Author: Lynn Sweet

  • President Obama official schedule and guidance, March 23, 2010. Signs health bill, Netanyahu meeting

    THE WHITE HOUSE
    Office of the Press Secretary
    _______________________________________________________________________________________
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    March 22, 2010

    DAILY GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR
    TUESDAY, MARCH 23, 2010

    In the morning, the President and the Vice President will receive the Presidential Daily Briefing and the Economic Daily Briefing in the Oval Office. The President will then meet with senior advisors in the Oval Office. These meetings are closed press.

    Later, the President will deliver remarks and sign the health insurance reform bill in the East Room. The Vice President will introduce the President. This event is open to correspondents and still photographers and pooled for live TV and unilateral TV to tape only. The event will also be streamed live on www.WhiteHouse.gov/live.

    Following the signing, the President will travel to the Department of Interior, where he will deliver remarks on the health insurance reform bill. The Vice President will introduce the President. There will be travel pool coverage of his remarks.

    In the afternoon, the President will meet with Senator Kerry and Senator Lugar on the ongoing consultations with Congress on the START treaty in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press.

    In the evening, the President will meet with Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press.

    In-Town Travel Pool
    Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
    Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
    TV Corr & Crew: CBS
    Print: Baltimore Sun
    Radio: Talk Radio

    EDT

    9:30AM Pool Call Time

    9:30AM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT receive the Presidential Daily Briefing
    Oval Office
    Closed Press

    10:00AM THE PRESIDENT and THE VICE PRESIDENT receive the Economic Daily Briefing
    Oval Office
    Closed Press

    10:30AM THE PRESIDENT meets with senior advisors
    Oval Office
    Closed Press

    11:15AM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks and signs the health insurance reform bill
    East Room
    Pooled for live TV, Open to correspondents and still photographers (Pre-set 9:45AM – Final Gather 10:45AM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

    12:05PM THE PRESIDENT delivers remarks on the health insurance reform bill
    Department of Interior
    Travel Pool Coverage (Gather Time 11:40AM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

    3:00PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Senator Kerry and Senator Lugar
    Oval Office
    Closed Press

    5:30PM THE PRESIDENT meets with Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel
    Oval Office
    Closed Press

    ##

  • Hillary Clinton tells AIPAC “The forces that threaten Israel” threaten the U.S.Transcript


    Hillary Rodham Clinton at the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Conference

    Secretary of State
    Washington Convention Center
    Washington, DC
    March 22, 2010

    Thank you. Thank you for that welcome. And it is wonderful to be back at AIPAC with so many good friends. I saw a number of them backstage before coming out, and I can assure you that I received a lot of advice. (Laughter.) I know I always do when I see my friends from AIPAC. And I want to thank Lee Rosenberg for that introduction. And congratulations, Rosy; you’re going to be a terrific president. (Applause.)

    I also want to thank David Victor and Howard Kohr and Lonny Kaplan and J.B. Pritzker and Howard Friedman and Ester Kurz and Richard Fishman — and I’d better stop – but all of AIPAC’s directors and staff for your leadership and hard work. And I’m very pleased that you will be hearing from a good friend of mine, Congressman Jim Langevin, a great champion for Israel. And let’s hear it for Jim. (Applause.)

    And to all of you, all of AIPAC’s members, thank you once again for your example of citizen activism. Petitioning your government, expressing your views, speaking up in the arena – this is what democracy is all about. (Applause.) And I am particularly pleased to see that there are, once again, so many young people here. (Applause.) You recognize that your future and the future of our country are bound up with the future of Israel. (Applause.) And your engagement today will help to make that future more secure.

    Given the shared challenges we face, the relationship between the United States and Israel has never been more important. (Applause.) The United States has long recognized that a strong and secure Israel is vital to our own strategic interests. (Applause.) And we know that the forces that threaten Israel also threaten the United States of America. (Applause.) And therefore, we firmly believe that when we strengthen Israel’s security, we strengthen America’s security. (Applause.)

    So from its first day, the Obama Administration has worked to promote Israel’s security and long-term success. And if you ever doubt the resolve of President Obama to stay with a job, look at what we got done for the United States last night when it came to passing quality affordable healthcare for everyone. (Applause.) And we know that, as Vice President Biden said in Israel recently, to make progress in this region, there must be no gap between the United States and Israel on security. (Applause.) And let me assure you, as I have assured you on previous occasions with large groups like this and small intimate settings, for President Obama and for me, and for this entire Administration, our commitment to Israel’s security and Israel’s future is rock solid, unwavering, enduring, and forever. (Applause.)

    And why is that? Why is that? Is it because AIPAC can put 7,500 people into a room in the Convention Center? I don’t think so. Is it because some of the most active Americans in politics and who care about our government also care about Israel? That’s not the explanation. Our countries and our peoples are bound together by our shared values of freedom, equality, democracy, the right to live free from fear, and our common aspirations for a future of peace, security and prosperity, where we can see our children and our children’s children, should we be so lucky – and as a future mother of the bride, I’m certainly hoping for that – (applause) – to see those children, those generations come of age in peace, with the opportunity to fulfill their own God-given potentials.

    Americans honor Israel as a homeland for a people too long oppressed and a democracy that has had to defend itself at every turn, a dream nurtured for generations and made real by men and women who refused to bow to the toughest of odds. In Israel’s story, we see our own. We see, in fact, the story of all people who struggle for freedom and the right to chart their own destinies.

    That’s why it took President Harry Truman only 11 minutes to recognize the new nation of Israel – (applause) – and ever since, our two countries have stood in solidarity. So guaranteeing Israel’s security is more than a policy position for me; it is a personal commitment that will never waver. (Applause.)
    Since my first visit to Israel nearly 30 years ago, I have returned many times and made many friends. I’ve had the privilege of working with some of Israel’s great leaders and have benefited from their wise counsel. I may have even caused some of them consternation – I don’t think Yitzhak Rabin ever forgave me for banishing him to the White House balcony when he wanted to smoke. (Laughter.) And over the years, I have shared your pride in seeing the desert bloom, the economy thrive, and the country flourish. But I have also seen the struggles and the sorrows. I have met with the victims of terrorism, in their hospital rooms I’ve held their hands, I’ve listened to the doctors describe how much shrapnel was left in a leg, an arm, or a head. I sat there and listened to the heart-rending words that Prime Minister Rabin’s granddaughter Noa spoke at her grandfather’s funeral. I went to a bombed-out pizzeria in Jerusalem. I’ve seen the looks on the faces of Israeli families who knew a rocket could fall at any moment.

    On one of my visits, in 2002, I met a young man named Yochai Porat. He was only 26, but he was already a senior medic with MDA and he oversaw a program to train foreign volunteers as first responders in Israel. I attended the program’s graduation ceremonies and I saw the pride in his face as yet another group of young people set off to do good and save lives. Yochai was also a reservist with the IDF. And a week after we met, he was killed by a sniper near a roadblock, along with other soldiers and civilians. MDA renamed the overseas volunteer program in his memory and it has continued to flourish. When I was there in 2005, I met with his family. His parents were committed to continuing to support MDA and its mission – and so was I. That’s why I spent years urging the International Red Cross, introducing legislation, rounding up votes to send a message to Geneva to admit MDA as a full voting member. And finally, with your help – (applause) in 2006, we succeeded in righting that wrong. (Applause.)

    As a senator from New York, I was proud to be a strong voice for Israel in the Congress and around the world. And I am proud that I can continue to be that strong voice as Secretary of State.

    Last fall, I stood next to Prime Minister Netanyahu in Jerusalem and praised his government’s decision to place a moratorium on new residential construction in the West Bank. And then I praised it again in Cairo and in Marrakesh and in many places far from Jerusalem to make clear that this was a first step, but it was an important first step. And yes, I underscored the longstanding American policy that does not accept the legitimacy of continued settlements. As Israel’s friend, it is our responsibility to give credit when it is due and to tell the truth when it is needed.

    In 2008, I told this conference that Barack Obama would be a good friend to Israel as president, that he would have a special appreciation of Israel because of his own personal history – a grandfather who fought the Nazis in Patton’s Army, a great-uncle who helped liberate Buchenwald. President Obama and his family have lived the Diaspora experience. And as he told you himself, he understands that there is always a homeland at the center of our story. As a senator, he visited Israel and met families whose houses were destroyed by rockets. And as President, he has supported Israel in word and in deed.

    Under President Obama’s leadership, we have reinvigorated defense consultations, redoubled our efforts to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge, and provided nearly $3 billion in annual military assistance. (Applause.) In fact, as Rosy told you – or maybe it was Howard – that assistance increased in 2010 and we have requested another increase for 2011. (Applause.) And something else I want you to know, more than 1,000 United States troops participated in the Juniper Cobra ballistic missile defense exercises last fall, the largest such drill ever held. (Applause.) President Obama has made achieving peace and recognized secure borders for Israel a top Administration priority.

    The United States has also led the fight in international institutions against anti-Semitisms and efforts to challenge Israel’s legitimacy. We did lead the boycott of the Durban Conference and we repeatedly voted against the deeply flawed Goldstone Report. (Applause.) This Administration will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself. (Applause.)

    And for Israel, there is no greater strategic threat than the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran. (Applause.) Elements in Iran’s government have become a menace, both to their own people and in the region. Iran’s president foments anti-Semitism, denies the Holocaust, threatens to destroy Israel, even denies that 9/11 was an attack. The Iranian leadership funds and arms terrorists who have murdered Americans, Israelis, and other innocent people alike. And it has waged a campaign of intimidation and persecution against the Iranian people.

    Last June, Iranians marching silently were beaten with batons. Political prisoners were rounded up and abused. Absurd and false allegations and accusations were leveled against the United States, Israel, and the West. People everywhere were horrified by the video of a young woman shot dead in the street. The Iranian leadership denies its people rights that are universal to all human beings, including the right to speak freely, to assemble without fear, the right to the equal administration of justice, to express your views without facing retribution.

    In addition to threatening Israel, a nuclear-armed Iran would embolden its terrorist clientele and would spark an arms race that could destabilize the region. This is unacceptable. It is unacceptable to the United States. It is unacceptable to Israel. It is unacceptable to the region and the international community. So let me be very clear: The United States is determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

    Now, for most of the past decade, the United States, as you know, declined to engage with Iran. And Iran grew more, not less, dangerous. It built thousands of centrifuges and spurned the international community. But it faced few consequences. President Obama has been trying a different course, designed to present Iran’s leaders with a clear choice. We’ve made extensive efforts to reengage with Iran, both through direct communication and working with other partners multilaterally, to send an unmistakable message: Uphold your international obligations. And if you do, you will reap the benefits of normal relations. If you do not, you will face increased isolation and painful consequences.

    We took this course with the understanding that the very effort of seeking engagement would strengthen our hand if Iran rejected our initiative. And over the last year, Iran’s leaders have been stripped of their usual excuses. The world has seen that it is Iran, not the United States, responsible for the impasse. With its secret nuclear facilities, increasing violations of its obligations under the nonproliferation regime, and an unjustified expansion of its enrichment activities, more and more nations are finally expressing deep concerns about Iran’s intentions. And there is a growing international consensus on taking steps to pressure Iran’s leaders to change course. Europe is in agreement. Russia, where I just returned from, has moved definitely in this direction. And although there is still work to be done, China has said it supports the dual-track approach of applying pressure if engagement does not produce results. This stronger consensus has also led to increased cooperation on stopping arms shipments and financial transactions that aid terrorists, threaten Israel, and destabilize the region.

    We are now working with our partners in the United Nations on new Security Council sanctions that will show Iran’s leaders that there are real consequences for their intransigence, that their choice is to live up to their international obligations. Our aim is not incremental sanctions, but sanctions that will bite. It is taking time to produce these sanctions, and we believe that time is a worthwhile investment for winning the broadest possible support for our efforts. But we will not compromise our commitment to preventing Iran from acquiring these nuclear weapons. (Applause.)

    But Iran is not the only threat on the horizon. Israel today is confronting some of the toughest challenges in her history. The conflict with the Palestinians and with Israel’s Arab neighbors is an obstacle to prosperity and opportunity for Israelis, Palestinians, and people across the region. But it also threatens Israel’s long-term future as a secure and democratic Jewish state.

    The status quo is unsustainable for all sides. It promises only more violence and unrealized aspirations. Staying on this course means continuing a conflict that carries tragic human costs. Israeli and Palestinian children alike deserve to grow up free from fear and to have that same opportunity to live up to their full God-given potential. (Applause.)

    There is another path, a path that leads toward security and prosperity for Israel, the Palestinians, and all the people of the region. But it will require all parties, including Israel, to make difficult but necessary choices. Both sides must confront the reality that the status quo of the last decade has not produced long-term security or served their interests. Nor has it served the interests of the United States. It is true that heightened security measures have reduced the number of suicide bombings and given some protection and safety to those who worry every day when their child goes to school, their husband goes to work, their mother goes to market. And there is, I think, a belief among many that the status quo can be sustained. But the dynamics of demography, ideology, and technology make this impossible.

    First, we cannot ignore the long-term population trends that result from the Israeli occupation. As Defense Minister Barak and others have observed, the inexorable mathematics of democracy – of demography are hastening the hour at which Israelis may have to choose between preserving their democracy and staying true to the dream of a Jewish homeland. Given this reality, a two-state solution is the only viable path for Israel to remain both a democracy and a Jewish state. (Applause.)

    Second, we cannot be blind to the political implications of continued conflict. There is today truly a struggle, maybe for the first time, between those in the region who accept peace and coexistence with Israel and those who reject it and seek only continued violence. The status quo strengthens the rejectionists who claim peace is impossible, and it weakens those who would accept coexistence. That does not serve Israel’s interests or our own. Those willing to negotiate need to be able to show results for their efforts. And those who preach violence must be proven wrong. All of our regional challenges – confronting the threat posed by Iran, combating violent extremism, promoting democracy and economic opportunity – become harder if the rejectionists grow in power and influence.

    Conversely, a two-state solution would allow Israel’s contributions to the world and to our greater humanity to get the recognition they deserve. It would also allow the Palestinians to have to govern to realize their own legitimate aspirations. And it would undermine the appeal of extremism across the region.
    I was very privileged as First Lady to travel the world on behalf of our country. I went from Latin America to Southeast Asia. And during the 1990s, it was rare that people in places far from the Middle East ever mentioned the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Now, when I started traveling as Secretary of State and I went to places that were so far from the Middle East, it was the first, second, or third issue that countries raised. We cannot escape the impact of mass communications. We cannot control the images and the messages that are conveyed. We can only change the facts on the ground that refute the claims of the rejectionists and extremists, and in so doing create the circumstances for a safe, secure future for Israel. (Applause.)
    And then finally, we must recognize that the ever-evolving technology of war is making it harder to guarantee Israel’s security. For six decades, Israelis have guarded their borders vigilantly. But advances in rocket technology mean that Israeli families are now at risk far from those borders. Despite efforts at containment, rockets with better guidance systems, longer range, and more destructive power are spreading across the region. Hezbollah has amassed tens of thousands of rockets on Israel’s northern border. Hamas has a substantial number in Gaza. And even if some of these are still crude, they all pose a serious danger, as we saw again last week.

    Our message to Hamas is clear: Renounce violence, recognize Israel, and abide by previous signed agreements. (Applause.) That is the only path to participation in negotiations. They do not earn a place at any table absent those changes. (Applause.) And I will repeat today what I have said many times before: Gilad Shalit must be released immediately and returned to his family. (Applause.)
    Unfortunately, neither military action nor restricting access into and out of Gaza has significantly stemmed the flow of rockets to Hamas. They appear content to add to their stockpile and grow rich off the tunnel trade, while the people of Gaza fall deeper into poverty and despair; that is also not a sustainable position for either Israelis or Palestinians.
    Behind these terrorist organizations and their rockets, we see the destabilizing influence of Iran. Now, reaching a two-state solution will not end all these threats – you and I know that – (applause) – but failure to do so gives the extremist foes a pretext to spread violence, instability, and hatred.
    In the face of these unforgiving dynamics of demography, ideology, and technology, it becomes impossible to entrust our hopes for Israel’s future in today’s status quo. These challenges cannot be ignored or wished away. Only by choosing a new path can Israel make the progress it deserves to ensure that their children are able to see a future of peace, and only by having a partner willing to participate with them will the Palestinians be able to see the same future.

    Now, there is for many of us a clear goal: two states for two peoples living side by side in peace and security, with peace between Israel and Syria, and Israel and Lebanon, and normal relations between Israel and all the Arab states. (Applause.) A comprehensive peace that is real, not a slogan, that is rooted in genuine recognition of Israel’s right to exist in peace and security, and that offers the best way to ensure Israel’s enduring survival and well-being. That is the goal that the Obama Administration is determined to help Israel and the Palestinians achieve.

    George Mitchell has worked tirelessly with the parties to prepare the ground for the resumption of direct negotiations, beginning with the proximity talks both sides have accepted. These proximity talks are a hopeful first step, and they should be serious and substantive. But ultimately, of course, it will take direct negotiations between the parties to work through all the issues and end the conflict.

    The United States stands ready to play an active and sustained role in these talks, and to support the parties as they work to resolve permanent status issues including security, borders, refugees, and Jerusalem. The United States knows we cannot force a solution. We cannot ordain or command the outcome. The parties themselves must resolve their differences.

    But, we believe – (applause) – we believe that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree to an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state based on the ’67 lines, with agreed swaps, and Israel’s goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israel’s security requirements. (Applause.)

    And the United States recognizes that Jerusalem – Jerusalem is a deeply, profoundly important issue for Israelis and Palestinians, for Jews, Muslims, and Christians. We believe that through good-faith negotiations the parties can mutually agree on an outcome that realizes the aspirations of both parties for Jerusalem and safeguards its status for people around the world.

    But for negotiations to be successful, they must be built on a foundation of mutual trust and confidence. That is why both Israelis and Palestinians must refrain from unilateral statements and actions that undermine the process or prejudice the outcome of talks.

    When a Hamas-controlled municipality glorifies violence and renames a square after a terrorist who murdered innocent Israelis, it insults the families on both sides who have lost loves ones over the years in this conflict. (Applause.) And when instigators deliberately mischaracterize the rededication of a synagogue in the Jewish quarter of Jerusalem’s old city and call upon their brethren to “defend” nearby Muslim holy sites from so-called “attacks,” it is purely and simply an act of incitement. (Applause.) These provocations are wrong and must be condemned for needlessly inflaming tensions and imperiling prospects for a comprehensive peace.

    It is our devotion to this outcome – two states for two peoples, secure and at peace – that led us to condemn the announcement of plans for new construction in East Jerusalem. This was not about wounded pride. Nor is it a judgment on the final status of Jerusalem, which is an issue to be settled at the negotiating table. This is about getting to the table, creating and protecting an atmosphere of trust around it – and staying there until the job is finally done. (Applause.)

    New construction in East Jerusalem or the West Bank undermines that mutual trust and endangers the proximity talks that are the first step toward the full negotiations that both sides say want and need. And it exposes daylight between Israel and the United States that others in the region hope to exploit. It undermines America’s unique ability to play a role – an essential role – in the peace process. Our credibility in this process depends in part on our willingness to praise both sides when they are courageous, and when we don’t agree, to say so, and say so unequivocally.

    We objected to this announcement because we are committed to Israel and its security, which we believe depends on a comprehensive peace, because we are determined to keep moving forward along a path that ensures Israel’s future as a secure and democratic Jewish state living in peace with its Palestinian and Arab neighbors, and because we do not want to see the progress that has been made in any way endangered. .

    When Prime Minister Netanyahu and I spoke, I suggested a number of concrete steps Israel could take to improve the atmosphere and rebuild confidence. The prime minister responded with specific actions Israel is prepared to take toward this end, and we discussed a range of other mutual confidence-building measures. Senator Mitchell continued this discussion in Israel over the weekend and is meeting with President Abbas today. We are making progress. We’re working hard. We are making it possible for these proximity talks to move ahead. I will be meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu later today and President Obama will meet with him tomorrow. (Applause.) We will follow up on these discussions and seek a common understanding about the most productive way forward.

    Neither our commitment nor our goal has changed. The United States will encourage the parties to advance the prospects for peace. We commend the government of President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad for the reforms they’ve undertaken to strengthen law and order, and the progress that they’ve made in improving the quality of life in the West Bank. But we encourage them to redouble their efforts to put an end to incitement and violence, continue to ensure security and the rule of law, and ingrain a culture of peace and tolerance among Palestinians. (Applause.)

    We applaud Israel’s neighbors for their support of the Arab Peace Initiative and the proximity talks. But their rhetoric must now be backed up by action. (Applause.) They should make it easier to pursue negotiations and an agreement. That is their responsibility.

    And we commend Prime Minister Netanyahu for embracing the vision of the two-state solution, for acting to lift roadblocks and ease movement throughout the West Bank. And we continue to expect Israel to take those concrete steps that will help turn that vision into a reality – build momentum toward a comprehensive peace by demonstrating respect for the legitimate aspirations of the Palestinians, stopping settlement activity, and addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

    Now, from the time of David Ben-Gurion, who accepted the UN proposal to divide the land into two nations, Israel and Palestine, leaders like Begin and Rabin and Sharon and others have made difficult but clear-eyed choices to pursue peace in the name of Israel’s future. It was Rabin who said, “For Israel there is no path that is without pain. But the path of peace is preferable to the path of war.” And last June at Bar-Ilan University, Prime Minister Netanyahu put his country on the path to peace. President Abbas has put the Palestinians on that path as well. The challenge will be to keep moving forward, to stay on what will be a difficult course.

    Peace does brings with it a future of promise and possibility. Ultimately, that is the vision that drives us and that has driven leaders of Israel going back to the very beginning – a future freed from the shackles of conflict; families no longer afraid of rockets in the night; Israelis traveling and trading freely in the region; Palestinians able to chart their own futures; former adversaries working together on issues of common concern like water, infrastructure, and development that builds broadly shared prosperity and a global strategic partnership between Israel and the United States that taps the talent and innovation of both our societies, comes up with solutions to the problems of the 21st century.

    From addressing climate change and energy to hunger, poverty and disease, Israel is already on the cutting edge. Look at the spread of high-tech start-ups, the influx of venture capital, the number of Nobel laureates. Israel is already a force to be reckoned with. Imagine what its leadership could be on the world stage if the conflict were behind it. We are already working as partners. There is so much more we could achieve together.

    We are entering the season of Passover. The story of Moses resonates for people of all faiths, and it teaches us many lessons, including that we must take risks, even a leap of faith, to reach the promised land. When Moses urged the Jews to follow him out of Egypt, many objected. They said it was too dangerous, too hard, too risky. And later, in the desert, some thought it would be better to return to Egypt. It was too dangerous, too hard, too risky. In fact, I think they formed a back-to-Egypt committee and tried to stir up support for that. And when they came to the very edge of the promised land, there were still some who refused to enter because it was too dangerous, too hard, and too risky.

    But Israel’s history is the story of brave men and women who took risks. They did the hard thing because they believed and knew it was right. We know that this dream was championed by Herzl and others that many said was impossible. And then the pioneers – can you imagine the conversation, telling your mother and father I’m going to go to the desert and make it bloom. And people thinking, how could that ever happen? But it did. Warriors who were so gallant in battle, but then offered their adversaries a hand of peace because they thought it would make their beloved Israel stronger. Israel and the generations that have come have understood that the strongest among us is often the one who turns an enemy into a friend. Israel has shed more than its share of bitter tears. But for that dream to survive, for the state to flourish, this generation of Israelis must also take up the tradition and do what seems too dangerous, too hard, and too risky. And of this they can be absolutely sure: the United States and the American people will stand with you. We will share the risks and we will shoulder the burdens, as we face the future together.
    God bless you. God bless Israel and God bless the United States of America. (Applause.)

  • Organizing for America on health care, by the numbers

    WASHINGTON–With the House passing health care on Sunday, Organizing for America, the Obama presidential campaign network folded into the Democratic National Committee, released some numbers on their grass-and-netroot efforts to help get the bill passed.

    Below, from OFA….

    Here are the basic numbers on OFA’s efforts in health reform. Keep in mind what these metrics don’t say is how strategic we were about our approach. We made a point of learning everything we could about each Representative and made a plan for supporting or influencing their vote (working very often with their office or with Leadership) before we ever made a push for calls or letters or held a single event. The numbers are great – we made nearly 500,000 calls in the last ten days as part of our Final March for Reform, calls we know turned Representatives like Baird around – but the other point is that OFA volunteers and staff really reached out personally to the Representatives’ offices. We were there to counter the opposition and demonstrate support (even at a moment’s notice), answer questions, build relationships.

    Statistics from Final March to Reform:
    · Made nearly 500,000 real-people calls to Congress.
    · Sent 324,000 letters to Congress.
    · Held nearly 1,200 health care-related events with more than 10,000 attendees.
    · Sent nearly 1 million localized text messages.
    · Called nearly 120,000 supporters using OFA’s Neighbor-to-Neighbor tool online.
    TOTAL ACTIONS IN PAST 10 DAYS = Nearly 1.2 million

    Since the June 6 launch of the health care campaign, OFA has:
    · Held more than 30,000 health care related events in every Congressional District, in all 50 states.
    · Organized more than 65,000 congressional office visits for health insurance reform during one week.
    · Generated more than 315,000 calls to Congress in support of reform in a single day and more than 1.5 million calls overall.
    · 238,000 people have shared their personal health care stories.
    · 2.7 million people have taken action with Organizing for America on the campaign to enact health insurance reform.
    · 9.3 million volunteer hours have been pledged for legislators who fight for health reform.

  • Abortion rights groups not happy with Obama executive order on abortion

    Below, letter from NARAL….

    Dear Pro-Choice Activist,

    It is with mixed emotions that I write with news that, tonight, the House of Representatives passed the health-reform bill.

    I am extremely disappointed to tell you that the final package includes the insulting, unworkable Nelson restriction on abortion coverage in the new system.

    As you may recall, the Nelson language requires Americans in the new system to write two separate checks if the health plan they choose includes abortion coverage. This unacceptable bureaucratic stigmatization could cause insurance carriers to stop covering abortion care. This would represent a major setback, given that more than 85 percent of private plans cover this care for women today.

    Despite this totally unacceptable anti-choice provision, reform will bring more than 30 million Americans into a system that includes affordable family-planning services and maternity care for women. It also outlaws some discriminatory insurance-industry practices that make health care more expensive for women. Improving women’s access to birth control and prenatal care and making reproductive-health care more affordable are also at the core of our mission.

    Here at NARAL Pro-Choice America, we struggled with the dilemma of how to respond to a bill that included both positive and disappointing provisions for reproductive health. Ultimately, we determined that we could not endorse this bill due to the abortion-coverage restrictions. But, we also could not, in good conscience, call for the bill’s outright defeat and deny millions of American women the promise of better–although imperfect–health-care services that are an important part of our pro-choice values.

    That these abortion-coverage restrictions remained in the bill is terrible news for all of us who believe that American women should not have to sacrifice their right to choose in order to gain ground in other areas of health care. It is an outrage that anti-choice politicians such as Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) used women’s reproductive health as a bargaining chip.

    But, believe me when I say that Congress and the White House have not heard the last from us. NARAL Pro-Choice America does not accept this bill as the final word on how abortion coverage will be defined in the new health-care system. We are committed to finding opportunities to repeal dangerous and unacceptable restrictions as the new system takes shape.

    Thank you for standing with us for so many months. We will keep fighting to elect pro-choice members who share our pro-choice values.

    Nancy Keenan
    President, NARAL Pro-Choice America

  • “John King, USA” CNN new political show debuts tonight

    john king.jpeg
    John King interviews Vicki Kennedy on the set of his new CNN Show, “John King, USA.”

    below, from CNN….

    Tonight, on the premiere of John King, USA, John will sit down for an exclusive interview with Vicki Kennedy. They will discuss her personal reflections on the health care reform vote, her late husband’s impact on the bill, the election of Sen. Scott Brown and more. Tune in to America’s new home for political news and conversation at 7pm ET/ 6pm CT/ 5pm MT / 4pm PT.

  • As Lipinski votes no on health bill, the scene in the House from the Illinois angle

    WASHINGTON — At 10:20 p.m. Sunday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was imploring House members to vote yes for a landmark health care bill that a little more than an hour later would pass, after a long day of final wrangling.

    Rep. Debbie Halvorson (D-Ill.) and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) sat in the front row on the Democratic side as Pelosi spoke. Across the aisle where Republicans sit — almost as far away from Pelosi as a lawmaker could get — I spotted GOP Illinois Senate nominee Rep. Mark Steven Kirk in the last row, ducking out after a few minutes.

    Rep. Debbie Halvorson (D-Ill.) and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) sat in the front row on the Democratic side as Pelosi spoke. Across the aisle where Republicans sit — almost as far away from Pelosi as a lawmaker could get — I spotted GOP Illinois Senate nominee Rep. Mark Steven Kirk in the last row, ducking out after a few minutes.

    Then, as Pelosi was wrapping up her remarks, I saw Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) entering the chamber — as it happened through a door on the Republican side — and he headed toward the Democratic seats. But Lipinski paused in the middle aisle, glanced up at the packed House galleries and never crossed over to stand with the other Democrats, leaving right away. The scene that unfolded seemed apt.

    Then, as Pelosi was wrapping up her remarks, I saw Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) entering the chamber — as it happened through a door on the Republican side — and he headed toward the Democratic seats. But Lipinski paused in the middle aisle, glanced up at the packed House galleries and never crossed over to stand with the other Democrats, leaving right away. The scene that unfolded seemed apt.

    The health care bill — President Obama’s top legislative priority — passed on a 219-212 roll call, with three votes to spare, in essentially a party line vote. Kirk and all Republicans voted no. Lipinski was the only Illinois Democrat to vote no, one of 34 Democrats siding with the GOP.

    The anti-abortion Lipinski had a slew of objections to the bill’s provisions and was not convinced that the executive order Obama signed Sunday provided enough safeguards against federal money being channeled to clinics providing abortions or to insurance plans offering abortions.

    The Obama executive order helped win the vote of other anti-abortion lawmakers. Lipinski said in a statement, “I do not believe the last-minute effort to address these concerns through an Executive Order is sufficient because there is every indication that federal courts would strike down this order, and the order could be repealed at any time in the future.”

    I’m told that Democratic leaders in Washington and Illinois were “confounded” by Lipinski’s opposition to the bill because he is a diabetic who would find it tough –maybe impossible — to find insurance coverage if he were not in Congress. The bill — which still faces votes in the Senate before it can be sent to Obama to be signed, bans insurance companies from discriminating against people with pre-existing conditions.

    But Lipinski’s vote was his vote. Democratic leaders were furious with him earlier Sunday, when it was not yet clear they had enough votes. Lipinski told me last week he did not think he would hurt his career within the House — where relations with leaders and the White House can matter — by voting no.

    “Dan has a tremendous amount of resolve,” Rep. Danny Davis (D-Ill.) told me when we talked in the Capitol. “And great desire to vote what he considers to be in his district’s interests. He often does not waver in his convictions.”

    Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.) was a holdout for a while — he wanted a better deal for drug coverage — but he said he never “would stand in the way of this historic and much-needed reform bill.” Rush said about Lipinski, “It’s like we live in two different cities. Maybe we do.”

  • Obama on House health bill passage. Transcript

    P032110PS-0467-1.jpg

    President Obama talks on the phone with a ,ember of Congress in Chief of Staff Rahm Emenuel’s office at the White House in advance of the Sunday, March 21, 2010 historic health care vote in the House. From left, aides Phil Schiliro, Sean Sweeney, Rahm Emanuel, Jim Messina, and DanTurton. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

    Click below for transcript of Obama’s remarks delivered after the close 219-212 vote.

    THE WHITE HOUSE

    Office of the Press Secretary
    _________________________________________________________________
    For Immediate Release March 22, 2010

    REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
    ON THE HOUSE VOTE ON HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM

    March 21, 2010

    East Room

    11:47 P.M. EDT

    THE PRESIDENT: Good evening, everybody. Tonight, after nearly 100 years of talk and frustration, after decades of trying, and a year of sustained effort and debate, the United States Congress finally declared that America’s workers and America’s families and America’s small businesses deserve the security of knowing that here, in this country, neither illness nor accident should endanger the dreams they’ve worked a lifetime to achieve.

    Tonight, at a time when the pundits said it was no longer possible, we rose above the weight of our politics. We pushed back on the undue influence of special interests. We didn’t give in to mistrust or to cynicism or to fear. Instead, we proved that we are still a people capable of doing big things and tackling our biggest challenges. We proved that this government — a government of the people and by the people — still works for the people.

    I want to thank every member of Congress who stood up tonight with courage and conviction to make health care reform a reality. And I know this wasn’t an easy vote for a lot of people. But it was the right vote. I want to thank Speaker Nancy Pelosi for her extraordinary leadership, and Majority Leader Steny Hoyer and Majority Whip Jim Clyburn for their commitment to getting the job done. I want to thank my outstanding Vice President, Joe Biden, and my wonderful Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, for their fantastic work on this issue. I want to thank the many staffers in Congress, and my own incredible staff in the White House, who have worked tirelessly over the past year with Americans of all walks of life to forge a reform package finally worthy of the people we were sent here to serve.

    Today’s vote answers the dreams of so many who have fought for this reform. To every unsung American who took the time to sit down and write a letter or type out an e-mail hoping your voice would be heard — it has been heard tonight. To the untold numbers who knocked on doors and made phone calls, who organized and mobilized out of a firm conviction that change in this country comes not from the top down, but from the bottom up — let me reaffirm that conviction: This moment is possible because of you.

    Most importantly, today’s vote answers the prayers of every American who has hoped deeply for something to be done about a health care system that works for insurance companies, but not for ordinary people. For most Americans, this debate has never been about abstractions, the fight between right and left, Republican and Democrat — it’s always been about something far more personal. It’s about every American who knows the shock of opening an envelope to see that their premiums just shot up again when times are already tough enough. It’s about every parent who knows the desperation of trying to cover a child with a chronic illness only to be told “no” again and again and again. It’s about every small business owner forced to choose between insuring employees and staying open for business. They are why we committed ourselves to this cause.

    Tonight’s vote is not a victory for any one party — it’s a victory for them. It’s a victory for the American people. And it’s a victory for common sense.

    Now, it probably goes without saying that tonight’s vote will give rise to a frenzy of instant analysis. There will be tallies of Washington winners and losers, predictions about what it means for Democrats and Republicans, for my poll numbers, for my administration. But long after the debate fades away and the prognostication fades away and the dust settles, what will remain standing is not the government-run system some feared, or the status quo that serves the interests of the insurance industry, but a health care system that incorporates ideas from both parties — a system that works better for the American people.

    If you have health insurance, this reform just gave you more control by reining in the worst excesses and abuses of the insurance industry with some of the toughest consumer protections this country has ever known — so that you are actually getting what you pay for.

    If you don’t have insurance, this reform gives you a chance to be a part of a big purchasing pool that will give you choice and competition and cheaper prices for insurance. And it includes the largest health care tax cut for working families and small businesses in history — so that if you lose your job and you change jobs, start that new business, you’ll finally be able to purchase quality, affordable care and the security and peace of mind that comes with it.

    This reform is the right thing to do for our seniors. It makes Medicare stronger and more solvent, extending its life by almost a decade. And it’s the right thing to do for our future. It will reduce our deficit by more than $100 billion over the next decade, and more than $1 trillion in the decade after that.

    So this isn’t radical reform. But it is major reform. This legislation will not fix everything that ails our health care system. But it moves us decisively in the right direction. This is what change looks like.

    Now as momentous as this day is, it’s not the end of this journey. On Tuesday, the Senate will take up revisions to this legislation that the House has embraced, and these are revisions that have strengthened this law and removed provisions that had no place in it. Some have predicted another siege of parliamentary maneuvering in order to delay adoption of these improvements. I hope that’s not the case. It’s time to bring this debate to a close and begin the hard work of implementing this reform properly on behalf of the American people. This year, and in years to come, we have a solemn responsibility to do it right.

    Nor does this day represent the end of the work that faces our country. The work of revitalizing our economy goes on. The work of promoting private sector job creation goes on. The work of putting American families’ dreams back within reach goes on. And we march on, with renewed confidence, energized by this victory on their behalf.

    In the end, what this day represents is another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream. Tonight, we answered the call of history as so many generations of Americans have before us. When faced with crisis, we did not shrink from our challenge — we overcame it. We did not avoid our responsibility — we embraced it. We did not fear our future — we shaped it.

    Thank you, God bless you, and may God bless the United States of America.

    END 11:55 P.M. EDT

  • President Obama official schedule and guidance, March 22, 2010

    THE WHITE HOUSE
    Office of the Press Secretary
    _______________________________________________________________________________________
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    March 21, 2010

    DAILY GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR
    MONDAY, MARCH 22, 2010

    In the morning, the President will meet with senior advisors in the Oval Office. This meeting is closed press.

    In-Town Travel Pool
    Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
    Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
    TV Corr & Crew: ABC
    Print: Washington Times
    Radio: SRN

    EDT

    10:00AM Pool Call Time

    11:30AM THE PRESIDENT meets with senior advisors
    Oval Office
    Closed Press

    Briefing Schedule

    12:30PM Briefing by Press Secretary Robert Gibbs

    ##

  • House passes health care 219-212

    WASHINGTON–The House Sunday night, on a 219-212 roll call, approved the Senate version of a health care bill, setting the stage for final passage of the historic measure with two more votes expected in the next hour. The legislation passed with three votes to spare.
    Click here for the roll call.

    All 219 votes were Democratic. There were 34 Democrats and 178 Republicans voting no.

    All Illinois Republican House members voted no.
    Illinois Democrat Dan Lipinski voted no.

    All other Illinois Democrats voted yes.

    The Obama presidential order negotiated with Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) on abortion delivered critical last minute votes. Patricia Murphy at Politics Daily has the details.

  • Democrati Lipinski to vote no on health bill. Statement.

    Below, release from Lipinski….

    Congressman Lipinski Will Vote ‘No’ on Senate Health Care Bill

    Today, Congressman Dan Lipinski (IL-3) released the following statement regarding his decision to vote against the Senate health care bill:

    “My decision to vote against the Senate health care bill is the result of months of studying our broken health care system, developing and analyzing various proposals for reform, studying legislation, and listening closely to my constituents. I want to thank each and every one of the thousands of Third District residents who contacted me by phone, fax, email, and in person to share their views for and against the bill.

    “As I have said many times, I strongly believe reform is needed to lower soaring health care costs and make insurance coverage more affordable and accessible for individuals and working families. But reform must be done right. The Senate bill does make a number of improvements to our health care system, including expanding access and reforming health insurance by doing such things as immediately banning discrimination based on pre-existing conditions for children, prohibiting lifetime coverage limits, and banning rescissions. Unfortunately, the bill also contains a number of serious flaws, and many of the good aspects could have been done without passing this massive bill. The Senate bill does not do enough to lower the skyrocketing cost of health care, cuts more than $400 billion from Medicare, is not fiscally sustainable over the long term, and breaks with the status quo by providing federal funding for abortion and abortion coverage. This bill was also marred by backroom deals that benefit pharmaceutical companies and other special interests. In the final analysis, I cannot support such a deeply flawed bill.

    “Last November, after successfully fighting to make numerous improvements to the initial House health care bill, I voted to move the measure forward. I did so because I did not want to give up on reform, and because I believed we might still be able to fix the flaws in the bill before a final vote. However, I made my position very clear at the time, stating: ‘If this bill does not improve when it comes back from the Senate, I will vote against it.’ Unfortunately, the final bill is in many ways worse, not better, than the House legislation.

    “To deserve the name of reform, a bill of this magnitude ought to make major progress on reducing health care costs, which continue to increase at unsustainable rates. Since 1980, overall spending on health care has risen on average at almost twice the rate of inflation, and per capita health care spending is nearly double what it was 10 years ago. Unless we address these increases, health care will continue to gobble up more and more of people’s income, and more and more of our tax dollars, until we reach a breaking point. Government subsidies alone cannot solve the problem of the increasing burden that skyrocketing health care costs impose on middle class Americans. We must change payment incentives for providers and this bill does not accomplish that.

    “As the Congressional Budget Office has stated, the Senate health care bill would do little to affect the cost of premiums for those who currently get their health care through large employers. Since 70 percent of Americans who are not on Medicare are in this group, this bill fails to sufficiently reduce costs for the majority of working families in the Third District. The Senate bill also does not include several specific measures that were in the House bill that could increase competition. These include the elimination of the health insurance industry’s anti-trust exemption and a provision to begin to require health care providers to disclose their prices.

    “I am also concerned that the bill’s more than $400 billion in Medicare cuts could have ramifications for seniors in my district. For instance, the Senate bill reduces Medicare reimbursements to providers – such as hospitals, skilled nursing facilities, and home health agencies – by over $200 billion. The Chief Actuary of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services has stated that these cuts would likely result in roughly 20 percent of providers becoming unprofitable; this could lead to providers refusing to take care of seniors on Medicare. And if these cuts are going to be made to Medicare, the money should at least be put in the Medicare Trust Fund instead of being spent elsewhere as this bill does. In addition, unlike the House bill, the Senate bill does not allow the government to negotiate for lower drug prices, which I have long supported.

    “I am also greatly concerned about the impact of this bill on our ballooning deficit. While the Congressional Budget Office has stated that the bill would officially reduce the deficit, close inspection of this analysis reveals serious problems. The CBO counts as deficit reduction over $70 billion in premiums that will be paid into the newly created CLASS Act. This well-intentioned program to provide long-term care for people with disabilities should be keeping this money in a trust fund to pay out future benefits instead of being spent elsewhere. And even if these premiums were kept in a trust fund, CBO states that the CLASS Act is fiscally unsustainable after two decades, when benefit payouts will significantly overwhelm the premiums coming in. Further, $29 billion in increased Social Security receipts are counted towards deficit reduction although they ought to remain in the Social Security Trust Fund.

    “The bill also does not address this year’s scheduled 21 percent cut in Medicare reimbursements to doctors; when Congress votes to do this, likely later this year, it will cost over $200 billion over the next 10 years. Also, the CBO score assumes that in later years, the growth in federal subsidies would suddenly be allowed to decline, and that the tax on middle-class insurance plans – which I and many others already oppose – would be expanded. If Congress will not do these things today, why would it do so tomorrow? Taken together, these elements more than wipe out the supposed savings.

    “Finally, of great concern to me and to a significant majority of my constituents, this bill changes current federal policy and provides funding for abortion. This is not acceptable. It is in direct contradiction of the Hyde Amendment, which for more than three decades has prohibited federally funded abortion. First, the bill allows federal funds to subsidize health plans in the insurance exchanges that cover abortion. For any insurance plan that receives federal subsidies and provides abortion, all participants would be required to contribute at least $1 per month that would fund abortion services, regardless of whether they want abortion coverage or not. It also opens the door for Community Health Centers receiving federal funding under the bill to use that money to pay for abortion. I do not believe the last minute effort to address these concerns through an Executive Order is sufficient because there is every indication that federal courts would strike down this order, and the order could be repealed at any time in the future.

    For all of these reasons, I cannot support the health care bill. I am deeply disappointed that Congress did not develop a better bill. But whatever this bill’s fate, I will not stop fighting against special interests and for improvements to our health care system that will benefit all of the residents of the Third District. And in the days, weeks, and months ahead, I will continue working to create jobs and revive our economy.”

    ###

  • Pelosi’s guests for health care votes include Ezekiel Emanuel. Pelosi’s list.

    WASHINGTON–House Speaker Nancy Pelosi invited guests to her box in the House chamber for the historic health care vote Sunday night, including Chicagoan Ezekeiel Emanuel, a White House health policy specialist who is the brother of White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel. The Emanuel brothers were profiled Sunday by Katie Couric on the CBS show “60 Minutes.”

    Pelosi’s list:

    Speaker’s Gallery

    1. Mr. Pelosi

    2. Nancy Corinne Prowda (daughter)

    3. Alexandra Pelosi (daughter)

    4. Michiel Vos (son-in-law)

    5. Gordon Witman, PICO

    6. Richard Kirsch – Health Care for America Now (HCAN)

    7. Robert Hall – American Academy of Pediatrics

    8. Rich Trumpka – AFL-CIO

    9. Dr. Willard Edwards – National Medical Association

    10. Christina Romer – Council of Economic Advisors

    11. Mark Duggan – Council of Economic Advisors

    12. Zeke Emanuel – Senior Advisor for Health Policy, OMB

    13. Jason Furman – National Economic Council Advisor

    14. Nancy Ann DeParle – White House Office of Health Care Reform

  • Bill Clinton zings Rahm Emanuel at the Gridiron dinner

    WASHINGTON–Former President Clinton filled in for President Obama at the Gridiron Club and Foundation annual spring dinner on Saturday night, and he was a hit, with zingers aimed at himself, Obama and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

    “So tell the truth. You guys miss me?” Clinton said at the top of his remarks.

    Emanuel was not at the white tie and evening gown dinner–this weekend marked the Bar Mitzvah of his son–but fellow Chicagoans White House Senior Advisors Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod were at the head table.

    “Look, I know Axelrod from Chicago and Valerie. I know them before Let’s get this straight,” Clinton said.

    “I found Rahm. I created Rahm. I made him the man he is today. I am so sorry,” quipped Clinton.

    Emanuel’s rise to national prominence started when he was a fund-raiser for Clinton’s 1992 presidential campaign and grew when he served in the Clinton White House.

    The club marked its 125th anniversary on Saturday, and, in keeping with tradition featured a show lampooning figures in Congress and the White House performed by club members–I’m one of them–and talented ringers.

    Sen. Claire McCaskill of Missouri spoke for the Democrats and Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah represented Republicans. McCaskill, an early Obama supporter, has had run-ins with Clinton and his wife, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton during the 2008 presidential campaign.

    Zinged Clinton, “Of these senators, you know, one of them has been often a harsh and partisan personal critic of mine and Hillary’s. The other one is a senator from Utah,”

    McCaskill and Hatch, who is a Mormon–you need to know this to get one of McCaskill’s jokes–were willing to be a bit risqué.

    “When I went through security,” Hatch said, “I was asked if I had a bomb in my underwear. Modesty, of course kept me from answering truthfully.” He went on to joke,
    his wife, Elaine, “knows me as the original stimulus package.”

    McCaskill said she gets along so well with Hatch, “had things worked out differently, I could have been one of his wives.” Referring to the Louisana senator caught going to a prostitute, she complained that some senators are so literal, “every time I mention that Missouri is the show me state, I have to tell David Vitter to put his pants back on.”

    President Obama skipped the dinner for the second year; he begged off because at first he was to have been on his Indonesia, Guam and Australia trip. He canceled his overseas travel to work on tallying 216 Democratic votes for health care. Clinton, arriving 48 minutes late, told Gridiron guests that he was tardy because he was on the phone trying to round up votes. Last year Obama preferred a weekend at Camp David to the Gridiron. In past years–before he was president–Obama spoke at one spring and one winter club dinner.

    Clinton–who addressed the crowd while he was in the White House, relished the home coming and so did the audience.

    Referring to his own health problems–and that of former Vice President Cheney–Clinton quipped about the prospects for the Obama White House and Democratic leaders passing the landmark measure, “It may not happen in my lifetime, or Dick Cheney’s but hopefully at least by Easter.”

    Of Vice President Biden, who slogged through a difficult recent trip to Israel on a Mid East peace mission, Clinton said, “Biden, god rest his mouth…trying to explain what happened in the Middle East with the only two words he learned over there. Oy Vey.”

    And Clinton–who has worked on obesity issues for years, paid a compliment to First Lady Michelle, who this years took up childhood obesity as a cause. Said Clinton, “and I think it is wonderful that we have two sets of dramatically different perspectives on this obesity problem. She is young, vibrant, thin and fit and then there is me.”

    In one riff, Clinton joked that Obama razzed him about his not ever winning a Nobel Peace Prize during a phone call. Obama snared one less than a year as president.

    “I said Mr. President, What’s up?”

    “I’m just here in the White House, polishing my Noble Peace Prize.’ He said, ‘You got one of these yet?

    And I said no, no I don’t.

    “No? Well Jimmy’s got one of them.

    “I said, Yes, yes, he does.”

    “Al Gore, he’s got one two, I think…

    “I said yes sir, he sure does; wears it around his neck.”

  • Quigley yes on health care if no abortion compromise

    Below, from Quigley……

    Quigley to vote ‘yes’ on health care provided no compromise on choice

    WASHINGTON – Today, Congressman Mike Quigley (D-IL) issued the following statement in advance of the House vote on health care reform:

    “I was pleased yesterday to hear that the ‘deem and pass’ maneuver was abandoned and that the House will have a fair and transparent up-or-down vote on the Senate health care bill today. My constituents voted for me to have a vote, and it’s only right that I am able to use it on an issue this critical to the American people.

    I was also glad to hear that House leadership refused to entertain any side deal with anti-choice lawmakers in exchange for their support. I made it clear to the leadership of the House that I would not support a bill which included such a deal.

    As for my vote, I understand many would have preferred that I announce my intentions sooner, some perhaps before the final bill text was even released. However, this bill and this process have changed so drastically in the last 24 hours, particularly when it came to the issue of choice, that I could not commit myself to a bill of this importance before knowing what it would contain. Even now, hours before the final vote, there is a chance for a last-minute amendment that could compromise women’s health care.

    In the end, I have always been committed to reforming the status quo to bring health care access to the 69,500 people in Illinois’ Fifth District who currently do not have it and improve it for the half-million who do, but not at the expense of a woman’s ability to choose. Unless there is a last-minute change to the bill that compromises this right, I plan to vote ‘yes.’

    No one can claim that this bill is perfect. It is rather a historic place to start from which we will review, refine, and most importantly, help millions of American families for the first time in generations. We are on the brink of history, and it is honor to be a part of it.”

    ###

  • Obama issues executive order on abortion hoping to break health bill deadlock. Text.

    Below, from the White House…

    THE WHITE HOUSE

    Office of the Press Secretary
    _____________________________________________________________________________
    For Immediate Release March 21, 2010

    STATEMENT FROM COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR DAN PFEIFFER

    Today, the President announced that he will be issuing an executive order after the passage of the health insurance reform law that will reaffirm its consistency with longstanding restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortion.

    While the legislation as written maintains current law, the executive order provides additional safeguards to ensure that the status quo is upheld and enforced, and that the health care legislation’s restrictions against the public funding of abortions cannot be circumvented.

    The President has said from the start that this health insurance reform should not be the forum to upset longstanding precedent. The health care legislation and this executive order are consistent with this principle.

    The President is grateful for the tireless efforts of leaders on both sides of this issue to craft a consensus approach that allows the bill to move forward.

    A text of the pending executive order follows:

    THE WHITE HOUSE

    Office of the Press Secretary
    _____________________________________________________________________________
    For Immediate Release March 21, 2010

    STATEMENT FROM COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR DAN PFEIFFER

    Today, the President announced that he will be issuing an executive order after the passage of the health insurance reform law that will reaffirm its consistency with longstanding restrictions on the use of federal funds for abortion.

    While the legislation as written maintains current law, the executive order provides additional safeguards to ensure that the status quo is upheld and enforced, and that the health care legislation’s restrictions against the public funding of abortions cannot be circumvented.

    The President has said from the start that this health insurance reform should not be the forum to upset longstanding precedent. The health care legislation and this executive order are consistent with this principle.

    The President is grateful for the tireless efforts of leaders on both sides of this issue to craft a consensus approach that allows the bill to move forward.

    A text of the pending executive order follows:

    EXECUTIVE ORDER

    – – – – – – –

    ENSURING ENFORCEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF ABORTION RESTRICTIONS IN THE PATIENT PROTECTION AND AFFORDABLE CARE ACT

    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” (approved March __, 2010), I hereby order as follows:

    Section 1. Policy.
    Following the recent passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“the Act”), it is necessary to establish an adequate enforcement mechanism to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), consistent with a longstanding Federal statutory restriction that is commonly known as the Hyde Amendment. The purpose of this Executive Order is to establish a comprehensive, government-wide set of policies and procedures to achieve this goal and to make certain that all relevant actors–Federal officials, state officials (including insurance regulators) and health care providers–are aware of their responsibilities, new and old.

    The Act maintains current Hyde Amendment restrictions governing abortion policy and extends those restrictions to the newly-created health insurance exchanges. Under the Act, longstanding Federal laws to protect conscience (such as the Church Amendment, 42 U.S.C. §300a-7, and the Weldon Amendment, Pub. L. No. 111-8, §508(d)(1) (2009)) remain intact and new protections prohibit discrimination against health care facilities and health care providers because of an unwillingness to provide, pay for, provide coverage of, or refer for abortions.

    Numerous executive agencies have a role in ensuring that these restrictions are enforced, including the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

    Section 2. Strict Compliance with Prohibitions on Abortion Funding in Health Insurance Exchanges. The Act specifically prohibits the use of tax credits and cost-sharing reduction payments to pay for abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) in the health insurance exchanges that will be operational in 2014. The Act also imposes strict payment and accounting requirements to ensure that Federal funds are not used for abortion services in exchange plans (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered) and requires state health insurance commissioners to ensure that exchange plan funds are segregated by insurance companies in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, OMB funds management circulars, and accounting guidance provided by the Government Accountability Office.

    I hereby direct the Director of OMB and the Secretary of HHS to develop, within 180 days of the date of this Executive Order, a model set of segregation guidelines for state health insurance commissioners to use when determining whether exchange plans are complying with the Act’s segregation requirements, established in Section 1303 of the Act, for enrollees receiving Federal financial assistance. The guidelines shall also offer technical information that states should follow to conduct independent regular audits of insurance companies that participate in the health insurance exchanges. In developing these model guidelines, the Director of OMB and the Secretary of HHS shall consult with executive agencies and offices that have relevant expertise in accounting principles, including, but not limited to, the Department of the Treasury, and with the Government Accountability Office. Upon completion of those model guidelines, the Secretary of HHS should promptly initiate a rulemaking to issue regulations, which will have the force of law, to interpret the Act’s segregation requirements, and shall provide guidance to state health insurance commissioners on how to comply with the model guidelines.

    Section 3. Community Health Center Program.
    The Act establishes a new Community Health Center (CHC) Fund within HHS, which provides additional Federal funds for the community health center program. Existing law prohibits these centers from using federal funds to provide abortion services (except in cases of rape or incest, or when the life of the woman would be endangered), as a result of both the Hyde Amendment and longstanding regulations containing the Hyde language. Under the Act, the Hyde language shall apply to the authorization and appropriations of funds for Community Health Centers under section 10503 and all other relevant provisions. I hereby direct the Secretary of HHS to ensure that program administrators and recipients of Federal funds are aware of and comply with the limitations on abortion services imposed on CHCs by existing law. Such actions should include, but are not limited to, updating Grant Policy Statements that accompany CHC grants and issuing new interpretive rules.

    Section 4. General Provisions.
    (a) Nothing in this Executive Order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect: (i) authority granted by law or presidential directive to an agency, or the head thereof; or (ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
    (b) This Executive Order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

    (c) This Executive Order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity against the United States, its departments, agencies, entities, officers, employees or agents, or any other person.

    THE WHITE HOUSE,

  • Foster a yes on health care

    below, Foster release…..

    Rep. Foster To Support

    Health Insurance Reform Legislation

    Bill Will Allow Individuals to Keep their Insurance,

    Have Access to the Same Insurance Choices as Members of Congress

    (Washington, DC) – Today, after evaluating the final text of the legislation, Congressman Bill Foster (IL-14) announced that he will vote in favor of the Health Insurance Reform bill, and released the following statement.

    “After thorough consideration, I have decided to support the health insurance reform legislation because it eliminates pre-existing conditions, protects and strengthens Medicare and will significantly reduce the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 20 years. While the Senate bill itself is not perfect, many important improvements have been made so that the overall package is one that I can support.

    This bill will give my constituents freedom from the fear of becoming uninsurable, and freedom to pursue better job opportunities or start a small business without the fear of losing their insurance. As a former small business owner, I was pleased to see that this bill will allow small businesses to thrive and expand without facing crippling health care costs.

    In the past year I’ve heard from thousands of constituents who have passionately argued in favor of or against the legislation. Though there have been spirited disagreements about the details, almost everyone agrees that our health insurance system is broken. I’ve listened to small business owners who tell me they won’t be able to continue to offer health insurance to their employees if costs continue to rise, and I’ve listened to individuals who have become uninsurable through no fault of their own – like one woman who was denied insurance because her health insurance company cited menopause as her pre-existing condition. I have also made it a priority to carefully read and analyze major pieces of legislation before casting my vote – and to think ahead about what will be best for our country 10, 20 and 50 years from now.

    I want to make sure my constituents understand that I have heard their calls, read their emails and letters, seen their faxes, and I have weighed the concerns of those opposed and those in favor. In the last 72 hours, I also consulted with experts like Illinois Insurance Commissioner Michael McRaith, who confirmed the positive impact that this legislation will have on Illinois businesses and consumers. I ran for Congress to find workable solutions to the problems facing the families of the 14th District, and by controlling costs and eliminating pre-existing conditions as a barrier to health care, I have kept that promise.

    I am pleased that this bill is endorsed by the AARP, the American Medical Association, the Mayo Clinic and dozens of other organizations. It was also important to my decision that the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office determined that the legislation will cut the federal deficit by $1.3 trillion over 20 years, and will increase the solvency of Medicare by nine years.

    While I realize this has been a stressful exercise for our country’s democracy, I believe that voices on both sides are to be thanked for actively participating in that democracy. Whether my vote today was one you support or oppose, I have listened to and balanced your concerns and believe that now, we must go forward together, Republicans and Democrats alike, and do everything possible to continue restoring our nation’s economy so that everyone needing work can find it.”

    ###

  • Dan Lipinski–a diabetic–getting more scrutiny over opposition to health care bill

    Updated…
    (please note: You’ll notice I struck the portions where I wrote earlier that Lipinski would be eligible to buy health coverage for his lifetime after serving a stint as a congressman. Lipinski spokesman Nathaniel Zimmer said that would only kick in at his retirement. I am not certain, but debate is going on now on the health care bill and I am in the House press gallery working on Monday’s column, so it is difficult to sort this out now. The central point is the same: Lipinski got insurance when he came to Congess, even with a pre-existing condition.)

    WASHINGTON–With the House Sunday health care vote a cliffhanger–Democratic leaders are close to the 216 needed for passage–holdout Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.)–a diabetic–over the weekend became a special focus of Democratic leaders.

    I’m told that Democratic leaders in Washington and Illinois are “confounded” by Lipinski’s opposition to the bill because he is a diabetic who would find it tough–maybe impossible–to find insurance coverage if he were not in Congress.

    Lipinski, a strong anti-abortion lawmaker, has said he will vote no on the bill unless stricter bans are in place to ensure no federal money is channeled to clinics providing abortions or to insurance plans offering abortions. He has other issues with the legislation, but abortion is the major one.

    As of mid-day Sunday, President Obama’s team is weighing issuing a executive order to assure the anti-abortion holdouts, led by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) that the Hyde amendment (named for the late Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) banning any federal money for abortion would apply to anything new created in the bill–whether it be clinics or insurance coverage. Stupak has said no final deal has been reached. A group of abortion rights lawmakers were meeting with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to go over the executive order proposal.

    People remember that former Rep. Bill Lipinski (D-Ill.) used political trickery to line-up his Third Congressional District seat for Dan Lipinski, who returned to Illinois from Tennessee to get to Congress through a rigged 2004 nomination. At the time, the scuttlebutt was Bill Lipinski wanted his son in the seat long enough in order to have him vested enrolled in the congressional insurance coverage plan for life. Other well connected Southwest Siders stood down at the time to help out Dan Lipinski.

    With his expected re-election in November, Lipinski becomes vested in a plan that will give him lifetime coverage.
    “It’s kind if stunning that he would deprive millions of Americans with pre-existing conditions the same security he is given as a member of Congress,” a vote counter close to the situation told me. “That is exactly the kind of thing that enrages folks who are out there struggling.”

    Lipinski’s concerns over abortion and other aspects of the bill trump provisions in it that would help people with diabetes. The bill would ban insurance companies from denying people coverage because of pre-existing conditions.

    In 2007, Lipinski said, “As a juvenile diabetic, I have a special understanding of how critical it is to have health insurance and access to health care. I will continue to work to provide health insurance to the most vulnerable Americans, our children.”

    In 2004, after Lipinski was anointed the heir to his father’s seat, he told the Chicago Sun-Times Abdon Pallasch that as a diabetic who takes multiple insulin injections a day, he wants “health care more available and more affordable.”

    I’m hearing that Democrats in Washington and Illinois and the labor community are so infuriated with Lipinski that they may start early lining up a 2012 Democratic primary challenger. Lipinski is immune from a primary challenge now because the Illinois primary–the first in the nation–was Feb. 2. His November re-election is assured because he comes from a safe Democratic district. But a no vote on Sunday could cause Lipinski two years of aggravation.

    Since Monday, the President had at least 64 meetings or phone calls with Members of Congress on health insurance reform. I hear Lipinski is one of them.

    I put calls e-mails into Lipinski and his spokesman to ask about whether an executive order would remedy his objections. And I want to ask how his own diabetic condition–and his ability to get health insurance– is balanced against his opposition to abortion. I will update later with developments.

  • Quigley, Lipinski health care bill holdouts over abortion

    Rep. Dan Lipinski wants stricter anti-abortion language in bill; abortion rights Rep. Mike Quigley, his fellow Illinois Democrat, wants no deal with opponents

    WASHINGTON — Over the weekend, President Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi were still scrambling to lock in 216 votes for their health-care bill, with a small group of Democrats — whose support could be crucial — holding out for stronger anti-abortion provisions.

    Two Chicago Democrats, Rep. Dan Lipinski and Rep. Mike Quigley, are a microcosm of the dilemma for the Obama White House and Democratic House leaders as they head to a Sunday showdown vote.

    The anti-abortion Lipinski won’t vote for the measure as it stands. He told me stricter bans are needed to ensure no federal money is channeled to clinics providing abortions or to insurance plans offering abortions. While some Catholic groups have signed on to the Obama plan, the nation’s bishops have not.

    Lipinski said he looks to the bishops for guidance, not other groups not an official part of the church. “The Catholic church says this is not acceptable, there are Catholics who believe otherwise,” Lipinski told me.

    And in a surprise to Democratic vote-counters, Quigley, an abortion-rights supporter, said Friday night Obama can’t count on his support if a deal is made with the anti-abortion bloc to get to 216. Moreover, Quigley wants to strip out anti-abortion language already in the legislation.

    “I don’t feel pressured. I feel pressure to do the right thing,” Quigley told me.

    Quigley spent some of Friday taking fire from the Service Employees International Union and talking to White House senior adviser David Axelrod.

    “Ax is not a heavy whipper,” said Quigley. “We talked, and we are going to talk again tomorrow. I expressed my concerns about the choice issue.”

    Last week, I didn’t include Quigley in a list of uncommitted Illinois Democrats because I thought — as did the Obama White House and House leaders — that Quigley, elected last year to replace Rahm Emanuel when he became Obama’s chief of staff, was a yes.

    As Pelosi’s march to 216 became more difficult with the pool of uncommitted Democrats shrinking, the prospect of a deal with the anti-abortion bloc loomed. Abortion-rights forces do not want their support to be taken for granted.

    Quigley said “people slowly started to believe me when I said I was undecided.”

    Quigley and Lipinski have problems with other parts of the bill, but the abortion issue is the most intractable. I think in the end, Quigley will be a yes.

    Lipinski is another case. Lipinski told me he thinks he will pay no consequential price for a no vote on legislation Obama is staking his legacy on. “I don’t think this will have a significant impact on my career,” Lipinski said.

    If he was looking to move up in leadership, a no vote could be problematic. “I don’t aspire to leadership,” he told me. He’s not looking for better committee assignments. The primary was Feb. 2, so Lipinski is immune from a challenge. And he can’t be messed with in the upcoming congressional district redistricting as long as ally House Speaker Micheal J. Madigan (D-Chicago) is in charge.

    Dan Lipinski has been most influenced by a vote made by his father, former Rep. William Lipinski (D-Ill.), in 1993, against former President Bill Clinton’s deficit-reduction package — a must win, back then, for Clinton. The senior Lipinski was the only Illinois Democrat and one of 38 Democrats in Congress to say no to Clinton and he wasn’t punished and his son pointed out to me he went on to serve another decade on Congress with no punishment. Said Lipinski of his fathers’s no vote back then, “I think it served him well.”

  • Halvorson, Bean move to yes on health bill

    below, statements……

    BEAN SUPPORTS FINAL PASSAGE OF HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM

    Congresswoman Melissa Bean (IL-08) announced her support for final passage of the health insurance reform legislation moving through Congress and released the following statement:

    “In the years since I came to Congress, I’ve heard from thousands of families and small businesses across the 8th District, whose stories illustrated their concerns with rising health care costs and the need for reform. This bill will provide them with the health care security, affordability and choice they seek, while yielding an historic federal deficit reduction of $1.3 trillion.

    “This legislation addresses the key concerns of those families and small businesses. For families who have insurance, this bill provides health care security by prohibiting insurance companies from denying coverage based on pre-existing conditions, dropping coverage when families need it most, or instituting lifetime caps that drive Americans to bankruptcy. For small business owners and employees, who currently pay more than those at large firms for the same benefits, this bill allows them to pool together to access lower rates and a wider choice of insurance plans. For seniors, the bill protects and extends the Medicare system they rely on, and preserves and expands benefits while reducing drug costs in the ‘donut hole.’ And for 31,500 Americans without insurance in the 8th District, this bill finally provides access to affordable coverage choices.

    “As a fiscal conservative, it was important to me that this legislation benefit not just our physical health, but also our fiscal health. The final legislation approved today delivers the most significant deficit reduction in more than a decade, cutting our federal deficit by $1.3 trillion over 20 years, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. Experts, including those at the Mayo Clinic, expect that the bill’s significant reforms to Medicare and its transition to a value-based payment system are likely to yield significant additional cost reductions for both government and the private sector.”

    -30-

    Halvorson Will Vote for Health Insurance Reform Bill

    Landmark health insurance reform bill will hold insurance companies accountable,
    lower costs, provide Americans the same insurance choices as Members of Congress

    WASHINGTON, DC – Citing the stories of Illinois families unable to keep up with rising insurance costs or access coverage because of pre-existing conditions, Rep. Debbie Halvorson announced her intention to vote for health insurance reform.

    “Every day I hear from people in our district who are hurting because of the health insurance industry and rising premiums. Recently, a Joliet resident from my district, Paul Cabay, wrote me about the construction small business he started three years ago. He said his insurance plan is draining his family’s income by the month. ‘My wife and I both work, we have through high school and college. We have to wonder if we are going to be financially stable in the future because of health care.’ Paul wrote. Because of rising costs, Paul says he is “on the verge of having to close a successful small business”.

    “He is not alone in his experience. So many of the small businesses and entrepreneurs we need to grow our economy and create jobs are struggling because of health insurance costs that are growing unsustainably.

    “Stories like Paul’s, as well as from seniors who can’t afford their prescriptions and working families denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions are the reason we need health reform. Recently, we’ve seen insurance premiums for individuals in Illinois rise by as much as 60 percent. Every day, more small businesses are priced out of offering insurance to their employees because premiums have gone up nearly 130% over the last ten years. It’s clear we must act now.

    “The choice is to be on the side of reform, or on the side of a status quo that makes insurance company CEOs rich while families suffer. After reading the legislation and listening to my constituents, I’ve decided to stand with my constituents to be on the side of health insurance reform.

    “We’re going to make sure Americans can access the same health insurance choices as members of Congress, and we’re going to lower costs for families and small businesses. Health insurance reform will reduce the deficit by over $130 billion over the first ten years, and by even more in the next decade. This bill holds health insurance companies accountable by forcing them to cover people with pre-existing conditions, stops them from dropping people’s coverage when they get sick. It will bring more choice and competition to health insurance by allowing states to band together so insurance can be sold across state lines, lower prescription drug costs, and allow small businesses to pool together for lower premiums through private insurers. I believe this reform is necessary and long overdue.”

    Provisions that will immediately help Americans this year include:

    · Small businesses can access tax credits to purchase affordable coverage.
    · Pre-existing condition denials are prohibited for all children in all new plans
    · Access to affordable insurance for Americans with pre-existing conditions
    · Insurance companies prohibited from dropping people when they get sick
    · Insurance companies prohibited from having lifetime limits on benefits on all plans
    · $250 in relief for seniors who are in the Medicare prescription drug donut hole

    ###

  • President Obama official schedule and guidance, March 20, 2010. House Democrats health bill pushh

    THE WHITE HOUSE
    Office of the Press Secretary
    _______________________________________________________________________________________
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    March 19, 2010

    WEEKEND GUIDANCE AND PRESS SCHEDULE FOR
    SATURDAY, MARCH 20 AND SUNDAY, MARCH 21, 2010

    On Saturday afternoon, the President will meet with members of the House Democratic Caucus at the Capitol Visitor Center Auditorium. The meeting is pooled press.

    The President has no scheduled public events on Sunday.

    Saturday’s In-Town Travel Pool
    Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
    Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
    TV Corr & Crew: FOX
    Print: Washington Examiner
    Radio: FOX

    Sunday’s In-Town Travel Pool
    Wires: AP, Reuters, Bloomberg
    Wire Photos: AP, Reuters, AFP
    TV Corr & Crew: NBC
    Print: Washington Post
    Radio: NPR

    Saturday, March 20, 2010

    EDT

    11:00AM Pool Call Time

    3:05PM THE PRESIDENT meets with members of the House Democratic Caucus
    Capitol Visitor Center Auditorium
    Pooled Press (Gather Time 2:35PM – North Doors of the Palm Room)

    Sunday, March 21, 2010

    EDT

    11:00AM Pool Call Time

    ##