Morning Must Reads

“Mr. Franken himself said Tuesday that “Sixty is a magic number, but it isn’t. We have Republicans who will vote with a majority of Democrats on certain votes, and Democrats who will vote with a majority of Republicans on others.”

Mr. Franken’s politics, while indisputably liberal, aren’t entirely predictable. He didn’t oppose the Iraq war at the outset. He has been close to the military, performing for U.S. troops in Iraq. He opposed the $700 billion financial-services bailout, and acknowledges that a single-payer health-care system — supported by many progressives — isn’t feasible in today’s political climate.”
 
Bloomberg News — Kennedy Seeks Public Health Insurance Plan That Finances Self
 
The one point of consensus on health care seemed to be that a government-run insurance option was dead in the water – it costs too much and would eventually cost much more when private insurance companies fled the marketplace in the face of a subsidized behemoth.

But writer Nicole Gaouette got a leak from Sen. Ted Kennedy’s health committee that outlines a plan to revive the public option by making it cost-neutral. The details had been left out of the first version of the Kennedy plan circulated to hoots and jeers last month.
But with an idea to create independent, non-profit insurance cooperatives gaining traction as a less fiscally punishing option, the supporters of the public plan are trying to get back in the fight. While addressing, however implausibly, the costs by saying that the subsidies will be treated as loans to the insured, the plan does not address the concern that widely affordable private plans won’t be able to compete with the subsidized government version – making private an insurance something for just the rich.

The president wants a public plan, but as we saw with the cap and trade bill, he is willing to win ugly, even if it means forgoing the liberal goal of a government plan.

“The summary of the committee’s proposal says a public plan would be part of a computer “gateway” where consumers can compare different plans, including private offerings. All participating plans would follow the same rules for defining benefits, protecting consumers and setting premiums “that are fair and based on local costs,” the plan says.

The government would pay the first three months of claims, which would be considered a loan to be repaid over time. If necessary the plan may qualify for ‘risk corridor protections’ to offset or reclaim excessive losses.

Payment rates may not be more than the local average private rates and could be less, the draft says. These rates would be negotiated by the health secretary.

Each state would create an advisory council to recommend savings and strategies for quality improvement. Health-care providers would be under no obligation to participate in the plan, the draft says.”
 
New York Times — With Something for Everyone, Climate Bill Passed

The hangover from Friday’s global warming blowout in the House continues as liberals and conservatives alike come to truly despise the bundle of special interest favors that was thrown together to get the bill passed.

Writer John Broder chronicles many of the nastiest pieces that were slipped in as Democrats whipped and whipped looking for the final votes that would get the legislation passed.

The president had been one of those doing the whipping and took credit for the bill’s passage, commending it to the Senate for speedy approval. The president has also defended the compromise bill as acceptable as a good first step, warts and all.

But it may be the 11th-hour pork, not the diminished environmental standards or invasive rules effecting transactions as common as a home sale, that kills the bill.

“Representative Bobby Rush, Democrat of Illinois, withheld his support for the bill until a last-minute accord was struck to provide nearly $1 billion for energy-related jobs and job training for low-income workers and new subsidies for making public housing more energy-efficient.

Representative Joe Barton, a Texas Republican staunchly opposed to the bill, marveled at the deal-cutting on Friday.
‘It is unprecedented,’ Mr. Barton said, ‘but at least it’s transparent.’”
 
Washington Post — After Call From Senator’s Office, Small Hawaii Bank Got U.S. Aid
 
There have been other examples of lawmakers benefiting from or seeking favors in the billions of bailout dollars sloshing around the country’s financial institutions – Maxine Waters’ plumping for a bailout for a bank in which her husband was part owner is the most obvious example.

But writer Binyamin Applebaum found a case that in its own way, is more egregious. Applebaum – working with a reporter from ProPublica, the outside reporting outfit founded by liberal activists billionaire sub-prime mortgage bundlers on which the Post increasingly depends for investigative work – discovered that a bank that was founded and owned in part by Sen. Daniel Inouye got TARP funds for which it did not qualify because it was already in trouble with the FDIC for insufficient capital stemming from bad management, not exotic financial instruments or toxic assets. But a call from Inouye’s office got the money flowing.

While it’s not as spectacular as Mark Sanford’s ongoing meltdown, it’s a good indication of what the status quo is like in Washington.
“The report by the FDIC inspector general found that 26 of the 408 companies whose applications were sent to the Treasury faced enforcement actions as severe as those against Central Pacific. Because the FDIC inspector general did not name these 26 banks, it is unclear how many ultimately won the Treasury’s approval. Nor is it clear whether any other bank used the Treasury money — as Central Pacific did — to address a capital shortfall identified by regulators.

Several financial analysts said they know of no other instances in which Treasury money was used this way.”