One of the more amazing aspects of the health-care debate is how steady public opinion has remained. Despite repeated and intense sales efforts by the president and his allies in Congress, most Americans consistently oppose the plan that has become the centerpiece of this legislative season. For every person who strongly favors it, two are strongly opposed. Why can't the president move the numbers? One reason may be that he keeps talking about details of the proposal while voters are looking at the issue in a broader context. Polling conducted earlier this week shows that 57% of voters believe that passage of the legislation would hurt the economy, while only 25% believe it would help.
March 10, 2010
|
Zogby in Financial Times
In surveying American opinion just before and a week after President Barack Obama’s healthcare summit, we found a third of respondents more supportive of his plan, a third less so and a third unchanged. This would seem to confirm that the summit achieved nothing. But looking deeper into our March 3 data reveals some surprises. These may give second thoughts to those Republicans who want some type of health reform but are under orders to vote no on Obamacare. When we asked who was putting the nation’s interest ahead of political gain, we got a surprise: most independents – and almost half of Republicans – chose the Democrats.
March 10, 2010
|
Wall Street Journal
The Senate on Tuesday cleared a hurdle to extending unemployment benefits and health-care subsidies for the jobless until year's end, the latest modest bipartisan success on jobs and the economy. The vote was 66-34, with eight Republicans, including newly-elected Sen. Scott Brown of Massachusetts, joining the Democrats. One Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, voted against the measure. The Senate bill extends eligibility for enhanced unemployment-insurance benefits and eligibility for tax credits for laid off workers who obtain health insurance through the Cobra program, both through year's end.
March 9, 2010
|
Wall Street Journal Editorial
Now that they have raised federal spending as a share of GDP to 25% and don't want to return to the 20.7% 40-year average, Democrats are looking for political cover to pay for it. They want the commission to declare that there's no way you can cut future spending enough to balance the budget, and then to propose ways to raise huge new chunks of revenue beyond the current tax code. Mr. Obama's nominees will endorse both propositions, and if GOP appointees go along the headline will be: Bipartisan Commission Says Taxes Only Way to Balance Fisc. One way to increase the odds of dodging this trap would be for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell to name the likes of former Texas Senator Phil Gramm as one of his three appointees.
March 9, 2010
|
KeithHennessey.com
The President’s chance of legislative success is way above the 10% I projected shortly after the Brown election when I declared a comprehensive bill dead. Was I wrong, or have things changed dramatically? A little of both, I think. As of this posting, Intrade estimates about a 50% chance of success. That seems a little high. I’ll guess it’s a coin toss as to whether the Speaker can round up 216 votes for two bills, multiplied by an 80% chance that if she does they can overcome other hurdles to get two signed laws. That puts me at a 40% chance President Obama gets to declare victory, but with lots of uncertainty. Click through for an analysis of vote counting, timing, process, and the probability a comprehensive bill becomes law.
March 9, 2010
|
Financial Times
Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, on Monday called for an upfront levy on large financial institutions to pay for the costs of their failure – but she signalled willingness to compromise. As regulatory reform talks grind towards a conclusion in the Senate, Ms Bair told the Financial Times that she was still pushing for a pre-funded “resolution authority” to wind down the next Lehman Brothers-style failure even though the biggest banks faced an additional $90bn tax announced by President Barack Obama.
March 9, 2010
|
Washington Post
Obama and his health secretary staged a two-pronged attack Monday in a stern letter to health insurance chief executives and a speech in which the president castigated insurance companies 22 times. "How much higher do premiums have to rise," he demanded, "before we do something about it?" The messages are part of a strategy that Obama and those around him have begun to employ lately, to ratchet up the pace and the populist appeal of their rhetoric against the health insurance industry. The barbed tone moves far beyond that of the 2008 presidential campaign, when Obama began to say that medical coverage should be accessible and affordable for more Americans.
March 8, 2010
|
New York Times Editorial Chart
Would using reconciliation to pass health reform represent an anomalous and dangerous power grab? The accompanying chart, which lists 15 major reconciliation bills passed by Congress since the process was first used in 1980, provides evidence for assessing that charge. Reconciliation was intended to be a narrow procedure to bring revenues and spending into conformity with the levels set in the annual budget resolution. But it quickly became much more. The 22 reconciliation bills so far passed by Congress (three of which were vetoed by President Bill Clinton) have included all manner of budgetary and policy measures: deficit reductions and increases; social policy bills like welfare reform; major changes in Medicare and Medicaid; large tax cuts; and small adjustments in existing law.
March 8, 2010
|
OpenLeft.com
In a letter to a constituent, Senator Mark Begich has indicated that he is open to using reconciliation for health reform. That makes 50 Senators publicly open to using reconciliation to finish health reform without any maybes. There will be a reconciliation fix to the Senate health bill, as long as the House first passes one.
March 8, 2010
|
Financial Times
Barack Obama has given Democrats a March 18 deadline for the House to pass the Senate version of a healthcare reform bill before he leaves on a trip to Asia, leading to a frenzy of arm-twisting and vote tallying on Capitol Hill. But Democratic leaders in the House are struggling to get the 216 votes they need to pass the Senate bill. As many as 12 conservative Democrats who voted in favour of the House bill because it included tough new restrictions on abortion funding are now threatening to vote against the Senate version, which is less restrictive. The House bill passed by 220 to 215 so Democrats have few votes to spare.
e21 PRESENTS
TODAY'S NEWS
March 10, 2010
|
Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
e21 IS SOCIAL
Washington Update