Progressive Breakfast: Lieberman's Double-Cross Flip-Flop

The daily Progressive Breakfast serves up what progressive movement members need to know to start their day

Lieberman's Double-Cross Flip-Flop Threatens Health Care Bill

TPMDC reports Lieberman and Reid had a "confrontation in Reid's office" after Lieberman declared opposition to Medicare buy-in: "In a move that senior leadership aides say has left them stunned, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) has told Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) that he will filibuster a tentative public option compromise unless it's stripped of its key component ... The development casts substantial doubt on whether or not a health care reform bill can pass in the Senate..."

NYT quotes a flummoxed anonymous Senate Dem aide: "It was a total flip-flop, and leaves us in a predicament as to what to do.”

The Treatment's Jonathan Cohn finds a Lieberman double-cross flip-flop: "More than a week ago .. according to one senior Senate aide, 'Lieberman told Reid personally he could support the Medicare buy-in.' ... Lieberman wasn't always so skeptical about the Medicare buy-in. In fact, as a vice presidential candidate in 2000, he endorsed the idea."

Lieberman doesn't care about actual cost estimates of Medicare buy-in. Ezra Klein: "Previously, Lieberman had been cool to the idea, saying he wanted to make sure it wouldn't increase the deficit or harm Medicare's solvency ... the CBO is expected to say it will do neither. Someone must have given Lieberman a heads-up on that, as he's decided to make his move in advance of the CBO score, the better to ensure the facts of the policy couldn't impede his opposition to it."

Schumer optimistic about CBO estimate. CQ: “'I think when people see the details, they’re going to be pretty happy with it. I think that many of the concerns that have been voiced, when we get a CBO score and see the details, will be allayed' ... An estimate from CBO could come this week. Soon after he receives the report, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., is expected to file a cloture petition on a manager’s amendment to the bill."

HuffPost's Sam Stein quotes Senate Dem aide hinting that use of budget rules to require only simple majority still a last resort if right-leaning Dems are implacable: "'It is not on the table at this point,' the source said. 'We are still trying to go through regular order.'"

President tells 60 Minutes he expects Senate bill by Christmas. Short window to meet Christmas expectation. Politico: "Most insiders agree that Democrats have until Thursday to work out their differences if they want to pass a bill by Dec. 23. It will take at least five or six days after Democrats move to end debate before they can vote on the bill. Democrats expect to begin the endgame early this week and still sound optimistic that they can get it done."

GOP hopes to woo Sen. Webb to oppose bill. Politico: "With all the attention focused on four other fence-sitting moderates, Webb has voted with Republicans six times on the first series of amendments on the Senate floor — giving GOP leaders some hope that the unpredictable Virginian could buck his party in the end and block the bill ... Asked if that meant he might oppose the underlying bill, Webb said: 'I’ll see what the bill looks like when we get to the end of it.'"

While conservatives use Medicare actuary report to argue reform won't cut costs, Cohn has the graphs that prove otherwise: "You could make a legitimate argument that the curve should bend down more, something the president and Congress could do by pushing hard on some of the cost-cutting measures that have been watered down through the legislative process. But you can't make a legitimate argument that the Actuary projections--which, remember, are based on pretty conservative assumptions about the potential of specific reforms to save money--prove the curve bends up. If anything, the projections show the curve bending down."

Drug import amendment continues to stall Senate floor action. CQ: "GOP senators charge that Democrats, facing fierce opposition from prescription drug manufacturers, are essentially trying to sideline Dorgan’s drug importation amendment. In a move that appears aimed at preventing the powerful Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) from pulling its support for the health care bill, Democrats have proposed to allow a vote on Dorgan’s amendment only if it is paired with an alternative 'side-by-side' proposal by Lautenberg that would allow drugs to be imported only if the Department of Health and Human Services certifies the safety and efficacy of every drug that crosses the border. It would — as a practical matter — be next to impossible for HHS to certify all imported drugs, meaning that Lautenberg’s proposal, if adopted, would effectively prevent drug importation."

Jacob Hacker clarifies position, rejects compromising away broad public option. The Treatment: "What I said (on PBS "Newshour") is that I like the idea of a Medicare buy-in for uninsured Americans aged 55 to 65, and I do. We don’t know the details of the buy-in--and the details matter a great deal for whether it is a workable idea for this age group and their families--but this could be a simple, popular way of providing affordable coverage. It’s also one, valuably, that could be made available almost immediately, not almost a half decade from now, like the rest of the Senate bill’s big steps. I also said, however, that I think the hazy substitute for the public option that's apparently part of the proposed deal--having the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) contract with one or a few national private plans--is an 'inadequate' substitute for the public option. It won't contain costs and won't provide the 'choice and competition that President Obama spoke about.' That's not an endorsement."

Obama Meets With Bankers

USA Today reports small biz lending WH priority: "President Obama, already at odds with bankers over big bonuses and new regulations, plans to urge executives at a White House meeting today to provide more loans to small-business owners ... Obama's leverage is limited, however; nine of the 12 banks invited have repaid money they received under the Troubled Asset Relief Program."

Time's Massimo Calabresi argues the meeting is not just for show: "...expect a healthy dose of political posturing before, during and after the President's meeting with top bankers Monday. 'It's a p.r. stunt,' says an executive at one of the banks that will be getting a dressing-down at the White House meeting ... But Obama's bank-bashing is about more than politics. The President has real problems only the banks can help him solve. On jobs, housing and the strength of the economy, he needs bankers to change their behavior, and there's only so much he can do to force them. So when he sits down with the financial industry élite on Monday, he may talk tough, but he'll also be asking for their help ... Obama and Geithner have a long list of penalties they can impose if the banks don't do a better job of lending to small businesses or modifying home loans. And Obama's pay czar, Kenneth Feinberg, could target the bank's bonuses with what the senior bank executive calls a "crazy" pay restriction like the one Britain passed last week. But the banks are expert at staying just on the right side of the Administration's guidelines for lending, and they have many friends on the Hill who can help defuse a movement to punish the banks. Which is why Obama's weapon of choice for now will be trying to shame the banks into better behavior."

Banks to say they will do more for economy, reports Politico.

Don't expect attempt to cap bonuses. NYT: "This time, he will not call on the banking executives to give back their bonuses. (They aren’t likely to anyway, one official said, so it would simply look weak if he did.)"

Citigroup to pay back TARP loan. NYT: "Citigroup reached a deal early Monday morning to be the last of the big Wall Street banks to exit the government’s bailout program, after persuading regulators that it was sound enough to stand on its own. Citigroup executives announced a broad program that will replace the $20 billion of remaining federal aid with funds from private investors, facilitate the sale of the government’s $25 billion stock investment and begin to wean itself off other forms of government assistance."

Opponents of House financial reform bill well-financed by finance industry. Open Secrets: "Members of the House who voted against the measure collected 70 percent more from commercial banks since 1989, on average, than those supported it. And they raised an average of 50 percent more from credit and finance companies than the bill's supporters..."

Deficit Commission Fight Heats Up

OurFuture.org's Roger Hickey calls out scare rhetoric from Pete Peterson in advance of Peterson press conference today: "Peterson's self-appointed deficit warriors don't really have a plan to cut debt and deficits - although most of them have a clear record of trying to cut America's meager Social Security and Medicare benefits. But they are selling a dangerous and undemocratic new budget process that would take the responsibility for budget-making away from the President and the committees of Congress ... Pete Peterson and the other conservative ideologues behind the task force on deficits are clearly trying to undermine President Obama's emphasis on jobs and reviving growth - which, if successful is the best way to balance the budget. They are also aiming a dagger in the heart of active government."

House leader suggests deficit reduction alternatives are on tap. W. Post: "Unhappy that they have to vote on the debt-limit issue, conservative Democrats in both chambers want any increase to be coupled with cost-cutting initiatives. Conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats in the House want rules put into law requiring new spending increases or tax cuts be offset by spending cuts or tax increases, and several Senate Democrats are demanding the creation of a commission with authority to force Congress to cut the deficit. [Rep. Chris] Van Hollen said there are more such proposals to come. 'Next year, you will see a number of initiatives to put us on a sustainable path,' he said."

NYT's John Harwood sees Dem strategy is job creation now, deficit reduction later: "On the gargantuan budget deficit, the first problem for Democrats is political: voters fear overspending but want action to create jobs, which costs money. The second problem is economic. Curbing the deficit now, under Keynesian theories that Democrats still embrace, might crimp recovery from the Great Recession ... The outlines of a Democratic approach have begun to emerge: talk about deficit reduction in 2010, but defer serious action until after the midterm elections."

State budgets worst in a generation. Stateline: "Another federal bail-out is plausible. Some state governments may even be fundamentally overhauled. But the worst for most states will sound familiar: service cuts, tax hikes, IOUs, layoffs, furloughs and political gridlock."

Developing Nations Force Suspension of Climate Talks

Politico reports on bump in climate negotiations: "The G77, the African Union and China have effectively suspended negotiations on an overall climate deal in Copenhagen until wealthy countries provide details of how they will compensate developing nations for the damage wrought by climate change"

US proposes investment in green tech for developing nations. NYT: "...the United States Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced Monday that industrialized countries would spend $350 million over five years — including $85 million from the United States — to spread renewable and non-polluting energy technologies in developing countries."

Talks progress on combatting non-carbon greenhouse gases. LAT: "One provision would create a fast-acting program to tackle several non-carbon-dioxide contributors to the greenhouse effect, including black carbon. The fund would go toward providing nations with more efficient cookstoves or paying them to reduce black carbon output from shipping. Another provision would simply direct the parties to the Montreal Protocol -- a 1987 treaty that phased out chemicals depleting the ozone layer -- to phase out HFCs using the same mechanism. Under the Montreal Protocol, ozone-depleting chemicals were phased out quickly and, at a $2.4-billion total cost, far more cheaply than any large-scale proposed reduction in carbon dioxide emissions ... U.S. officials maintain that the Montreal parties don't need help from a climate agreement to regulate HFCs ... Other delegates say that if the United States championed the non-carbon-dioxide proposals in a final agreement, it could gain support from developing nations that have complained of being marginalized..."

Sen. Merkley counsels Obama on how to make cash for caulkers work, reports Grist's David Roberts: "He suggests that Obama modify [his "Clean Energy for Homes and Buildings" proposal] for use in the jobs program 'by directing loan guarantees or other federal support to programs already set up to offer financing or, in areas where no such programs have been created, by having community banks or others with financing capability partner with local companies or programs that can provide the energy efficiency services.'"

Views expressed on this page are those of the authors and not necessarily those of Campaign for America's Future or Institute for America's Future