The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day
CBO Expected To Score Senate Bill Soon, Kickstart Debate
The Hill suggests Senate debate starts next week, passage by Christmas, final bill by State of the Union address: "The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is expected to finish its cost analysis of the Senate bill by the end of this week or early next. Senior aides and senators say Democrats plan to pivot quickly and file the first procedural vote as early as Monday ... a first, critical test of the caucus’s unity on procedural votes. Senators ... say the most realistic scenario is for a Senate vote by Christmas followed by final passage in mid-January. That would allow sufficient time for House-Senate conference talks and final House-Senate votes during January’s first weeks."
The Hill also finds "No" votes who are open to voting "Yes" on the final House-Senate bill: "Perriello’s and Nye’s votes should continue to be topics of conversation if the measure comes back to the House, as should Boccieri’s, Kosmas’s, Kissell’s and those of many other vulnerable Democrats."
President indicates to ABC Stupak amendment needs to be scaled back: "I laid out a very simple principle, which is this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill ... there needs to be some more work before we get to the point where we're not changing the status quo."
41 pro-choice House Dems levy threat. The Hill quotes: "We will not vote for a conference report that contains language that restricts women’s right to choose any further than current law"
HuffPost reports Sen. McCaskill shifting away from Stupak: "Less than a day after saying the Senate could live with a health care amendment that greatly restricted a woman's access to abortion in the private insurance market, Sen. Claire McCaskill, (D-MO) announced she opposed such an amendment."
Politico reports on other senators sympathetic to Stupak: "Other key moderates didn’t go quite [as far as Sen. Nelson], but at least two others — Sens. Kent Conrad of North Dakota and Mary Landrieu of Louisiana — said they, too, want to ensure that the Senate bill prevents federal dollars from paying for abortion."
GOP Sen. Susan Collins deems the Senate Finance compromise better than Stupak. Bloomberg: "...she believes the plan that came out of the Senate Finance Committee 'did a good job putting up a firewall that would prevent federal funds from going to abortions.' The committee’s bill prohibits abortion services from being required as part of a minimum benefits package offered through the exchange. It also segregates public subsidy funds from private premium payments for insurance plans that provide abortion services."
FDL's Jon Walker reports Sen. Ben Nelson embracing Stupak: "If Nelson gets his way (and when hasn’t Nelson gotten his way this year?), so much for 'don’t worry, Obama will fix it in conference.' ... If these groups are serious about protecting a woman’s right to choose, they better start looking into [budget] reconciliation."
NYT "news" article complains about lack of cost-cutting because House version does not tax expansive insurance plans. Dean Baker rebuts: "Why Is Using a Public Health Care Plan to Drive Down Health Care Costs Ideology and Not Pragmatism?"
President Clinton to address Senate Dems today. CNN: "Democratic leaders have consistently cited what they call a lesson of the Clinton administration: fail to pass health care, and congressional Democrats will suffer on Election Day."
Dodd Bill Takes A Shot At The Fed
Bloomberg gets a sneak peak at the Dodd bill to be released today: "Senator Christopher Dodd will propose creating a single U.S. regulator that would strip the Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. of bank-supervision authority [and] would eliminate the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Office of Thrift Supervision and fold the Treasury Department units into the new bank regulator ... Dodd will also propose creating a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, a council of regulators to monitor large firms for disruptive effects on the industry and the economy, and giving the FDIC power to unwind failed firms whose collapse in bankruptcy could shake the economy."
Dodd doesn't have Shelby on board. Politico: "Shelby balked over some of the substance in Dodd’s bill — particularly Dodd’s determination to include the so-called consumer financial protection agency. But the main tension appears to be one of timing. Shelby and his staff felt there were serious weaknesses and unanswered questions in the proposal that they needed addressed before moving forward with compromise talk ... Dodd and his staff – no doubt feeling pressure from the White House – feel a greater sense of urgency, and they believe they’ve thoroughly explored the relevant issues in dozens of hearings and sit-downs with experts ... a partisan vote in committee doesn’t mean that’s the end of negotiations between Dodd and Shelby."
Wonk Room's Pat Garofalo questions Treasury opposition to a financial transaction tax: "...the tax could raise some deficit-reducing revenue, while giving us a more efficient financial system. That’s something that Geithner should be willing to spend a few moments contemplating."
NYT on the latest attacks on consumers by credit card companies: "Interest rates are going up, credit lines are being cut and a variety of new fees are being imposed on even the best cardholders ... lawmakers have accused them of trying to impose rate increases before many of the new rules take effect in February ... the House of Representatives voted last week to make the law effective immediately. The bill now goes to the Senate, where a vote has not been scheduled. The Senate Banking Committee chairman, Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut, meanwhile, is pushing legislation that would freeze interest rates on existing credit card balances until the law takes effect."
Obama to press China on currency on his upcoming Asia trip. NYT: "Mr. Obama has so far resisted domestic pressure to brand China as a currency manipulator, which could anger a crucial U.S. creditor, and when asked about this in the interview he parried the question ... He did, however, say that the two countries share a common interest in delivering sustainable growth that will help rebalance the global economy ... [and] did acknowledge that the complaints about access to Chinese markets had some validity."
Right-leaning Senate Dems threaten to block debt limit increase without new commission to prematurely slash budget deficit outside of regular procedure. CQ: "Senate Budget Chairman Kent Conrad said he and 10 other senators have told Majority Leader Harry Reid that they will not vote for an increase in the debt limit without also having a vote on creating a special process to deal with ... long-term budget problems ... Conrad has pushed hard for creation of a commission of lawmakers and administration officials that would produce policy proposals that Congress would have to consider for curtailing the growth in government debt."
Baucus Pledges To Pass Climate Bill
CQ reports Sen. Max Baucus is promising to pass climate protection legislation before midterms: "'There’s no doubt that this Congress is going to pass climate change legislation,' said Baucus, whose committee kicks off hearings on the issue [today]. 'I don’t know if it will be this year, very likely next year. But I very much want climate change legislation. I think it’s very important for my state and for the country.' Baucus’ pledge to press for legislation addressing global warming is especially important because his panel has jurisdiction over particularly contentious parts of any cap-and-trade bill, including the formula for distributing billions of dollars in emissions allowances to polluters."
HuffPost on Baucus' links to special interests: "The Sunlight Foundation's Paul Blumenthal traces Sen. Max Baucus' special interest ties to climate legislation -- 12 of his former staffers, including four former chiefs of staff, now lobby for organizations with a vested interest in the policy.
EPA & WH keep raising pressure on Congress, moving towards EPA regulation of carbon. WSJ: "... the Obama administration appears one step closer to creating its own regime for controlling greenhouse gases. On Monday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced it sent the White House Office of Management and Budget its proposed finding that greenhouse gases endanger human health and welfare. Adoption of that endangerment finding is the legal precursor to regulating such gases under the Clean Air Act.
Climate Progress on new Pew polls in swing states: "Polling from 3 key states — and 5 key districts — finds strong support for the climate and clean energy bill ... 75% of voters in Michigan favor. 68% of voters in Ohio favor. 67% of voters in Missouri favor ... You can find details on the 8 polls here."
Politico reports veterans groups are increasingly supportive of climate legislation on national security grounds: "...scores of retired admirals and generals are lending their stars to the boards of energy security organizations in ways that could expand the political base for new climate change policies ... Citing what many see as weather-related calamities that are striking with increasing fury, possibly because of climate change, [CAP's Rudy] DeLeon said that the military services 'see the displacement that is occurring when these disasters hit' because of their role in aiding the world’s most important humanitarian missions."
NYT reports on friction between EPA heads and two EPA lawyers critical of cap-and-trade approach: "The Environmental Protection Agency has directed two of its lawyers to makes changes to a YouTube video they posted that is critical of the Obama administration’s climate change policy. The agency, citing federal policies, told the two lawyers, Laurie Williams and Allan Zabel ... that they could mention their E.P.A. affiliation only once; must remove language specifying Mr. Zabel’s expertise and their years of employment with the agency; and must remove an image of the agency’s office in San Francisco."
Grist's David Roberts critical of both parties: "even though I think many of Williams & Zabel’s policy arguments are deeply flawed, I can’t see any justification for refusing them the right to communicate honestly about their backgrounds to the public. EPA should back off."
