WASHINGTON -- The moment Democrats have been waiting for is almost here: The House plans to vote on the healthcare reform bill Sunday evening. Lawmakers began debate on a rule governing the rest of the day's procedures in mid-afternoon. Later, they'll vote on the Senate's healthcare bill, and then a budget reconciliation measure designed to fix that version. Look here for updates throughout the day, and read earlier coverage here.
4:09 p.m. Eastern: The bloc of anti-abortion Democrats holding out against healthcare reform have just announced that they've reached a deal with the White House and with House leadership, and they'll vote for the bill. "We've all stood on principle," Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., the leader of the bloc said. "The real winner here is the American people."
There won't be any additional language on abortion added to the bill, but President Obama will issue an executive order to ensure that tax money can't be used to pay for abortions once the legislation becomes law. Pro-choice groups have complained about the restrictions, which will force women who buy insurance through the exchanges the bill sets up to buy separate policies to cover abortions, but have still supported the bill nonetheless.
Here's a statement from White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer, which the administration blasted out by e-mail just as Stupak arrived at his press conference:
Today, the President announced that he will be issuing an executive order after the passage of the health insurance reform law that will reaffirm its consistency with longstanding restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortion.
While the legislation as written maintains current law, the executive order provides additional safeguards to ensure that the status quo is upheld and enforced, and that the health care legislation’s restrictions against the public funding of abortions cannot be circumvented.
The President has said from the start that this health insurance reform should not be the forum to upset longstanding precedent. The health care legislation and this executive order are consistent with this principle.
The President is grateful for the tireless efforts of leaders on both sides of this issue to craft a consensus approach that allows the bill to move forward.
A group of pro-choice lawmakers had told House leadership they might not vote for the bill if Stupak got additional language included, and besides, the abortion language couldn't make it in through budget reconciliation process that Congress will use to pass some changes to the bill.
The announcement virtually guarantees that Democrats will have the votes they need to pass the bill.
Here is the language of the executive order that the White House will be issuing:
EXECUTIVE ORDER
- - - - - - -
ENSURING ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (approved March __, 2010), I hereby order as follows:
Section 1. Policy.
Following the recent passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“the Act”), it is necessary to establish an adequate enforcement mechanism to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), consistent with a longstanding Federal statutory restriction that is commonly known as the Hyde Amendment. The purpose of this Executive Order is to establish a comprehensive, government-wide set of policies and procedures to achieve this goal and to make certain that all relevant actors—Federal officials, state officials (including insurance regulators) and health care providers—are aware of their responsibilities, new and old.
The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly-created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. §300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, Pub. L. No. 111-8, §508(d)(1) (2009)) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.
Numerous executive agencies have a role in ensuring that these restrictions are enforced, including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).
Section 2. Strict Compliance with Prohibitions on Abortion Funding in Health Insurance Exchange.
The Act specifically prohibits the use of tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments to pay for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) in the health insurance exchanges that will be operational in 2014. The Act also imposes strict payment and accounting requirements to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services in exchange plans (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) and requires state health insurance commissioners to ensure that exchange plan funds are segregated by insurance companies in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, OMB funds management circulars, and accounting guidance provided by the Government Accountability Office.
I hereby direct the Director of OMB and the Secretary of HHS to develop, within 180 days of the date of this Executive Order, a model set of segregation guidelines for state health insurance commissioners to use when determining whether exchange plans are complying with the Act’s segregation requirements, established in Section 1303 of the Act, for enrollees receiving Federal financial assistance. The guidelines shall also offer technical information that states should follow to conduct independent regular audits of insurance companies that participate in the health insurance exchanges. In developing these model guidelines, the Director of OMB and the Secretary of HHS shall consult with executive agencies and offices that have relevant expertise in accounting principles, including, but not limited to, the Department of the Treasury, and with the Government Accountability Office. Upon completion of those model guidelines, the Secretary of HHS should promptly initiate a rulemaking to issue regulations, which will have the force of law, to interpret the Act’s segregation requirements, and shall provide guidance to state health insurance commissioners on how to comply with the model guidelines.
Section 3. Community Health Center Program.
The Act establishes a new Community Health Center (CHC) Fund within HHS, which provides additional Federal funds for the community health center program. Existing law prohibits these centers from using federal funds to provide abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), as a result of both the Hyde Amendment and longstanding regulations containing the Hyde language. Under the Act, the Hyde language shall apply to the authorization and appropriations of funds for Community Health Centers under section 10503 and all other relevant provisions. I hereby direct the Secretary of HHS to ensure that program administrators and recipients of Federal funds are aware of and comply with the limitations on abortion services imposed on CHCs by existing law. Such actions should include, but are not limited to, updating Grant Policy Statements that accompany CHC grants and issuing new interpretive rules.
Section 4. General Provisions.
(a) Nothing in this Executive Order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) authority granted by law or presidential directive to an agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This Executive Order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This Executive Order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its departments, agencies, entities, officers, employees or agents, or any other person.
THE WHITE HOUSE
3:55 p.m. Eastern: For supporting healthcare reform, Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., was yelled at Saturday and Sunday by protesters calling him "faggot" on his way into the Capitol. Once he was inside, he decided to take a second look at the tea party scene. Frank just wandered out on the second floor balcony overlooking the protest. When he came back in, he said it was unfortunate that Republicans were encouraging some of the angry rhetoric.
"I regret that a reasonable conversation about important policy is to some extent getting hijacked by thuggery," Frank said. "The worst thing that happened today, it seemed to me, was when a man in the gallery stands up and disrupts, and Republican members of the House stand up and cheer him on. And the people who work for us are trying to do their job, and expel people, and they're sort of grappling in this narrow space, and you have Republican members of Congress encouraging people to physically resist arrest. It was appalling."
The incident Frank was talking about happened earlier Sunday; a man watching the House debate stood up and shouted something about killing the healthcare bill before he was escorted out. Some GOP lawmakers applauded him. Republicans have been playing to the tea party crowd all day, and they'll probably keep it up all night as the House stays in session.
WASHINGTON -- The moment Democrats have been waiting for is finally here: The House plans to vote on the healthcare reform bill later Sunday evening. Lawmakers will arrive in the afternoon to begin debate on a rule governing the rest of the day's procedures. Later, they'll vote on the Senate's healthcare bill, and then a budget reconciliation measure designed to fix that version. Look here for updates throughout the day.
3:34 p.m. Eastern: On the House floor, Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif., is trying to stir up some trouble. The GOP keeps baiting Democrats, insisting that the Senate won't actually pass the budget reconciliation package of amendments after the House votes on the Senate's bill. So Dreier asked Rep. Louise Slaughter, D-N.Y., how Democrats know the Senate will follow suit.
Before long, Slaughter and Dreier were shouting at each other, and both were gaveled down.
3:12 p.m. Eastern: Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., who voted against the healthcare reform bill last fall but isn't seeking reelection, now says he'll vote for the bill Sunday. "On balance, I believe this legislation will be much better than what exists today," he said in a statement issued by his office. " I believe it represents a number of improvements in both content and process over the legislation as passed by the House, and, it is the best we are likely to be able to accomplish at the present time."
Baird, a psychologist who taught health policy before arriving in Congress, told Salon recently he still wasn't sold on the bill. He doesn't think the current healthcare system is sustainable for very long; he says the complex web of federal agencies and programs that affect delivery of care needs to be replaced. But he also said expanding access was crucial. And in the end, he may have realized that going from "no" to "yes" was easier for someone who isn't trying to hold onto his job than for some colleagues who will face voters in November.
2:42 p.m. Eastern: Republican lawmakers are trying their best to show the tea party activists outside the Capitol that they're on their side. Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., the third-ranking GOP leader, just strolled outside and shook hands with the crowd (now gathered behind police barriers to keep them away from House members), smiling and thanking them.
Pence stopped to talk to a few reporters. Asked about the racist and homophobic shouts from the crowd at Democrats Saturday, he was pretty blunt. "I crossed the bridge in Selma with [civil rights leader and Democratic Rep.] John Lewis a couple weeks ago," Pence said. "I denounce, in the strongest possible terms, the kind of language and statements that have been reported." But he said the GOP wasn't responsible for inciting the anti-government movement to the frenzy that it's reached. "I think we've reached a tipping point here," he said. "I think the American people are rising up with one voice and saying, 'Enough is enough.'"
Other Republicans were doing their best to rev up the crowd outside, which has grown to more than a thousand people throughout the afternoon. Rep. Geoff Davis, R-Ky., joined a small group of Republicans who borrowed a "Don't Tread on Me" flag from a tea partier, then took it up to a balcony on the second floor of the Capitol, just off the House floor, and waved it for protesters to see.
Take a look here (I snapped a picture with my phone):
Afterward, Davis came down and returned the flag. "This is a demonstration of the people of our republic expressing, frankly, their fear of their own government, at the attempt to take over a system that belongs to the private citizens," he told me and the Washington Post's Perry Bacon. "I wish we had a million people here instead of the ones that we've got." (Davis, of course, is the charming fellow who referred to President Obama during the 2008 campaign as "that boy," then had to issue an apologetic press release.)
The GOP is walking a fine line here. On the one hand, Republicans don't want to be held accountable for the people who called John Lewis "nigger." On the other hand, they're perfectly happy to encourage the anti-government impulses that have led people to camp out outside the Capitol all weekend. If Republicans do wind up taking over a majority in Congress, it's not entirely clear how they'll keep that anti-government fervor in check.
2:04 p.m. Eastern: Despite rumors that Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., had agreed to support the healthcare bill if the White House issues an executive order on abortion, an aide says he hasn't signed off on anything yet. "There is not yet a deal and he is still a no vote right now," spokeswoman Michelle Begnoche told Salon.
1:59 p.m. Eastern: Capitol Police just removed a protester from the public gallery in the House chamber, after he began shouting about the healthcare reform bill. There's a large crowd of tea party protesters gathered outside, as well; you can hear them chanting, "Kill the bill! Kill the bill!" and "Nancy, Nancy" (a sing-songy taunt aimed at Speaker Nancy Pelosi) from inside the building.
Police formed a cordon to protect Democratic lawmakers as they walked in from a caucus meeting in a House office building earlier. For the second day in a row, some of the protesters yelled, "Faggot," at Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., as he walked in (according to Anna Edney, a reporter for Congress Daily, who saw the incident).
1:38 p.m. Eastern: In a rather intense encounter with David Plouffe on ABC's "This Week," Karl Rove said that the Obama healthcare plan is based on "Bernie Madoff-style economics" and that it will bankrupt the country. Watch the entire segment below:
Part 1:
Part 2:
1:15 p.m. Eastern: The House just came back into session, and it's already clear that the day won't go smoothly. The GOP demanded a recorded vote approving the journal for Saturday; that's a bit of clerical work that usually happens with a voice vote, but forcing what the House calls "the yeas and nays" will slow the proceedings down.
Lawmakers are now doing one-minute speeches, which on this Sunday are mostly focused on, yes, healthcare reform. "We know the consequences of this bill will be frightening and horrible," Rep. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., said to kick the one-minutes off, setting the likely tone for the rest of the day. Shortly afterward, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas, reminded her colleagues of the racist, homophobic taunts hurled at some of them Saturday. On her way into the Capitol Sunday, she said, someone had asked her "why my braids were so tight." But she said it was time to move past all that and do the right thing, and pass the legislation.
12 p.m. Eastern: There's still a little suspense in the air over how it's all going to shake out, but not much. "We've got the votes," Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., the chairman of the House Democratic conference, told CNN's "State of the Union." Democratic aides expect a final vote to come around 9 p.m., in part because Republicans will do whatever they can to delay the end. "We are going to use every means at our disposal to oppose this government takeover of healthcare," Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., the GOP conference chairman, told CNN.
Over the last few days, obstacles to passage that had seemed insurmountable started melting away. An antiabortion bloc led by Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., splintered, and conservative lawmakers may be assuaged by an executive order from President Obama making it explicitly clear that the healthcare bill won't permit the use of federal funds for abortions. (Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, was one new "yes" vote Sunday.) Pro-choice lawmakers held fast and kept additional restrictions that Stupak was demanding out of the legislation. The National Council of La Raza, a leading Latino civil rights group, had come out in support of the bill the other day, and key Latino lawmakers said they'd vote for it despite restrictions on undocumented immigrants.
The bill will still wind up passing with only Democratic votes, and only by the slimmest margin. A White House official says Obama is preparing to call -- and take phone calls from -- House Democrats ahead of the vote, just in case. And the Senate must still pass the reconciliation package of amendments; that's a much tougher lift than in the House, because of rules that allow the GOP to try to pick off pieces of that bill -- or add mischievous amendments -- while it's on the floor. But if the House vote does go as Democrats say they're expecting, the Senate bill will head to Obama for signature into law.
(Updated below)
When the tea party movement began last year I saw it as right-wing reaction, but given the economic turmoil across the country, I tried to understand it. Maybe there was populism within the movement that the left needed to recognize. I attended a local tea party last April 15, tax day, and while I didn't find folks whose minds seemed mutable by liberal populism, at least it seemed possible to have a conversation. I wrote about a former banker and a Democrat who made common cause with some of the protesters around the bank bailout and Goldman Sachs's overall influence on government. She had some good conversations. I saw closed minds, but I didn't see violence or overt racism. Of course I was in San Francisco, so it probably wasn't representative of the tea party movement, but I still think the effort to understand the economic anxiety that's part of what's motivating the tea partiers was worth my time.
A year later, though, it's worth more of my time to say what many resist: The tea party movement is disturbingly racist and reactionary, from its roots to its highest branches. On Saturday, as a small group of protesters jammed the Capitol and the streets around it, the movement's origins in white resistance to the Civil Rights Movement was impossible to ignore. Here's only what the mainstream media is reporting, ignoring what I'm seeing on Twitter and left wing blogs:
On Thursday MSNBC's "Hardball" host Chris Matthews grilled tea party Astroturf leader Tim Phillips of Americans for Prosperity about supporters who taunted a man with Parkinson's disease at a tea party gathering in Ohio last week. Phillips insisted the bullies just didn't represent the tea party movement. But such demurrals don't cut it any more. At the Nashville tea party gathering last month, a proponent of the kinder, gentler tea party movement, Judson Phillips, tried to distance himself from crazed and racist elements – but later endorsed racist speaker Tom Tancredo even after he told the convention: "People who could not even spell the word 'vote', or say it in English, put a committed socialist ideologue in the White House. His name is Barack Hussein Obama." Tancredo blamed Obama's election on the fact that "we do not have a civics, literacy test before people can vote in this country." He got some of the loudest cheers of the weekend.
So I'm having a hard time tonight trying to believe almost uniformly white tea partiers are anything other than a racist, right-wing reaction to the election of an African American president who brings with him feminists and gays (even if he doesn't do as much for them as they would ideally like). I'm having a hard time seeing the tea partiers as anything other than the spawn of George Wallace racism – the movement Pat Buchanan bragged to me that Richard Nixon made his own. Of course, in that same "Hardball" segment, Buchanan denounced me for condescending to and "demonizing" the tea partiers. I still find that rich: I grew up in lower middle class Long Island, with a first-generation Irish father, going to public schools and universities, while the wealthy Buchanan grew up in Washington D.C. with professionals as parents and attended Georgetown University. How is he the supposed working class troubadour while I'm somehow emblematic of the pointy-headed liberal elite?
Democrats are lame about fighting stupid class-based slurs like that, which is part of why this health care fight has dragged on and become so bitter. But I think a lot of Democrats were horrified by the ugliness they saw today, and I'm hoping that helps pass health care reform on Sunday.
I'm going to close with statements issued by the offices of Emanuel Cleaver and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (no firebrand lefty, by the way), which I found on the New York Times: Cleaver (who didn't press charges against the loser who spit at him) is first:
For many of the members of the CBC, like John Lewis and Emanuel Cleaver who worked in the civil rights movement, and for Mr. Frank who has struggled in the cause of equality, this is not the first time they have been spit on during turbulent times.
This afternoon, the Congressman was walking into the Capitol to vote, when one protester spat on him. The Congressman would like to thank the US Capitol Police officer who quickly escorted the other Members and him into the Capitol, and defused the tense situation with professionalism and care. After all the Members were safe, a full report was taken and the matter was handled by the US Capitol Police. The man who spat on the Congressman was arrested, but the Congressman has chosen not to press charges. He has left the matter with the Capitol Police.
This is not the first time the Congressman has been called the “n” word and certainly not the worst assault he has endured in his years fighting for equal rights for all Americans. That being said, he is disappointed that in the 21st century our national discourse has devolved to the point of name calling and spitting. He looks forward to taking a historic vote on health care reform legislation tomorrow, for the residents of the Fifth District of Missouri and for all Americans. He believes deeply that tomorrow’s vote is, in fact, a vote for equality and to secure health care as a right for all. Our nation has a history of struggling each time we expand rights. Today’s protests are no different, but the Congressman believes this is worth fighting for.
Hoyer here:
Today’s protests against health insurance reform saw a rash of despicable, inflammatory behavior, much of it directed at minority Members of Congress. According to reports, anti-reform protestors spat on Rep. Emmanuel Cleaver, yelled a sexual slur at Rep. Barney Frank, and addressed my dear friend, Rep. John Lewis, with a racial slur that he has sadly heard far too many times. On the one hand, I am saddened that America’s debate on health care — which could have been a national conversation of substance and respect — has degenerated to the point of such anger and incivility. But on the other, I know that every step toward a more just America has aroused similar hate in its own time; and I know that John Lewis, a hero of the civil rights movement, has learned to wear the worst slurs as a badge of honor.
America always has room for open and spirited debate, and the hateful actions of some should not cast doubt on the good motives of the majority, on both sides of this argument. But Members of Congress and opinion leaders ought to come to terms with their responsibility for inciting the tone and actions we saw today. A debate that began with false fears of forced euthanasia has ended in a truly ugly scene. It is incumbent on all of us to do better next time.
UPDATE: Rep. Mike Pence, R-Ind., the No. 3 GOP leader, denounced tea party racism on Sunday. Mike Madden reports:
Asked about the racist and homophobic shouts from the crowd at Democrats Saturday, he was pretty blunt. "I crossed the bridge in Selma with [civil rights leader and Democratic Rep.] John Lewis a couple weeks ago," Pence said. "I denounce, in the strongest possible terms, the kind of language and statements that have been reported." But he said the GOP wasn't responsible for inciting the anti-government movement to the frenzy that it's reached. "I think we've reached a tipping point here," he said. "I think the American people are rising up with one voice and saying, 'Enough is enough.'"
It's nice that Pence isn't endorsing the shouts of "nigger" John Lewis heard Saturday. But he continues to blame the anti-government frenzy on Obama and the Democrats and ignore the role of GOP racism. Shortly after Pence's remarks, his colleague Geoff Davis (great name!) of Kentucky actually hung a tea partier's "Don't Tread On Me" sign over the Capitol Balcony. You'll all remember Davis as the guy who referred to Obama as "that boy." On Sunday Davis insisted the tea partiers are merely expressing "their fear of their own government" (now that it's led by "that boy"?) No racism there, none at all.
Oh, and Barney Frank was called a "faggot" again. Frank later demanded that his GOP colleagues stop applauding the tea partiers who were heckling House Democrats. "That's why you get this kind of virulence and hatred," Frank said, according to the Huffington Post. If Pence and other GOP leaders wanted to stop the hate, they'd stop encouraging the vicious rowdies who are behind it.
Ever since Thomas Frank published his book "What's the Matter With Kansas?" Democrats have sought a political strategy to match the GOP's. The healthcare bill proves they've found one.
Whereas Frank highlighted Republicans' sleight-of-hand success portraying millionaire tax cuts as gifts to the working class, Democrats are now preposterously selling giveaways to insurance and pharmaceutical executives as a middle-class agenda. Same formula, same fat-cat beneficiaries, same bleating sheeple herded to the slaughterhouse. The only difference is the Rube Goldberg contraption that Democrats are using to tend the flock.
First, their leaders campaign on pledges to create a government insurer (a "public option") that will compete with private health corporations. Once elected, though, Democrats propose simply subsidizing those corporations, which are (not coincidentally) filling Democratic coffers. Justifying the reversal, Democrats claim the subsidies will at least help some citizens try to afford the private insurance they'll be forced to buy -- all while insisting Congress suddenly lacks the votes for a public option.
Despite lawmakers' refusal to hold votes verifying that assertion, liberal groups obediently follow orders to back the bill, their obsequious leaders fearing scorn from Democratic insiders and moneymen. Specifically, MoveOn, unions and "progressive" nonprofits threaten retribution against lawmakers who consider voting against the bill because it doesn't include a public option. The threats fly even though these congresspeople would be respecting their previous public-option ultimatums -- ultimatums originally supported by many of the same groups now demanding retreat.
Soon it's on to false choices. Democrats tell their base that any bill is better than no bill, even one making things worse, and that if this particular legislation doesn't pass, Republicans will win the upcoming election -- as if signing a blank check to insurance and drug companies couldn't seal that fate. They tell everyone else that "realistically" this is the "last chance" for reform, expecting We the Sheeple to forget that those spewing the do-or-die warnings control the legislative calendar and could immediately try again.
Predictably, the fear-mongering prompts left-leaning establishment pundits to bless the bill, giving Democratic activists concise-yet-mindless conversation-enders for why everyone should shut up and fall in line ("Krugman supports it!"). Such bumper-sticker mottos are then demagogued by Democratic media bobbleheads and their sycophants, who dishonestly imply that the bill's progressive opponents 1) secretly aim to aid the far right and/or 2) actually hope more Americans die for lack of healthcare. In the process, the legislation's sellouts are lambasted as the exclusive fault of Republicans, not Democrats and their congressional majorities.
Earth sufficiently scorched, President Obama then barnstorms the country, calling the bill a victory for "ordinary working folks" over the same corporations he is privately promising to enrich. The insurance industry, of course, airs token ads to buttress Obama's "victory" charade -- at the same time its lobbyists are, according to Politico, celebrating with chants of "We win!"
By design, pro-public-option outfits like Firedoglake and the Progressive Change Campaign Committee end up depicted as voices of the minority, even as they champion an initiative that polls show the majority of voters support. Meanwhile, telling questions hang: If this represents victory over special interests, why is Politico reporting that "drug industry lobbyists have huddled with Democratic staffers" to help pass the bill? How is the legislation a first step to reform, as proponents argue, if it financially and politically strengthens insurance and drug companies opposing true change? And what prevents those companies from continuing to increase prices?
These queries go unaddressed -- and often unasked. Why? Because their answers threaten to expose the robbery in progress, circumvent the "What's the Matter With Kansas?" contemplation and raise the most uncomfortable question of all:
What's the matter with Democrats?
© 2010 Creators.com
The cash-strapped GOP has been enjoying a bit of free publicity over the last few days. A March Madness-themed ad slamming the healthcare bill was recently featured on both "The Today Show" and the "CBS Evening News." Now, free airtime for political ads is not exactly new in the age of the 24-hour news cycle, but this case has an odd twist.
On "The Today Show," coverage of the ad tells us: "Republicans rolled out a new TV spot attacking what’s in the healthcare bill." When the ad is played on the "CBS Evening News," we learn that "the angry war of words in Washington is echoing over the nation." All this seems to suggest that the ad is actually being aired somewhere -- other than as part of a news program -- right now.
However, as it turns out, not only has the ad not yet run on TV, but the National Republican Congressional Committee, which produced the ad, hasn’t even bought airtime for it. The NRCC says they’ve been calling stations to ask about pricing and availability, but have yet to purchase any spots. The campaign committee is waiting to buy airtime until after the upcoming House vote on healthcare, because it's only planning to run the ad in districts represented by Democrats who voted for the bill. Of course, thanks to NBC and CBS, the spot has already reached a much broader audience than that — and the NRCC didn't have to spend a dime.
This sort of thing isn't uncommon. Campaigns and committees are well aware that they can get a lot mileage from controversial ads without actually spending much money to air them, knowing that these spots will get played for free on the news anyway. But this particular situation is unusual, and the free advertising is especially important for the NRCC this election cycle. According to the latest numbers, the organization just has $6.4 million in the bank compared to its House Democratic counterpart’s whopping $35.4 million.
WASHINGTON -- Give House and Senate Republicans credit for one thing, at least -- at this point in the debate, there's no way the Democrats could have pulled off a bicameral meeting on healthcare reform without several members needing some healthcare themselves afterwards.
The GOP, though, seems to have emerged from a joint session with lawmakers from each chamber Thursday morning unscathed and uninjured. Republicans banded together to display unity and pledge to keep fighting the bill all weekend long. "We're going to continue to work closely together to do everything we can do to make sure that this bill never, ever, ever passes," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, told reporters after the meeting.
The Republican love-in, though, had a bit of a jarring subtext: On the House side of the Capitol, the GOP is busy demanding a straight up-or-down vote on the healthcare bill. On the Senate side, the GOP has done everything in its power to block an up-or-down vote. In a battle over which parliamentary device is more or less beloved, Republicans have come down very clearly on the side of the filibuster, and against "deem and pass." The GOP loves an up-or-down vote, except when they don't.
"Well, there are legitimate parliamentary devices and there are illegitimate parliamentary devices," Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., told Salon after the meeting. "This one's illegitimate, it seems to me." The ranking Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sessions said he's got his lawyers looking at whether the House maneuver is constitutional, and whether the GOP should sue to block it.
What makes the "deem and pass" tactic (also known as a "self-executing rule") necessary in the House, of course, is that Republicans won't let Democrats bring a revised version of the legislation back to the Senate. Which means the House can't amend the bill the Senate has already passed; if they did, Republicans would use procedural devices of their own to prevent it from coming to a vote. So the House is trying to wrap their approval of the Senate bill together with a budget reconciliation measure designed to fix it.
That's not to say Democrats have a sterling track record when it comes to grandstanding over process, either; they used the filibuster in the Senate when they were in the minority, and protested the "deem and pass" technique in the House when Republicans were in control there, too. Still, Democratic aides haven't been shy about pointing out the "epic levels" of "hypocrisy and inconsistency" that Republicans have reached during the debate this week.
After all, what's the main reason for all the GOP outrage? Republicans don't really have a very good way of stopping the bill if the House approves it. "Our plan is for it not to come to the Senate," GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said. "Our plan is for it to be defeated here in the House in the next few days." So if that means latching on to one parliamentary argument in one chamber and another one in the other, that's just what they'll do.
Carly Fiorina and Meg Whitman: Running on Empty
Sarah Palin Is Of No Importance
Obama, Liz Cheney Lack Faith in American Justice System
Double Dip: Will We Repeat 1937?
