HEALTH CARE REFORM PACKAGE PASSES HOUSE

The House passed its health care overhaul package late Sunday, clearing a bill for presidential signature that will expand coverage to an estimated 32 million Americans, as well as passing a separate measure making significant changes to that bill. 

For a summary of the reconciliation bill, click here.

President Obama applauded the action and praised Democrats for taking what he acknowledged was a tough vote for some. “This is what change looks like,” said Obama a short time after in televised remarks from the East Room of the White House.

The two measures were pushed forward without the help of a single Republican. By 219-212, the House first cleared the Senate-passed health bill HR 3590 for Obama’s promised signature. Thirty-four Democrats joined all 178 Republicans in opposing the Senate bill.

Republicans then attempted unsuccessfully to shelve the reconciliation measure. The House defeated, 232-199, the GOP motion to send that bill HR 4872 back to the Budget Committee to add tougher language on abortion funding that was part of a House-passed health bill HR 3962. Twenty-one Democrats voted with the GOP.

Democrats then turned to the reconciliation bill that reflects deals reached by Congressional Democrats and the White House to modify the version earlier passed by the Senate, passing it on a vote of 220-211. Thirty-three Democrats joined Republicans in opposition.

The Senate is expected to take up the bill as early as Tuesday under special budget reconciliation rules that will shield it from filibusters, but not from a blizzard of GOP-sponsored amendments.

For House Democrats, the vote to send Obama the Senate-passed health care bill was a painful one. The legislation offers less generous subsidies than they wanted to help individuals buy health insurance and contains a number of special provisions that critics have assailed as "sweetheart deals" designed to buy off votes in the Senate the first time around.

Republicans said they will continue to accuse everyone who voted for the bill of supporting the “Cornhusker Kickback,” the “Louisiana Purchase,” “Gator Aid” and similar provisions that offer some states more Medicaid payments than others. The reconciliation bill would strip some but not all of those provisions.

But once Democrats discovered there was no way to vote on the reconciliation bill ahead of the Senate-passed measure, they accepted the risks and cast their votes.

EXECUTIVE ORDER HELPS PASS HEALTH CARE

A last-minute compromise that swung a half-dozen anti-abortion Democrats behind President Obama's health care bill - virtually ensuring its passage - failed to placate outside activists on either side of the issue, and drew derision from Republicans.

Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI), leader of the anti-abortion bloc, said he was satisfied with an executive order issued by Obama affirming prohibitions in current law and in the health legislation against taxpayer money going to abortions.

"Make no doubt about it. There will be no public funds for abortion," Stupak said in announcing the agreement Sunday ahead of a vote on the landmark health care bill.

The National Right to Life Committee quickly issued a scathing statement disputing Stupak's claim.

"The executive order promised by President Obama was issued for political effect. It changes nothing," the group said. "It does not correct any of the serious pro-abortion provisions in the bill."

The bill tries to maintain a strict separation between taxpayer funds and private premiums that would pay for abortion coverage. No health plan would be required to offer coverage for the procedure. In plans that do cover abortion, beneficiaries would have to pay for it separately, and those funds would have to be kept in a separate account from taxpayer money.

Moreover, individual states would be able to prohibit abortion coverage in plans offered through a new purchasing exchange. Exceptions would be made for cases of rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother.

Abortion foes contend that the separation of funds is an accounting gimmick, and in reality taxpayers would be paying for abortion because health plans that cover abortion would be getting federal money.

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO) an abortion-rights supporter, said she thinks current law and the language in the health care bill go too far in restricting access to abortion. But DeGette said she doesn't have a problem with the executive order because "it doesn't change anything."

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH), dismissed the executive order and said, "Make no mistake, a 'yes' vote on the Democrats' health care bill is a vote for taxpayer-funded abortions."

Stupak said he would have preferred to change the law itself, as sought by the bishops and others, but that it wasn't possible because the votes weren't there in the Senate."  We cannot get more than 45 pro-life votes in the Senate. The bishops are right, statutory law is better than an executive order. We can't get there," Stupak said. "So what do you have, nothing? Or do you want the same executive order that has the force of law? I'll take the executive order."

Last week Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced that there would be no reform this year of the 1872 law governing hard rock mining.  The Nevada Democrat told Elko’s Daily Free Press that he sees a need for reform, but the congressional calendar won't permit it.

"We're just overloaded. We won't have time to get to this," he said. "The mining companies want it, and I want it, but based on the schedule of the Senate, it won't make it this year."

Reid's pronouncement is likely a fatal setback for several mining reform bills. One of those measures, S. 796, from Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), would authorize the Interior Department to establish a royalty of between 2 and 5 percent on new mining operations and charge a new abandoned-mine fee for hard rock operations.

In the House, Natural Resources Chairman Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) is sponsoring a bill, H.R. 699, that calls for a 4 percent gross royalty on minerals taken from existing mining operations and an 8 percent gross royalty on new ones.

Mining for minerals such as copper, uranium and gold remains largely regulated by the 1872 law, which doesn't charge a royalty on extracted minerals or include a mechanism for funding the cleanup of hundreds of abandoned hard rock sites.

"Everyone seems to agree that the Mining Law Act of 1872 is an antique in need of an update," said Bill Wicker, a spokesman for Bingaman. "I think most folks also share Senator Reid's outlook that these changes are not going to happen this year. [He] has acknowledged the reality of a crowded election-year calendar.”

With this session ruled out, reform advocates are looking ahead to the 112th Congress.

ANOTHER SHORT-TERM EXTENSION ON UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS

The House passed a short-term extension of expanded unemployment benefits, health insurance subsidies for the jobless and other government programs Wednesday, some of which are set to expire at the end of the month.

The bill HR 4851, passed by voice vote, would extend the programs through the end of April, and would give lawmakers more time to enact a longer-term extension package HR 4213 that is ready for a House-Senate conference committee.