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

DOWNLOADS: (2745)

PLAYS: (3255)

If I hear "He's with us on everything but the war" one more time, I'm going to go medieval on somebody.

Sen. Joe Lieberman, the Democrat-turned-independent from Connecticut, said Tuesday that he will not vote for a healthcare reform bill that includes a government-run insurance plan.

This means that as things now stand, Democrats will not have enough votes to pass healthcare reform with a so-called public option unless Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) can pick up unexpected GOP votes.

Sen. Olympia Snowe (Maine), the only Republican to vote for the Senate Finance Committee’s healthcare bill, said Tueday that she would vote against bringing up a bill that included a government-run insurance program unless the implementation of such a program were set to a trigger.

Lieberman said he would vote with Reid and other Democrats on a motion to begin debate on a healthcare bill because he believes it is an important issue that needs to be considered. But he said he would not lend his support to an effort to cut off debate on a bill including a government-run insurance program.

Lieberman said he told Reid of his position in a recent conversation and that the leader “respected and understood.”

“We’re trying to do too much at once,” said Lieberman. “To put this government-created, government-run insurance company on top of everything else is just asking for trouble for the taxpayer, for the premium payer and for the national debt. I don’t think we need it now.”

Lieberman said he was not placated by allowing states to opt out of the public option “because it still creates a whole new federal government entitlement program, for which taxpayers will eventually be on the line.”

The motion to begin debate and the motion to move to a final vote are two actions that would require 60 votes and are considered the highest hurdles to passing a reform bill through the Senate.

Can we strip this traitor of his chairmanships already? I have several choice descriptors for Lieberman, but party/caucus loyalist is not one of them. Mr. Gang of 14/Up or Down Vote is more interested in letting insurance companies make a profit off you than helping Americans. He's afraid of doing "too much."

Too late. He already has done too much. Too much to ever be allowed to caucus with the Democrats again.

Harry Reid told the Las Vegas Review Journal that the bill coming out of Congress will have a public option.

U.S. Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said today there will be a "public option" in whatever health insurance reform bill comes out of Congress.

"We are going to have a public option before this bill goes to the president's desk," Reid said in a conference call with constituents, referring to some kind of government plan.

."I believe the public option is so vitally important to create a level playing field and prevent the insurance companies from taking advantage of us," he said.

Reid also mentioned the inclusion of incentives for healthy behavior, something suggested by Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev.

What form of a public option is something we don't know.

dday runs down the various types of proposals that are out there in his post: What's In A Name?

Well, we'll know one way or another soon enough and although many are not optimistic about the chances of a vibrant public option the fact that Reid has injected it into the dialogue after he has been unwillingly to do so only helps our cause. And all the online activism done by the blogosphere and health-care groups has been essential or it never would have gotten this far. We will continue to push and fight and scratch and yell to save the bill from the grubby hands of the health-care industrial complex. You can count on it.
The Huffington Post updates Reid:

UPDATE: Reid's office clarifies his remarks in a statement sent over from an aide to the Senator.

"Sen. Reid believes that health insurance reform must include a mechanism to keep insurers honest, create competition and keep costs down," the statement reads. "He feels that the public option is the best way to do that. While we don't know exactly what that option will look like, Sen. Reid, working with President Obama, will ensure that whatever is included in the final bill does just that."

This seemed somewhat inevitable as Reid has largely resisted going out on a limb when it comes to the public option.

You know that old joke about the definition of mixed emotions: your mother-in-law driving your brand new Benz over a cliff? That's how I feel about the GOP targeting Harry Reid. Can't we find a real Democrat to challenge him in the primary?

And besides, why don't we have a Majority Leader from a safe state who won't be bending over backwards to keep the GOP happy?

Nevada Republicans have been unsuccessful in finding a top-tier candidate, but the head of the GOP's Senate campaign arm promised Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) would face a strong challenge in 2010.

National Republican Senatorial Committee chairman John Cornyn (Texas) admitted Wednesday that time to find a candidate to take on Reid is not unlimited, but he said the chance to take out the Senate majority leader would open Republican wallets around the nation.

"With the right candidate against Harry Reid, money will not be a problem. And not just in Nevada, among contributors there, but I mean nationally," Cornyn told reporters.

"I think we have time, it's not open-ended, to find the right candidate," Cornyn said. "Because of the overall political environment, I don't think there's that kind of urgency that we might otherwise feel to get a candidate early.

"We don't yet have the field completed. My hope is here over the next few weeks that will change," Cornyn said.

But Republicans have seen several prominent potential candidates fall by the wayside in their hunt for the right candidate. Ex-Rep. Jon Porter (R), long seen as a strong challenger, lost his reelection bid in 2008 and has since signed on with a Washington lobbying firm. Former state Sen. Bob Beers (R), another possible contender, suffered the same fate last year.

Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki (R) is already in the race, but he was indicted for misappropriation of funds during his tenure as state treasurer. Though Krolicki maintains his innocence and has pleaded not guilty, he is no longer a candidate national Republicans speak of.

We're really going to have to turn up the heat, guys. Make sure you continue calling and emailing your representatives. Don't let the lobbyists be the only ones whispering in their ears:

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid acknowledged Thursday that his chamber is unable to pass health-care reform before its August recess, a move that highlighted internal Democratic divisions on the legislation and is likely to result in significant changes to the shape of the final bill.

The Aug. 7 deadline that President Obama set for House and Senate leaders to move their versions of reform served as a vital tool for congressional leaders in minimizing dissent as the $1 trillion package moved through five committees. But with their hopes of reaching that target date slipping in recent days, a torrent of complaints and concerns began to surface.

The comments by Reid (D-Nev.) confirmed the growing consensus on Capitol Hill that the White House's fast-track approach has failed, and that a more plodding and contentious process has taken hold. Not only would the Senate not meet Obama's timeline for passing a bill, but across the Capitol, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was struggling to quell an uprising by conservative Democrats that had brought House action to a near halt.

Appearing at an event Thursday in Shaker Heights, Ohio, intended to rally support for health-care reform, Obama attempted to brush aside the delay, saying he is content to know that Congress is pressing ahead.

In response to a questioner at the event, the president said, "That's okay. I just want people to keep on working," adding that he wants to sign a final bill "by the end of this year."

He did not acknowledge the delay in his prepared comments, telling the crowd of 1,600 at a high school gymnasium that "reform may be coming too soon for some in Washington, but it's not soon enough for the American people." He vowed that the final bill would be deficit-neutral while making systemic changes to stop health-care costs from skyrocketing.

Like a candidate asking for votes, he urged supporters of change to press for it.

"Keep on your members of Congress, keep up the heat," Obama told the crowd. "We've got to get this done."

Lawmakers, however, appeared to be in no rush. When Democratic members of the Senate Finance Committee met Thursday morning and raised doubts about the bill coming through their panel. Sen. John F. Kerry (Mass.) questioned new Medicare formulas that could penalize high-cost states such as his. Sen. Bill Nelson (Fla.), who represents millions of elderly constituents, also expressed doubts about Medicare cuts that could add up to $500 billion over 10 years. Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (W.Va.) lambasted the panel's tentative decision to support the creation of member-run cooperatives rather than the government insurance plan that he and many other Democrats prefer.

Some Democrats are so opposed to the cooperative idea that they are urging Finance Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.) to offer no new coverage option in his legislation. That would allow Democrats more time to build support for the government insurance plan included in the House bill, along with legislation approved on a party-line vote by the Senate health committee.

But dropping the cooperative provision would risk losing the support of Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the panel's ranking Republican and a co-op advocate, whose presence at the negotiating table represents Obama's best hope of getting the broad bipartisan support he has pledged to seek for reform.

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

DOWNLOADS: (973)

PLAYS: (1650)

There was a little bit of history made yesterday, though hardly anyone noticed: the Senate passed a hate-crimes bill.

This is historic because it marks the first time both houses have agreed to a federal law dealing with these kinds of crimes. Dating back to the failures of Congress to ever enact anti-lynching legislation, the Senate made history by forwarding the bill to the president, where he is expected to sign ... or is he?

WASHINGTON — People attacked because of their sexual orientation or gender would receive federal protections under a Senate-approved measure that significantly expands the reach of hate crimes law.

The Senate bill also would make it easier for federal prosecutors to step in when state or local authorities are unable or unwilling to pursue hate crimes.

"The Senate made a strong statement this evening that hate crimes have no place in America," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said after the chamber voted Thursday to attach the legislation as an amendment to a $680 billion defense spending bill expected to be completed next week.

The House in April approved a similar bill and President Barack Obama has urged Congress to send him hate crimes legislation, presenting the best scenario for the measure to become law since Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., first introduced it more than a decade ago.

Republicans will have the opportunity to propose several more changes to the hate crimes bill on Monday, but that will not change its status as part of the must-pass defense bill.

However, Obama is threatening to veto the bill if it comes attached with funding for F-22s that John McCain and Co. have stuck onto it. Eventually it's expected to return to his desk if that happens, but there's always the chance for Republican mischief in the interim.

In any event, perhaps the best thing about its passage is that it makes the wingnuts very, very unhappy. Even John McCain was spouting off about its inclusion as David Doody at HuffPo noted:

"While we have young Americans fighting and dying in two wars we're going to take up the hate-crimes bill," McCain said, "because the majority leader thinks that's more important, more important than legislation concerning the defense of this nation." And later: "The Senate will pass a highly controversial, highly explosive piece of legislation to be attached to the authorization for the defense and the security of this nation. That's wrong."

Better yet, it makes people like Glenn Beck even more insane than they already are.

Yesterday on his Fox News show, Beck tried to make the case that there's a logical reason to include veterans in hate-crime statistics, and cited the example of the military recruiters shot in Arkansas by an angry Muslim man was proof of this problem. His guest had a couple more incidents.

Well, it's been our position all along that recruiters aren't included in the legislation for a number of reasons (including the fact that veteran status is a problem in terms of equal-protection issues), the main one being that there isn't an identifiable problem that needs addressing under this legislation.

All that Beck and his guest have to do is go visit the FBI's Website and look up, say, the 2007 hate crime statistics. You'll see that there are about 8,000 of them reported to the FBI in about any given year. The largest single motivation is anti-black bias crimes (2,658 of them in 2007). Even in the category that people like Beck like to pretend doesn't exist -- anti-white bias crimes -- there were 749 reported offenses.

Can Beck and his guest demonstrate anything even close to those kinds of numbers -- and thus a demonstrable need for inclusion? I would wager not.

Besides, they're not actually serious about this. They're just trying to add to the pile of BS they've been spreading about this bill from the get-go. Like anybody's paying attention to what they think anyway.

(Here's some info on the ads by OFA)

Those poor poor Democrats in Congress who want to block the public option. They can't face the heat so they are whining to Harry Reid. And Reid then scolds the DNC for "wasting their money" on ads that target them.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) slammed the Democratic National Committee (DNC) on Thursday for running ads designed to pressure centrist Democrats into supporting the president’s healthcare plan, calling the effort a “waste of money.”
Reid’s comments sent his staff into damage control mode, as they sought to clarify his remarks, but also reflect a growing frustration among those centrists who have been reluctant to back a government-run health insurance plan at the center of President Obama’s healthcare proposal. Liberals have been urging centrists to support such a plan for months, using various television and radio campaigns to try to force their hand. This week a wing of the DNC announced it would run television ads in states represented by centrist senators.

Reid slammed the DNC for targeting Democrats instead of Republicans or special interest groups that traditionally oppose Democratic policies.
“I think it’s a waste of money,” Reid said when asked about the ads. “Democrats running ads against Democrats?”

First of all they are not centrist. That's a bogus word to try and muddle the issue. Dems like Blue America's target Blanche Lincoln, Evan Bayh, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu and all the rest are Conservative Dems. Health care is not a right/left issue, but an American issue. Standing in the way of real reform makes one a republican obstructionist at this time and not a centrist. And Harry Reid should be careful who he backs in this fight. These ads came with a blessing from the White House so is he going against the President now? You're supposed to be the majority leader so if they come whining to you again just tell them to act like Democrats.
You can still donate to Blue America's Campaign For Health Care Choice. We're working on our next action and will need your help.

Somebody has to tell Sen. Tom Coburn that he was elected to office and is bound by their rules.

(UPI) -- Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., said Thursday he would invoke privilege if asked about advice he gave to Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., on handling an extramarital affair.

Coburn said he was talking to Ensign about his tryst with a former staffer in his capacities as a doctor and a man of the cloth, Roll Call reported.

"I was counseling him as a physician and as an ordained deacon," Coburn said. "That is privileged communication that I will never reveal to anybody. Not to the (Senate) Ethics Committee, not to a court of law, not to anybody."

Doug Hampton, whose wife had engaged in an affair with Ensign, has claimed Coburn urged Ensign to pay the Hamptons millions of dollars after Hampton confronted Ensign about the affair.

"I categorically deny everything he said," Coburn said. Coburn said he has acted as a counselor to other lawmakers in the past. "Ya'll don't know about all the people I've counseled," he told Roll Call when asked why Ensign sought his help.

Coburn is bound by congressional law, I would imagine, and if he's going to stick his nose into salacious dealings that may cross the line, then he'll need to answer whatever questions come his way.

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

DOWNLOADS: (899)

PLAYS: (1008)

[H/t Scarce]

While I'm enjoying the sight of Specter's seniority reduced, he did bring a lot of money to Pennsylvania and I'm hoping my state doesn't suffer too much as a result:

The Senate last night stripped Sen. Arlen Specter (Pa.) of his seniority on committees, a week after the 29-year veteran of the chamber quit the Republican Party to join the Democrats.

In announcing his move across the aisle last week, Specter asserted that Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) had assured him he would retain his seniority in the Senate and on the five committees on which he serves. Specter's tenure ranked him ahead of all but seven Democrats.

Instead, though, on a voice vote last night, the Senate approved a resolution that made Specter the most junior Democrat on four committees for the remainder of this Congress. (He will rank second from last on the fifth, the Special Committee on Aging.) Reid himself read the resolution on the Senate floor, underscoring the reversal.

Democrats have suggested that they will consider revisiting Specter's seniority claim at the committee level only after next year's midterm elections.

"This is all going to be negotiated next Congress," Jim Manley, a Reid spokesman, said last night.

Specter's office declined to comment.

The loss of seniority could prove costly to Specter in his campaign to win reelection in 2010, denying him the ability to distinguish himself from a newcomer in his ability to claim key positions.

Specter said last week that becoming chairman of the Appropriations Committee was a personal goal of his, and his Senate service seemed to put him in position to be the third-ranking Democrat there. Now, though, he will not hold even an Appropriations subcommittee chairmanship in 2011 -- a critical foothold Specter has used to send billions of dollars to Pennsylvania.