Lieberman Could Vote "Yes" on Health Care Bill

Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman says he is moving in the direction of voting "yes" for the Senate's version for the health care bill, as long as the public option and Medicare buy-in are left out. The independent Senator's vote is important because his is one of the last of the 60 votes needed to pass the bill in the Senate, as no Republicans are voting for it. Lieberman says that he has wanted health care reform all along, but that he isn't willing to risk a government takeover of the system and raising taxes by voting in favor of a public option. Read more at http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/15/lieberman-moving-towards-a-yes-vote/ All this comes on the same day that President Obama claimed that the Senate was "on the precipice" of passing the health care reform bill. It's hard to believe that this bill is actually close to being passed. It sure would be a tragedy if at the last minute something stopped it from going through. Lieberman has that kind of power, and his vote is enormously important. No pressure Joe.

Pelosi Willing to Consider Health Care Bill Without Public Option

After Senate Democrats reached a tentative agreement earlier this week to drop the public option from the Health Care Bill (see my Tuesday post), Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said today that she would be willing to support a bill without the public option as long as that's what the consensus was. After the House passed its version of the Health Care Bill last month (that includes the public option), the bill has stalled in the Senate, where it's unlikely to get enough votes to pass if the public option is included. This is a result of the opposition of Republicans and moderate Democrats, who fear a government take-over of the health care system. Pelosi said that at the moment, the Senate and House bills are 75 percent compatible. Read more at http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/10/health.care/index.html. This development doesn't surprise me, as American politics is set up so that moderation reigns supreme. Whenever the two parties disagree on something, they are forced to move to the middle if anything is to get passed, which is exactly what the Democrats and Republicans are doing now. Hooray for compromise!

Obama to Accept Nobel Prize Tomorrow

President Obama will spend 26 hours in Norway tomorrow and Friday to accept the Nobel Peace Prize. He plans to meet and have dinner with Norway's royal family before heading off to the award ceremony to receive his medal and the 1.4 million dollar check that goes with it. Some see his selection for this prestigious award as controversial, as nominations ended only 12 days after Obama took office last February, but there's no doubt that he has captured the world's attention, broke one of the last barriers for African Americans, and been an inspiration to many throughout the world. Some experts say that his recognition will give him more clout and increase his influence in the health care debate. I can see this happening, as such a prestigious recognition has to count for something. I'm glad his visit will be short though, as he has important business to attend to back home with the health care debate and the war in Afghanistan.

Harry Reid: Senate Democrats Reach Agreement on Public Option

Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) said today that liberal and moderate Senate Democrats have reached a "broad agreement" in terms of the health care bill's controversial public option. Sources say that the agreement contains proposals to replace the public option with a nonprofit "private option." Liberal Democrats such as Wisconsin's Russ Feingold dispute Reid's statement, and claim to be unwilling to compromise on the public option. But replacing the public option with a private option could potentially sway the votes of two Senators, Joe Lieberman (I-Connecticut) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who are against the public option but are willing to compromise. All this public vs. private option doesn't make sense to me, maybe because I don't know that much about insurance. But I have to doubt that the Senate has actually reached a consensus, seeing how most everything these days is gridlocked. Maybe Reid is just saying these things to boost the morale of the American people. Find more information at http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/08/health.care/index.html.

Unregistered Couple Recieve Entry Into White House State Dinner

Last week at President Obama's first state dinner, and couple whose names were not on the guest list were allowed into the exclusive event. Virginians Tareq and Michaele Salahi were told they could attend the dinner and were let in by White House security guards even though they were not on the guest list. The Secret Service announced in a House committee that the admittance was a mistake and that "appropriate procedures were not followed." Mark Sullivan testified at a Homeland Security Committee hearing for the investigation into the mistake and said that "established procedures and protocols were not followed" and that the breech in security was "unacceptable and indefensible." Read more at http://www.cnn.com/2009/12/03/secret-service-headsays-agency-erred-when-couple-attended-white-house-dinner/. This seems like an inexcusable mistake, but luckily the couple had good intentions, as they wanted to honor India's prime minister. I'm sure the White House security staff won't make the same mistake again.

Officeholders From Both Parties Question Obama's Afghanistan Strategy

Lawmakers on both sides of the political spectrum were questioning Obama's plan with regard to the conflict in Afghanistan a day after his speech, although for different reasons. Republicans are concerned that President Obama set an arbitrary deadline for initial withdrawal of U.S. troops (July, 2011) and that this date should depend more on the conditions in Afghanistan than on what the president says now. Additionally, some Republican legislators, such as Florida's Connie Mack, claim that announcing the U.S.'s planned withdrawal strategy only strengthens the Al Qaeda and Taliban extremist groups' resolve. Democrats on the other hand are concerned that the war may not be winnable and are against sending more troops to Afghanistan. If you are information-hungry, eat up at http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/02/obama.afghanistan/index.html. From all this opposition, it's clear Obama faces a rocky road ahead of him with regard to his foreign policy. But remember kids, don't criticize our president too much, he is a human being and he has feelings just like all of us.

Obama's Afghanistan Strategy: More Troops Now, Withdraw in 2011

On Tuesday evening President Obama spoke at the United States Military Academy about his strategy for the conflict in Afghanistan. Among his major points were that he plans to deploy 30,000 additional troops starting in January and that he hopes the U.S. can start withdrawing troops by July, 2011. This depends, however, on the situation in Afghanistan at that time, as there will be no withdrawal if conditions have not improved from their present state. In his speech Obama also said that U.S. forces will be assisted by NATO troops and that he most of the U.S. troops can be withdrawn by the end of his first term (January, 2013). More information can be found at http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/01/obama.afghanistan/index/html. I doubt that we will be able to withdraw these troops as early as Obama suggests, as January 2010 to July 2011 doesn't seem like enough time for the Afghans to begin managing their own situation. I guess only time will tell.