GOP prepares for floor fight as lawmakers pore over legislative language

WASHINGTON - House Democratic leaders late Friday were exploring the possibility of a deal with abortion opponents that would clinch the final votes to pass major health care legislation, but they faced stiff resistance from lawmakers who support abortion rights.

It was not immediately clear if the bill could win approval without some concessions to Democrats seeking tighter abortion restrictions.

In similar late-hour wrangling in November, Representative Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan, succeeded in winning approval of tight limits on insurance coverage of abortions in the House health care bill.

Mr. Stupak has said he would oppose the current measure without similar limits. Other Democratic opponents of abortion have said they are satisfied with the language in the Senate bill that bans the use of federal money to pay for coverage of the procedure, and they have pledged support for the package, expected to come to a decisive vote in the House on Sunday.

Mr. Stupak introduced a resolution on Friday that would add tougher abortion restrictions to the bill after it is approved but before it is sent to the president — a technique typically used to make minor or technical changes with the consent of both chambers, an unlikely prospect.

“We don’t want another vote on abortion,” said Representative Diana DeGette, Democrat of Colorado and a champion of abortion rights, as she left a meeting Friday evening in the office of Speaker Nancy Pelosi. “We are not going to vote for a bill that restricts women’s right to choose beyond current law.”

Medicare dispute
The abortion issue was just one complication that Democratic leaders wrestled with on Friday. A dispute over Medicare payments rates also flared as rank-and-file lawmakers pored over the detailed legislative language released Thursday, and a handful of lawmakers said their states would be shortchanged by new provisions.

Still, Ms. Pelosi expressed confidence that the issues would be resolved. “When we bring the bill to the floor,” she said, “we will have a significant victory for the American people.”

Several previously uncommitted House Democrats announced Friday that they would support the bill. They included four who had opposed the legislation in the fall: Representatives John Boccieri of Ohio, Allen Boyd and Suzanne M. Kosmas of Florida and Scott Murphy of New York.

Republicans, meanwhile, readied for a ferocious floor fight. The House Republican leader, Representative John A. Boehner of Ohio, said he would demand that lawmakers call out their votes one by one in the chamber. Other Republicans said they would unleash every procedural weapon available to stop the bill.

The disputes over abortion and Medicare rates were among several fast-moving developments as the Democrats pressed toward a vote.

‘Something historic’
President Obama, making a quick trip to northern Virginia, rallied a crowd of 8,500 supporters at George Mason University. The White House also said he would meet with the House Democratic Caucus at the Capitol on Saturday afternoon.

“We are at the point where we are going to do something historic this weekend,” Mr. Obama told the cheering throng.

He continued: “Teddy Roosevelt, Republican, was the first to advocate that everybody get health care in this country. Every decade since, we’ve had presidents, Republicans and Democrats, from Harry Truman to Richard Nixon to J.F.K. to Lyndon Johnson to —” he paused, continuing, “Every single president has said we need to fix this system.”

The argument over geographic disparities in Medicare payments has percolated throughout the yearlong health care debate.

Representative Peter A. DeFazio, Democrat of Oregon, who voted in favor of the legislation in November, warned Friday that he would oppose the current bill unless it increased Medicare payments to states like his that provide high-quality care at relatively low cost. “It does not cost three times as much to do an appendectomy in Miami as it does in Portland,” Mr. DeFazio said. “This has to be fixed.”

Ms. Pelosi acknowledged the concerns at a news conference on Friday morning, and said party leaders would work to address them. Lawmakers from Iowa, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington and Wisconsin have been meeting with her to reach an accord.

The growing rancor in the health care debate was illustrated by an extraordinary exchange on the House floor on Friday.

Representative Jason Chaffetz, a freshman Republican from Utah, raised the possibility that some lawmakers were “trading votes for jobs.” He cited a report that Representative Bart Gordon, Democrat of Tennessee, had been promised a job as NASA administrator and that another Tennessee Democrat, Representative John Tanner, wanted an appointment as ambassador to NATO in exchange for his vote.

The two men said the assertions were false.

“That offer was never made, and I would not accept it,” said Mr. Gordon, the chairman of the House Science and Technology Committee, who announced Thursday that he would support the bill.

Secretary of state has proved to be eager team player, deferential defender

President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton have made gestures toward each other’s families.

WASHINGTON - On a snowy Thursday shortly before her weekly meeting with President Obama last month, Hillary Rodham Clinton got a distressing phone call: her husband, Bill Clinton, was in a hospital with chest pains and needed an urgent heart procedure.

Mrs. Clinton kept her appointment with Mr. Obama in the Oval Office, taking her customary seat on the yellow sofa as the two talked about her coming trip to the Persian Gulf, where she planned to turn up the heat on Iran over its nuclear program.

“No one had any idea” that she might have had a personal worry, said a senior White House official who was present. Afterward, Mrs. Clinton raced for a shuttle flight to New York to see her husband.

But the fact that she first spent 45 minutes plotting Iran strategy with the man who beat her in a divisive primary campaign shows just how far Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton have come since the bitter spring of 2008, when he sniped that her foreign-policy credentials consisted of sipping tea with world leaders, and she scoffed that his consisted of living in Indonesia when he was 10.

Sixteen months after Mr. Obama surprised nearly everyone by picking her as secretary of state, the two have again surprised nearly everyone by forging a credible partnership. Mrs. Clinton has proved to be an eager team player, a tireless defender of the administration, ever deferential to Mr. Obama and careful to ensure that her husband, the former president, does not upstage her boss.

‘Sweet’ offer
Mr. Obama has been solicitous of Mrs. Clinton, yielding to her at times in internal debates, even showing signs of adopting some of her more hawkish world views.

They now joke about their “frenemies” status and have made gestures toward each other’s families. When Mr. Obama learned that Chelsea Clinton had become engaged, he turned to Mrs. Clinton and asked, “Does she want a White House wedding?” a senior official recalled. (Mrs. Clinton declined, saying the offer was “sweet” but would be “inappropriate.”) And when Mrs. Clinton traveled to Honolulu in January, she paid tribute to Mr. Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, in a speech she gave while looking over a garden dedicated to Ms. Dunham.

Still, there is none of the deep familiarity or the tight bonds — the round-the-clock, back-channel access — of their predecessors, Condoleezza Rice and George W. Bush, or going further back, James A. Baker and the first President Bush or Henry A. Kissinger and Richard M. Nixon.

“Hillary Clinton is the secretary of state,” said David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official who has written about the shaping of foreign policy. “The question now is whether she becomes a real adviser, and whether he trusts her.”

Mr. Obama has jealously guarded his prerogatives as the architect of American foreign policy, concentrating decision-making on crucial issues like Iran, Iraq and the Middle East in the White House. And Mrs. Clinton has yet to stake a claim to a core foreign-policy issue, the kind of signature role that would allow her nascent partnership with Mr. Obama to become a truly historic alliance.

Of course, they would have to make history first. So far, the administration’s foreign-policy ambitions have been marked more by frustration than fulfillment, from a stubborn Russia and a defiant China to the standoff with Iran over its nuclear program and a deepening conflict with Israel, where Mrs. Clinton has loudly given voice to the president’s dissatisfaction. Mr. Obama’s dominant foreign policy concern — the conflict in Afghanistan and Pakistan — is still a work in progress.

Interviews with more than a dozen senior White House and State Department officials, and friends of Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton, suggest that the president and his top diplomat are still easing into their alliance. Most of those interviewed spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, but their accounts have been matched against those of other participants whenever possible. The officials and associates tell a story of painstaking cultivation and sublimated ambition, seat-of-the-pants diplomacy and ritualized White House meetings (she sips water; he munches an apple).

While their underlings at times grouse about one another — some Clinton supporters call White House officials “The Cardinals” (to suggest that they are too controlling), and some Obama staff members refer to the State Department as “Hillaryland” (the campaign’s leftover name for the enemy camp) — Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton both have compelling reasons to make their relationship work.

‘Very good rapport’
For Mrs. Clinton, a successful stint in Foggy Bottom could add to her luster if she decides on another run for the presidency. For Mr. Obama, keeping Mrs. Clinton satisfied helps ensure that she will not emerge again as a rival, particularly if his current troubles deepen.

“We’ve developed, I think, a very good rapport, really positive back and forth about everything you can imagine,” Mrs. Clinton said in a recent interview in her wood-paneled State Department office. “And we’ve had some interesting and even unusual experiences along the way.”

The White House declined requests for an interview with the president.

In the early days of the administration, aides said, Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton treated each other gingerly, using Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. as an informal go-between.

“Hillary would say to me, ‘How do you think I should present this to the president?’ ” Mr. Biden recalled in an interview. “And I’d say, Whoa, just present it to him. And Barack would say, ‘Does she know what a good job I think she’s doing?’ I’d say, Just tell her.”

Part of this is simply who they are and what they had both come through. Mr. Obama can seem aloof even to close associates, and questions about Mrs. Clinton’s reserved manner prompted Mr. Obama’s memorably dry observation during a debate: “You’re likable enough, Hillary.”

The Afghan president has agreed to let two foreigners join a panel monitoring parliamentary elections in September, reversing an earlier decision.

Last month Mr Karzai signed a decree letting him appoint all five members of the Electoral Complaints Commission.

But he came under fire for what some saw as a bid to control a body which stripped nearly a third of his votes in last year’s fraud-tainted election.

Mr Karzai was declared the eventual victor after his opponent dropped out.

On Saturday, a spokesman said Mr Karzai would now accept some foreigners on the body, because the nation was on a “transitional phase” to democracy.

“The Afghan government has shown its readiness to accept two non-Afghans on the Electoral Complaints Commission and this has been announced to the United Nations,” Waheed Omar said.

The watchdog helped expose massive fraud in last year’s presidential poll, forcing Mr Karzai into a second vote.

But days before the vote in early November, it was scrapped, with officials citing a need to avert further political damage to Afghanistan and a rerun of the Taliban violence that marred the first round.

Mr Karzai’s only rival, Abdullah Abdullah, had earlier pulled out of the run-off, saying that it would not be free or fair.

Correspondents say the commission - which previously had three foreign experts appointed by the United Nations - will play a vital role in this year’s parliamentary poll.

Many now see hothead Washington caricature as as a voice of reason

Rahm Emanuel is officially a Washington caricature. He’s the town’s resident leviathan, a bullying, bruising White House chief of staff who is a prime target for the failings of the Obama administration.

But a contrarian narrative is emerging: Emanuel is a force of political reason within the White House and could have helped the administration avoid its current bind if the president had heeded his advice on some of the most sensitive subjects of the year: health-care reform, jobs and trying alleged terrorists in civilian courts.

It is a view propounded by lawmakers and early supporters of President Obama who are frustrated because they think the administration has gone for the perfect at the expense of the plausible. They believe Emanuel, the town’s leading purveyor of four-letter words, a former Israeli army volunteer and a product of a famously argumentative family, was not aggressive enough in trying to persuade a singularly self-assured president and a coterie of true-believer advisers that “change you can believe in” is best pursued through accomplishments you can pass.

By all accounts, Obama selected Emanuel for his experience in the Clinton White House, his long relationships with the media and Democratic donors, and his well-established — and well-earned — reputation as a political enforcer, all of which neatly counterbalanced Obama’s detached, professorial manner. A president who would need the deft navigation of Congress to pass his ambitious legislation turned to the Illinois congressman and former chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee because he possessed a unique understanding of the legislative mind.

The pairing made sense, but things haven’t worked out as expected. And in the search for what has gone wrong, influential Democrats are — in unusually frank terms — blaming Obama and his closest campaign aides for not listening to Emanuel. And this puts the 50-year-old chief of staff in a very uncomfortable position.

Listening to Emanuel would serve “all our overall goals,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.). “I think that Rahm’s considerable legislative experience translates into advice that the president should heed.”

Instead, Obama went for the historically far-reaching, but more legislatively difficult, achievements that he and his campaign-forged inner circle believe they were sent to Washington to deliver.

‘Gut instincts’ on 9/11 trials
In December 2008, Obama, Emanuel and Republican Sens. John McCain (Ariz.) and Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.) met in Obama’s transition headquarters in Chicago to discuss detainee policy. According to Graham, Obama turned to him at one point and said, ” ‘I’m going to need your help closing Guantanamo Bay. . . . I want you and Rahm to start talking.’ ” They did, and as the discussions progressed, Emanuel grew wary that closing the U.S. military prison in Cuba was possible without opening a slew of other politically sensitive national security problems ” ‘This stuff is like flypaper,’ ” Graham recalled Emanuel saying. ” ‘It will stick to you.’ ”

Graham said Emanuel was well aware that his and any other Republican support for closing Guantanamo Bay hinged on keeping alleged Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed out of civilian court.

According to a person familiar with the conversations, who discussed the confidential deliberation on the condition of anonymity, Emanuel made his case to Obama, articulating the political dangers of a civilian trial to congressional Democrats. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. presented a counterargument rooted in principle, for civilian trials.

David Axelrod, senior adviser to Obama, supported Holder, the source said. The president agreed that letting the Justice Department take the lead was the right thing to do.

“Axelrod has a strong view of the historic character Obama is supposed to be,” said an early Obama supporter who is close to the president and spoke on the condition of anonymity to give a frank assessment of frustration with the White House. The source blamed Obama’s charmed political life for creating a self-confidence and trust in principle that led to an “indifference to doing the small, marginal things a White House could do to mitigate the problems on the Hill. Rahm knows the geography better.”

Emanuel and Axelrod declined to comment for this article.

“During this whole civilian-trial debate, Rahm’s gut instincts knew that taking KSM to New York for civilian trials was going to be a misstep,” Graham said. “He has a better ear for domestic politics on this issue than anybody in the administration, quite frankly.”

With the Justice Department in charge, Emanuel tried to keep tabs on the process through Graham. “He’d say: ‘How’s it going? Did you tell them they were going to lose you?’ And in terms a sailor could understand.”

One administration official close to Emanuel did not dispute that Obama had overruled Emanuel on some key policy issues. “It’s not germane what the discussion was beforehand, what his idea was, because once a decision is made, he puts himself whole-hog behind it,” the official said of Emanuel. “It would be difficult for people to discern what his [original] position was.”

Abortion opponents, fiscal conservatives may scuttle health care overhaul

WASHINGTON - The future of President Obama’s health care overhaul now rests largely with two blocs of swing Democrats in the House of Representatives — abortion opponents and fiscal conservatives — whose indecision signals the difficulties Speaker Nancy Pelosi faces in securing the votes necessary to pass the bill.

With Republicans unified in their opposition, Democrats are drafting plans to try on their own to pass a bill based on one Mr. Obama unveiled before his bipartisan health forum last week. His measure hews closely to the one passed by the Senate in December, but differs markedly from the one passed by the House.

That leaves Ms. Pelosi in the tough spot of trying to keep wavering members of her caucus on board, while persuading some who voted no to switch their votes to yes — all at a time when Democrats are worried about their prospects for re-election.

Representative Dennis Cardoza, Democrat of California, typifies the speaker’s challenge. The husband of a family practice doctor, he is intimately familiar with the failings of the American health care system. His wife “comes home every night,” he said, “angry and frustrated at insurance companies denying people coverage they have paid for.”

‘I think we can do better’
But as a member of the centrist Blue Dog Coalition, Mr. Cardoza is not convinced that Mr. Obama’s bill offers the right prescription. It lacks anti-abortion language he favors, and he does not think it goes far enough in cutting costs. So while he voted for the House version — “with serious reservations,” he said — he is now on the fence.

“I think we can do better,” Mr. Cardoza said of the president’s proposal.

Representative Frank Kratovil Jr., Democrat of Maryland, is also unconvinced. He voted against the House bill on the grounds that it is too big and too costly — a view that some constituents in his Republican-leaning district share. In case he did not get the message, one of them hanged him in effigy this past summer outside his district office on the Eastern Shore of Maryland.

“This system is broken; we have to do something,” Mr. Kratovil said. “But my preference would be to do smaller things.”

Under the Democrats’ tentative plans, the House would pass the health care bill approved in December by the Senate, and both chambers would approve a separate package of changes using a parliamentary device known as budget reconciliation.

The tactic is intended to avoid a Republican filibuster, but in the Senate, the majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, faces challenges if he tries to use it. He is having trouble persuading a majority of his caucus to go along.

In the House, lawmakers like Mr. Kratovil, Mr. Cardoza and other swing Democrats will come under increasing scrutiny from leadership as a vote draws near. Of the 219 Democrats who initially voted in favor of the House measure, roughly 40 did so in part because it contained the so-called Stupak amendment, intended to discourage insurers from covering abortion.

Some, notably Representative Bart Stupak, the Michigan Democrat for whom the amendment is named, will almost certainly switch their yes votes to no because the new version being pushed by Mr. Obama would strip out the House bill’s abortion restrictions in favor of Senate language that many of them consider unacceptable.