You can view this video right here by getting the latest version of Flash Player!

DOWNLOADS: (1195)

PLAYS: (1748)

November 23, 2009 CNN

SANCHEZ: I want to start with some breaking news, Mark Sanford, embattled governor of South Carolina, accused today of breaking state laws, not one time, not two times, 37 times, according to the finding by the state ethics commission, 37 counts of law-breaking, which means Sanford's problems may transcend the political now, even as an impeachment committee is set to convene tomorrow.

You're going to recall the governor's problems began when he disappeared from view for something like five days last summer. It was a big story then, still is. Aides said that Sanford was -- quote -- "trying to clear his head" hiking along the Appalachian Trail.

But he was spotted then by a reporter getting off a flight from Argentina and then was forced to admit what we all now remember he ended up saying in a news conference, forced to admit to having a South American mistress at the time.

Since then, his wife has left him. She says the couple's separated. She is also writing a book about him. Any talk of a presidential run, forget about it, and now, on top of potential impeachment, 37 counts of breaking state law, much of it stemming from Sanford's frequent travels. Joining me now from Washington, CNN's Peter Hamby, who spent a lot of time chasing this story in South Carolina.

Look, we get the ethics thing. What I think you need to explain to us is how this becomes a criminal issue and specifically what crimes are we talking about.

PETER HAMBY: Well, what we're talking about here. And the ethics commission is not saying that he's actually broken a law yet. What they have found are 37 counts in this complaint that he may have violated state law by using his office for personal gain.

They list three different kinds of charges against him that they will argue in a hearing. They haven't set a hearing date yet, but they will soon. Many of those counts say that he upgraded from business class to coach on flights going back to 2005.

Continue reading »

The vote on bringing the bill to the floor may happen by the end of this week:

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid scrambled Tuesday to lock down votes behind a health-care bill that he may present as early as Wednesday.

The Nevada Democrat would not confirm that he had received commitments from all 60 members of his caucus to overcome GOP procedural objections and bring the bill to the Senate floor, saying only, "I feel cautiously optimistic that we can do that. I think we're together as a caucus."

[...] Preliminary estimates by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the legislation's official scorekeeper, have indicated that the Senate measure would cost far less than the bill the House approved last week, while lowering the federal deficit further over the long term, said several senior Democratic aides who have reviewed the CBO data.

Which, of course, makes me wonder: Who did the Senate leave out?

Democrats are hopeful about winning over at least one Republican, Sen. Olympia J. Snowe, on a vote for final passage. But the Maine moderate has pledged to support a GOP filibuster at the outset because Reid's bill is expected to include a public-insurance option that she opposes.

UPDATE from TPM:

Under the terms of the bill, Medicaid would be expanded to cover everybody up to 133 percent of the poverty line. And in a move that will disappoint progressives, tax credits to buy health insurance would be limited to those between 133 and 300 percent of poverty line. (People between 300 and 400 percent of poverty would not be provided any direct federal assistance, but insurers would not be able to set their premiums at more than 9.8 percent of their annual income.)

Here we go again. That's not going to be enough to make it affordable to most people, and it has to change in the final version. Call your Congress critter!

The Democrats are so strangely self-destructive at times, I have to say this: Please tell me they're not only investigating Democrats, but Republicans, too. Because that would just be stupid. I mean, we didn't bother going after Republican war criminals - so why single out Democrats?

House ethics investigators have scrutinized the activities of more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July.

The report, disclosed on a publicly accessible computer network, was made available to The Washington Post by a source familiar with such networks.

The ethics committee is one of the most secretive panels in Congress, and its members and staff members sign oaths not to disclose any activities related to its past or present investigations. Watchdog groups have accused the committee of not actively pursuing inquiries; the newly disclosed document indicates the panel is conducting far more investigations than it had revealed.

Shortly after 6 p.m. Thursday, the committee chairman, Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), interrupted a series of House votes to alert lawmakers about the breach. She cautioned that some of the panel's activities are preliminary and not a conclusive sign of inappropriate behavior.

"No inference should be made as to any member," she said.