Steve Benen in the Washington Monthly has the basics on the intensely partisan politics of the reconciliation process.
Update: Benen adds to the post above, via NBC’s Chuck Todd. Health care reform has already passed the Senate with 60 votes; reconciliation is about a few budget-related amendments. Anyone ignoring that fact is missing the major part of the story.
Paul Krugman and David Brooks on the same topic on the same day – and not in anywhere near as much disagreement as the two sides at Blair House yesterday. They only disagree where it matters most.
Krugman, without even visibly holding his nose, is unwilling to let the perfect be the enemy of the merely okay, and says the Dems should pass this now with 51 (agreeing with Bob Reich just below) .
Brooks concludes, and seems to believe: “Health care reform probably will not get passed this year. But there were moments, at the most wonky and specific, when the two sides echoed each other. Glimmers of hope for the next set of reformers.”
For the 45 million or so Americans without health care insurance and the future of the American political process, I sincerely hope the engagingly thoughtful Mr. Brooks is dead wrong.
Bob Reich at the Talking Points Memo Cafe rounds up the five basic arguments for reconciliation and concludes: Do it now and do it fast.
Jason Schwartz at Seeking Alpha returns to his iPad enthusiasms – again. Nut graf:
So what is the opening weekend of iPad sales going to be like? Before we answer that question let me tell you what the iPad really is. It’s the first device ever built to use the internet they way it was meant to be used. It’s like taking the top off of your sports car for the first time and being able to enjoy the majestic mountain vistas of a drive through the canyon. Until now, we’ve been squinting out the back window of Grandma’s 1987 minivan (the laptop). The mobile internet is ready for it’s own device. This is it.
In a single story, Kaiser Health News summarizes and links to initial coverage of the Blair House HCR summit by the Washington Post, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, NPR, Poliltico and ABC News.
The takeaway from the event seems to be that the Democratic Congressional leadership will double down on the Obama/Senate bill via the reconciliation route without the public option.
Tom Ashbrook of NPR’s On Point interviewed Nathaniel Frank of UC Santa Barbara’s Palm Center today about his study of the 25 nations with gay service members serving successfully.
Frank is the lead author of the research report, “Gays in Foreign Militaries 2010: A Global Primer” (pdf), which concludes that integrating gay soldiers into the military can be done without disruption and much more quickly than the Pentagon is planning. Countries in the study include Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Israel, Norway, South Africa and Sweden.
Elizabeth Bumiller’s NY Times Feb. 21 report on the study is here. In it, she writes:
The report concludes that in foreign militaries, openly gay service members did not undermine morale, cause large resignations or mass “comings out.” The report found that “there were no instances of increased harassment” as a result of lifting bans in any of the countries studied.
In addition, the report says that none of the countries studied installed separate facilities for gay troops, and that benefits for gay partners were generally in accordance with a country’s existing benefits for gay and lesbian couples.
On implementation, the study said that most countries made the change swiftly, within a matter of months and with what it termed little disruption to the armed services. Mr. Frank said the study did not look at what happened if the change was implemented gradually because, he said, “I don’t think any of the militaries tried it.”
A fascinating New Yorker profile by Larissa MacFarquhar.
Matthew Yglesias notes that The Economist is guilty of execrable reporting of late.
Economist: If Only Obama Had Done Things He’s Actually Done, Things Might Be Different
… turns out to be a web site. The Atlantic’s Jim Fallows mentioned it in a brief post today. I’d never heard of it before. Not sure I’ll make much use of it, but it does seem designed to respond to folks who forward annoying urban legends. I can ignore the email, send them the appropriate Snopes URL… and now there’s a third alternative.
Fast Company produces its list of the 10 most innovative media companies. I haven’t heard of some of them and I’d quibble about one or two, but NPR and ProPublica certainly belong there. Expand it to a dozen and add Talking Points Memo and Inside Higher Ed, say I.
Bali Arts 