves," said Edgar, a former six-term member of the House.

Health care lobbyists increase their effectiveness by strategically targeting their campaign contributions or the donations of the interests they represent, Edgar said.

Health industry contributions to congressional candidates have more than doubled so far this decade, rising to $127 million in the 2008 election cycle from $56 million in the 2000 election, with disproportionate sums going to the party in power and to members of committees that oversee health care, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

But lobbyist and former Kennedy staffer Andrew Rosenberg said political conditions, not big money or the predispositions of lobbyists sidelined a public option.

"You could see this coming from a long way off. The Democratic Party is now the big tent party. They have to get to 60 votes. That is the reality," Rosenberg said. "It was going to have to be something that appeals to moderates" opposed to expanding government-run health insurance.





How Lobbyists Pushed Senate Health Care Bill


At least 166 former congressional staffers now working as health-industry lobbyists got their old bosses to give their new bosses big breaks in the pending health-care reform legislation, according to a new report.

For example, David Nexon, a former aide to the late Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA), amassed 14 lobbyists with similar résumés to attack a tax in the bill aimed at one of his clients, a medical-device trade association.

They succeeded in cutting the $40 billion tax in half in the current legislation, according to a report by Northwestern University’s Medill News Service, the Center for Responsive Politics, and the Tribune Newspapers' Washington Bureau.

In addition to the former aides, at least 13 former lawmakers are registered to represent a total of 338 health-care clients since the beginning of last year. Since then, those clients spent $635 million lobbying.



View Larger Map


Sources: Chicago Tribune, The Daily Beast, MSNBC, TPM, Huffington Post, Youtube, Google Maps

GOP's Defacto Leader: Senator John McCain

Despite losing the 2008 Election to Pres. Barack Obama, Republican Senator John McCain's status remains elevated within GOP circles. In fact his "Political Star" appears to be rising higher & higher.

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

View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, The Daily Beast, Google Maps

McCain & Baucus' Heated Health Care Show down (Video)

During a rare Saturday session to debate—what else?—health care, Senators McCain and Baucus got into a heated exchange.




Sources: The Daily Beast

Max Baucus Questions Reason For Ethics Inquiry...Conflict Of Interest

Harvard Law Professor Larry Lessig: The effects of Political Corruption on Voters. In this video Sen. Max Baucus is the focus of a lesson on Political and Public Corruption.






(Politico) Baucus: "No sense" in Ethics inquiry


Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) on Saturday dismissed calls for the Senate Ethics Committee to investigate his recommendation that the White House consider his girlfriend for a top federal prosecutor’s position in Montana.

“I can’t understand why,” Baucus said when asked about calls for the panel to probe the matter. “I don’t understand why that’d be the case. Everything of it is straight up and up. I went out of my way to be up and up. That doesn’t make any sense to me.”

On Friday night, Baucus’ office disclosed that the senator had recommended his girlfriend, along with two others, for the White House to consider for the position of U.S. attorney in Montana. But as the Justice Department was reviewing the candidates, Baucus said his relationship with Hanes intensified, and the two decided that it was time for her to withdraw her name.

“At some point when we were becoming quite close, then I thought it made more sense and she thought it made more sense not to continue,” Baucus told reporters just off the Senate floor Saturday.

While GOP senators mostly stayed away from commenting on the matter, Michael Steele, chairman of the Republican National Committee, said the question that Baucus used his Senate office “to advance a taxpayer-funded appointment for his staff-member girlfriend raises a whole host of ethical questions.”

“This issue demands the attention of the Senate Ethics Committee,” Steele said. “They should hold a hearing to identify who was involved in this process, what they knew and when they knew it, and why Senator Baucus put his personal needs above those of the people of Montana.”

Democrats pointed out Saturday that the RNC did not call for an Ethics investigation into the sex and lobbying scandal involving Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.).

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), chairwoman of the Ethics Committee, declined to comment on a possible investigation.

But some members of the Ethics Committee seemed to expect Saturday that the panel would have to at least look at the matter.

Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who sits on the panel, said “if there’s any chance it may come up,” he didn’t want to comment on the controversy.

Melanie Sloan, who heads the watchdog group the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said she didn’t see the matter warranting an Ethics Committee investigation, saying that politicians on a regular basis recommend people who are close to them to get top spots in the administration, especially U.S. attorney positions.

“I think Baucus showed bad judgment,” she said, but added that the fact that Hanes withdrew from consideration makes it even more difficult for the panel to reprimand the senator.

Stan Brand, an ethics attorney in Washington, said that Baucus’ promoting of his girlfriend doesn’t seem to run afoul of any nepotism statutes or ethics rules.

Baucus and Hanes began their relationship in summer 2008, when Hanes was serving as Baucus’ state director, and both are now divorced and live together on Capitol Hill. Baucus took pains Saturday to argue that he was not having an extramarital affair with Hanes since both were separated from their spouses when the relationship began.

“It’s very, very happy in my life – where I am,” Baucus said. “It’s wonderful. … There was no affair.”

Baucus said that when there was an opening for the U.S. attorney position in Montana, Hanes put her name forward, which didn’t surprise him because she was “unbelievably qualified” with her background working in prosecutors’ offices and in the legal field.

He said six people applied for the job, and he submitted their resumes to a lawyer in Montana, a process that he said is “totally objective” and that he used to “totally get the best persons possible.” The lawyer came back with the three names, including Hanes’, and both he and Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.) interviewed the three candidates.

Baucus then submitted the names to the Justice Department, but he said Saturday that he did not lobby administration officials to choose Hanes. And he added that the two later decided they did not want to carry on a relationship 2,000 miles apart, prompting her to withdraw from consideration.

Hanes later got a job as acting deputy administrator for policy in the Justice Department’s Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, which Baucus said she earned on her own merits, with no help from his office.

Asked if he should have recused himself from the process of considering Hanes this past spring, Baucus said he thought his long-used process to vet candidates yielded “sufficient objectivity.”

But Baucus said he didn’t know whether the third-party reviewer was aware that he and Hanes were carrying on a romantic relationship.

“I do not know if the vetter did or didn’t,” Baucus said. “The point is that when it became apparent that the relationship was becoming close, then it made sense for it not to continue.”

Baucus said he didn’t think the White House was aware of the relationship – or his close friend and former chief of staff Jim Messina, who is now the White House’s deputy chief of staff. And he said that he didn’t believe Messina played a role in the process of choosing the attorney.

Obama later selected Michael Cotter, who was one of the two other names Baucus submitted.

“I did not at all push” Messina or the White House to nominate Hanes, Baucus said.

Still, the Friday night disclosure of the unusual episode threatened to cause a distraction in the Senate’s historic health care debate, which Baucus is leading as chairman of the powerful Finance Committee. But Baucus said it would have “no effect whatsoever” on the health care debate, and that his colleagues were offering him encouragement on the Senate floor Saturday.

“All in all, I kind of wonder why someone called a blogger in the middle of the health care debate,” Baucus said in an apparent reference to the website Main Justice, which first reported the story Friday night. “I’m not going to insinuate anything but it seems a little interesting.”

Democrats came to Baucus’ defense Saturday and insisted the matter would not deter from their efforts to pass a bill out of the Senate by year’s end.

“No distraction,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) of the controversy. “Not in the least,” added Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.

Baucus informed Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of the matter soon before the story broke Friday night, and Reid came to his defense Saturday.

“Max is a good friend, an outstanding senator and he has my full support,” Reid said in a statement.




(MSNBC) Aide: Baucus nominated girlfriend for Fed Post


Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus was already involved with his girlfriend and former staffer when he recommended her earlier this year to become the next U.S. attorney for Montana, a spokesman said.

The Montana Democrat and his former state office director Melodee Hanes began their relationship in the summer of 2008, after Baucus separated from his wife, Ty Matsdorf told The Associated Press late Friday.

Baucus nominated Hanes for the U.S. attorney post in Montana in March. But she later withdrew, saying she had been presented with other opportunities she couldn't pass up.

The Senate leader who's been a major proponent of Democratic health care legislation had submitted six names to a third-party reviewer, who whittled those to Hanes and two others. Matsdorf said the senator sent the three names to the White House with no ranking.

"Senator Baucus recommended each of the three candidates based solely on qualifications, and merit, knowing whichever one the White House selected would serve Montana well," Matsdorf said.

The spokesman said Baucus and Hanes decided during the nomination process that she should withdraw her name because the couple wanted to live together in Washington, which they later did.

Reason for disclosure?

Matsdorf declined to say why the senator was just now disclosing the circumstances surrounding the nomination, which was first reported in Roll Call, an online publication that covers Washington politics.

Baucus and his ex-wife Wanda announced last April that they planned to divorce after 25 years of marriage. In a joint statement, they said they have "parted ways amicably and with mutual respect."

Before the April announcement, Baucus said the couple had some "differences" in the marriage, which was his second.

Hanes started working for Baucus in 2002 and was his state director before leaving his office earlier this year for a position in the U.S. Department of Justice.

"Mel is supremely qualified and she got to her current position based solely on her merit," Matsdorf said.

President Barack Obama eventually nominated Helena attorney Michael Cotter for U.S. attorney, who supervises prosecutors of all federal crimes committed in Montana and the state's seven Indian reservations. Cotter is awaiting confirmation.

Baucus was elected to the Montana House in 1973 and to the U.S. House in 1974 and 1976. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1978 at age 36, and is up for re-election in 2014.

The senator has played increasingly visible roles in Congress, sometimes willing to buck his Democratic Party on certain issues. He seems to take the position that the state that sent him to the Senate for five terms is fundamentally conservative and its voters want someone willing to base votes on more than party lines.

At the center of health reform effort

Most recently Baucus has been at the center of an effort to move sweeping health care legislation through the Senate with a bill aimed at meeting Obama's goal of overhauling the nation's health care system to cover 48 million uninsured Americans.

Just on Friday, Baucus went against his party and backed a Republican effort to eliminate a long-term care insurance program to help seniors and the disabled. Republicans argued that the new plan would be a drain on the federal budget.

The Democrat has also been in the middle of other congressional battles: He played a key role in 2003 legislation adding a prescription-drug benefit to the Medicare program and enactment of President George W. Bush's tax cuts in 2001.

Baucus also has secured millions in federal funding for highways and billions in disaster aid for drought-plagued farmers and ranchers.




(Billing Gazette) County Prosecutor joins Baucus bid


Deputy County Attorney Melodee Hanes will be leaving her job to work for Sen. Max Baucus' re-election campaign.



View Larger Map


Sources: Politico, MSNBC, Billing Gazette, The Daily Beast, Daily World Buzz, Youtube, Google Maps

Melodee Hanes & Max Baucus: Another Lurid D.C. "Love Story"

(NY Daily News) Montana Sen. Max Baucus nominated own mistress, Melodee Hanes, as U.S. attorney



Sen. Max Baucus was having an extramarital affair with a woman he nominated to be U.S. attorney in Montana, the senator's spokesman admitted Friday night.

The Montana Democrat nominated Melodee Hanes, who was Baucus' state office director, and three others to the post in March, spokesman Tyler Matsdorf said. The two began having an affair in the summer of 2008, Matsdorf said.

He said the senator was separated from his wife when he gave Hanes' name to the White House. Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, and his wife have since split.

"Sen. Baucus is currently in a mature and happy relationship with Melodee Hanes. They are both divorced, and in no way was their relationship the cause of their respective divorces," said Matsdorf.

Hanes later removed her name from nomination and took a job in the Justice Department.




(MSNBC) Aide: Baucus nominated girlfriend for Fed Post


Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus was already involved with his girlfriend and former staffer when he recommended her earlier this year to become the next U.S. attorney for Montana, a spokesman said.

The Montana Democrat and his former state office director Melodee Hanes began their relationship in the summer of 2008, after Baucus separated from his wife, Ty Matsdorf told The Associated Press late Friday.

Baucus nominated Hanes for the U.S. attorney post in Montana in March. But she later withdrew, saying she had been presented with other opportunities she couldn't pass up.

The Senate leader who's been a major proponent of Democratic health care legislation had submitted six names to a third-party reviewer, who whittled those to Hanes and two others. Matsdorf said the senator sent the three names to the White House with no ranking.

"Senator Baucus recommended each of the three candidates based solely on qualifications, and merit, knowing whichever one the White House selected would serve Montana well," Matsdorf said.

The spokesman said Baucus and Hanes decided during the nomination process that she should withdraw her name because the couple wanted to live together in Washington, which they later did.

Reason for disclosure?

Matsdorf declined to say why the senator was just now disclosing the circumstances surrounding the nomination, which was first reported in Roll Call, an online publication that covers Washington politics.

Baucus and his ex-wife Wanda announced last April that they planned to divorce after 25 years of marriage. In a joint statement, they said they have "parted ways amicably and with mutual respect."

Before the April announcement, Baucus said the couple had some "differences" in the marriage, which was his second.

Hanes started working for Baucus in 2002 and was his state director before leaving his office earlier this year for a position in the U.S. Department of Justice.

"Mel is supremely qualified and she got to her current position based solely on her merit," Matsdorf said.

President Barack Obama eventually nominated Helena attorney Michael Cotter for U.S. attorney, who supervises prosecutors of all federal crimes committed in Montana and the state's seven Indian reservations. Cotter is awaiting confirmation.

Baucus was elected to the Montana House in 1973 and to the U.S. House in 1974 and 1976. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1978 at age 36, and is up for re-election in 2014.

The senator has played increasingly visible roles in Congress, sometimes willing to buck his Democratic Party on certain issues. He seems to take the position that the state that sent him to the Senate for five terms is fundamentally conservative and its voters want someone willing to base votes on more than party lines.

At the center of health reform effort

Most recently Baucus has been at the center of an effort to move sweeping health care legislation through the Senate with a bill aimed at meeting Obama's goal of overhauling the nation's health care system to cover 48 million uninsured Americans.

Just on Friday, Baucus went against his party and backed a Republican effort to eliminate a long-term care insurance program to help seniors and the disabled. Republicans argued that the new plan would be a drain on the federal budget.

The Democrat has also been in the middle of other congressional battles: He played a key role in 2003 legislation adding a prescription-drug benefit to the Medicare program and enactment of President George W. Bush's tax cuts in 2001.

Baucus also has secured millions in federal funding for highways and billions in disaster aid for drought-plagued farmers and ranchers.




(Billing Gazette) County Prosecutor joins Baucus bid


Deputy County Attorney Melodee Hanes will be leaving her job to work for Sen. Max Baucus' re-election campaign.



View Larger Map


Sources: NY Daily News, MSNBC, Billing Gazette, Daily World Buzz, Google Maps

Olympia Snowe & Susan Collins: GOP Lone Rangers For HC Reform Or Secret Right Wing HC Reform Foes?

(Public option a "deal-breaker"? Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, joins the Morning Joe gang to discuss her “yes” vote on health care legislation and explain what would cause her to pull back her support once the legislation hits the Senate floor.)

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

(Merging the Health Care Bills)

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

Another GOP senator open to health overhaul

A second Republican senator signaled Wednesday she's open to voting for sweeping health care legislation this year, putting President Barack Obama closer to a historic achievement that has eluded generations of Democratic leaders.

But Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, told The Associated Press that the bill approved Tuesday by the Finance Committee needs substantial improvements to make coverage more affordable, contain costs, and protect Medicare. Nevertheless, she joined her Maine GOP colleague Sen. Olympia Snowe in endorsing the goal of far-reaching changes.

"My hope is we that can fix the flaws in the bill and come together with a truly bipartisan bill that could garner widespread support," Collins said in an interview. "I think this bill is far superior to the ones passed by the Senate (health) committee and the three House committees, but it needs substantial additional work."

The ten-year, $829 billion Finance bill was approved by the committee Tuesday on a 14-9 vote, after Snowe broke ranks with her Republican colleagues to support Chairman Max Baucus' middle-of-the-road plan.

Wednesday, Snowe tackled the most divisive issue still on the table: creation of a government insurance plan that would compete with private ones.

While emphasizing that she still opposes the so-called public option, Snowe said in a nationally broadcast interview that she could foresee a government-run plan that would "kick in" if private insurers failed to live up to expectations that they keep premiums in check.

"I think the government would have a disproportionate advantage" in the event of a government-run option, Snowe acknowledged. At the same time, she added, "I want to make sure the insurance industry performs, and that's why we eliminate many egregious practices."

If the industry didn't follow through on congressionally-mandated changes aimed at making health care more affordable, she said, "then you could have the public option kick in immediately."

Snowe previously had proposed using the public option as an incentive, or a threat, to private insurers. This "trigger" option, or some version of it, has survived the bitter debate and scrutiny to remain a viable option for compromise.

Such a statement from a Republican can be very influential in an environment in which GOP lawmakers almost universally have opposed any kind of government-run health care option to compete with private insurers. It represents a break in party solidarity, even if finite. Health care proposals advanced in the House include such a government option.

Snowe broached her standby notion again as talks among lawmakers on health care were going back behind closed doors; Senate leaders are trying to merge two very different bills into a new version that can get the 60 votes needed to guarantee passage.

Collins, however, said she could not support Snowe's idea because she thinks it would make it too easy for a Democratic administration to impose a government plan nationwide. "It would simply delay the public plan for a couple of years," she told AP.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has said he wants move quickly to merge the Finance bill with a version passed earlier by the Senate health committee. His goal is to get health care overhaul legislation onto the floor the week after next.

Both bills were written by Democrats, but that's not going to make it easier for Reid. They share a common goal, which is to provide all Americans with access to affordable health insurance, but they differ on how to accomplish it.

The Finance Committee bill that was approved Tuesday has no government-sponsored insurance plan and no requirement on employers that they must offer coverage. It relies instead on a requirement that all Americans obtain insurance.

The Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee bill, passed earlier by a panel in which liberals predominate, calls for both a government plan to compete with private insurers and a mandate that employers help cover their workers. Those are only two of dozens of differences.

Aides say Reid has a keen sense of what the Senate will pass and he is focused on finding a solution that can get the 60 votes needed to overcome a Republican filibuster.

In general, bills moving toward floor votes in both houses would require most Americans to purchase insurance, provide federal subsidies to help those of lower incomes afford coverage and give small businesses help in defraying the cost of coverage for their workers.

The measures would bar insurance companies from denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions and for the first time limit their ability to charge higher premiums on the basis of age or family size. Expanded coverage would be paid for by cutting hundreds of billions of dollars from future Medicare payments to health care providers. Each house also envisions higher taxes — an income tax surcharge on million-dollar wage-earners in the case of the House, and a new excise levy on insurance companies selling high-cost policies in the Senate Finance Committee bill.

Apart from Snowe, Finance Committee Republicans cited higher taxes, a greater federal role in the insurance industry and other concerns as they lined up to oppose the bill.

Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, said the legislation would place the nation on a "slippery slope to more and more government control of health care."

Snowe said there were problems with the bill but the risks of doing nothing were too great.

Across the Capitol, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her lieutenants have been at work for weeks trying to blend legislation approved by three House committees. The eventual result is certain to include a government option, but the details of the plan have split the rank and file and leaders have spent days struggling with the issue.



View Larger Map

Sources: MSNBC, Senate.gov, Huffington Post, Google Maps

"Healthcare Fighting" Kung Fu Mix Parody (Video)

"Healthcare Fighting (Kung Fu Mix)"

(See your favorite political heavy-hitters fight it out over Health Care
Reform -- Kung Fu style!! After months of health care bickering and
bitterness, this musical parody is just what the doctor ordered. From: Parody & Son)




Sources: A Parody & Son Presentation, MSNBC, Health Reform.gov, Youtube

Pres. Obama's Remarks On Today's Health Care Reform Bill Senate Vote..."A Critical Milestone"

"A Critical Milestone"


After many months of debate and deliberation, dozens of hearings, the dissemination and debunking of hundreds of myths and falsehoods, and testimonials from thousands and thousands of ordinary Americans asking for change, reform took yet another step forward. With the emergence of a reform bill from the final committee is Congress with jurisdiction over the the issue, this issue that has seemed utterly intractable for most of a century is now closer to a resolution than it has ever been.

The President took a few minutes this afternoon to express his approval:

THE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. Today we reached a critical milestone in our effort to reform our health care system. After many months of thoughtful deliberation, the fifth and final committee responsible for health care reform has passed a proposal that has both Democratic and Republican support. This effort was made possible by the tireless efforts of Chairman Max Baucus and the other members of the Senate Finance Committee. It's a product of vigorous debate and difficult negotiations.

After the consideration of hundreds of amendments, it includes ideas from both Democrats and Republicans, which is why it enjoys the support of people from both parties. And I want to particularly thank Senator Olympia Snowe for both the political courage and the seriousness of purpose that she's demonstrated throughout this process.

Now, this bill is not perfect and we have a lot of difficult work ahead of us. There are still significant details and disagreements to be worked out over the next several weeks as the five separate bills from the Senate and the House are merged into one proposal. But I do believe the work of the Senate Finance Committee has brought us significantly closer to achieving the core objectives I laid out early in September.

Most importantly, this bill goes a long way towards offering security to those who have insurance, and affordable options for those who don't. It reins in some of the worst practices of the insurance industry, like the denial of coverage due to preexisting conditions. It also sets up an insurance exchange that will make coverage affordable for those who don't currently have it. And as the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has certified, it will slow the growth of health care costs in the long term and it will not add a penny to our deficit.

The committee's progress over the past several weeks is the culmination of work by all five committees and numerous members of Congress over the better part of this year. We've reached out to stakeholders across the spectrum -- doctors and nurses, businesses and workers, hospitals and even drug companies. And we've considered a wide variety of ideas and proposals in an effort to find common ground.

As a result of these efforts, we are now closer than ever before to passing health reform. But we're not there yet. Now is not the time to pat ourselves on the back. Now is not the time to offer ourselves congratulations. Now is the time to dig in and work even harder to get this done. And in this final phase, I hope that we will continue to engage each other with the spirit of civility and seriousness that has brought us this far and that this subject deserves.

I commend the Chairman and the committee's members for their achievement and the example that they've set, and I look forward to continue to work with Congress in the weeks ahead. We are going to get this done.

Thank you very much, everybody.

Sources: Whitehouse.gov, Youtube

Fact Checking The Baucus Health Care Reform Bill

(What's in the Bill? How Effective is it)

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

Sources: MSNBC

Health Care Reform Bill Passes Senate Panel Committee With Snowe's Vote!..Historic Legislation!

(Sen. committee approves health overhaul bill. A Senate committee approves a remake of the country's health care system, delivering a boost to President Barack Obama's goal of expanding coverage.)

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

(Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe announces in the Senate Finance Committee debate that she will vote for the heath care bill, telling her colleagues she has misgivings about the bill, but "when history calls, history calls.")

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

(Republicans condemn the Baucus Health Care Plan. Republicans condemn the health care plan as a costly and heavy-handed government intrusion into the private healthcare sector, adding the measure would get even worse as it moves forward.)

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

Sweeping health bill passes Senate panel


With support from a lone Republican, a key Senate committee Tuesday approved a middle-of-the-road health care plan that moves President Barack Obama's goal of wider and affordable coverage a giant step closer to becoming law.

Maine Republican Olympia Snowe said she was laying aside misgivings for now and voting to advance the bill, a sweeping $829-billon, 10-year health care remake that would help most Americans get coverage without creating a new government insurance plan. "When history calls, history calls," said Snowe.

Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., called his bill "a commonsense, balanced solution." A distance runner, Baucus has endured months of marathon meetings to get this far. It's not the finish line.

Health care legislation is expected to be on the Senate floor the week after next, said a spokesman for Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada. But it won't be the Baucus bill. Reid will combine the Finance version with a more liberal proposal from the health committee — with unpredictable results.

The vote in the Finance Committee was 14-9, with Snowe joining all 13 Democrats in support. In a sign of long political battles ahead, every other Republican voted against it.

The ultimate fate of the legislation hinges on how lawmakers decide dozens of unresolved issues, from letting government sell insurance to abortion coverage. Even some senators who voted for the Baucus bill said they have concerns it will deliver on providing access to affordable coverage for all.

As Snowe made clear, "My vote today is my vote today. It doesn't forecast what my vote will be tomorrow."

The Baucus plan would, for the first time, require most Americans to purchase insurance and it also aims to hold down spiraling medical costs over the long term. Questions persist about whether it would truly provide access to affordable coverage, particularly for self employed people with solid middle class incomes.

The Finance Committee's top Republican, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, gave voice to the GOP's concerns about the bill, saying it was "moving on a slippery slope to more and more government control of health care."

"There's a lot in this bill that's just a consensus that needs to be done, but there are other provisions of this bill that raise a lot of questions," Grassley said, contending the legislation would mean higher costs for Americans.

The committee approval marked a personal victory for Baucus. Four other congressional committees finished their work before August, and for months all eyes had been on the Finance panel, whose moderate makeup most closely resembles the Senate as a whole.

Snowe kept Washington guessing about how she would vote until she announced it late in the debate Tuesday. Democrats, aware that Snowe could be the only Republican in Congress to vote for their health care overhaul, have spent months addressing her concerns about making coverage affordable and how to pay for it.

The committee's centrist legislation is also seen as the best building block for a compromise plan that could find favor on the Senate floor.

One of the biggest unanswered questions is whether the legislation would slow punishing increases in the nation's health care costs, particularly for the majority who now have coverage through employers. The insurance industry insists it would shift new costs onto those who have coverage.

Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf, under questioning by Republican senators, acknowledged that the bill's total impact on the nation's health care costs is still unknown. The CBO has been able to establish that the legislation would reduce federal government deficits, but Elmendorf said his staff has not had time to evaluate its effects on privately insured people. Government programs pay about half the nation's annual $2.5 trillion health care tab.

Once the Finance Committee has acted, the dealmaking can begin in earnest with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., working with White House staff, Baucus and others to blend the Finance bill with a more liberal version passed by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Baucus' bill includes consumer protections such as limits on copays and deductibles and relies on federal subsidies to help lower-income families purchase coverage. Insurance companies would have to take all comers, and people could shop for insurance within new state marketplaces called exchanges.

Medicaid would be expanded, and though employers wouldn't be required to cover their workers, they'd have to pay a penalty for each employee who sought insurance with government subsidies. The bill is paid for by cuts to Medicare providers and new taxes on insurance companies and others.

Unlike the other health care bills in Congress, Baucus' would not allow the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies, a divisive element sought by liberals.

Last-minute changes made subsidies more generous and softened the penalties for those who don't comply with a proposed new mandate for everyone to buy insurance. The latter change drew the ire of the health insurance industry, which said that without a strong and enforceable requirement, not enough people would get insured and premiums would jump for everyone else.

A major question mark for Reid's negotiations is whether he will include some version of a so-called public plan in the merged bill. Across the Capitol, House Democratic leaders are working to finalize their bill, which does contain a public plan, and floor action is expected in both chambers in coming weeks. If passed, the legislation would then go to a conference committee to reconcile differences.


Sources: MSNBC, Huffington Post

Olympia Snowe Expected To Vote Yes For Health Care Reform...Will The GOP Abandon Her?

(Will (Sen.) Snowe drift? NBC News' Chuck Todd talks about the upcoming health care reform vote, and how after courting Sen. Olympia Snowe, Democrats expect her support.)

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

Snowe says she'll back the Baucus health bill

A Republican senator says she will vote for a Democratic health care bill, breaking with her party on President Barack Obama's top legislative item.

Sen. Olympia Snowe kept virtually all of Washington guessing how she would vote until she announced it late in the Senate Finance Committee debate Tuesday. Until then, she told reporters, she had not even let Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, in on her secret.

She told her colleagues: "When history calls, history calls" even though she had some criticism of the bill.

Democrats, aware that Snowe could be the only Republican in Congress to vote for their health care overhaul, have spent months addressing her concerns about making health care affordable and how to pay for it.

"Ours is a balanced plan that can pass the Senate," declared Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., earlier in the hearing.

Health care legislation is expected to be on the Senate floor the week after next, said a spokesman for Reid, who must combine the Finance version with a more liberal proposal from the health committee.

The expected approval by Baucus' committee would push a remake of the U.S. health care system closer to reality than it has been in decades. Four other congressional committees finished their work before August and for months all eyes have been on the Finance panel, the one whose moderate makeup most closely resembles the Senate as a whole.

The committee's centrist legislation is also seen as the best building block for a compromise plan that could find favor on the Senate floor.

Baucus' 10-year, $829-billion plan would, for the first time, require most Americans to purchase insurance and it also aims to hold down spiraling medical costs over the long term. But questions persist about whether it would truly provide access to affordable coverage, particularly for self employed people with solid middle class incomes.

Much work would lie ahead before a bill could arrive on Obama's desk, but action by the Finance Committee would mark a significant advance, capping numerous delays as Baucus held marathon negotiating sessions — ultimately unsuccessful — aimed at producing a bipartisan bill.

With Democrats holding a 13-10 majority on the committee, the outcome of Tuesday's vote, expected after several hours of discussion by senators, was not in doubt. The legislation that passed the other House and Senate committees did so without a single Republican vote.

The Finance Committee's top Republican, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, gave voice to the GOP's concerns about the bill, saying it was "moving on a slippery slope to more and more government control of health care."

"There's a lot in this bill that's just a consensus that needs to be done, but there are other provisions of this bill that raise a lot of questions," Grassley said, contending the legislation would mean higher costs for Americans.

One of the biggest unanswered questions is whether the legislation would slow punishing increases in the nation's health care costs, particularly for the majority who now have coverage through employers. The insurance industry insists it would shift new costs onto those who have coverage.

Congressional Budget Office Director Douglas Elmendorf, under questioning by Republican senators, acknowledged that the bill's total impact on the nation's health care costs is still unknown. The CBO has been able to establish that the legislation would reduce federal government deficits, but Elmendorf said his staff has not had time to evaluate its effects on privately insured people. Government programs pay about half the nation's annual $2.5 trillion health care tab.

Expanding coverage to the uninsured is likely to lead to more health care spending, Elmendorf said. But other provisions, such as a tax on high-premium health care plans, could push spending down. "We simply have not done the analysis to net that out," he said.

One Democrat expressed misgivings about the legislation. Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon said the bill doesn't do enough to promote consumer choice and guarantee affordability. "We clearly have more to do," Wyden said, without revealing how he'll vote.

Once the Finance Committee has acted, the dealmaking can begin in earnest with Reid, working with White House staff, Baucus and others to blend the Finance bill with a more liberal version passed by the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Baucus' bill includes consumer protections such as limits on copays and deductibles and relies on federal subsidies to help lower-income families purchase coverage. Insurance companies would have to take all comers, and people could shop for insurance within new state marketplaces called exchanges.

Medicaid would be expanded, and though employers wouldn't be required to cover their workers, they'd have to pay a penalty for each employee who sought insurance with government subsidies. The bill is paid for by cuts to Medicare providers and new taxes on insurance companies and others.

Unlike the other health care bills in Congress, Baucus' would not allow the government to sell insurance in competition with private companies, a divisive element sought by liberals.

Last-minute changes made subsidies more generous and softened the penalties for those who don't comply with a proposed new mandate for everyone to buy insurance. The latter change drew the ire of the health insurance industry, which said that without a strong and enforceable requirement, not enough people would get insured and premiums would jump for everyone else.

A major question mark for Reid's negotiations is whether he will include some version of a so-called public plan in the merged bill. Across the Capitol, House Democratic leaders are working to finalize their bill, which does contain a public plan, and floor action is expected in both chambers in coming weeks. If passed, the legislation would then go to a conference committee to reconcile differences.




Sens: Snowe's healthcare vote puts her top Commerce perch at risk


Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine) is risking a shot at becoming the top Republican on an influential Senate committee by backing Democratic healthcare legislation, according to senators on the panel.

A Senate Democrat on the Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee said Republicans on the panel are threatening to vote against Snowe, who is in line for the senior GOP post that is about to come open.

“Wake up,” the Democrat told a reporter last week when questioned if the Republicans would retaliate against Snowe for crossing party lines.

Snowe, a potential swing vote on the Senate Finance Committee, could give Democrats a major boost Tuesday when that panel holds a final vote on Chairman Max Baucus’s (D-Mont.) bill. She could also support the bill in the coming weeks on the Senate floor.

“A vote for healthcare would be something that would weigh on our minds when it came time to vote,” said a Republican on Commerce, who said Snowe would otherwise be assured of the ranking member post if not for the healthcare debate.

Every other GOP member of Finance is expected to vote against the healthcare bill.

Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (Texas), the senior Republican on Commerce, is preparing to leave the chamber to run for governor in the coming weeks.

The Republicans on Commerce will pick Hutchison’s replacement, with the entire conference ratifying that decision. Seniority is usually the most important consideration, but party loyalty could trump that.

Snowe represents the biggest wildcard for the GOP at Tuesday’s Finance vote. If she supports the bill, Democrats can claim a bipartisan product heading into the floor debate.

Her vote would diminish the threat of two Democrats who have strongly criticized Baucus’s legislation and whose votes are by no means guaranteed.
A spokesman for Snowe did not respond to a request for comment for this article.

Snowe’s policy concerns include weighing how the bill, which imposes a heavy tax on high-cost insurance plans, would affect her home state, where healthcare coverage ranks among the most expensive in the country.

She also has to determine whether the bill does enough to subsidize the healthcare costs of Americans who would be required under the bill to buy insurance, a concern she has repeatedly raised.

And she must determine whether the cost estimate provided by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) can be trusted.

Complicating the situation is the timing of Hutchison’s departure from the Senate, which could come this month or in November, at the height of the healthcare debate on the chamber floor.

“Olympia’s vote on healthcare could be a very fresh development by the time it came to replacing Kay,” said the GOP Commerce Committee lawmaker, who requested anonymity because the prospect of voting against a colleague is a sensitive subject.

Republicans will already be thinking about how Snowe has voted against her GOP colleagues many times this year. A tally by The Washington Post found that she voted with her party 58.4 percent of the time over the course of 308 votes, including on the $787 billion stimulus bill. Only Maine Sen. Susan Collins (R) posted a lower party unity score (58.1 percent).

Snowe is the ranking Republican on the Small Business Committee, but she would likely give up that post to take the more prestigious slot on the Commerce panel, a significantly more powerful committee.

Republican sources could not recall an instance in the last two decades when Republican senators voted to upset the seniority system.

The closest they came was in January of 1987, when Republican members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted to seat Sen. Richard Lugar (Ind.) as the senior Republican on the panel over the late Sen. Jesse Helms (N.C.), who had more seniority. But the committee’s action was overturned by a vote of the entire Republican Conference, which voted to “preserve the vital principles of party unity and Senate seniority.”

Snowe is helped by the fact that a rival for the post has yet to emerge. Sen. John Ensign (Nev.), the third-ranking Republican on the panel, has taken a hit publicly because of a recent sex scandal. The fourth-ranking Republican is Sen. Jim DeMint (S.C.), who has been outspoken in his calls to defeat the Democratic healthcare bill.

Democrats have their own party-unity issues with Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), who had threatened to vote against the bill if significant changes were not made, and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who blasted the measure after being denied a vote on an amendment.

Rockefeller did win a big change in the legislation when the panel adopted an amendment that would preserve the Children’s Health Insurance Program, which he helped create. Baucus had initially proposed taking many children out of the program and putting them into insurance exchanges, where they would be eligible for new federal subsidies. President Barack Obama has met with Rockefeller and Wyden in recent weeks to seek their votes, and subsequently called Rockefeller on the phone.

Wyden, who is upset the measure does not make insurance exchanges available to those with employer-provided insurance, has made no overt threats against the bill. To the contrary, he has indicated that he will try to change it at other points in the process, such as during floor debate and conference negotiations.

Baucus expects to have the votes, and after it is approved, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) will merge the bill with one approved in July by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.

Reid would like to bring legislation to the floor as soon as next week, said a Democratic aide. The floor debate could take two or three weeks.



What is Olympia Snowe thinking?

The only mystery left around the Senate Finance Committee’s health reform vote Tuesday is this:

What is Olympia Snowe thinking?

Snowe is the last Republican left who might vote for Chairman Max Baucus’s bill — holding the key to whether Democrats can claim bipartisan support, or must go it alone.

She’s been cagey, but consistent. Snowe doesn’t like the bill's penalties for people who don’t buy insurance. But she likes the overall price tag, well under $1 trillion. She’s even hinted at casting one vote in committee and a different vote on the floor.

“They’ve got me voting yes, preserving my leverage. Voting no, preserving my leverage,” Snowe said recently of all the commentary about her decision. “It’s all about what I’m comfortable doing at the end of the day.”

Here’s a look inside the vote and Snowe’s thinking:

IF SNOWE VOTES YES: This is clearly the outcome Baucus is rooting for, as he made a lot of concessions to bring her on board, including cutting the no-insurance penalties by more than half. The bipartisan nod Snowe brings to the bill strengthens Baucus’s hand as he, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee’s Chris Dodd merge the Health and Finance committee bills.

Snowe’s buy-in makes it easier for Baucus and Reid to sell reform to moderate Democrats — think Sens. Mary Landrieu, Ben Nelson and Evan Bayh — who are arguably more conservative than their colleague from Maine.

And it positions Snowe to grab a bigger seat at the decision-making table as Reid crafts a bill to send to the Senate floor. Not to mention, the headlines all laud Baucus for landing a Republican vote and give Democrats the “big mo.”

Democrats could overplay their hands: Look for Republicans to push back hard against any narrative that suggests a solitary GOP vote suddenly makes the bill bipartisan.

IF SNOWE VOTES NO: This will be written as a major setback for Democrats, plain and simple.

For Baucus, this one stings because he would have put so much time and effort into wooing Snowe, all for naught. He doesn’t get the hero’s welcome, or a carrot to entice moderate Democrats.

And the failure to win Snowe’s support in Finance will raise questions about whether Baucus and Reid can win her support on the floor. Remember, Nelson (D-Neb.) has said he didn’t want to vote for an all-Democratic bill, and other moderates could be jittery without the bipartisan cover Snowe provides.

As for Snowe, she may find herself with a less influential voice moving forward as Democrats begin to question whether she’s really serious about passing reform. The headlines may be the biggest problem for Dems as they’ll slow the mo' and cast doubts on what should be a very big day for Baucus and reform.

So what should she do?

There are two schools of thought:

A) Vote no, and preserve her leverage as it goes to the floor. Otherwise, Reid takes her for granted and goes searching for another Republican who might support it, though his choices are extremely limited, as Snowe’s fellow Mainer Susan Collins hasn’t sounded too promising.

b) Vote yes, and the White House argues that wins her a seat at the merger discussions: “She gets her greatest leverage by voting for it in committee, because then she’s a part of the discussions to merge the bill, because once you have her in committee, you have to keep her for the floor. Because now you’ve committed yourself to a 60-vote track. If she wants to be for something in the end, the worst thing she could do is vote against it in committee, and then allow there to be a sense that it’s headed to reconciliation, and the progressives are going to push incredibly hard for a bunch of things she’s uncomfortable with, like a full public plan.”

Don’t forget the caveats: Snowe has left herself enough room that no matter how she votes today she’ll be able to change it later.

A no today can become a yes tomorrow as Snowe continues using her leverage to shape the bill.

Conversely, a yes today can switch overnight if she feels Democratic leadership stepped all over her concerns while shaping the legislation. As Democrats’ last best hope at winning a GOP vote, Snowe will continue to hold a good deal of sway. If she votes no, some observers may start ringing the reconciliation bell — a rookie mistake, according to some insiders.

Nevertheless, if Snowe votes no, there will be consideration — and certainly speculation — about a reconciliation track, the use of a procedural effort that requires only a simple majority to pass legislation.

But make no mistake, it still looks highly unlikely, because it’s so messy. White House and Democratic leadership would have to do a quick analysis to see if they could get every Democrat to vote for cloture. They still say it’s much easier to do this the regular way.

And reconciliation isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. The Democrats would lose a lot of control when they put so many decisions in the hands of the parliamentarian — who gets to decide what’s in and what’s out. Even some liberals say the optics of that would be terrible, an unelected official getting to decide which pieces of health legislation could come to the floor, for a one-party vote by the Democrats, on an issue where polls show the country is still deeply divided.

And there are pieces of health reform that simply won’t fit with reconciliation — which is supposed to be for budgetary matters — and where Democrats will definitely need 60 votes. Even if they’re popular pieces of the legislation, it’s hard to imagine the Republicans will do anything other than simply vote “no.”



View Larger Map


Sources: MSNBC, Huffington Post, The Hill, Politico, Google Maps