My column today argues that Reid actually needs this plan to fail so he can save face on the Left but not get tarred with backing the behemoth when he’s running for office next year.

Writers Greg Hitt and Janet Adamy look at where all the money will come from.

“Funding the bill is proving troublesome. Mr. Reid decided to pare back a proposed tax on high-value insurance plans, bowing to liberal and union complaints that the measure would hit middle-class families. Under his proposal, the tax would fall on plans valued at more than $23,000 for couples, up from $21,000 in legislation written by the Senate Finance Committee. The tax was estimated to raise $149 billion over ten years, far less than earlier envisioned.

To help make up for the lost revenue, Mr. Reid inserted a provision that would raise Medicare payroll taxes on couples with income of more than $250,000 a year. For those families, the levy would be raised to 1.95%, up from 1.45%. Overall, the proposal would bring in $54 billion over ten years. Mr. Reid is also proposing a new tax on elective cosmetic surgery, generating $5 billion.”

The Hill — Reid rolling out big guns to push healthcare bill to 60 needed votes


If you want to know why the Senate is in a twist over health care, just consider who counts as “big guns” over there.

Writer Alexander Bolton tells us about Harry Reid’s kitchen cabinet on passing a health plan.

“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has recruited an all-star team of former senators — Vice President Joe Biden, Tom Daschle and Ken Salazar — to push healthcare reform over the finish line.

Reid (D-Nev.) plotted strategy with the vice president, Interior Secretary Salazar and former Majority Leader Daschle (D-S.D.) on Wednesday, days ahead of a crucial vote to begin debate on the bill that needs every Democrat.

Reid’s all-star team indicates that the administration and Democratic leadership are now using all the persuading power and arm-twisting prowess available to them to carry President Barack Obama’s signature agenda item to a successful conclusion.”

Dana Milbank — In China, Obama leaves more questions than he takes


Milbank makes a bold assertion in saying that President Obama is less accessible to the press than President George W. Bush was – and maybe the head of the Chinese Communist Party. The evidence of the Asia trip is pretty convincing.

Bush was a big believer in letting foreign reporters ask questions, even when they threw their shoes at him. But on the road, Obama acted more like a celebrity on a movie publicity tour – controlled access as a reward for gentle coverage.

“Other elements of Obama’s Asian trip — the bow to the Japanese emperor, the handshake with the Burmese prime minister — have earned more attention, but Obama’s reluctance to be challenged in public is more problematic. It sends a message to the world that contradicts his claim to the Chinese students that he is a better leader because he is forced ‘to hear opinions that I don’t want to hear.’

Instead of facing questioners in public, Obama invited correspondents from each American television network to come to his hotel for a series of one-on-one interviews of about 10 minutes apiece.

For the president, this was a low-risk alternative. Each reporter had to cover multiple topics, and that, by the White House’s design, left little room for probing beyond the superficial.”

Washington Post — Holder answers to 9/11 relatives about trials in U.S.

Well, maybe “answers to” is the wrong way to put it. “Hears questions” might be more like it.

After rebuffing requests and casting an chilly gaze at Republican questioners on the Senate Judiciary Committee for hours on end, Attorney General Eric Holder was confronted by the questions of 9/11 victim’s families. Writer Carrie Johnson describes not the political activists who campaigned for John Kerry in 2004, but earnest, modest folks who seemed just to want to know why Holder would do anything to invite another attack or jeopardize the chance to kill Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his co-conspirators.

“In quiet yet persistent tones, Alice Hoagland of Los Gatos, Calif., told Holder that she took ‘great exception to your decision to give short shrift to military commissions.’

‘I can’t help feeling that it does make New York City a much more dangerous place and a target,’ said Hoagland, who had pinned a white ribbon and a large button honoring her son Mark Bingham to her muted purple suit.

Bingham perished in a field near Shanksville, Pa., as one of four passengers credited with helping rush the cockpit of the hijacked United Airlines Flight 93. ‘We are heartsick and weary of the endless machinations,’ his mother said.”

New York Times — U.S. Demands Clear Results From Afghan Reforms

The whip won’t move a starving mule, but the Obama administration is going to see if it can whip Afghanistan’s dysfunctional government into shape.

Secretary of State Clinton’s visit to Kabul seems to have been designed to tell Afghan President Hamid Karzai what the new terms of his arrangement are: the U.S. will keep his government in power through a kind-of surge, but we will abandon Karzai and his country to the Talibani wolves if the Afghan president doesn’t quickly turn the country into something John Kerry can be proud of.

It’s perfectly Obamian – using liberal naiveté about foreign affairs as cover for a cynical exit strategy.

Writers Peter Baker and Mark Landler look at the track record on getting Afghanistan in shape:

“But laying out such benchmarks in the past — most recently in September — did not change the course of events in that region, and aides said Mr. Obama was reluctant to threaten consequences aggressively if the goals were not met. Mrs. Clinton’s mention of civilian aid raised one potential point of leverage. The fact that additional American troops will flow into Afghanistan in phases over the next year provides another.

But even if Mr. Karzai is willing to clamp down harder on corruption, he may find it difficult to do so without jettisoning some of the very allies who helped him get re-elected. It is not clear that he is willing to replace enough people to placate critics — or if he did, whether his government could survive.”

–To get Morning Must Reads in your inbox every weekday click here.