Progressive Breakfast: The Merging Begins

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

WH, Senate Begin Work To Craft Final Bill

HCAN releases report showing how Senate health committee bill better for middle-class [1] than Senate Finance bill.

WH partial to Snowe's trigger compromise, reports NYT: [2] "Two senior administration officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the White House looked favorably on the Snowe plan. But liberal Democrats were maneuvering against it Wednesday, arguing that Ms. Snowe, the lone Republican to vote in favor of the Finance Committee’s bill, was gaining undue influence over the talks."

Speaker Pelosi tries to sweeten public option proposal to win rural Dem support. The Hill: [3] "Speaker Nancy Pelosi is seeking to modify the House healthcare legislation to bring centrists around to the more liberal government-run insurance option, hoping that will give her the strongest negotiating position with the Senate ... Pelosi offered a key policy change to the 'Medicare plus 5 percent' option being pushed by the Progressive Caucus and other liberal members. Rural members have been irritated that the 'plus 5 percent' went only to physicians, not hospitals. Hospitals under the 'robust' option would be reimbursed at Medicare rates. Rural lawmakers find that unfair, because in rural areas most healthcare is provided through hospitals, and there’s often only one in a region. ... So Pelosi offered to give hospitals Medicare plus 5 percent as well, which would reportedly add $20 billion to the cost of the bill."

Ezra Klein notes Sen. Harry Reid's warning shot to the insurance lobby: [4] "Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid appeared before the Judiciary Committee today in an unusual capacity: as a witness. He was there to argue that the Senate should repeal the insurance industry's exemption from anti-trust statutes ... He was really there to send a clear and unmistakable signal to the insurance industry in the aftermath of Monday's assault on health-care reform: Attack us, and we'll hurt you. Badly."

Insurance lobby releases a second, flawed report threatening to jack up premiums. The Treatment's Jonathan Cohn: [5] "By releasing a transparently hyperbolic and self-serving study on the effects of health reform, the insurance industry appears to have blundered in a big way. They discredited themselves in the eyes of the media elite, alienated potentially sympathetic members of Congress, and rallied Democrats around a common foe. So what are they doing now? They seem to be trying the same stunt again, with a brand new study. It's not as deceptive as the last one. But it's not going to win any points for intellectual honesty, either." HCAN adds: [6] "They're extortionists, and they're threatening you ... All the more reason we must have a public health insurance option."

House and Senate trying to find consensus on doctor payments without exacerbating deficit [7], reports NYT

Expected passage for reform sparking last-minute lobbyist frenzy [8] reports LAT.

W. Post on the waste and deception privately-run Medicare Advantage plans, which would lose subsidies under health care reform: [9] "'It's a wasteful, inefficient program and always has been,' Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.) said at a recent hearing. At its core, Rockefeller added, Medicare Advantage is 'stuffing money into the pockets of private insurers, and it doesn't provide any better benefits to anybody.' ... Medicare Advantage policies can be frustrating, too. As with traditional managed-care programs, beneficiaries must consult through primary-care physicians in their insurers' networks, and the companies sometimes deny coverage. Bernie Keegan, 68, was hospitalized in March when he got sick and was throwing up blood. But his HMO did not cover some of his bloodwork or doctor's fees, leaving him with hundreds of dollars in medical bills."

Frank Strengthens Derivatives Reform, Turns To Consumer Agency Today

Rep. Barney Frank moves to tighten up derivatives regulation. WSJ: [10] "Rep. Frank (D., Mass.) introduced an amendment to the legislation Wednesday that would require all swaps that are standard enough to clear through a central counterparty to be traded on exchanges, so long as they are between financial institutions. Companies that use swaps to hedge interest-rate and commodity risks tied to their business would be exempt from trading on exchanges, unless its position was so large it caused a risk to its counterparties. The move bows to arguments from the Treasury Department and Commodity Futures Trading Commission that derivatives should be traded on exchanges to reduce systemic risk and increase price transparency. The original version of the bill introduced late last week only required swaps be cleared through a central counterparty, but didn't mandate trading on an exchange or electronic equivalent."

GOP cmte members oppose change, while Treasury Dept. supports. Bloomberg: [11] "Republicans on Frank’s panel said yesterday the measure would lead to too much government interference in markets ... Frank plans to offer today an amendment that would mandate trading on exchanges or swap execution facilities for standard contracts between dealers and their biggest customers. [Asst. Treas. Sec. Michael] Barr called that provision 'essential.' 'We continue to think that as long as the chairman’s amendment is enacted and all dealers and major swaps participants are covered that that is absolutely essential to preserving a strong marketplace, preserving transparency, getting the incentives right in the system,' Barr said. 'We don’t want to allow any firm like an AIG to be able to engage in derivatives transactions without requiring those transactions to be reported and to be traded on an exchange or an alternative execution facility.'"

"Republicans Claim Derivatives Regulation Will Cause Job Loss And A ‘Decrease In The American Dream’" [12] reports Wonk Room.

Structure of consumer protection agency to be debated today, final House votes soon. The Hill: [13] "The House committee sped through debate on the derivatives bill on Wednesday, but is now turning to the more contentious issue of creating a new federal Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) ... Frank said lawmakers on the panel would continue to mark up legislation until the end of the month, with other divisive issues yet to arise. Democratic leaders are eyeing a vote on the House floor as early as mid-November. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) continue to negotiate behind the scenes, and a vote in the upper chamber could be delayed until early next year."

Consumer Watchdog previews today's action: [14] "Some areas that we’ll be watching as the debate continues bright and early tomorrow morning: Whether all credit-related transactions remain in the agency’s jurisdiction, if the states are allowed to enact strong protections for consumers when federal regulators do not, whether anyone has the courage to re-introduce language requiring companies to offer consumers a simple, understandable product, and if consumers have a way to participate in the new agency to make regulation work for the public."

"The financial services industry has poured more than $220 million into lobbying in 2009" [15] reports NYT.

One By One, Sane Republicans Moving Towards Climate Deal

Climate Progress notes Kerry-Graham climate compromise may move GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski and others: [16] "Key swing Senators are moving away from obstructionism toward a bipartisan deal. Those who stand on the sidelines not only risk ending up on the wrong side of history for this momentous bill, but they risk the more tangible benefits of sitting at the negotiating table."

The Vine's Brad Plumer lists the reasons Sen. Graham is ready to deal: [17] "South Carolina is home to seven nuclear reactors, with four more in the planning stage, and cap-and-trade could give those projects a leg up. Hunters in his state are increasingly dismayed about global warming's adverse effects on wildlife ... But the national-security fears loom largest: Graham snaps to attention every time generals and intelligence analysts warn that a sharp increase in global temperatures, bringing droughts, floods, and refugee crises, could make the world a more dangerous place."

NYT reports American Farm Bureau steps up effort to kill bill: [18] "The campaign’s slogan will be 'Don’t CAP Our Future' — a play on the baseball-style caps often worn by farmers. According to the memo, state farm bureaus will get a campaign 'starter kit' — including themed stickers — by early next month." EARLIER from Politico: "Farm lobby divided over climate bill": [19] "One key group — the American Farm Bureau Federation — believes that higher fuel, fertilizer and other costs resulting from climate legislation could hurt farmers more than higher temperatures ...
But the National Farmers Union, which represents roughly 250,000 farm families, believes that changed weather patterns stemming from global warming could have a significant impact on farmers’ livelihoods."

Global agreement may come down to money. NYT: [20] "Many developing countries have made it clear that they will not sign a treaty unless they get money to help them adapt to a warmer planet. Acknowledging that a new treaty needs unanimity for success, industrialized nations like the United States and those in Europe have agreed in principle to make such payments; they have already been written into the agreed-upon structure of the treaty, to be signed in Copenhagen in December. But to date there is no concrete strategy to raise such huge sums. There is not even agreement about which nations should pay or in what proportion."

Climate Progress eviscerates Freakonomics authors, former top Microsoft official, for embracing climate myths: [21] "What’s most worrisome is 1) who exactly has been peddling much of the nonsense and illogic to the authors — Nathan Myhrvold, the former CTO of Microsoft — and 2) who else may have been persuaded by his bulls**t. The Myrhvold connection deserves special focus because it may help explain three puzzling things: Why does Bill Gates’ Foundation mostly ignore global warming? Why is Warren Buffett so wrong — and outspoken — about cap and trade? Why did Gates and Buffett visit the Athabasca tar sands — the biggest global warming crime ever — to satisfy 'their own curiosity' but also 'with investment in mind'?"

Dow 10,000? Yawn.

Robert Reich cautions against premature celebration: [22] "How did the Dow break 10,000 when the rest of the economy is in the toilet? Corporate earnings are up -- mainly because companies have been cutting costs ... Federal borrowing has filled the gap that consumers and businesses created when the latter began to reduce their debt ... With such horrid employment numbers, Wall Street figures the Fed will keep interest rates low for some time ... this, too, is temporary. At some point the Fed is going to worry about inflation and a falling dollar ... Investors of all stripes want to get in early and ride the wave ... Think Ponzi scheme. Nice for now, but watch out if you're one of the last in. In other words, this is all temporary fluff, folks."

Stimulus data to be released today. W. Post: [23] "The public will get its first granular look Thursday at how the $787 billion stimulus package is being spent -- but the information may leave armchair auditors dissatisfied, and the data on job-creation data will be less than definitive ... administration economists estimate that it has saved or created 1 million positions so far. Skeptics note the rise in unemployment to nearly 10 percent; the White House says things would be much worse without the stimulus."