Who Runs Gov

* The town halls are back! Sort of. The NRCC is coordinating a “tele-town hall” — by phone — tonight in the districts of two key undecided Dems, Bill Owens and Scott Murphy, a GOP official says.

The call will be run by two GOP Reps, heart surgeon Charles Boustany (who responded to Obama’s speech) and NRCC deputy chair Greg Walden. They’ll be on a phone call that gets pumped into homes in the Dem districts. Recipients can sign into the call, whereupon the good doctor will explain to them why the Dem plan is disastrous for their health.

* MSNBC says Dem leaders are within five of getting the needed 216 to pass health reform.

* But David Dayen urges skepticism, since it’s in the interest of leaders to give passage an aura of inevitability in order to swing remaining undecides.

* Rep Travis Childers will vote No, which is a big deal because he was one of the core 15 or so truly undecided votes.

* Rep Betsy Markey of Colorado will switch from No to Yes, a vote that puts her in “political peril,” according to the Fort Collins Coloradoan.

* Rep Bart Gordon will also flip from No to Yes.

* Upshot of above announcements: As best as I can determine, many of the core true undecided Dems still haven’t made up their minds.

* Sam Stein concurs, says it all turns on whether former No votes who are still undecided can be flipped.

* The final bill is here.

* Also in that link (scroll down): Rep Bobby Rush is all over the map, appears to be back in the undecided camp.

* Research 2000 for DailyKos: Marco Rubio still crushing Charlie Crist, 58-30.

* White House announces renewed push for immigration reform, but those involved insist the timing has nothing to do with the need for Hispanic support for the health bill.

* Glenn Greenwald and Jane Hamsher say Ben Smith was mostly right about Rahm Emanuel’s vindication.

* And Joe Biden acknowledges in an interview with ABC News that he’s gotten an earful of criticism of White House “messaging” from nervous House Dems — but tells them everything’s gonna be alright.

What else is happening?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

As I noted below, Mitch McConnell seemed to make a stark admission in an interview published yesterday, suggesting flatly that the decision had been made in advance to deny Dems bipartisan support for health reform.

Now the Democratic National Committee, seeking to elevate McConnell’s remarks, is going up with a new ad, sent over by a source, blasting McConnell as “what’s wrong with Washington”:

“Last summer, Republican Senator Mitch McConnell said he wanted a bipartisan bill on health care,” the ad intones. “But that wasn’t true. Even before President Obama took office, he was plotting his obstruction. And Senate Republicans stood with him, playing politics and protecting their special interest allies.”

The spot will run on D.C. cable into next week, through the health care vote, suggesting the target is Beltway lawmakers, opinionmakers and media figures. Dems had been hoping that McConnell’s remarks constituted a kind of “smoking gun” that revealed the true nature of GOP obstructionism, but the McConnell interview went largely ignored yesterday.

Here’s what McConnell said in the interview, referring to health care:

“It was absolutely critical that everybody be together because if the proponents of the bill were able to say it was bipartisan, it tended to convey to the public that this is O.K., they must have figured it out. It’s either bipartisan or it isn’t.”

The ad highlights the odd public opinion conundrum Dems face. Polls show that more think the GOP has been unwilling to compromise with Obama and Dems than vise versa. But majorities keep saying Obama should nonetheless continue to seek common ground — suggesting that Dems haven’t yet persuaded voters to buy the message that Republicans won’t compromise under any circumstances as part of a concerted strategy.

Dems are hoping this ad will start to change that a bit by drawing more media attention to McConnell’s remarks. They think McConnell’s admission deserves to get some serious, sustained attention from the cable nets and Beltway punditocracy.

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

* Incoming: The Congressional Budget Office score of the reconciliation fix is due to land on D.C. today like a bomb. One lingering question: Are House Dems who are holding out for it doing so because they genuinely intend to make it a factor in their thinking, or merely to put off a tough decision?

* At least a dozen House Dems, mostly on the conservative side, are saying right now that they’re awaiting the score. So presumably they’re hoping it will give them cover to support the Senate bill by letting them argue that it’s more conservative than the House version and has stronger cost controls.

* Case in point: Rep Brian Baird of Washington, a former No vote. He bluntly told the President in a private meeting that he won’t make up his mind without the score. But will it genuinely be a factor in his decision?

* The GOP targets two new undecided House Dems: The NRCC is going up on the air with spots hitting Dina Titus of Nevada and Dennis Cardoza of California, both former Yes votes, a GOP official says. The spots asks whether their “careers on life support.”

Key takeaway: The GOP ad expenditures are worth tracking because they indicate who Republicans view as genuinely undecided or vulnerable in the event they vote Yes.

* Hey, whatever works: Mark Kirk is running for Obama’s Senate seat with a pledge to “lead the effort to repeal” Obama’s signature initiative.

* Tripling down: Perry Bacon reports that “dozens” of GOP candidates and lawmakers have pledged repeal.

* Nate Silver offers a persuasive explanation for why liberals are now overwhelmingly supportive of passing the Senate bill: Obama and other Dem leaders are conspicuously “fighting like hell” to get it done.

* Time is on their side? As of last night, House Dems still hadn’t seen the text of the reconciliation fix.

* Train wreck: General Stanley McChrystal is caught off guard by Eric Holder’s claim that he wants to read Miranda rights to Bin Laden’s “corpse,” says he still hopes to take the terror mastermind alive.

* Also: CIA director Leon Panetta shares new details on how badly hobbled the CIA’s drone strikes and other tactics has left Al Qaeda. What will the Cheneyites say?

* But: What about that pesky question of a legal rationale for those drone strikes? The Obama administration says they’ll get around to sharing that with us one of these days. The fierce urgency of whenever…

* Bart Stupak: Who cares what the nuns think?

* Special bonus Stupak: My effort to get my way on the health bill has made my life a “living hell.” Pass the tissues!

* And with the President set to sign a jobs bill today, the DSCC will release a new Web video ripping Republican Senate candidates for opposing job creation.

What else is happening?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

* Here’s the latest argument from Dem leadership aides to nervous rank and file members: Republicans, no matter how hard they try, just can’t kill the bill.

Top Dem aides are circulating a new memo urging House Dems to keep in mind the long view: The GOP has tried to stop reform for a year, but it’s still moving inexorably forward. Key quote:

The other side has hit us with their best shot and reformers are still standing. It’s now clear that those opposing reform can’t close the deal to kill the bill. That is why they are focusing on process over policy, insider attacks meant to cause confusion and further muddy the waters. This is their last gasp and, as the polls show, it isn’t working.

That last assertion seems debatable — even Obama and some top Dems have conceded that the Senate bill was tainted by the process and attacks on it. But the bill is, in fact, still alive. Read the whole memo here.

* Taegan Goddard: “For the first time, the Gallup daily tracking poll shows more people disapproving of President Obama’s job performance than approving, 47% to 46%.”

* Still more evidence that the Cheneyites aren’t even remotely chastened by all the conservative legalistic handwringing about their ongoing DOJ smear.

* I noted here a while ago that Dems shouldn’t be too smug about getting reconcilation past the GOP’s procedural blockade, and now Senator Kent Conrad, who’s well respected on procedural matters, confirms that Dems have yet to resolve how they’re going to surmount some hurdles.

* Speaking of Conrad, he said in an interview with Mike Stark that he’s for filibuster reform. That’s no small thing: Conrad is a moderate who’s treated inside the Beltway as a kind of all-knowing procedure oracle.

* Takedown of the day: Spencer Ackerman versus Abe Foxman.

* They appear to be dead serious about this pass-the-bill stuff: SEIU keeps up the pressure on wavering House Dems.

* Adam Green, who’s done as much as anyone to keep the public option’s pulse beating, unloads with both barrels on Jill Lawrence over her latest public option obituary.

* Five more undecided House Dems signal they’ll vote YES on the Senate bill, and while these were expected, The Hill opines that “momentum seemed to be building” today.

* But: House GOPers will move to force a vote tomorrow to block the Dem use of “deem and pass.”

* And: Latest CNN whip count says foes of the bill can kill it if they round up 11 more NO votes.

* And for those of you who like hanging out deep in the weeds, the First Read gang has a useful look at whether “deem and pass” is constitutional.

What else is happening?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

* A stark admission from McConnell? This should stoke some discussion today: In an interview with The New York Times, Mitch McConnell suggested that GOP leaders decided in advance that Dems must be denied bipartisan support for health reform at all costs:

“It was absolutely critical that everybody be together because if the proponents of the bill were able to say it was bipartisan, it tended to convey to the public that this is O.K., they must have figured it out,” Mr. McConnell said about the health legislation in an interview, suggesting that even minimal Republican support could sway the public. “It’s either bipartisan or it isn’t.”

In the same interview, McConnell said the partisan breakdown in D.C. is largely the Dems’ fault. Discuss.

* Howard Dean to rally the troops: I’m told the Governor will be meeting with key House Dems today to give a pep talk about the use of reconciliation, in particular about how it might be used to get a Medicare buy-in into the legislation. It’s an idea he’s long advocated for.

* Today will be dominated by a continuing spin war over the announcement that Dems may use the arcane “deem and pass” procedure to get reform done. Republicans continue to mount a ferocious offensive and have Dems on defense.

* Indeed, it seems clear that Dems again failed to think through in advance how to explain themselves, and are again getting outworked by the GOP in the spin wars.

* Since this will be the topic of the day, here’s one suggested way Dems might describe the “deem and pass” process: “We are taking two votes in one shot in order to ensure that the bad stuff that got crammed into the Senate bill never sees the light of day.”

* Another: “We are passing a better version of the Senate bill, one without all the crap in it.”

* Mark Landler finds an upside in Obama’s standoff with Israel.

* But a growing number of Congressional Dems, who by and large run for their lives whenever national security issues come up, are suddenly finding the courage to speak up and criticize Obama over his handling of the mess.

* Michael Scherer notes that the new NBC/WSJ poll shows (slight) movement in Obama’s favor, with 46% preferring to pass the health bill and change the system, while 45% favor the status quo.

Key takeaway: When the choice is framed as one between change and doing nothing, change wins.

* But: The poll also shows that a whopping 57% disapprove of Obama’s handling of health care, versus only 41% who approve.

* And: Americans tilt against the use of reconciliation, 35%-26%, though 37% have no opinion, suggesting there’s still room for Dems to win more public support for the tactic.

* CNN offers a rundown of the reforms that would kick in immediately and give House Dems “deliverables” to take home to their constituents this year.

* Here’s a user-friendly snapshot of the state of play this AM in the House, revealing yet again that Nancy Pelosi’s margin for error is, well, non-existent.

* Gearing up for post-vote payback? National liberal groups take first steps towards supporting primary challenger to Bart Stupak.

* And here’s the key quote from David Petraeus’ testimony on the Mideast:

“The conflict foments anti-American sentiment due to a perception of U.S. favoritism toward Israel.”

Petraeus clearly meant that this is a bad thing for America. Widespread conservative outrage at the General to follow, right?

What else is happening?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

* On the Sunday shows, David Axelrod tripled down on the argument that passing health reform will show voters results this year, continuing the White House effort to let skittish House Dems know they’ll have results to campaign on this fall. Here’s Axelrod on NBC:

If the Republican Party wants to go out and say to that child who now has insurance, or say to that small business that will now get tax credits this year if he signs the bill — if they want to say to them, “You know what, we’re actually going to take that away from you,” I say, “Let’s have that fight. Every member of Congress ought to be ready to have that debate as well.”

* Axelrod made the same case on CNN today, underscoring how heavily invested the White House is in making this closing argument to House Dems.

* But: The chief vote counter for House Dems flatly acknowledged on NBC this morning that the Dem leadership doesn’t have the votes to pass health care as of now. Asked whether Dems have the votes, Dem Rep James Clyburn said:

No, we don’t have them as of this morning. But we’ve been working this thing all weekend, we’ll be working it going into the week. I’m also very confident that we’ll get this done. I’ve been talking to members for a long time on this, and they have the will to do it.

Of course, things may well start looking very different once the reconciliation fix language is released and House Dems are forced to stop the posturing and take a stand.

* Also: Dick Durbin gave House Dems strong assurances that the Senate will pass the reconciliation fix desired by the House, which could prove reassuring to members of the House wary of the Senate’s intentions.

“We’re in the process of actually contacting every single Democratic Senator,” Durbin said on Meet the Press. “When Nancy Pelosi goes before her Democratic caucus, it will be with the solid assurance that when reconciliation comes over to the Senate side, we’re gonna pass it.”

********************************

* Frank Rich points out that the critical mass of conservative lawyers criticizing Liz Cheney’s smear of the “Al Qaeda Seven” shows that it’s “way out in crazyland.” True enough, but again, Liz Cheney doesn’t care about the stuffy old conservative establishment and its legalistic handwringing.

There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of who she’s trying to reach with this attack. The intended audience is the Limbaugh/Beck/Palin electorate. When those luminaries start criticizing her, then she’ll start worrying. For now, she’s loving every second of this: The criticism has gotten her two weeks of free media coverage of this outlandish smear — all because of a measly web video.

**************************************

* The Washington Post does a nice job in explaining why military tribunals are a weak tool in the war on terror. Of course, few if any Dem members of Congress are willing to publicly make this case, so…

* John Boehner: I wouldn’t support closing Gitmo “if you put a gun to my head.”

Again: Is there a single reason to believe Lindsey Graham’s claim that he can secure GOP support for closing Gitmo in exchange for military trials and indefinite detention?

* House Republicans don’t appear to be terribly worried about the Democratic National Committee’s warning that if they keep up with the attacks on the Eric Massa mess, Dems will retaliate by invoking David Vitter and John Ensign.

On Fox News today, Eric Cantor reiterated the GOP call for a Massa probe: “The House Democratic Leadership needs to be taken into the ethics committee to find out what’s going on, because there have been a lot of conflicting reports.”

* And Chris Dodd decides it’s probably not a good idea to try to kick Lucy’s football again.

What else is happening?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

* White House dispatches Obama pollster Joel Benenson to try to shoot down yesterday’s widely-discussed Caddell/Schoen prediction of doom for Dems if they pass reform, another sign Obama and Dems believe they’re on the verge of passing reform.

(Update: In fairness the Op ed seems less like a sign of confidence and more like a signal that all hands are on deck for the final push.)

* Chris Frates reports that leading health reform groups are already hard at work on plans to make the implementation of reform go smoothly.

* But: CNN tallies up 21 House Dems who are now saying they’ll vote No (though at least one of these, Luis Gutierrez, doesn’t seem firm). Foes need 38 Dems to vote against it to prevail, meaning they need to lock down another 17 No votes.

* What’s interesting about Karl Rove’s mendacity is how casual it is, even over stuff that’s relatively inconsequential or easily verifiable.

* Catholic leaders pen a letter to House Dems urging them not to buy the claim that the Senate bill would allow Federal funding of abortions. And Bart Stupak keeps sulking.

* Senate parliamentarian finally confirms that Senate bill must become law before the fix.

* But: In the above link, Nancy Pelosi shrugs it off: “The fact is that once we pass it in the House, it’s going to be the law of the land.”

* Scott Brown urges Dems to jettison all their health care priorities and reach bipartisan agreement on the GOP health plan.

* This was true yesterday, it’s true today, and it will be true tomorrow: There is still not a single Republican who’s willing to go along with Lindsey Graham’s offer to deliver GOP support for closing Gitmo in exchange for military trials and indefinite detentions.

* And behold next week’s controversy:

Senate Republicans are preparing to challenge President Obama’s nominee for ambassador to El Salvador over her previous ties to an alleged asset of Cuban intelligence.

What else is going on?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

Since yesterday, there’s been some confusion over the claim that the Senate bill has to be signed into law before it can be fixed via reconciliation — which, if true, poses a bit of a hurdle for Dems.

GOP leaders have insisted that the parliamentarian informed them this is the case. But Politico’s David Rogers, who’s been on the Hill longer than the grass, suggested otherwise.

Now, however, House Dem leaders appear to have adopted the former view. At her presser today, in a reference to the president, Nancy Pelosi said:

“People would rather he waited until the Senate acted, but the Senate Parliamentarian said in order for them to do a reconciliation based on the Senate bill, it must be signed by the President.”

Separately, on the House floor today, Eric Cantor pressed Steny Hoyer on the issue, asking Hoyer whether it’s his position that the Senate bill “must be signed into law before the Senate can even take up the reconciliation package.”

“I think the gentleman correctly states the Senate parliamentarian’s position,” Hoyer replied.

That seems, at first glance, to be an endorsement of the GOP position from the House Dem leadership. But this stuff is very murky, and the only certainty right now is that it’s pretty foolish to feel certain about anything. I’m seeking clarification and will keep you posted.

**********************************

Update: Here’s video of the Cantor-Hoyer exchange. Hoyer seems pretty ticked off:

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

* Must read: Harry Reid pens a scorching letter vowing the use of reconciliation and accusing the Senate GOP leadership of lying, obstructing, fearmongering, and every other type of mongering you can think of. Which will immediately cause GOP leaders to sob hot tears of shame.

* But: A good point from Ezra Klein, who notes that the Reid letter really should reassure House Dems about the Senate Dem leadership’s determination to get reconciliation done.

* House votes in overwhelming bipartisan fashion to support the GOP push for probe of Dem leaders over Eric Massa mess.

* Wow: New Gallup poll finds that only 30% of conservatives — that would be less than a third — believe global warming is happening.

* The DCCC calls on Republicans to inform every one of their constituents that those “census” fundraising mailers were bogus.

* Sage words from the eerily unflappable Steve Benen on the parliamentary twist: “Word from the parliamentarian, in other words, is only bad news if House Dems allow it to be bad news.”

* Beltway head-in-sand moment of the day: Kent Conrad is apparently reassuring colleagues that if the GOP figures out a way to blow up the reconciliation process, Dems will emerge with the moral high ground. Um, and?

* Lefty groups blast away at Dick Durbin for saying leadership may have to persuade Senate Dems to vote against public option amendment.

* CNN does its own whip count, concludes House Dems face increasingly difficult odds. But: Wait for the reconciliation fix!

* Republicans hammer away at Eric Holder over Padilla document screw-up. Total train wreck.

* And heads are swiveling like mad on Capitol Hill because Durbin and Chuck Schumer are (gasp!) behaving like liberals.

What else is up?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

Health reform just hit a potential snag.

The Senate GOP leadership is confirming that the parliamentarian has informed them that the Senate bill must be passed into law before any reconciliation fix is passed — lessening the likelihood that such a fix will actually happen.

“The Senate Parliamentarian’s office has informed Senate Republicans that reconciliation instructions require the measure to make changes in law,” Don Stewart, a spokesman for Mitch McConnell, emails, confirming an anonymously sourced report in Roll Call.

If this bears out, it would effectively nix one route forward that House Dems had hoped would give them a guarantee of getting the bill fixed later. The hope had been that the House could pass the Senate bill and then get the reconciliation fix done before the whole package were signed into law — a route that would have increased the pressure on the Senate to do a fix.

Now, if the GOP Senate leadership is right, that may no longer be possible. To be clear, the Senate could pass a reconciliation fix after the Senate bill becomes law. But as Ryan Grim notes, there will now be much less pressure to do so.

This increases the possibility that the Senate bill without a fix will become the law of the land. It also means that with the fix in peril, some House Dems may be less likely to support the Senate bill.

The road ahead just got a bit tougher, and Republicans are rejoicing on the Hill right now.

**********************************

Update: A quick clarification: This claim by the parliamentarian, if it bears out, doesn’t have to lessen the chances of getting reform done. If House Dems don’t let fear that the fix will fail dissuade them from voting for the Senate bill, it won’t impact the likelihood of passing it, obviously. The GOP is already pushing this parliamentarian opinion to further spook House Dems, so a lot rides on them ignoring the GOP’s efforts.

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

Does the GOP Senate leadership’s strategy to stall reform — bleed reconciliation to death by using the Byrd rule — have any prayer of succeeding?

I just got off the phone with a former Senate parliamentarian. Bottom line: The Byrd rule can be — and repeatedly has been — successfully used to strip individual provisions out of reconciliation measures, forcing them back to the House for additional votes. By all indications, Dems are prepared for this. But they should really be prepared.

Robert Dove, Senate parliamentarian from 1981-1987, declined to discuss the current GOP strategy. But he said that in theory, the Byrd rule is an effective weapon against reconciliation, allowing the opposition to strip individual measures out of such bills on the grounds that they are policy, not budgetary, fixes.

“I stripped 300 out of a 1995 reconciliation bill,” Dove said. He confirmed that if even one provision is ruled by the parliamentarian to be a violation and is successfully stripped from a reconciliation bill, “it absolutely has to go back to the House.”

Dove also confirmed that it requires 60 votes to waive the Byrd rule, as Republicans have argued, meaning that Republicans will be able to mount numerous challenges. “It’s impossible to waive it without 60 votes,” Dove said.

What of the Democratic argument that the chair of the proceedings — Joe Biden, perhaps — can ignore it if the parliamentarian does strip a provision from the bill? It’s theoretically possible, Dove said, but there’s no precedent for it: “It has not ever happened.”

What does this mean? Well, the Dem Senate leadership is going to have to produce a bulletproof reconcilation bill. They know this, are proceeding accordingly, and expect to succeed. And they very well may: The fact the GOP is telegraphing its strategy so aggressively — allowing Dems to prepare for it — suggests it’s entirely about sowing confusion and frightening House Dems into believing the reconcilation fix will fail.

Still, it’s not inconceivable that the GOP could gum up the works, if the parliamentarian agrees with them on a single provision and the chair for some reason is hesitant to override him. Probably a good idea for Dems not to be too smug about this.

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

Looks like the entire Senate GOP caucus is all in on the strategy to bleed reconciliation to death with the “Byrd rule.”

I first reported here the other day that anonymous Senate GOP aides had developed a strategy to stall or derail reform: Invoke the “Byrd rule” to strip individual provisions out of the reconciliation fix, forcing it back to the House for new votes countless times.

For a refresher on that, go here.

Well, now the Senate GOP leadership is doubling down on the strategy, saying publicly that the entire GOP caucus is united behind it. All 41 GOP Senators have signed a letter to Harry Reid pledging to use this tactic:

In that regard, to endeavor to ensure that the reconciliation process is not used to fast-track an unpopular bill through Congress, we wish to inform you that we will oppose efforts to waive the so-called Byrd Rule during Senate consideration of any reconciliation bill concerning health reform. The Byrd Rule, as you know, was created by Senator Byrd to ensure that reconciliation bills were not used to enact policy changes, the primary purpose of which is not specifically related to the federal budget. As it takes 60 votes to waive the Byrd Rule, we can ensure that any provision that trips the Byrd Rule will be stripped from the bill, which will require that the bill be sent back to the House for further consideration and additional votes.

This is a pretty striking move. There’s some debate about how effective this strategy will prove. GOP aides inisist that Dems will not be able to craft a reconciliation bill that’s bulletproof. Some Dems privately express similiar concerns, while others think whoever is chairing the proceedings — Joe Biden, perhaps — will be able to brush aside these procedural cobwebs.

But given the murkiness of Senate procedure, this doesn’t seem like something one can be certain about either way. And the question is whether this will succeed in spooking House Dems into believing the reconciliation fix will fail, leading them to be even more reluctant to pass the Senate bill in the first place. Full letter here.

The DNC — hoping to underscore the trivial nature of the argument between Charlie Crist and Marco Rubio over whether Rubio got an expensive haircut or a “back wax” or whatever — is going out with this new spoof video that, er, dramatizes what it might look like if Rubio did undergo the procedure:

The vid might not do much to help Dem candidate Kendrick Meek, but it’s not a bad way to lampoon the level of discourse on display in this particular “controversy.”

The footage of Rubio grimacing is, I’m told, from his campaign Web site.

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

* Okay, first up: Here are a few quick updates on where the House Dem whip count is on health reform, none of them great news for Dems as three former Yes votes are now undecided…

* There was some confusion today about the current position of New York Rep Michael Arcuri, a former Yes vote, and a spokesperson confirms to me that he’s Undecided.

That’s both good and bad news for Dems: The GOP today announced he was now a definite No, based on this local interview. But the spox, Jay Biba, assures us he’s still undecided pending what the reconciliation fix looks like.

Still, not great for Dems: A Yes is firmly in the Undecided camp.

* Reps Dan Maffei and Bill Owens of New York also move from Yes to Undecided.

* Dem Rep Dan Lipinski of Illinois, a former Yes, will now vote No if the Senate bill doesn’t have Stupak-like language.

* If any of these four become No votes, Dem leaders will need to make up for it by flipping a previous No to Yes. No movement in that direction today, at least not publicly.

* Indeed, Rep Larry Kissell of North Carolina, who was rumored today to be mulling a switch from No to Yes, is not changing his position, spokesperson Haven Kerchner confirms to me.

* Breaking: Another prominent Congressional Dem steps forward and calls on the Obama administration to stick with a civilian trial for KSM. Sayeth Chris Dodd:

“I for one wish they’ll stay with their principles.”

What is that, two now?

* Pete King says he might be kinda sorta open to Lindsey Graham’s effort to get Republicans to support closing Gitmo in exchange for a military trial for KSM. Which other GOPers are on board with this again?

* On second thought…after declining to say whether GOP Senate candidates should run on repeal of health reform, Rick Klein notes that NRSC chief John Cornyn has now clarified that indeed they should push repeal.

* Reassuring? House Dems are now enlisting the help of a “centrist” think tank to teach them how to talk about national security issues.

* Which prompts this barbed response from the NRCC:

“The fact that Democrats have to train their own candidates on how to talk about defending America is an indictment not just of their candidates but of their policies, as well. Our candidates’ message is simple: Stop treating terrorists like common criminals, don’t import terrorists into our communities and listen to our military and intelligence officials instead of attacking them.”

As you can see, the GOP has thought through their message on this already.

* And the snark of the day, from Matthew Yglesias, on the news that Sarah Palin traveled to Canada for health care:

She wasn’t rationed away? Her parents were’t sent to a death panel? She experienced socialized medicine and learned to tell the tale!

What else is happening?

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.

Striking findings buried in the new Democracy Corps poll:

When it comes to national security, do you think President Obama is doing better, worse, or about the same as President George W. Bush?

Total better: 39
Total worse: 31

And:

When it comes to combating terrorism and handling terrorism suspects, do you think President Obama is doing better, worse, or about the same as President George W. Bush?

Total better: 38
Total worse: 31

So Obama is rated better than Bush on national security and terrorism and the handling of terror suspects — despite the fact that the Cheneyites have been arguing for months that by undoing Bush policies, Obama has made us less safe.

The poll also finds that Obama retains a high 58% approval rating on national security and 55% on terrorism. Republicans in Congress, meanwhile, score 45% on national security.

What’s more, as Spencer Ackerman notes, this poll also has some numbers that drive home, yet again, one of this blog’s pet theories: That Congressional Dems, by skittishly refusing to have any kind of message at all on national security, are only hurting themselves.

To wit: Only 43% approve of Dems on national security — less than Republicans, and far less than Obama. Saying nothing on these issues doesn’t help, see?

Now, a few caveats. This is a Dem poll. But it’s a well respected firm. And there are some warning signs in this poll: Many voters have rising doubts about Obama’s handling of terror suspects, even if they do prefer him to Bush.

But overall, the poll shows clearly that there’s no justification whatsoever for the Dems’ strategy of receding meekly into the background on these issues, rather than vocally allying themselves with Obama on them.

*************************************

Update: I should have added that this poll was also done with Third Way, a centrist think tank.

This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.