It’s the time of year when Halloween thrill-seekers stalk graveyards in search of goblins and phantasms.

I stalked a cemetery too, this week. For creatures even scarier than ghosts and ghouls.

I was looking for politicians.

Congressional Cemetery in Washington, DC was Arlington National Cemetery long before Arlington National Cemetery ever existed. It’s the final resting place for 19 senators and 71 U.S. representatives. They’re joined by a vice president, a world-renowned band leader, a legendary FBI director, an attorney general, the first woman to seek the presidency and a man who was the original Washington insider. And that’s to say nothing of the dozens of markers memorializing America’s deceased political elite.

Tourists may flock to Arlington National Cemetery to spy the graves of the Kennedys and watch the changing of the guard at the Tomb of the Unknowns. But few journey to the banks of the Anacostia River to pay their respects to America’s first leaders at Congressional Cemetery.

“Every city has old cemeteries,” said Congressional Cemetery Board Chairman Patrick Crowley. “But this cemetery honors the founders of the nation.”

I asked Crowley what the qualifications were for interment. There’s just one.

“Death,” he said.

Keep Reading ...

The House's health care reform bill runs 1,990 pages and. It's filled with gullies and eddies of arcane, cryptic language that are hard to understand. But one of the chief architects of the measure wants to be clear about one provision: "No government funds will be used to pay for illegal immigrants to get health care coverage," said House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA).

Waxman points out that the Democrats’ health care reform bill unveiled Thursday contains a “verification status” check if anyone is to receive any federal health care subsides. But there’s a distinction between illegal immigrants being eligible for government-run components of the health care legislation versus what they would be permitted to purchase from private insurance providers.

“Yes,” exclaimed Waxman when a reporter asked the California Democrat if he personally thought illegal immigrants should be permitted to purchase health insurance. “Can they buy a car? They’re people doing business in the U.S.”

Coverage for illegal immigrants is one of the most vexing questions in the health care reform debate . But from Waxman’s vantage point, it’s alright for illegal immigrants to participate in the proposed health care reform regime, so long as their care isn’t subsidized.

“Should an illegal immigrant be allowed to drive down the Dulles Toll Road, paid for by federal dollars?” Waxman asked, referring to a major highway that links the nation’s capital with Dulles International Airport in suburban Virginia. “Should illegal immigrants be allowed to buy health insurance from a private insurance company?”

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) says he expects the House of Representatives to vote on the health care reform bill no earlier than Thursday, November 5.

A plume of white smoke is sure to emanate from Capitol Hill this morning.

For House Democrats are unveiling their final health care reform bill during a grand ceremony on the West Front of the U.S. Capitol.

For months, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) regaled the Congressional press corps with platitudes and trifle that the health care legislation was “on schedule” or “on track.” She frequently seasoned this rhetoric with exclamations that the work was “exciting” and “historic.”

And on the day before Pelosi and the Democratic brain trust prepared to roll out the much-anticipated health care package, the speaker never spoke.

In fact, few Democrats said much of anything. And the big rollout was never even made official until the leadership blasted out an announcement via email at 7:36 pm Wednesday night.

Keep Reading ...

A senior intelligence official conceded Tuesday that the intelligence community has failed to fully inform Congress about some of its spying activities.

Congress is probing what some Democratic lawmakers argue are failures by the Bush administration's intelligence services to inform Congress what they’re doing.

Robert Litt is chief counsel for the Director of National Intelligence. He testified before the House Intelligence Committee Tuesday that the spies didn't tell Congress about a small number of operations. But Litt says the intelligence services have now corrected those omissions and is now informing Congress of its espionage.

Over the summer, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) asked all intelligence services to study and improve the systems they used to tell Congress about what they're doing. 

The ODNI says there were a some minor instances where they found Congress wasn't properly acquainted with various actions. Lawmakers were later brought up to speed.

The law requires the intelligence services to brief Congress about certain types of missions it undertakes.

“We have an obligation to get you the information that you need to provide oversight.  And the scope of what we provide you needs to be adequate to permit you to provide oversight of the intelligence community,” Litt said.

Litt did not discuss what sorts of activities the intelligence services failed to disclose to lawmakers or which agencies were not thorough in briefing Congress.

“I think that when some of the agencies went back and looked at their records, they found a couple of matters where they had determined not to brief. And they relooked at it and decided probably ought to be briefed,” Litt said. “But those were a few isolated instances.” 

The House Intelligence Committee launched a probe of the intelligence community over the summer after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) exclaimed at a contentious May press conference that the CIA "lied" to her about using advanced interrogation techniques on detainees.

Democrats on the House Intelligence panel say there as many as five episodes where Congress was kept in the dark. CIA Director Leon Panetta told the committee in June that it failed to alert Congress about operations targeting al Qaeda.

CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano told FOX that “it is the policy of the Central Intelligence Agency to be clear and candid with the United States Congress. Director Panetta has made a relationship of trust, confidence, and respect a top priority."

Some Republicans on the Intelligence Committee, including ranking member Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), argue that the House inquiry is politically motivated and is an effort to shield Pelosi from criticism after her allegation that the CIA failed to tell her the truth.

Senate Maj Ldr Reid appears to be gambling on this "opt out" public option that he announced earlier today - a national plan that somehow allows states to opt out.  He needs 60 votes on a procedural motion just to begin debate on the bill. I was told earlier today by a senior Dem aide that the rough count on "opt out" is about 58 votes (this appears to waiver, though, on any given day).  Sen. Ben Nelson, D-NE, is known to be one of the holdouts.  Unclear on the other(s).

When I asked a senior aide to Reid (post-Reid news conference) if the leader is 100% sure he has 60 votes (because Reid ignored that question at the event, the aide told Fox, Reid "hopes to have the 60 votes necessary" to move forward with debate on healthcare reform.  So he isn't sure.

His Whip/Deputy, Dick Durbin of Illinois, confirmed that he had not done a "hard Whip count" (where he meets with his deputy whips and they work in teams to ask all Dems how they'll vote or do a lot of persuading; hard tallies are put on paper, etc), that Reid was meeting one-on-one with moderates to win them over.  Durbin said that was the best way to start.

Regardless - Durbin made it clear that more liberal members of the caucus would have rejected a "trigger", so this is the gamble Reid will take - in favor of a public option, something the vast majority of the caucus supports.  Durbin called is "unfortunately a zero-sum situation" -- a comment on losing their only Republican, Olympia Snowe of Maine, in favor of not losing a handful of more liberal senators.

When asked for details of HOW a state will opt out of this national plan, WHO opts out, and other mechanical questions ---- the aide said, "We don't have a lot of details. Final decisions wont be made until we hear back from CBO."

Reid made clear at his news conference earlier that he has NOT sent any other public option (ie, trigger & "opt in" for states) to CBO ----- so I asked if perhaps this is because someone already as a CBO score on these provisions, the aide said emphatically: NO.

And on Snowe --- as I've reported, she's NOT for this opt in approach.  Her office put out this statement in reaction to Reid's announcement:

“I am deeply disappointed with the Majority Leader’s decision to include a public option as the focus of the legislation. I still believe that a fallback, safety net plan, to be triggered and available immediately in states where insurance companies fail to offer plans that meet the standards of affordability, could have been the road toward achieving a broader bipartisan consensus in the Senate.”

I guess they can count her out.  So what now - if there is no Republican support?

So --- sometime as early as next week, when CBO finishes its analysis and cost estimation of the bill (this could take 2 weeks), we will see if Reid has effectively garnered the 60 votes he needs to start debate on this bill.

Just tried to get Sens Snowe & Ben Nelson to comment on Reid's 315pm presser, in which he's expected to announce a decision on public option --- that he's choosing the opt out approach --- and got the following responses:

*NOTE:  Snowe has said emphatically that the only public option she supports is one that is triggered down the road at some determined point if current reforms prove not to be bringing down healthcare costs (aka: "bending the cost curve"):

SNOWE SPOX:  

"Nothing’s changed. She’s made her position on this pretty well known. "

BEN NELSON SPOX:

"Nelson’s out of pocket this afternoon and early evening, so he’s not available and we won’t be sending a statement.

What he said on another cable station yesterday is operational for now:

'I can't decide about the procedural vote until I see the underlying bill. It would be reckless to say I'll support the procedure without knowing what the underlying bill consists of. And it's not put together yet.' "

It might not be considered robust enough by some more liberal members of the Democratic Party, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, appears set to announce (at 3:15pm) that he's chosen to put a national public option, giving states the chance to opt out, in his base bill that he will bring to the floor as early as next week.  This is a pretty big deal, as any kind of public option seemed dead on arrival for quite some time.

Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, has been working hard to get something besides a "trigger" option touted by GOP Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine, the lone Republican to vote for healthcare reform thus far.  She would have a government plan kick in at some determined point, if current reform efforts don't work.

The White House has been trying to keep her on board, but Dem sources  say that the Administration is not pressuring Reid.  (see White House blog for Dan Pfeiffer's weekend entry)

Keep Reading ...

As we've reported, a compromise is emerging in the Senate on a public option that give states the opportunity to either opt out of or opt in.  Democratic sources say the former, rather than the later, is preferred by Majority Leader Harry Reid, but some concerns still exists for moderate Dems, like Sens. Ben Nelson, D-NE, and Blanche Lincoln, D-AR, among others.

Regardless, the very idea of creating some sort of government-created insurance plan, that seemed a distant possibility in the Senate until this week, is now gaining steam.

One moderate Democrat, Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-LA, just met privately with Reid and emerged to say, "It really is a possibility," adding, "There is a way to complete this, I believe."

Landrieu has been inside meetings with her fellow moderates for months, bipartisan meetings that have ranged in size from about 5 or 6 to 15 members. "It's everyone from Ben Nelson to Mark Udall," Landrieu said, referring to the Democratic senator from Colorado.

Landrieu described a plan that would be modeled on the health plan for federal government employees, called Federal Employee Health Benefits Plan (FEHBP), that could be started with federal "seed money" and run not by the government, but by a private, independent board (though it is not clear yet who would appoint the board).  The program would be funded by an earnings pool created from premiums.

"It's a private insurance model," Landrieu said, insisting that it neither be government-run, government-backed, nor government paid-for."

Landrieu has some criticism for the more liberal members of her caucus, saying that "this may not meet their requirements" for a "single payer, government-run, government-subsidized" insurance plan, but Landrieu said her group would not accept anything like that, something supporters call a "robust public option."

The senator said her group was trying to combine a proposal that emerged from the Senate Finance Committee, authored by Sen. Kent Conrad, D-ND, that would create a system of nonprofit cooperatives, and merge it with a states-based approach to a national plan authored by Sen. Tom Carper, D-DE.

"It's evolving. At this point...some solid compromise is possible," Landrieu said.

Pointing to about 5 or 6 Senate Republicans that she thought might be gettable, including both Maine moderates - Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, as well as, George Voinovich of Ohio and Bob Corker of Tennessee.

These are definitely just guesses from Landrieu, it seems, in talking to these senators.  All of them have varying levels of concern about this and many other components of the bills passed by the Senate and now the subject of merger negotiations between Reid and Administration officials.

The issue of whether not states will have to opt in or can choose to opt out of a government-created insurance plan is not something Landrieu wanted to discuss, and this could certainly derail this compromise.  Sens. Nelson and Evan Bayh, D-IN, both former governors, along with Lincoln, have expressed a great deal of concern for the "opt out" option, the one favored by Reid and many other Democrats.  Nelson wants to know, for instance, how difficult it would be for states to opt out, fearing that those who want a more robust public option would virtually lock states into plans from which they could not opt out.

And there is certainly a long way to go before Senate Democrats can get a bill passed.  Leadership aides have told Fox that a bill will likely not be sent to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) for a final analysis and determination of price tag until Monday or Tuesday of next week.

Moderates want to see more choices and greater affordability for all Americans in the bill that Reid is creating, a sentiment often expressed by more liberal members, as well.  Landrieu, alone, pointed to the variety of choices federal employees have, noting that in New York there are 34 insurance options, alone.

"We are not carrying water for the insurance companies," Landrieu said of herself and her moderate colleagues, but "We want to see more choice and more affordability not just for those who don't have insurance, but for those who can't afford what they have." 

Landrieu said that she and some of her fellow centrists want to see people come off of cash-strapped Medicaid programs and out of insurance plans they cannot afford to buy into a system like the one described, but she said that would not be part of current efforts to find a public option compromise.

"We're not trying to be Republicans...but we do believe in the free market," Landrieu said.

A handful of centrist Democrats with Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-ME, could pose a major problem for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, as he tries to bring major healthcare reform legislation to the Senate floor.

Snowe, in concert with Sen. Ben Nelson, D-NE, has hosted a group of about five to six moderates, including Sens. Joe Lieberman, D-CT, Mary Landrieu, D-LA, Blanche Lincoln, D-AR, and, at times, Susan Collins, R-ME. 

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-NV, will need 60 votes to start debate on healthcare in the coming weeks, but centrist Democrats seem to be girding for a possible fight, should Reid put anything in the bill with which they do not agree.

  Keep Reading ...

Forty is the new 30.

And on Capitol Hill, “surveying” is the new “whipping.”

The House Democratic leadership this week launched its first official effort to poll where lawmakers stand on the massive health care reform bill. The process provides leaders a metric to gauge whether they the votes to pass the plan. It also lets them know where there are potential problems so they can tweak the legislation.

A senior House Democratic leadership aide indicates that this nose count is not a formal “whip.” Instead, it’s just a “survey.”

House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) is one of the chief architects of the health care reform legislation. He characterized the count as a cordial exercise.

“You hold out what the proposal is and you say ‘Are you there? Can we count on you?’” Waxman said. “And when they say they are there, we count on them.”

But this process is not always as pleasant as Waxman described.

Keep Reading ...