From NBC's Domenico Montanaro

President Obama said he is "pleased," but not "satisfied" with what he and his administration have accomplished in his first 100 days while speaking at a town hall in Arnold, Mo.

"I'm not a miracle worker," Obama declared, after saying he's not "content" when workers are out of jobs, some don't have health care and the U.S. is not leading the world in developing 21st Century solutions to energy.

He tried to buy himself some space, urging patience on solutions and reminding that he inherited these crises, which he said "were many years in the making" and that it's going to take a while to overcome them.

"We've come a long way," the president said. "We can see the light on the horizon, but we have a long journey ahead."

Obama used that same rhetorical "suspension-of-disbelief" flair seen on the campaign trail when saying that people shouldn't be surprised by the policies he's pursued. After all, he'd laid them all out during the campaign, he said.

"It's not like anybody should be surprised," he said, adding almost laughing, "The things we've done are the plans we've talked about for two years."

He boasted that "it's good to be out of Washington. It's good to be in the Midwest, … where common sense often reigns."

This is Obama's latest trip to a battleground state. Remember, Missouri was the closest state of the 2008 presidential election. He lost it by fewer than 4,000 votes.

(When speaking, Obama twice pronounced Missouri, by the way, as Missour-uh. Arnold, however, is outside St. Louis and not in the Southwest section of the state where Missour-uh is the accepted pronunciation.)

More to come from NBC's Athena Jones, who's on the ground at the town hall in Arnold, Mo.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
So far, we've seen Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano out front of the swine flu outbreak.

But this morning, newly minted Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius took a leading role with a news conference at the agency.

Sebelius, who was confirmed by the Senate last night 65-31, said it is an "honor" to take a leadership position at HHS, but credited the agency's continuing strategy that has been "underway for some time."

She introduced Dr. Richard E. Besser, acting director of the Centers for Disease Control, who broke news via a video that the number of confirmed cases of swine flu in the United States have jumped to 91 in 10 states -- double the number of states previously reported by the CDC.

"Again, these numbers are almost out of date by the time I say them," Besser said.

Sebelius said she met with officials last night at the White House after swearing to be briefed on the outbreak. And she warned that there will be more cases and likely more deaths.

Sebelius wanted to give a sense of reassurance, that she's fully briefed and that HHS is doing everything possible and "working closely" with state and local officials.

She assured that there are enough treatments of the medicines Tamiflu and Relenza and that the "government has begun shipping supplies to states with confirmed cases."

"I want to make it clear," the former Kansas governor said, "these drugs are effective in treating those who have contracted the H1N1 virus."

But she warned that the flu is always serious and people should take basic actions to prevent further spread or getting sick -- things like washing hands often, covering mouths and noses when coughing or sneezing and not going to work or school if you or your children exhibit flu-like symptoms.

From NBC's Chuck Todd and Domenico Montanaro
Exit pollster extraordinaire and political historian Joe Lenski of Edison Research passes along the following:

The only times previous to yesterday that Pennsylvania has been represented by two Democrats in the U.S. Senate have been:

• January 3, 1945 – January 3, 1947 – Francis Myers and Joseph Guffey
• January 14, 1856 – March 3, 1857 – Richard Brodhead and William Bigler
• March 13, 1845 – March 3, 1849 – Simon Cameron and Daniel Sturgeon
• January 14, 1840 – March 5, 1845 – James Buchanan and Daniel Sturgeon

So basically in the last 152 years, the Democrats have held both Pennsylvania Senate seats for a total of two years.

The Republican Party was founded in 1854. So Democrats have held both seats for just three years since the GOP's founding.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Per a House Budget Committee aide, your House of Representatives is expected to pass the conference agreement on the budget around 11:00am-ish. This vote will come after 20 minutes of debate (10 minutes on for each side).

Per NBC's Ken Strickland, Senate Majority Harry Reid says the vote in the Senate will come in the late afternoon or early evening. (However, as of last night, the vote wasn't expected to occur until 9:00 pm ET -- after the president's news conference.)

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
*** Specter's shocker: Arlen Specter's defection yesterday to the Democratic Party was big news for several reasons. First, it gave Democrats a possibility at a filibuster-proof majority (even though Specter said he wouldn't be an automatic 60th vote for Dems, he'll be more reliable than Ben Nelson). It also gave Specter a MUCH greater chance at winning re-election (he admitted that was the reason for the switch, rare frankness from a politician). But perhaps the biggest news from the switch -- at least in the short term -- was that it served to kick a GOP that's already down. As Specter said in his statement yesterday, "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right… I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans." Translation: There's no longer room in the GOP for someone like Specter, even though he resides in a state Obama carried by TEN percentage points last November. While plenty of Republicans are bidding good riddance to Specter, we have this question: Can the Republican Party regain control of Congress without moderates like Specter? Don't forget this truism in American politics: Winning races often comes down to winning the middle (see: Obama, Barack). 

*** A wake-up call for the GOP? So will a majority of the folks who help run the Republican Party -- be it in Congress, on the campaign trail, or even on talk radio -- realize that Specter's loss is a problem, not an extraction of some sort of moderate or liberal cancer? It will be interesting to monitor talk radio and the conservative blogosphere to read and hear what they are saying about Olympia Snowe's op-ed in the New York Times, particularly this line: "We can't continue to fold our philosophical tent into an umbrella under which only a select few are worthy to stand. Rather, we should view an expansion of diversity within the party as a triumph that will broaden our appeal. That is the political road map we must follow to victory." The Washington Post's Balz also puts it well: "The question now is whether Specter's departure will produce a period of genuine introspection by a party already in disarray or result in a circling of the wagons by those who think the GOP is better off without those whose views fall outside its conservative ideological boundaries."

Video: Former Speaker of the House discusses Specter's decision to become a Democrat.

*** The ultimate Obamacan: Obama, Specter, and Vice President Biden made statements about Specter's party switch at the White House earlier this morning. Said Obama, "I'd like to think his decision is a reflection that this White House is open to many different points of view ... and [will] work together to find common ground." Make no mistake about it: Specter's defection is a huge gift to Obama -- for the sole reason that it creates the perception to the American public that he not only wants to work with the other side; he's also willing to expand his tent to take them in. Remember, most folks don't "know" Specter that well outside of Pennsylvania and Washington. And all it looks like to the average citizen in Denver or in Raleigh or in Orlando is that a Republican decided that Obama's Democratic Party was a good home for him.

Video: Obama welcomes the news that Specter plans to switch parties.

*** Obama as Reagan? To mark his 100th day in office today, President Obama makes his 13th trip as president (to yet another battleground state!) when he travels to Arnold, MO to conduct his eighth town hall at 11:20 am ET. Then, about nine hours later, Obama heads back to Washington to hold his 11th press conference (his third in primetime). Yet perhaps the most revealing number of the president's first 100 days comes via our brand-new NBC/WSJ poll: A whopping 81% say they personally like Obama, including 30% who disagree with his policies. That kind of number not only seems to give him extra political capital, it also forces our pollsters to compare him to another political figure who was well-liked, even by those who didn't always agree with him -- Ronald Reagan. We'll say it again: Obama's parallels so far with Reagan are uncanny. The country likes him (61% approve of his job, 64% view him favorably); the nation feels better despite the uncertain times we're living in (the right track number in our poll is up 31 points since October); and the political opposition is being reduced to a regional party (just like the Phil Gramms left the Dems in the 1980s, the Arlen Specters are leaving the GOP).

Video: TODAY correspondent Jamie Gangel takes a look back at some of the most memorable moments from Obama's first 100 days in office.

*** The L-word: Despite those high marks for Obama, there are a few warning signs in the poll for the president. A majority think he's taking on too many other issues rather than staying focused on the economy; another majority disapprove of his order closing Gitmo; there are concerns about government spending and the size of the deficit; support for his stimulus has declined; and the number who view him as "very liberal" or "somewhat liberal" has jumped up 10 points, from 49% in January to 59% now. That liberal number, however, has to scare and excite both parties. Here's one way to look at it: More and more Americans view Obama as liberal, especially after unveiling his budget, and that will eventually come back to bite him. Or here's the other way to look at it: More Americans view him as a liberal, but that isn't affecting his popularity. If it's the latter, that draws yet another Reagan comparison. Is Obama re-defining liberalism the same way as Reagan re-defined conservatism? Republicans believe if the word "liberal" remains a dirty word, they can drag Obama down. But if Obama makes the word "liberal" something not to run away from (as Reagan did with the word "conservative"), watch out.

*** A torturing issue: Another set of cautionary numbers for Obama comes on the tricky subject of interrogation. A majority (53%) disapprove of his decision to release the Bush administration memos detailing its controversial interrogation practices. In addition, a plurality (46%) believe that those interrogation techniques helped extract important information to stop terrorism. And 61% say there shouldn't be a criminal investigation into whether torture was committed during the Bush administration. (While other national polls have shown that respondents favor a commission, note the word "criminal" in this particular NBC/WSJ question; words matter in polling.) Despite those results, a majority (53%) say that torture was practiced during the Bush years. These numbers paint a nuanced picture about the public's views on interrogation/torture. "What people are saying is, 'Bad things may have happened… But whatever happened, it is in the past," observed NBC/WSJ co-pollster Bill McInturff (R). Bottom line: The president's initial instinct to "move on" is where the public is; he seemed to move away from that "move on" decision later on this issue. No doubt, this will come up at tonight's press conference, and the president will get another opportunity to button-hole the issue.

Video: Tapes show Bush calling for tough tactics in investigating torture, which may shed light on the current debate. MSNBC political analyst Eugene Robinson discusses.

*** Bush's freefall continues: George W. Bush has been out of office for 100 days, has stayed out of the news (even made a point to SAY he'd stay out of the news), and get this -- his numbers went DOWN in our NBC/WSJ poll, from 31% positive in January before he left office to 26% now. Cheney's numbers also went down, from 21% positive in January to 18% now. Cheney's drop makes sense to us, because he's been in the news battling the Obama administration. But Bush? He hasn't done a thing…

*** A consequential presidency: With Obama's 100th day in office, there are a ton of analyses out there. Be sure not to miss what one of us wrote on MSNBC.com: "[C]onservatives and liberals alike can agree on one thing after 100 days of President Barack Obama: This guy is going to be consequential. Now, how one defines "consequential" depends on the point of view.  Nothing about the first 100 days indicates that the president wants to be judged on his incremental achievements. And while we've probably never elected a president whose goal was to tread water and simply not screw up the country, one can sense that we're at a crossroads in the American story." Also, the Washington Post's Chris Cillizza, who broke yesterday's Specter story, has a good look at the winners and losers during Obama's first 100 days. 

*** Is the Voting Rights Act outdated? Per NBC's Pete Williams, the U.S. Supreme Court today hears a challenge to the 1965 Voting Rights Act that requires states with a history of racial discrimination in voting to get the federal government's permission before changing election practices. Under the law, any changes those states want to make are presumed suspicious, because of their histories of blatant racial discrimination. But Williams notes that challengers from Texas are asking the court to rule that the pre-clearance section of the law is so seriously outdated that it's unconstitutional and should be overturned. Why do we need this law, they ask, when we now have a black president -- proving that whites and blacks alike will vote for black candidates? By any measure, they say (registration, turnout, election of candidates, membership in Congress) that blacks have made huge gains at the polls, and the southern states have made enormous strides in eliminating the practices that for so long suppressed the black vote.   
 
*** Did Obama's victory change everything? But according to Williams, the NAACP and other groups say now is not the time to dismantle the most important civil-rights law in U.S. history. They say many areas of the South are still trying to pull the old tricks to suppress the minority vote. If the Voting Rights Act is gutted, they say, that kind of discrimination will re-emerge. Obama's election is an important symbol, they argue, but the hard-won progress can slip away unless the law is upheld. One more note from Williams: In a sign of the prominence of this case, the court will release the audio of today's oral argument shortly after it concludes in late morning. Our take: The numbers are interesting, a ton of ways to slice it. Obama under-performed Kerry among white voters in quite a view Voting Rights Act states. Then again, Obama over-performed Kerry in some of those same states overall, thanks to an increase in turnout among non-whites.

Countdown to NJ GOP primary: 34 days
Countdown to VA Dem primary: 41 days
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 188 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 552 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.

"Senator Arlen Specter, a liberal Pennsylvania Republican who had long chafed against his party's rightward drift, announced yesterday that he would switch allegiances and join the Democrats to strengthen his prospects for reelection next year," the Boston Globe front-pages. 

The New York Times: "Mr. Specter acknowledged that the surprise decision was driven by his intense desire to win a sixth term next year. It came after he and his political advisers concluded over the weekend that he could not win a Republican primary against a conservative challenger, particularly in light of his vote for the president's economic stimulus package."

More: "The defection of Mr. Specter creates the potential for Democrats to control 60 votes in the Senate if Al Franken prevails this summer in the court fight over last November's Minnesota Senate election, a prospect that appears increasingly likely."

The White House is giving Biden a lot of credit for the switch. The Washington Post: "The decision was the culmination of a months-long effort by key Democrats to woo Specter, who began his political career as a Democrat in Philadelphia but has been a Republican for 43 years. Biden, a regular Amtrak passenger with Specter as the two traveled to Wilmington and Philadelphia, respectively, when both served in the Senate, met with him face to face six times and spoke on the phone with him on eight more occasions since mid-February, aides said. Pennsylvania Gov. Edward G. Rendell, whose first job as a prosecutor in Philadelphia came under the tutelage of then-District Attorney Specter, had also lobbied him about making the switch, but it was his Senate colleagues who apparently closed the deal."

The Post also writes about how the White House learned about the decision.

The Hill: "Several GOP leaders, including Whip Jon Kyl (Ariz.) and conference Chairman Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), said they were unaware of Specter's decision until an emergency meeting in McConnell's office at noon. McConnell expressed dismay over the decision and said Specter's maneuver was an act of pure political self-preservation. 'Well, obviously we are not happy that Sen. Specter has decided to become a Democrat,' said McConnell. 'He visited with me in my office late yesterday afternoon and told me quite candidly that he'd been informed by his pollster that it would be impossible for him to be reelected in Pennsylvania as a Republican because he could not win the primary. And he was also informed by his pollster that he could not get elected as an Independent and indicated that he had decided to become a Democrat.'"

The two Republican Maine senators -- Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe -- are the only true moderates left now in the GOP's Senate caucus. And they had tough words for their party. "I do think our party needs to make clear that centrists are welcome," Collins said. "Sometimes that message is not sent as clearly as it should be."
 
Snowe added that Specter's switch "should serve as a 'wakeup call,' ... 'The blunt reality is that we're losing another key moderate who has played a key role in the Republican Party… If the Republican Party fully intends to become a majority party in the future, they will clearly have to move from the right toward the middle.'"

Here's Snowe's op-ed in the New York Times: "It is true that being a Republican moderate sometimes feels like being a cast member of 'Survivor' — you are presented with multiple challenges, and you often get the distinct feeling that you're no longer welcome in the tribe. But it is truly a dangerous signal that a Republican senator of nearly three decades no longer felt able to remain in the party."

And here's some big talk from Dems who don't have the best things to say about Specter. But will Ed Rendell and Barack Obama allow Specter to get challenged seriously in the 2010 Dem primary?

Trying to rally the troops, RNC Chairman Michael Steele sent out a scathing statement against Specter. It was filled with anger, but it also contained the word "leftist" -- three times. The word isn't something that's used often in American politics; usually, the word "leftist" is saved to describe political parties in Latin American countries. Previously, conservatives had been pushing the word "socialist" to describe the Democrats. Now Steele wants to use "leftist." There is a risk here: Is the word believable with the middle? Do Americans believe that either of the two major parties would be "socialists," "leftists" or "fascists"? Granted, this email was written for the base to fire them up to contribute money, and plenty in the base are actually excited Specter has left the party. But words matter.

Steele also said that Specter "simply flipped the bird" (about 2:40 into the video) to John Cornyn, head of the NRSC who had supported Specter's re-election bid. Steele also said, "It's not only disrespectful, it's just downright rude. I'm sure his mama didn't raise him that way. It's a shame that he's behaving this way today."

The New York Times uses the president's intervention into the auto industry as a case study of how he makes decisions. It's a worthy read. "For a new president, the automobile industry crisis has tested the boundaries of his activist approach and the acuity of his political instincts. As with so many issues in his action-packed 100 days in office, Mr. Obama confronted choices few of his predecessors encountered. His ongoing intervention in an iconic sector of the economy offers a case study in the education, management and decision-making of a fledgling president."

"Tutored by veterans of past administrations, Mr. Obama, often after dinner with his wife and daughters, devoured briefing papers until midnight to master the intricacies of the auto industry. But he had advisers deal directly with the car companies and never spoke with the G.M. chief executive he effectively fired. Methodical and dispassionate, Mr. Obama aggravated powerful players in Congress and the unions that helped elect him, then moved to assuage them. He encouraged internal debate but was forced to head off tensions as his treasury secretary and White House economic adviser maneuvered for position. In the end, he struggled with the proper balance between government power and market forces, a theme that has defined his first months in office."

The Wall Street Journal's Jerry Seib writes, "Some people have become a bit cynical about marking a new president's first 100 days, calling the milestone a kind of faux, Hallmark-card moment. Perhaps. But if ever there were 100 days worth marking, it would be those drawing to an end Wednesday. Consider what the country and its new president have been through."

Nancy Pelosi has an op-ed in The Hill on Obama's first 100 days: "By any measure, the work of President Obama and Congress in our first 100 days has been a great success. But it is just the prelude for the work that still needs to be done, including passing quality, accessible and affordable healthcare, tackling global warming and achieving energy independence, and restoring fiscal responsibility. In partnership with President Obama, Congress will continue to move America in a New Direction." 
 
Others judging Obama: Russ Feingold gave Obama mostly A's -- EXCEPT when it came to "state secrets" as a defense "to resist the release of information." For that, Feingold gave Obama a "D."

The AP on that Air Force One photo op: "The taxpayer bill for Monday's presidential plane flight over Manhattan was $328,835. The political cost to the Obama White House will be harder to calculate."

Kathleen Sebelius was finally confirmed as HHS secretary last night. The vote was 65-31. The Hill: "Senate Republicans insisted on subjecting Sebelius to a 60-vote margin but Democrats got the result they wanted with votes to spare," The Hill writes. GOPers voting for her: Specter, Brownback, Roberts, Collins, Gregg, Lugar, Snowe and Voinovich.

Whoa. Don't miss this Washington Times' Z. Hallow exclusive suggesting that some members of the RNC might want to handcuff Michael Steele's ability to spend money as HE sees fit. "Randy Pullen, the RNC's elected treasurer, former RNC General Counsel David Norcross and three other former top RNC officers have presented Mr. Steele with a resolution, calling for a new set of checks and balances on the chairman's power to dole out money. The powers include new controls on awarding contracts and spending money on outside legal and other services."

There is a lot of grumbling in the GOP consultant community about Steele's relationship with certain consultants and there clearly is a movement to try and curtail how much power these consultants have in the party. Right now, Steele shares the same consultants as the NRCC's Pete Sessions meaning these folks could end up cornering the GOP market and other consultants being left out of the contract world want a piece of the action. But they also believe it's a way to create a check on the party and make sure not just ONE firm controls everything in the party.

NEW JERSEY: A new Monmouth University/Gannett poll is out showing former U.S. Attorney Chris Christie continuing to lead incumbent Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine, 39%-35%, with 18% still undecided. In January, Corzine led Christie 38%-36% in this poll. Corzine also barely leads the little-known Bogota Mayor Steve Lonegan, 37%-33%, with 20% undecided. Corzine has a net-negative job approval: 40%-49%, which is actually a slight improvement from February when it stood at 34%-51%.

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell

Aides to Rep. Allyson Schwartz say the third-term Pennsylvania Democrat will not seek her party's nomination for the U.S. Senate in 2010. 

Schwartz was among those widely talked about as a possible candidate, and had considered a Senate run. But after Arlen Specter's party switch, Schwartz plans to support him and will focus on having a larger role in health-care policy in the House of Representatives.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Here's our take on the latest NBC/WSJ survey:

WASHINGTON - As he enters his 100th day in office, President Barack Obama enjoys higher marks from the American public than his most recent predecessors did at similar points in their presidencies, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll.

More than six in 10 approve of Obama's job, nearly two-thirds view him favorably, and a majority believe he has gotten off to a solid start during his first three months on the job.

Perhaps most significantly, Americans so far find him to be likeable. More than 80 percent in the poll say they personally like Obama, even if they don't agree with all of his policies. And respondents give him high scores on his personality, demeanor and leadership qualities.

Republican pollster Bill McInturff, who conducted this survey with Democratic pollster Peter D. Hart, says these numbers suggest "someone who is wearing well" with the public at this stage of his presidency. McInturff, in fact, even compares Obama's early likeability to Ronald Reagan's in the 1980s.

Yet the poll also contains a few cautionary numbers for Obama and his young administration: a growing number believe the president is liberal; a majority thinks he's trying to take on too many issues; and there are concerns about all the government spending.

"The wind is at his back," Hart says. But looking ahead to the next 100 days, the Democratic pollster adds that Obama might "face some pretty stiff headwinds in his future."

Click here for the rest of the story.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Here's another set of numbers we're releasing from our new NBC/WSJ poll: A combined 81% say they personally like President Obama, including 30% who say they like him but not his policies.

Indeed, in a very long list of Obama's attributes in the poll, his highest scores are on matters of personality, demeanor, and leadership. Here are his highest scores from respondents (on a five-point scale) in descending order:
-- 82% give him a 4 or 5 on his personality and the kind of family man he is
-- 81% give him a 4 or 5 on being easygoing and likeable
-- 69% on being inspirational and exciting
-- 68% on having strong leadership qualities
-- 67% on being compassionate enough to understand average people
-- 65% on being firm and decisive in decision-making
-- 64% on being honest and straightforward
-- 63% on improving America's image around the world
-- 62% on being willing to work with people whose viewpoints are different from his own
-- 60% on achieving his goals
-- 57% on uniting the country
-- 56% on bringing real change to the country
-- 56% on being knowledgeable and experienced enough
-- 55% on representing traditional American values
-- 55% on being a good commander-in-chief
-- 54% on having the ability to handle a crisis
-- 48% on sharing your positions on the issues
-- 47% on changing business as usual in Washington
-- 47% on appointing qualified people to serve in government positions

The rest of the poll comes out beginning at 6:30 pm ET on NBC Nightly News or MSNBC.com. Be sure to tune in -- or click on.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Sen. Arlen Specter, who was elected in 1980, would outrank the most senior Democrat on four of his six current committee assignments: Veterans Affairs (Akaka), Environment and Public Works (Boxer), Special on Aging (Kohl) and an Appropriations subcommittee (Harkin).

But, per NBC Senate producer Ken Strickland, this whole issue won't be addressed until the next Congress -- unless any current chairs want to voluntarily step aside for Specter.

And it's not clear which ones, if any, he'd take over in the next Congress. It would all have to be sorted out. But he's clearly going to want something -- notably the powerful Appropriations Committee, per Strickland, but there's a long line of senior Democrats there. And it's competitive.

Specter, a veritable spring chicken at 79 on this committee, would only be the fourth-ranking senator on it. Hawaii's Daniel Inouye, 85 and elected in 1962, knocked off 91-year-old Robert Byrd at the start of this Congress -- despite Byrd's seniority (elected in 1958). Also ahead of Specter is Pat Leahy, elected in 1974. Leahy's also ahead of Specter, by the way, where he shines -- on Judiciary.

Here's how Specter measures up on his current assignments with the current Democrats:
-- Appropriations: Current Chair: Inouye, elected in 1962
-- Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human -- Services, and Education: Current Chair: Tom Harkin, elected 1984
-- Committee on the Judiciary: Current Chair: Leahy, elected 1974
-- Committee on Veterans' Affairs: Current Chair: Daniel Akaka, appointed May 1990.
-- Committee on Environment and Public Works: Current Chair: Barbara Boxer, elected 1992
-- Special Committee on Aging: Herb Kohl, elected in 1988

From NBC's Harry Enten
Arlen Specter made history today becoming the first-ever senator to switch directly from the Republican to the Democratic Party.

In the history of the republic, 20 other United States Senators have switched political affiliations while in office with 12 of those coming since the direct election of senators in 1913, according to records kept by the U.S. Senate Historical Office.

Most recently, Joe Lieberman (CT) switched from the Democratic Party to Independent Democrat. He caucused with the Democrats in 2006 after losing a primary to challenger Ned Lamont.

While Specter's and Lieberman's decisions were mostly due to political survival, this is not the norm for party switchers.

Some have done so out of a belief that they no longer fit ideologically. Strom Thurmond's (SC) switch from the Democratic to Republican Party in the watershed year of 1964 is an example.

Others have done so due to frustration with the party establishment. Harry Byrd (VA) switched from the Democratic Party to an Independent, who caucused with the Democrats in 1971. He refused to pledge an oath to supporting Democratic candidates, including the Democratic candidate for president in 1972.

More recent examples include Jim Jeffords (VT), Robert Smith (NH), Ben Nighthorse Campbell (CO) and Richard Shelby (AL).

In 2001, Jeffords left the Republican Party to caucus with the Democrats as an Independent. By doing so, he gave the Democrats a one-seat majority in the Senate. Although he had just won re-election, he, like Specter, came from a state that was becoming increasingly Democratic.

In 1999, Smith switched from Republican Party to Independent in order to seek the U.S. Taxpayers Party nomination for president in 2000. Five months later, he gave up running for president and switched back to the Republican Party.

After Republicans won back the Senate in 1994, Nighthorse Campbell and Shelby left the Democratic Party to become Republicans. Both gained seniority on important Senate committees.

[EDITOR'S NOTE: An earlier version of this post incorrectly identified Ben Nighthorse Campbell's state. It has since been corrected.]

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) is known by some to be very ambitious. Perhaps some of that ambition was showing when he said today that he was going to "wait and see" on whether he'd support Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter in a Democratic primary.

Video: Saying he found himself more and more at odds with the GOP philosophy, and that he didn't want his record decided by the Pennsylvania Republicans, Sen. Arlen Specter announces he will run for re-election as a Democrat.

Sestak, a former two-star admiral elected in 2006, thought to be considering a 2010 Senate bid of his own, called Specter's decision a "good thing" for Specter, but not necessarily for Democrats or Pennsylvanians.

He told NBC's Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC that there are two things to consider:
1. "I ran for something, not against something." Sesktak said people should ask of Specter, "What he's running for?"

2. He said former President Bill Clinton reshaped the party for the better -- something Sestak said he would have liked to have seen Specter do for the GOP.

"I'm going to have to wait," Sestak said on whether he'd support Specter. "If the alternative is Toomey, that's one issue."

But he went on to say Specter's decision was shaped by politics. Specter, by the way, admitted as much at his news conference. He talked about seeing his own polling on Friday and expressing frustration with the state party and Republican base. He unloaded on the Club for Growth for costing Republicans elected officials by running people that can't win in general election or forcing people like former Sen. Lincoln Chafee to spend too much money in primaries.

"Is that the type of individual we want," Sestak asked of Specter, adding, "I have to see" what he's running for, "not that he can win, but that he's running on principle."

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Specter challenger Pat Toomey, former president of the Club for Growth, told NBC's Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC that Specter's switch is "very unfortunate," but not "surprising."

He charged that Specter shared "a liberal or left-of-center ideology" with Democrats in the Senate, and now his party identification matches his ideology.

Toomey upped the rhetoric, setting up a likely campaign mantra: "Can they trust this man?" Toomey said of what the question Pennsylvanians should ask themselves about Specter.

He added, that "just last week, he went around Pennsylvania" saying that we "can't turn control of the government" over to the Democrats. "He has to answer to that," Toomey said.

Mitchell asked, however, about Toomey and others in the party apparently trying to cast Specter as a left-winger. (RNC Chairman Michael Steele's, for example, noted in his statement that Specter left "because he knew that he was going to lose a Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record.")

She asked, isn't Specter more of a moderate and hasn't the Republican party in Pennsylvania gotten more conservative?

"I don't think the Republican Party has changed in Pennsylvania," Toomey said, adding that Specter is trying to be on "both sides" of every issue. He cited "card check" in particular.

"I think voters are fed up with people who are only concerned about their political fortunes and don't stick to principles or ideas."

Of note, Republicans have gone into full oppo mode against Specter, passing around background research:

Q: "Some Democrats have approached you to switch, why not take them up on it?" SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): How do you know that as a fact just because Rendell and Biden said that publicly? Q: "Sure, why not take the path of the least resistance." SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): "Because I am a Republican." ("Arlen Specter Unfiltered," Pennsylvania Avenue, 4/16/09)

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): "I'm staying a Republican because I think I have a more important role to play there." ("Specter won't rule out run as an Independent," The Hill, 3/17/09)

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA):  'I think each of the 41 Republican senators, in a sense — and I don't want to overstate this — is a national asset,' he said, 'because if one was gone, you'd only have 40, the Democrats would have 60, and they would control all of the mechanisms of government.'" ("Specter Won't Rule Out Run As An Independent," The Hill, 3/17/09)

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): "And because if we lose my seat they have 60 Democrats, they will pass card check, you will have the Obama tax increases, they will carry out his big spending plans. So the 41st Republican, whose name is Arlen Specter is vital to stopping tax increases, passage of card check, and the Obama big spending plans." ("Arlen Specter Unfiltered," Pennsylvania Avenue, 4/16/09)

SEN. ARLEN SPECTER (R-PA): "All that is standing between the Democrats and an avalanche are the 41 Republican Senators to to filibuster. If hes [Toomey] the nominee we lose the seat and you have card check, and you have tax increases and you have all of the big Obama spending programs." ("Arlen Specter Unfiltered," Pennsylvania Avenue, 4/16/09)

From NBC's Mark Murray and Domenico Montanaro

The Washington Post's Cillizza first reported and NBC News confirms that Republican Sen. Arlen Specter has switched parties, which would give Democrats a filibuster-proof 60 seats if/once Al Franken is seated.

Here's Specter's statement:

         April 28, 2009

         Statement by Senator Arlen Specter

I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.

Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.

When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.

Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.

I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.

I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.

I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.

I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania's economy.

I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.

While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.

My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords' switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.

Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy's statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.

*** UPDATE *** NBC's Chris Donovan points out that just a little over a month ago, on March 18, Specter told the Philadelphia Inquirer: "To eliminate any doubt, I am a Republican, and I am running for reelection in 2010 as a Republican on the Republican ticket," Specter said in a statement released by his campaign manager.

*** UPDATE 2 *** Specter was facing a tough re-election campaign in 2010. His poll numbers and approval ratings had been sinking among Republicans. The state party and state Republican officials didn't appear warm to the longtime moderate. He also got a challenge from former Club for Growth President Pat Toomey. Six years ago, Specter eked out a primary win over Toomey. This year, he was trailing in some polls to Toomey. The political landscape since 2004 in Pennsylvania has shifted. Obama won the state by double-digits, with huge Democratic registration growth, particularly in the populous Philadelphia suburbs.

Also remember that the 2010 Senate primary is closed. In other words, independents don't get to vote and would consist of more of a party activist base.

*** UPDATE 3 *** NBC's Savannah Guthrie reports that while in the Oval Office and during his Economic Daily Briefing, the president was handed a note that said, "Specter is announcing he is changing parties."

At 10:30 a.m. ET, the president called Specter and told him, "You have my full support" and that the White House/Democrats are "thrilled to have you."

*** UPDATE 4 *** Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA) on MSNBC with David Shuster, indicated that he'd spoken to Specter before he made the switch, said, "Welcome, Arlen."

*** UPDATE 5 *** Rejecting "the talk-show wing" of the GOP?
Rep. Eric Massa (D-NY) on MSNBC with Shuster: "He like I used to be a Republican" and they "rejected the talk-show wing of the Republican Party," he said.

*** UPDATE 6 *** Republican reaction:
Republicans are telling NBC News that Specter's move is entirely about keeping his Senate seat, since he was going to receive a TOUGH primary challenge from conservative Pat Toomey, who almost defeated Specter in a GOP primary in 2004.

Specter "has apparently chosen the path of political expediency," a GOP official tells NBC.

NBC's Kelly O'Donnell reported at 12:20 that Minority leader Mitch McConnell and top GOP senators are meeting now. They will have a statement after their discussion. There is no timeline yet as to when they were notified of Specter's decision.

*** UPDATE 7 *** Schumer on Specter: "Arlen Specter, through the years, has been an effective, intelligent and moderate senator. We welcome him into the Democratic Party and our caucus in the Senate with open arms and can understand that his party, particularly in the last three months, has shown no room for moderates. On a personal basis, I look forward to continuing to work with Arlen on a full range of issues. While it will still take a great deal of work to pass the President's comprehensive and bold agenda, the Republican party will no longer be able to revert to kneejerk filibusters at every whim to block progress, and that is a very good thing for Americans."

*** UPDATE 8 *** RNC Chairman Michael Steele on Specter: "Some in the Republican Party are happy about this. I am not. Let's be honest-Senator Specter didn't leave the GOP based on principles of any kind. He left to further his personal political interests because he knew that he was going to lose a Republican primary due to his left-wing voting record. Republicans look forward to beating Sen. Specter in 2010, assuming the Democrats don't do it first."

*** UPDATE 9 *** The AFL-CIO thinks this means Specter could be open to supporting "Card Check" now: "Throw out all the common wisdom about Employee Free Choice Act," a spokesman sent around to reporters after hearing of the news.

*** UPDATE 10 *** NBC's Harry Enten points out some of the poll numbers for Specter v. Toomey in a GOP primary. In particular check out the switch from December 2008 to March of this year:
Research 2000 (12/8-10, 2008): Specter 43%, Toomey 28%
Qunnipiac (March 19-23, 2009): Toomey 41%, Specter 27%

*** UPDATE 11 *** More on the timeline from NBC's Kelly O'Donnell:
Capitol Hill sources tell NBC News there had been active discussion between senior Democratic leadership and Arlen Specter for about three weeks.

NO DEM OPPONENT PROMISED: Specter was promised that the Democratic Party would fully support his candidacy as a Democrat and would not back any other Democrat seeking the seat. "In money and message," the party will be behind Specter. Any other Democrat who intends to run will "not have the blessing of the party."

NO CHAIRMANSHIP ON THE TABLE: Sources say Specter will not be given a chairmanship during this Congress, the 111th. For now, "chairmanships were not on the table" as a part of the party switch negotiations.

NOTIFICATION: Specter told McConnell today after signaling to Reid and other leaders in the "last day or so" that he was willing to switch, sources said.

APPROACHED DURING STIMULUS DEBATE: Reid and Sen. Menedez, head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, approached Specter during the stimulus negotiations to suggest a party switch. At that time, sources say Specter indicated he was "willing to think about it." Sources say Specter was disappointed that he had increasingly been at odds with his party. Specter insisted to Reid that he would vote his conscience and would not always be a Dem party-line vote as indicated in Specter's own release.

"THINGS HE STILL WANTS TO GET DONE": Specter told Democratic leadership that there are "things he still wants to get done" in office, according to sources. Collectively, their conversations determined he was unlikely to win in 2010.

*** UPDATE 12 *** "I am so thrilled with this news," said Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) on MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell reports. She called him a "fighter" and noted that she's worked with him often. She added, "I am thrilled to have Arlen Specter working with us. ... I am sure the people of Pennsylvania will give him the support he deserves."

*** UPDATE 13 *** NRSC Chairman John Cornyn (R-TX) on Specter: "Senator Specter's decision today represents the height of political self-preservation. While this presents a short-term disappointment, voters next year will have a clear choice to cast their ballots for a potentially unbridled Democrat super-majority versus the system of checks-and-balances that Americans deserve." Note that Cornyn consistently expressed support for Specter, unlike Steele, for example.

*** UPDATE 14 *** NBC's Ken Strickland reports on more of the context:
First, Specter told Majority Leader Harry Reid yesterday in Reid's leadership office in the Capitol.

Specter called his long-time friend and Judiciary Committee chairman Pat Leahy this morning. Leahy, who had a front-row seat for Jim Jeffords' party switching, said he was not surprised by specter's move.

Assuming Franken gets seated, Specter would give Democrats to 60 votes needed to break filibusters. But even Leahy admits it's by no means an automatic. "In our caucus we don't have any automatic votes for anything," Leahy said today. "I expect him to be just as independent as ever."

As long as there are moderate Democrats, as long as there are regional issues like energy and farming, the Democratic caucus always runs the risk of being fractured (i.e. specter is pro-choice; his PA Democratic colleague senator Bob Casey is pro-life.)

Senate No. 3 Democrat Chuck Schumer agrees. "Anyone who says the president's agenda can slide right thru here is wrong. That will not happen... but the really good news for us is that the Republican sort of knee-jerk filibuster at every whim cannot happen. That will mean much more debate and much more progress, and it's a major effect."

It means Democrats will at least be able to make the trains run faster -- get through the procedural stuff faster -- in order get to the final votes. While Republicans may have been unable to kill controversial bills, they have been able to slow things down. Specter and Franken votes with the Democratic caucus would dramatically reduce the procedural brinkmanship.

Schumer, who ran the Democrats' Senate campaign committee for at least two cycles added that "The Republican Party has just become inhospitable to moderates, and it just became very uncomfortable for Arlen Specter."

Leahy agreed, saying, "Arlen Specter didn't leave the Republican Party. The party left him."

*** UPDATE 15 *** Sen. Robert Byrd on Specter: "Senator Arlen Specter is one smart Senator. He is an independent thinker of the type that the Framers of the Constitution had in mind when they conceived the office of U.S. Senator. He is tough, thorough, and he can't be intimidated. I am delighted to welcome him as a Democratic colleague. Arlen Specter gives our side of the aisle not only a numerical boost, but also an intellectual shot in the arm."

*** UPDATE 16 *** Lindsey Graham on Specter: "While I often disagreed and voted opposite Senator Specter, I am very disappointed with his decision. Senator Specter's switch puts Senate Democrats on the verge of hitting the magic 60 vote threshold. I hope Senator Specter will hold his ground on card check and other important issues working their way through the Senate.

"The situation in Pennsylvania highlights the dilemma facing the Republican Party. Ideologically, we are a center-right party and I am committed to maintaining that position. However, for us to have national relevance we have to run and win in blue states. As a party we have to expand our base and diversify our membership while maintaining our fiscally conservative, limited government approach.

"Today's decision by Senator Specter puts a great deal of pressure on red-state Democratic Senators. Their constituents will look to them to reject a far left-wing agenda. President Obama and the Democratic majority will likely see this as an opportunity to pass card check and nationalize our health care system. I hope moderate Democrats will be willing to speak out against what could be a radical left-wing agenda that may be forthcoming."

*** UPDATE 17 *** A return to the Democratic Party
NBC's Chris Donovan adds, One interesting tidbit is Specter is actually returning to the Democratic Party. In his statement today note that Specter said he has been a Republican since 1966. That's because before 1966 he was a registered Democrat, but decided in 1965 to run as a Republican candidate for Philadelphia District Attorney when he realized he wasn't getting the support of the local Democratic Party for the post and Philly's Republican leader approached him about running. 

In his 2000 memoir "Passion for Truth," Specter wrote about his decision to change parties: "Changing parties involved a high level of trauma. It wasn't like changing religions, but there were elements of arguable disloyalty and opportunism that rubbed me the wrong way."

And interestingly enough, he recalled Democrats shouting at the time: "Benedict Arlen!" And "Judas!"

Here are a few lines from his memoir.  He covers the issue from pages 140-146:
"I held no allegiance or even sympathy for the local Democratic machine. I had to fight the machine to bring the Teamsters to trial and to subpoena the necessary witnesses who were Democratic bigwigs. Nonetheless, changing parties involved a high level of trauma. It wasn't like changing religions, but there were elements of arguable disloyalty and opportunism that rubbed me the wrong way. I thought about what my father would say. He had been a staunch FDR Democrat." (Page 144)

"I was also fighting an accusation of betrayal. Democrats shouted 'Benedict Arlen!' and 'Judas!' But I had never taken an oath to the Democratic Party. I had taken an oath to the people of Philadelphia. I firmly believed that DA Jim Crumlish had shirked his responsibilities as the city's top law-enforcement officer. He had not cracked down on crime and corruption. I knew that Philadelphia needed tough law enforcement, and I thought I could deliver it." (Page 146)

From NBC's Mark Murray
Here's an early set of numbers we're releasing from the new NBC/WSJ poll: A plurality -- by the thinnest of margins -- favors an active government.

According to the poll, 47% believe the government should do more to solve problems and meet people's needs, versus 46% who think the government does too much and that those things are better left to businesses and individuals.

The percentage believing in a more active government is down from February (when 51% said that government should do more), but it's slightly up from 2002 (when 45% said that) and from 1997 (when 41% said that).

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, and Domenico Montanaro
***

Holding up Sebelius: At a time when the swine flu is dominating headlines and TV news, how many Republicans today will vote against Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' nomination to be President Obama's Health and Human Services secretary? Sebelius is expected to be confirmed, but the AP says the vote could be close. NBC's Ken Strickland notes that Senate debate over the nomination begins at 10:00 am ET, and Dems hope to have her confirmed by 6:30 pm. She will need 60 votes to overcome the GOP's filibuster. The left has been pulling its hair over the fact that conservatives have been holding up her confirmation -- over abortion -- during this swine flu frenzy. Indeed, it's amazing that there's been very little finger-pointing that the president doesn't have an HHS secretary, surgeon general, or his own CDC head. Obviously, if Republicans started pointing fingers, they'd get grief right back given that members of their party have slowed down Sebelius. This entire incident, as it turns out, is a pretty good lesson for those who believe the partisan nature of Washington can hold up the serious work of government. Paging David Brooks… 

*** Stepping on 100 days: Here's another thing swine flu has done -- it has stepped on the 100-day stories. Many news organizations are still doing them; they just aren't getting the same prominence. (And why should they if a pandemic is possible?) Speaking of the possibility of a pandemic, we're about at that moment when the administration's response will start getting judged by the media. We've already seen some early "How's Napolitano doing?" stories, as we noted yesterday. Is there a more thankless job than Homeland Security secretary, the ultimate if-you-are-in-the-headlines-the-news-is-bad job? Right now, the administration is walking the line between being overly cautious and not causing panic. They seem to be striking the right balance. Of course, the minute someone dies -- or the minute the outbreak gets bigger exponentially, if it does -- then questions about when or if to close the border will kick in, as will questions about whether American airports should be screening for passengers with fevers. Meanwhile, folks should realize that Mexico City is truly in a panic. According to some reports from locals, the streets are empty; the trust in the government is at (or near) an all-time low; and folks are flooding health-care clinics and hospitals. This is a city of 20 million people brought to a grinding halt. And don't think the economic devastation Mexico will experience the rest of this year won't have consequences on our economy.

Video: NBC's chief medical editor Dr. Nancy Snyderman and psychiatrist Dr. Gail Saltz offer advice for hypochondriacs who think they may have symptoms of the swine flu.

*** Polls galore: Still, the 100-day stories go on… Right before that milestone tomorrow, there are two new national polls out that find President Obama enjoying broad support from the public. Per the New York Times/CBS survey, his approval rating is 68%, compared with Bush's 56% at this juncture. And a CNN/Opinion Research poll has Obama's approval at 63%, but it also shows that approval of his policies is somewhat lower (57%). Our own NBC/WSJ poll will be released tonight beginning at 6:30 pm ET on NBC Nightly News, as well as on MSNBC.com. Will it show similar support for Obama? How does the public view his legislative priorities? Who is Barack Obama -- a liberal or a moderate? How popular (or unpopular) are Republicans right now? And how does the public view the debate over those controversial interrogation practices? Be sure to tune in -- or click on -- for the answers.

*** Tower, this is Ghost Rider requesting a fly-by: Just how boneheaded was that Air Force One flyover/photo shoot? It seems to have been boneheaded enough that Obama let it be known that he was incensed, and the White House released this statement yesterday from Louis Caldera, director of the White House's military office: "Last week, I approved a mission over New York. I take responsibility for that decision. While federal authorities took the proper steps to notify state and local authorities in New York and New Jersey, it's clear that the mission created confusion and disruption. I apologize and take responsibility for any distress that flight caused."

*** Obama today: It looks like the torture story will be on the agenda today whether Obama wants it or not… At 10:45 am ET, he travels to FBI headquarters to meet with FBI Director Robert Mueller and other officials before addressing FBI employees at 11:10 am. Later in the day, he meets with the Congressional Progressive Caucus (closed to the press) and then presents the National Teacher of the Year award. It's the meeting with the progressive caucus that could provide some interesting nuggets. Will they press him on torture? On a truth commission?

*** Also today: Vice President Biden visits the National Domestic Violence Hotline headquarters in Austin, TX and then holds a fundraiser in the city for the Democratic National Committee. Also, First Lady Michelle Obama, Secretary of State Clinton, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, House Minority Leader John Boehner, and others participate this morning in the unveiling of the Sojourner Truth bust in Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor's Center.

Countdown to Obama's 100th day: 1 day 
Countdown to NJ GOP primary: 35 days
Countdown to VA Dem primary: 42 days
Countdown to Election Day 2009: 189 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 553 days

Click here to sign up for First Read emails. 
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.

The latest New York Times/CBS poll: "Barack Obama's presidency seems to be altering the public perception of race relations in the United States. Two-thirds of Americans now say race relations are generally good, and the percentage of blacks who say so has doubled since last July… Despite that, half of blacks still say whites have a better chance of getting ahead in American society."

More: "Mr. Obama's 68 percent job approval rating is higher than that of any recent president at the 100-day mark. Mr. Bush had the approval of 56 percent of the public at this juncture. But while Americans clearly have faith in Mr. Obama, the poll revealed something of a disconnect between what the public thinks the president has already accomplished and what it expects him to achieve. Fewer than half of those surveyed, 48 percent, said Mr. Obama had begun to make progress on one of his major campaign promises, changing the way business is conducted in Washington. And just 39 percent said he had begun to make progress on another major promise, cutting taxes for middle-class Americans, even though the stimulus bill he signed into law does include a middle class tax cut." 

The new CNN poll: "The CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll … indicates that 63 percent of Americans approve of how Obama is handling his duties as president. One in three questioned in the poll disapprove. Democrats overwhelmingly approve of how Obama is handling his job as president; 61 percent of independents agree. Only 28 percent of Republicans say the president is doing a good job in office." 

USA Today looks ahead to the next 100 days. "[T]he next stretch of Barack Obama's time in the White House, from Wednesday until about the time Congress begins its summer recess, looms as a period no less critical in how his tenure ultimately will be judged… 'These are going to be important months,' says David Axelrod, one of Obama's closest White House advisers. 'I'll stipulate that the next 100 days aren't going to be any easier in certain ways than the first 100. We know that.'"

"President Obama should think long and hard before reversing the foreign policies of the Bush administration," Politico's Vogel writes. "That advice comes not from Dick Cheney but from Kurt Campbell, a national security expert Obama nominated last week for a top diplomatic post, and James Steinberg, his soon-to-be boss at the State Department. In fact, it's one of the premises of a 2008 book co-written by Campbell, Obama's new nominee to be assistant secretary of state for Asian and Pacific affairs, and Steinberg, the No. 2 official at the State Department."

The New York Times: "As the administration responds to its first domestic emergency, it is building on concrete preparations made during the tenure of President George W. Bush that have won praise from public health experts. But its actions are also informed by what Mr. Bush learned in his response to Hurricane Katrina: that political management of a crisis, and of public expectations, can be as important as the immediate response."

The Los Angeles Times looks at the person who has become the administration's face on this issue: DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. "Under the law, this is the job of the secretary of Homeland Security, who in addition to protecting the nation against terrorism is charged with overseeing the nation's response to possible pandemics, even as clinicians and researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other agencies work to track the disease. Beyond the mandate, Napolitano bears the burden of dealing with the kind of natural disaster that can blindside a new administration and morph into a major headache almost overnight if not handled effectively."
 
More: "Napolitano's visibility has been further elevated because the posts of secretary of Health and Human Services, surgeon general and director of the CDC have not been filled. The White House has repeatedly said that those vacancies were not handicapping the government's response to the flu outbreak… Gerald Epstein, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies who specializes in domestic security, said he did not think the vacancies posed a problem."

Could this be the scariest part of the swine flu at this point? That it could delay any economic recovery? "The damage could hit the already ailing tourism and airline industries the hardest. The European Union and a number of nations began warning their citizens yesterday to avoid unnecessary travel to parts of North America. During the SARS outbreak in 2003 -- the last major epidemic of a respiratory disease with human-to-human transmission -- airline traffic to Asian destinations such as Hong Kong fell by as much as 60 percent. Overall, Asia-Pacific airlines lost 50 percent of traffic in the first five months of 2003, causing them $6 billion in losses. North American carriers saw passenger traffic fall by 3.7 percent that year."

The Boston Globe adds, "The bruised US economy, which had shown a few signs of life, took another beating yesterday with global concerns over the swine flu outbreak expected to hit travel and tourism the hardest."

"House and Senate Democrats reached a budget deal on Monday night that will allow both chambers to vote on budget resolutions this week," The Hill reports. "Budget negotiators, after hours of negotiations on Monday, put finishing touches on the resolution, which Democrats hope to approve by President Obama's 100th day in office Wednesday."

The AP says the Senate is on the verge of confirming Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius to be Obama's HHS secretary. "Debate is set to begin Tuesday morning, with a vote anticipated in the afternoon… Sebelius is expected to get the 60 votes needed in the Democratic-led Senate, though the vote could be close. Anti-abortion groups have been lobbying Republican senators to vote against her."

"If she's confirmed, Sebelius would have an immediate challenge because of the swine flu outbreak in the U.S. She also would be working without much of a team. The Senate hasn't acted on the nominees for deputy HHS secretary or commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration." 

The Wall Street Journal: "Republican critics have cited campaign contributions Ms. Sebelius received from a Kansas doctor who performs abortions. Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele last week called on President Barack Obama to withdraw her nomination unless she answered more questions about the issue."  

The Kansas City Star wonders whether conservative GOP Sen. Sam Brownback will vote for Sebelius -- as he once was expected to do. "Now, as the Sebelius nomination nears a final vote later today, Brownback's support -- considered a crucial test by conservatives opposed to Sebelius -- appears to have unofficially softened. His office Monday declined to reveal how the staunchly anti-abortion Republican will vote, but last week Brownback told a reporter Sebelius' recent veto of new abortion regulations made it 'harder and harder' for him to vote yes on the Democrat's nomination."

Politico has the take on Obama's 100 days from former White House press secretary Dana Perino and vaunted political watcher Tom Mann:
PERINO: "[T]he GOP is doing a much better job of working as a team, arguing on the merits, utilizing new technologies to communicate and raising the profile of younger members like Paul Ryan… The GOP's secret weapon will be the conservative Democrats -- and my advice is to keep making the votes tough for them to explain back home."
 
MANN: "Republicans have been in denial since the 2008 election returns came in. For a nation facing an economic crisis, they moved much too quickly into an opposition mode. They are embracing policies entirely unresponsive to the problems confronting the country and the globe. By retreating to their ideological base, they have made themselves irrelevant to policy­making and increasingly unpopular with the public. In my 40 years of watching American politics in Washington, I have never seen an out party so bent on self-destruction."

Politics Daily's Jill Lawrence says the GOP's disarray "reflects a party somewhere between implosion and recovery. It's an awkward phase that could last a while." More: "We've seen awkward attempts by GOP leaders to distance themselves from radio host Rush Limbaugh while trying not to offend the acerbic mischief-maker or his followers. We've witnessed family feuds and political missteps that are making even conservatives wonder if Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has a national future. President Obama's $787 billion economic recovery package has set Republicans against each other every which way: governor vs. governor, governor vs. state legislators, governors vs. members of Congress."  

A conservative group led by Ed Gillespie and Whit Ayres -- called ResurgentRepublic -- officially launches today. The group says "the White House and Congressional leaders" are moving "the country dramatically left," according to a release e-mailed to First Read. It "aims to shape the debate over the proper role of government. Resurgent Republic will promote market-oriented policies, lower taxes and economic growth, and strong national security policies. It will help policy makers, think tanks, interest groups and others advocate for policies that are consistent with conservative principles, and oppose policies that stifle job creation, weaken national security and undermine values that have made America a great country." Others on the advisory board include Gov. Haley Barbour (R-MS), former Sen. George Allen (R-VA), Bill Paxon, Vin Weber, and Mary Matalin.

This is a potentially interesting development. This is the establishment wing of the GOP flexing its muscles a tad. Could this be the DLC like development which started post-'84 and didn't see fruition, really, until '92? Obviously, these folks would bristle at the idea that they are a "centrist" GOP alternative. That's not the point... What we're saying is that the intellectual wing of the GOP is looking for a foundation again. Could this be it? It's a who's-who of the GOP from the Beltway end of things.

COLORADO: "Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck, a Republican known for his hard-line views on illegal immigration, is officially running against appointed Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet in the Colorado Senate race," Politico writes. "Buck, who launched his Senate campaign website Monday, will most likely face Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier in the GOP primary… All eyes are now on former Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-Colo.), who is still mulling over a Senate campaign and has higher name identification than both Buck and Frazier." 
 
KENTUCKY: "Lt. Gov. Daniel Mongiardo (D), who hails from Eastern Kentucky mining country, is a mountaintop mining proponent. His primary foe, Attorney General Jack Conway (D), takes a much more nuanced view. In November, Conway added his name to a letter some state officials sent to then-President Bush arguing against the administration's proposal to legalize dumping waste from mountaintop mining near rivers and streams. Both positions could have serious impact on a state hard-hit by the economic crisis." 
 
NEW YORK: The NY-20 spin is coming fast and furious… The GOP is already girding for a 2010 fight. The NY-20 loss "'taught us we could once again be competitive in a Democrat-held district, so it will be natural for us to apply what worked well and target it again in 2010,' National Republican Congressional Committee spokesman Paul Lindsay said on Monday. In addition to state Assemblyman Jim Tedisco (R) -- who lost the special election to replace recently appointed Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) by less than 400 votes -- potential Republican candidates in 2010 include former state Assembly Minority Leader John Faso, state Sens. Betty Little and Roy McDonald, Richard Wager, a former aide to New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg (I), and Saratoga County District Attorney James Murphy, who is no relation to the Congressman-elect."