From NBC's Ali Weinberg
A day before President Obama's half-day bipartisan health care summit tomorrow at Blair House, the liberal and conservative blogospheres discuss whether "fixes" to the Senate's health care reform bill, on contentious points like a public option or tax on expensive insurance plans, can realistically pass through budget reconciliation. 

Red State's Brian Darling takes New Republic writer Jonathan Chait's assertion, made a few days ago, that "it's fairly easy to just have the House pass the Senate [health care reform] bill, then use reconciliation to eliminate the Nebraska Medicaid subsidy and change the mix of taxes that pay for new coverage." 

Darling points out a combination of parliamentary hurdles and points of contention in the actual legislation that he writes disprove Chait's premise. "It is far from easy, if you ask somebody who understands the budget rules, to pass a reconciliation bill with 50 votes plus the VP... Any member of the Senate can make a point of order against provisions that do not comply with the instructions.  If a point of order is made, and the Parliamentarian acts in good faith, proponents of the provision would need 60 votes to retain it," Darling writes. 

On the Senate bill's actual provisions:  "[It] will offend pro-life Democrats and that is something that seems impossible to solve via reconciliation.  The reconcilation measure will have controversial new tax provisions and it will lack your beloved public option.  The massive new taxes proposed in the President's reconciliation draft, like a new tax "on income from interest, dividends, annuities, royalties an rents" are going to be unpopular."  
 
Hot Air's Allahpundit takes issue with First Read's point this morning that President Obama may court fiscally conservative Blue Dog House Democrats who did not vote for the health care bill the first time around, but may be willing to support a bill without a public option or "millionaire's tax." 

Allahpundit's response: "That assumes that (a) no progressives will walk away from Obama because he didn't include a public option, and (b) that the political risk to Blue Dogs in voting yes now is the same as, or even less than, the risk they faced when voting on Pelosi's bill in November, which of course is insane." 
 
TNR health care columnist Jonathan Cohn refutes the prevailing sentiment in the conservative blogosphere - also articulated in a memo by House Minority Whip Eric Cantor today - that House Democrats do not have enough votes to pass a set of health care amendments through reconciliation. "Conservative Democrats in the Senate have been indicating they are open to passing final amendments to the bill via the budget reconciliation process. When Bernie Sanders or Sherrod Brown say Democrats need to use reconciliation because of Republican obstructionism, that doesn't mean much. When Evan Bayh, Mary Landrieu, and Ben Nelson say their liberal colleagues may be right, that's Significant...Comments like these do more than increase, vastly, the odds that reconciliation amendments could pass the Senate. They also embolden those skittish House Democrats skittish who either fear the bill won't play well in conservative districts or don't trust the Senate to do its part," Cohn writes.
 
"The odds, in other words, are still not great. But they are, once again, moving in the right direction.  Maybe the reason Cantor is trying so hard to convince Democrats that passing reform is hopeless is that, in reality, it isn't," he continues. 
 
MYDD's Jonathan Singer notes that both sides of the aisle have relied heavily on budget reconciliation to pass health care legislation. "It has been the preferred tactic for Senates, Democratic and Republican alike, for decades," Singer writes. "To take one example, the CHIP program, under which children across the country are provided healthcare coverage, was created through the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. Heck, COBRA, which enables Americans to keep their health coverage after being laid off, was named for the reconciliation legislation under which it was passed: the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985. The list goes on." 
 
AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay provides part of that list, linked to from the NPR website, also noting that "reconciliation isn't new."

From NBC's Athena Jones
President Obama defended his agenda in a speech to a group of business leaders on Wednesday, arguing that actions his administration has already taken had helped avert an economic collapse and policies it has proposed will spur growth and produce jobs.

The president told about 100 business leaders gathered at a hotel near the White House that he was not anti-business, that he would never stop listening to their concerns and their ideas and that he would never stop rooting for their success.

During the 40-minute speech, he argued the Recovery Act, the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the efforts to bail out US automakers, help stem foreclosures and unfreeze credit markets put the economy on a stronger footing. He said his proposals in the areas of education, energy and health care would help ensure America's ability to compete in the global economy and defended himself against charges of radicalism.

"Contrary to the claims of some of my clients -- uh, critics and some of the editorial pages, I am an ardent believer in the free market," Obama told the meeting of the Business Roundtable. "I want everyone in this room to succeed. I want your shareholders to do well, I want your workers to do well, I want you to do well, because I firmly believe that America's success in large part depends on your success."

Some of the administration's efforts to reform the way financial firms function, for instance by limiting the activities of banks, and to recoup TARP funds by charging a fee to those companies that benefited from the taxpayer rescue have to contributed to a view among some in the business community that the president is anti-business, an argument Republicans on Capitol Hill consistently make.

"We have arrived at a juncture in our politics where reasonable efforts to update our regulations, or make basic investments in our future, are too often greeted with cries of "government takeover" or even "socialism", Obama said. "And not only does that kind of rhetoric deny our history, but it prevents us from asking hard questions about the right balance between the private and public sectors."

A consistent message of the administration has been that government has a vital, but limited, role to play in laying the foundation for solid growth, by establishing strong rules of the road to govern business and industry and by making investments in education, infrastructure and energy. The president argues financial industry reforms are necessary to avoiding a repeat of the economic catastrophe that deepened the recession and cost millions of jobs, while allowing that the new regulations must be carefully crafted.

"If we don't pass financial reform, we can expect more crises in the future of the sort that we just saw. On the other hand if we design the new rules carelessly, they could choke off the supply of capital to businesses and families," he said.

Obama hailed the Senate's passage of a series of tax cuts for small businesses that hire more workers, calling it "an important step forward in putting more Americans back to work as soon as possible" and he said more must be done to help small businesses get access to credit.

Health care push
Previewing tomorrow's bipartisan summit on health care, the president said high health care costs were "an undeniable drag on our economy" and urged the support of the business communities.

"I know that there are many who have been skeptical of our reform efforts -- because in the wake of extraordinary measures that we took to rescue our economy, it's been an easy political tactic to characterize any effort at health reform as a "big government takeover," he said. "The truth is just the opposite."

He said his proposal would not eliminate private insurance or undermine the employer-based system, that it incorporated ideas from across the political spectrum and that it would reduce the deficit.

"Tomorrow, I look forward to a good exchange of ideas at the Blair House with some of the legislative leaders and I hope everyone comes with a shared desire to solve this challenge, not just score political points," he said.

Senior adviser Valerie Jarrett and Secretary of Commerce Gary Locke were also at the event.

From NBC's Mark Murray
Earlier this morning, we noted that liberal Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D) might be a House Democrat who voted against the House health-care bill last year, but who might end up voting for the Senate version, if House Speaker Nancy Pelosi needed his vote.

Kucinich shoots that down, however. Here's the Wall Street Journal: "Asked about the matter by Washington Wire, the congressman from Ohio released this statement about the president's compromise: 'The new proposal starts with a wholly unacceptable Senate health care bill and, with a few exceptions, continues to make it worse. It's a much better bill for insurance company investors than it is for the American people.'"

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
During the Oct. 15, 2008 presidential debate, First Read made the point that there remain many unanswered questions as to what Sarah Palin's specific policy initiatives would be for children with special needs after John McCain claimed that no one knows more about autism than Sarah Palin. 

Here's what we wrote, in part:

"Because Palin has a child with Down Syndrome, it can be safely assumed she feels a connection with parents of children with special needs. But what does McCain-Palin specifically want to do about special education? Do they agree with IDEA? Do they want to expand rights for special-education students to private schools? Do they want to increase funding? Do they want more access, by way of funding, to special-ed advocates?

In public appearances, Palin has voiced support and advocacy for special needs children: "To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters," she said on Oct. 24, 2008. "I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House."

Today, The Daily Beast has a piece on how special needs advocates are wary of Palin, whom they view as either out of step with their policy priorities or having unclear policy positions on what she would do to help the disabled.

From the piece:

"From crusading against Rahm Emanuel's use of the term 'retarded' to criticizing the Fox cartoon Family Guy for depicting a character with Down syndrome whose mother is 'governor of Alaska,' Sarah Palin has positioned herself in recent weeks as a national spokesperson on disability issues. Yet leading disability-rights organizations in Alaska, Washington, D.C., and across the country tell The Daily Beast they view Palin's increasing outspokenness on the issue with skepticism, noting that on most of their policy priorities—from health-care reform to increased federal funding for community services—Palin is either out of step with many national disability-advocacy groups or has yet to articulate a clear position. ... [O]n the policy level, Palin has a mixed and murky record on disability organizations' priorities. ...

"Indeed, though the Democratic Party has historically been more enthusiastic about funding health-care and education programs that serve disabled people, the key pieces of legislation addressing disability rights, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1975, passed with bipartisan support. Bob Dole, Orin Hatch, Sam Brownback, and Cathy McMorris Rodgers are among the Republican politicians who have prioritized disability policy issues.

"So far, Palin has not demonstrated the same depth of interest. Adam Pockriss, a spokesperson for Autism Speaks, wrote in an email to The Daily Beast that since the 2009 Westchester fundraising walk, 'Sarah Palin hasn't had any further involvement with Autism Speaks; nor has she taken a position on any autism-related policy items, to our knowledge.'"

Palin has drawn crowds of parents of children with disabilities to some of her events, but even as she professed to be their greatest advocates during the 2008 campaign questions were being asked as to what she would do when it comes to funding. At the end of the day, that's where a legislator can have the greatest impact.

And Palin was on record in wanting to reject stimulus funds to her state -- millions of which included special education funding.

From NBC's Mark Murray
After witnessing some surprising retirements from Democratic senators -- North Dakota's Byron Dorgan and Indiana's Evan Bayh -- Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Bob Menendez also told reporters today that he doesn't expect any more Dem retirements.

"I have every confidence at this point in time that there is no other Senate retirements."

From NBC's Mark Murray
Despite facing a political environment in which Democrats are now favored to lose several Senate seats this November, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chairman Bob Menendez argued today that the Republican Party has its share of problems that will limit its midterm successes.

Divisive and ideologically charged primaries. A band of Senate candidates whom can be portrayed as Washington insiders. And a party brand that remains in tatters.

Additionally, Menendez said that the talk of Republicans winning back control of the Senate is "wishful thinking."

"Look, they have to win every one of their open seats [in FL, KS, KY, MO, NH, and OH]. They have to defend a couple of their most vulnberable incumbents in North Carolina and in Louisiana. And after that, they have to pick up 10 seats," he told a group of political reporters this morning. "I just do not see that under any set of circumstances."

Menendez began his remarks by acknowledging the political environment confronting the majority party -- including an unemployment rate near 10%, a history benefiting the out-of-power party in midterms, and the two wars the nation is fighting. "We know the cards are somewhat stacked against us."

Still, the Democratic senator from New Jersey said the GOP is facing divisive primaries in states like Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Nevada, and New Hampshire. In Kentucky.

"They have huge primaries that drive them in the wrong direction," he said. "When you have Carly Fiorina traveling across California saying that she shares Sarah Palin's values, it gives you a sense of what those Republican primaries are doing."

Moreover, Menendez noted that several of the top GOP Senate candidates -- ex-Congressman Rob Simmons in Connecticut, ex-Sen. Dan Coats in Indiana, Congressman Roy Blunt in Missouri, and ex-Bush administration official Rob Portman in Ohio -- were Washington insiders would have a difficult navigating in this change environment.

"I'd rather be Robin Carnahan running against Roy Blunt. I'd rather be [Richard] Blumenthal running against Simmons. I'd rather be Lee Fisher running against Rob Portman."

Asked how some vulnerable Democratic incumbents -- like Blanche Lincoln in Arkansas, Harry Reid in Nevada, and Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania -- could benefit in this change, anti-incumbent environment, Menendez replied that these Democrats could still be seen as agents of change. "Blanche Lincoln has an independent streak in her."

That said, Menendez admitted that the Democratic Party's political fortunes have reversed in the past year. He said that was due to the economy, a "freefall" in the housing market, and two wars. "The confluence of all of this at the same time is enormous."

Menendez also said that the DSCC was launching a "new offensive" aimed at GOP Senate candidates to ask them: "Where are your ideas?"

"We believe the American people are hungry for ideas and solutions," he contended, adding that the Democrats won't let the midterms become a referendum on President Obama. "It's going to be an election on our candidate against their candidate."

*** UPDATE *** The National Republican Senatorial Commitee sends this response: "We look forward to highlighting the Chairman's statements today in states like New Hampshire, Louisiana and Florida, among others, because I can't imagine Paul Hodes, Charlie Melancon and Kendrick Meek will be happy to learn that they've been deemed 'Washington insiders.' Further, if the standard is that primaries are bad, it sounds like the Democrats aren't very optimistic about their chances in states like Colorado, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Kentucky, where they are facing divisive primary battles. Rhetoric like that aside though, the reality is that Republicans are currently ahead in eight Democrat-held seats, along with every open seat, because voters are simply not happy with the Democrats' liberal agenda in Washington. More taxes, more spending, and more government control over their everyday lives is not the type of change they believe in which is why voters are making clear they will vote for new leadership in November." 

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
The jobs bill today passed the Senate overwhelmingly, 70-28 with two not voting. Yet it barely squeaked past a filibuster yesterday, 62-30 with eight not voting.

So, who voted for the final jobs bill but against cloture?

Six Republicans changed their vote, including both senators from Mississippi -- Roger Wicker and Thad Cochran; as well as Lamar Alexander (TN), James Inhofe (OK), George LeMieux (FL), and Lisa Murkowski (AK).

Why did they change their vote? (1) These are all senators who aren't ideologically opposed to their states getting their fair share from the federal government; and (2) For at least two of the senators, the cloture vote was essentially a protest vote against the way Majority Leader Harry Reid carried out the process. The hope was that if Reid's bill failed the 60-vote hurdle, he would have been forced to scrap the measure and go back to a larger bill that seemed to have widespread bipartisan support.

Cochran was "dissatisfied" that Reid "did away with the bipartisan bill," said Chris Gallegos, the senator's press secretary. In the end, though, Cochran "agreed with the pieces that were in [the final bill] to try to spur hiring," Gallegos said.

Murkowski spokesman Michael Brumas echoed that: "Sen. Murkowski was disappointed that the Majority Leader didn't allow a vote on a bipartisan bill, crafted by Sens. Grassley and Baucus, that would have addressed a number of expiring federal laws tied to job creation. Additionally, she believes that the bill should've been open to amendments. So Sen. Murkowski voted against ending debate on the bill. She did support the elements contained in the pared down bill that the Senate passed today and voted for the legislation."

*** UPDATE *** LeMieux was upset that senators were not allowed to present amendments. "He thinks the rights of the senator ought to be respected," LeMieux's spokesman Ken Lundberg said. LeMieux wanted to present an amendment to cut the payroll tax in half, Lundberg said. "We protest the process; he wanted the senator's and other's ideas heard." But "at the end of the day, this [bill] was better than nothing."

Two Republicans who didn't vote yesterday, voted yes today -- Richard Burr (NC) and Orrin Hatch (UT). A total of 13 Republicans voted in favor of this bill, and one Democrat -- Ben Nelson of Nebraska -- voted against, as he did on the cloture vote.

It's hard to find two people who know more about the Senate and House than NBC's Ken Strickland and Mike Viqueira.

FULL VIDEO HERE: On MSNBC's Daily Rundown with Chuck Todd and Savannah Guthrie, Strick and Viq talk about reconciliation, the way forward on health care, what to expect from tomorrow's White House health-care summit?

Here's a brief excerpt:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

From NBC's Kelly O'Donnell and Domenico Montanaro
The jobs bill passed 70-28.

So who exactly are the people who voted against cloture but then voted for the bill? More on that to come.

From NBC's Pete Williams
By a vote of 7-2, the U.S. Supreme Court said today that when a suspect refuses to answer police questions by invoking the Miranda right to counsel, police can try again to ask questions if there's a break in custody for interrogation of at least two weeks. Police would then have to notify the suspect again of the right to remain silent.

The case involved a Maryland prison inmate suspected of a sex crime. After refusing to discuss the case and asking for a lawyer, police closed the file. When new evidence became available 2 1/2 years later, they went back to the inmate, gave the Miranda warning, and asked about the case again. The second time, the inmate confessed but later tried to get the confession thrown out, arguing that because he had refused to discuss the case the first time, the second attempt to question him amounted to coercion.

The court said as long as there's at least a two-week break in custody for interrogation, there's no coercion.

The court was unanimous in upholding the conviction in this case, because so much time had passed between the two interrogations, but voted 7-2 on imposing a two-week rule.

The new math hurts Dems' chances of passing health care in House, but there IS a way -- albeit a difficult one -- to get the votes. … KBH's pre-obit … Is the GOP now Jim DeMint's party? Maybe. But there's an irony in who's been winning elections for Republicans. … The DeMint-Rubio alliance … FL GOV general election gets underway VERY early with guns blazin'. … Daily Rundown has Graham, Cantor; Andrea Mitchell talks with Feinstein, Hatch.

From Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Ali Weinberg
*** The House math: How hard is it going to be for the White House and the Democratic Party to pass health care? Just look at the math they now face in the House of Representatives. Back in November, the House health-care bill passed, 220-215, with 39 Democrats voting against and one Republican voting for it. But that 220 number has since declined: The one Republican, Joseph Cao, now says he'll vote no; John Murtha passed away; Robert Wexler left the House (the special election isn't until April 13); and Neil Abercrombie is officially exiting on Friday to run for Hawaii governor. With those three Dem vacancies, you need 217 votes for passage (instead of the usual 218), but the Cao/Murtha/Wexler/Abercrombie changes mean that Speaker Nancy Pelosi is now at 216. What's more, Bart Stupak says he can't support the Senate bill's abortion language, so Pelosi is at least 215 -- not factoring in other "no" votes Stupak might take with him. And then you have House Democrats who voted for the bill, but who are scared about what happened in Massachusetts last month. "This is a career-ending vote," one Dem who voted yes last November told the Washington Post's Ruth Marcus.

*** Looking at the 39 Dems who voted no: So where does Pelosi get the handful of votes to get to 217? It will have to come from the pool of the 39 House Democrats who voted no last year -- most of whom are Blue Dogs or face tough re-election campaigns in November. First, she can start with the three Dems, who are retiring this year -- Brian Baird, Bart Gordon, and John Tanner. Next, she can twist the arms of Dennis Kucinich and Eric Massa, who voted against the original because it wasn't far-reaching enough. And then you have conservative-leaning Dems (Jason Altmire? Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin?), who voted against the House bill because it had a public option or because it raised taxes on the wealthy. But the Senate bill the House will have to vote on doesn't contain a public option, and doesn't contain the millionaire's tax. The argument to some blue dogs will be, If Ben Nelson, Blanche Lincoln, and Mary Landrieu, could -- ideologically -- vote for the Senate bill, then they can too. In short, 217 votes are there, but getting them won't be easy at all. 

*** The Senate math: As for the math in the Senate, Democrats would need just 50 votes (plus Vice President Biden's) if they proceed via reconciliation. But keep this mind: Senate Democrats are NOT talking about pushing all of health care through this process -- just the so-called "fixes" (eliminating the Cornhusker Kickback, dealing with the excise tax, etc). This explains why the public option isn't really included in this discussion because Dems are trying to preserve the reconciliation option for relatively small issues that will pass muster with the Senate parliamentarian.

*** KBH's pre-bituary: It's six days until Tuesday's GOP gubernatorial primary in Texas, but the pre-bituaries are already coming in for Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who's trailing incumbent Gov. Rick Perry in the polls. First was Chris Cillizza's "What Happened to Kay Bailey Hutchison" post. And then KBH's interview with the AP, in which she seem to all but concede that Perry's attacks on her as Washington insider have worked. "'It definitely has made it more difficult for me. I didn't think that people would buy that because I've been so effective for Texas,' Hutchison told the AP on her campaign bus. 'I didn't think that anyone could turn my success in producing results for Texas into a negative, but I think that he has attempted to do that and that what I've been having to fight against.'" It's worth wondering whether the race might have been different had Hutchison immediately resigned her Senate race -- without equivocation -- and attacked Perry's secessionist talk from last year. What if she had said back then, "You can be president of the Republic of Texas; I want to be governor of Texas." It would have shown some toughness that her candidacy seemed to lack.

*** Has it become DeMint's party? It's amazing to think about it, but it was just a year ago that there was a legitimate debate within the Republican Party whether it should be a "big tent" party or a "purist" one. Now? Many of the big-tenters have either left the building or are running for their lives. Examples: Arlen Specter switched parties; Dede Scozzafava had to quit her race in that NY-23 election because she was perceived being too liberal for a Republican; Marco Rubio is beating Charlie Crist in the polls; and John McCain has steered hard to the right to stave off a serious primary challenge. To put it another way, the GOP has become Jim DeMint's party. "I'd rather have 30 Marco Rubios than 60 Arlen Specters," DeMint said at last week's CPAC confab. (Ironically, the way things are going for the GOP in the midterms, it looks like we're going to see more than 30 Rubios in the next Senate…). Then again, look at the Republican Party's three big wins so far: Scott Brown, Chris Christie and Bob McDonnell. None of the three ran as DeMint conservatives. So it's as if DeMint's wing of the party has won the spin on these elections even as the campaigns themselves will tell you it was the wooing of the middle and the LACK of  use of the Republican brand that helped.

*** The DeMint-Rubio alliance: And speaking of Rubio-vs.-Crist, DeMint is now trying to deliver a coup de grace to Crist, with his PAC running this internet ad: "Will Charlie Switch Parties -- Yes or No?" In addition, DeMint is escorting Rubio to handful of fundraisers next month in South Carolina, which has set off 2012 speculation for Rubio (before he's even won his Senate race' actually before he's even won his primary). "Some are trying to spin this as a 2012 toe in water, and that's just ridiculous," a GOP source told First Read, adding that Crist enjoys a built-in advantage from a money standpoint. "This is going to be a long, tough battle… The reason [for the events] is to help Rubio to get the resources he needs to run against more well-funded Crist." But given the rock-star treatment Rubio is getting, does he really need to step inside South Carolina to raise cash? And does Rubio tying himself to DeMint so publicly hurt him in a general election. Florida -- a battleground state Obama won in '08 -- isn't Massachusetts, but how would Scott Brown have fared earlier this year had he publicly stumped with DeMint in South Carolina before his race? Its truly stunning that Rubio has agreed to do this; Could Rick Perry have gotten away with a stop in SC, IA or NH during his primary? Then again, Crist did get grief when he went to a major Republican confab in Michigan, which at the time some saw as dipping a toe in national Republican politics.

*** The guns of February: The Republican Governors Association fired the first shot in Florida's hotly contested gubernatorial race with a TV ad aimed at Alex Sink (D). Later today, the Florida Democratic Party fires back with an attack ad at Bill McCollum (R). The RGA's shot at Sink was pretty smart politics; she's more vulnerable now than she will be three or six months from now. What's more, the RGA knows they have a flawed nominee in McCollum, so the idea is to make Sink just as flawed. Six months ago, there was some chatter that the country's three largest states were on the verge of electing women governor -- Whitman in California, Sink in Florida, and KBH in Texas. Now only Whitman has gotten stronger since then, while Sink and KBH have fallen. Also, the RGA knows there are a lot of nervous nellies in Democratic circles both in Florida and Washington over the direction of the Sink campaign; they smell blood and figure why not add to the chaos.

*** More midterm news: In Arizona, Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell endorses McCain … In California, Meg Whitman launches a new ad … In New York, Harold Ford tests the waters with a poll out of his pocket … In Ohio, Fischer leads Brunner in Dem primary, but Portman leads both in general. … In Texas, KBH grumbles that Perry's "insider" attacks worked.

*** Programming notes: MSNBC's "Daily Rundown" interviews GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham and GOP House Minority Whip Eric Cantor, while MSNBC's "Andrea Mitchell Reports has Dem Sen. Dianne Feinstein and GOP Sen. Orrin Hatch.
 
Countdown to NC filing deadline: 2 days
Countdown to TX primary: 6 days
Countdown to AR filing deadline: 12 days
Countdown to OR, PA filing deadlines: 13 days
Countdown to CA, NV filing deadlines: 16 days
Countdown to IA, UT filing deadlines: 23 days
Countdown to Election Day 2010: 251 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.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter.

Politico's Allen on the White House's ramping up of the president's re-election bid: "President Barack Obama's top advisers are quietly laying the groundwork for the 2012 reelection campaign, which is likely to be run out of Chicago and managed by White House deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, according to Democrats familiar with the discussions. The planning for now consists entirely of private conversations, with Obama aides at all levels indulging occasionally in closed-door 2012 discussions while focusing ferociously on the midterm elections and health care reform, the Democratic sources said. 'The gathering storm is the 2010 elections,' one top official said. But the sources said Obama has given every sign of planning to run again, and wants the next campaign to resemble the highly successful 2008 effort."

On the team: David Axelrod may leave the White House, and return to Chicago to focus on 2012; David Plouffe, called "the father of all this" will be a key figure, but perhaps as an "outside adviser;" Anita Dunn is also very involved and perhaps coming on board as the campaign's communications director could be Brad Woodhouse, now heading communications at the Democratic National Committee. "White House press secretary Robert Gibbs, White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer and senior adviser Valerie Jarrett are likely to remain at the president's side in Washington, while exercising major influence over the campaign," Allen writes. On timing, the campaign is likely to launch in just over a year from now: "President Bill Clinton opened his second presidential campaign in the March after his first midterm congressional elections, and President George W. Bush opened Bush-Cheney '04 a month later in the political cycle."

The New York Times: "Ever since his days as a young community organizer in Chicago, Mr. Obama has held fast to the belief that by listening carefully and appealing to reason he can bring people together to get results, an approach that in Washington has often come up short. He is not showing any signs of changing his style. But he is facing perhaps the toughest test yet of his powers of persuasion: winning the votes he needs, in the face of unified Republican opposition and a deteriorating climate for Democrats, to push his health care measure through a skittish Congress." 

The New York Times' Leonhardt also previews Thursday's health-care summit.

The New York Daily News calls Thursday's summit "political theatre": "Few observers think there's a shot at bipartisanship erupting at the President's health summit on Thursday. But showmanship? Count on it." 

"After months on life support, the public option died Tuesday," The Hill writes. "The White House and House leaders on Tuesday pronounced the government-run health program dead even as some Democratic senators continued their effort to resurrect it. The move is a clear indication that President Barack Obama and leading Democrats are wary of another intra-party battle on the public option. Last year, Democrats lost valuable time debating the issue, leading to many missed deadlines."

Yet it's unclear progressives will choose to move on and take what's possible. (After all, 23 votes doesn't make a majority, right?)

Progressive groups pushing for "real health care reform" by passing health care through reconciliation descend today for a "Virtual March on Washington" "to send Congress one million messages urging action on health care reform. This will be the single largest day of action yet in the health care fight," organizers say. The coalition includes MoveOn.org Political Action, Progressive Congress Action Fund, Health Care for America Now (HCAN), Service Employees International Union (SEIU), National Physicians Alliance, Doctors for America, Campaign for America's Future, TrueMajority, USAction, United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW), EQUAL, MomsRising.org and FixItandPassIt.com. The group will be sending members of Congress messages via phone, fax, email, Facebook, Twitter and petition.

"As Washington plays politics as usual instead of fixing our broken system, people are dying," according to a press release for the group. "Americans simply cannot wait for comprehensive health care reform -- it's time for Congress to stand up to Big Insurance and their conservative allies, and get reform done right. During the Virtual March for Real Health Care Reform, we'll send a million messages to Congress to make sure they know that voters want them to get to work and get health care done. Our message is simple: It's time for Washington to stop stalling. Pass real health care reform now."

House Minority Whip Eric Cantor penned a memo on why he believes Obama's health care proposal won't pass: He cites House vacancies, abortion, reconciliation, and retirements. "Over the last few weeks, we have watched with great interest, and disbelief, as Democrats have doubled-down on their ideological, government-centric approach to health reform," he writes. "Instead of listening to the American people, not to mention members of their own party, President Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Leader Harry Reid are back advocating a proposal that increases health care costs, places onerous mandates on struggling businesses, raises taxes on working families, and will lead to many losing the coverage options they have now. Even the president's own Health Reform Director, Nancy-Ann DeParle, told reporters yesterday that their proposal is merely the Senate bill 'with targeted changes.'" 

What Can You Do For Brown: "In the last 19 days of the race, nearly 70 percent of the 12,773 contributors who gave more than $200 to the Brown campaign were from outside Massachusetts, a Globe review shows. By contrast, in the first 109 days of Brown's candidacy, when he was still considered a dark horse, less than 8 percent of Brown's 1,766 contributions of more than $200 were from out-of-staters." 

"Scott Brown's decision to buck GOP leadership and back Senate majority leader Harry Reid's stripped-down jobs bill Monday is playing to a mixed reaction and wildly mixed emotions among conservatives," the Boston Globe writes. "Dozens of angry messages filled his Twitter page and Facebook page, charging the Massachusetts senator with everything from being "another out-of-touch politician'' to 'Benedict Brown.'" Michelle Malkin took aim at him; others "responded with more of a shrug."

Brown's vote got praise from the Boston Globe's editorial page, which called it a "welcome step." "Given the stranglehold that the Senate filibuster rule imposes on any legislation, there's good reason to keep rooting for compromise. Brown seems to realize that this form of frustration -- the yearning for solutions -- supersedes the 'tea party' -- inspired attempts to tie up government. It bodes well for his Senate career."

"The lone Republican lawmaker to support Democratic health care legislation has seen his fundraising drop by nearly 40 percent since his vote, and he is quickly burning through a dwindling bank account after resorting to a costly national fundraising operation," AP writes. "Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao, the unlikely congressman from New Orleans, is facing the perils of bipartisanship unlike any other lawmaker in Washington -- trying to please a heavily Democratic constituency while relying on core conservatives for money to fuel his campaign."

Former Vice President Dick Cheney suffered a "mild heart attack," his office confirms.

"Lab testing revealed evidence of a mild heart attack," a statement from his office reads. "He underwent a stress test and a heart catheterization. He is feeling good and is expected to be discharged in the next day or two."

NBC's Pete Williams reports, according to a family member, Cheney spoke yesterday afternoon with former President George W. Bush and Vice President Biden. After his procedure, he was "feeling good" and watched NBC's Olympics coverage in his hospital room last night, according to the family member.

Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels -- considered by some to be a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2012 or beyond -- said today that he doesn't plan to run in 2012 and is content to "get things done" in his home state.  "I don't plan to do it, I don't expect to do it, I really don't want to do it," Daniels said, neglecting to add, however, a Sherman-esque statement that he will not run.

*** UPDATE *** Cheney was released from the hospital this morning. His office released this statement: "Former Vice President Cheney is feeling good this morning and was discharged from GWU Hospital. He will resume his normal schedule shortly."

"Art will imitate life when Bristol Palin, teen mom and daughter of former vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin, makes her acting debut on ABC Family's 'The Secret Life of the American Teenager,'" the New York Daily News reports. "The series focuses on teenage issues, most notably teen pregnancy. Palin, 19, will be playing herself, the network announced Tuesday."

ARIZONA: "Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell will endorse Arizona Sen. John McCain in his primary battle with former congressman J.D. Hayworth, advisers to the governor say," the Washington Post reports, adding that McCain campaigned for McDonnell last year.   
 
CALIFORNIA: Republican gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman, the former CEO of eBay, is up with a new TV ad featuring former colleagues touting her leadership.  
 
NEW YORK: "Former Representative Harold E. Ford Jr. of Tennessee has dug into his own pocket to pay for a detailed poll, conducted over the last few days, intended to test the viability of a Senate run in New York, according to people briefed on the matter," the New York Times reports. In one test of Ford's potential vulnerabilities, "he is hypothetically characterized as a carpetbagger; a member of the National Rifle Association; a flip-flopper on gay marriage; a Wall Street executive who has not disclosed his bonus; and a newcomer who began paying taxes in New York only within the past year."

OHIO: Lt. Gov. Lee Fischer leads Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner 29%-20% in a Democratic primary. But in a general-election matchup, Republican Rob Portman leads both Fischer (40%-37%) and Brunner (40%-35%).

TEXAS: "Trailing in the polls with less than a week before the March 2 primary, Hutchison assessed the state of her campaign and Perry's anti-Washington tactics to The Associated Press on Tuesday. 'It definitely has made it more difficult for me. I didn't think that people would buy that because I've been so effective for Texas,' Hutchison told the AP on her campaign bus. 'I didn't think that anyone could turn my success in producing results for Texas into a negative, but I think that he has attempted to do that and that is what I've been having to fight against.'" 

From NBC's Mark Murray
Earlier today, we noted how the Republican Governors Association aired a new TV ad hitting Florida gubernatorial candidate Alex Sink (D).

Now the Florida Democratic Party is firing back ... at Sink's opponent, Bill McCollum.

[Youtube:fAIQspDK2dE]

From NBC's Ali Weinberg
Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels -- considered by some to be a possible Republican presidential candidate in 2012 -- said today that he doesn't plan to run for the office but is content to "get things done" in his home state.

"I don't plan to do it, I don't expect to do it, I really don't want to do it," Daniels said, neglecting to add, however, that he will not run.

Daniels spent much of the hour-long Q&A expressing the need for lawmakers to "have a grown-up conversation about the affordability of the government we have," citing Social Security as one of the country's most ominous problems. But when asked to explain why he wouldn't want to lead the country himself, Daniels responded, "can't you name a hundred reasons a sane person wouldn't want to do this?"

Daniels also weighed in on Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh's decision not to seek re-election, which came as a surprise even to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

"I think it's too bad that our senator decided not to stay," Daniels said. "I thought he was providing, and had the prospect of providing, a lot more balance. But I think he finally decided it wasn't going to happen. I didn't see it coming, and was just as surprised as anyone," he added.

While he denied wanting to run for national office, Daniels did cite his own governing style as a successful example of adherence to his party's values while accepting and listening to the ideas of his opponents.

"We have a divided legislature; we get them to come together on things like health insurance for uninsured, property tax capping, a host of things." Daniels said. "A Republicanism that looks like that might have a chance," he added.

"I'm very shy about prescribing or extrapolating anything from our state for other states -- let alone the nation," he continued, adding: "It's very important that our party present a constructive, inclusive program to the country."

Although Daniels was one of 12 Republicans to appear on the ballot for the Conservative Political Action Conference's presidential straw poll over the weekend, he did not attend the event. When asked why he wasn't present, Daniels said, "It's the second or third or fourth time that I respectfully declined the opportunity to come speak. I don't do much of that sort of thing, as I say I stay in my lane."

He did, however, note the influx of conservative grassroots attendees -- and what he saw as the nuance of their political leanings -- at this year's event, citing the account of a CPAC organizer. "He was talking a lot about some of the new people that showed up; I gather they were generally from the group that's organized rallies and so forth. I said, you know, for instance, it looks like they cut Sen. [Scott] Brown a lot of slack. He's simply not aligned with a lot of folks on what we've come to call the social issues."

Daniels cautioned that the energy and frustration of groups like the Tea Party need to be funneled into constructive policy. Referring to local and national grassroots conservative rallies, Daniels said, "The events of the past year have had their moments of excess but been a very healthy thing... And it's the first stage, possibly of getting a handle on this nationally. It's clearly not sufficient, raising hell never is. But it can be a very important first step. So we just need to now move from that awakening to an honest discussion," he added.

The governor, who also served as George W. Bush's OMB Director from 2001 to 2003, commented on the Obama administration's handling of the fiscal crisis.

"Having served two sentences in White Houses, I'm inclined to be a little charitable to whoever's there, because they always have to operate under incredible pressure," Daniels said, adding that he agreed with the underlying rationale for the administration's actions, if not its implementation.

"I never have critized, for instance, the idea of some effort to stabilize the financial markets. I didn't like the way they finally did it. I thought maybe buying bad assets and quarantining them was a better idea, but something had to be attempted. Daniels distanced himself from Florida Gov. Charlie Crist's recent statements that Obama's stimulus package worked, but added, "I didn't criticize the idea of some fiscal stimulus as part of the attempt to jump start. The way they did it turned out to be mediocre, just to be gentle about it," he said.

Prescribing his advice for Republican candidates in 2010 and beyond, Daniels recommended "thick skin and a willingness to accept criticism and alternative views," quoting President Ronald Reagan: "we have no enemies, only opponents."

From NBC's Stacey Klein
Defense Secretary Robert Gates said today that NATO needs to re-evaluate some specific ideas in order to avoid becoming a "renaissance weekend on steroids."

In a speech at the National Defense University on the future of NATO, Gates warned that U.S. threats are now more widespread than in the past, requiring new approaches.

"No one is trying to reinvent the wheel," he said, but  suggested NATO examine its "excess infrastructure and outdated command centers."

If they do not, Gates cautioned, "NATO will not be worth the paper it is printed on."

Gates briefly mentioned Afghanistan: "We have to do better, not just in Afghanistan, but elsewhere."

From NBC's Betsy Cline
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said today House Democrats are "pleased" with the president's health-care proposal posted online yesterday. Though it's not exactly like the House bill, Pelosi said the president's call for state fairness, how its paid for, and closing the doughnut hole are initiatives her caucus can support.

"We didn't get everything we asked for," she told reporters, "but everything in it is what we asked for."

With the president's upcoming health-care summit on Thursday, Pelosi cautioned Democrats are moving forward one day at a time.

"We have seen the 11 pages the president has given us," but, she added, "it's not legislative language. It's getting good reception in our caucus, but we have more work to do to have everyone on board."

In a news conference on legislation to end the health insurance industry's anti-trust exemption, Pelosi said she expected high bipartisan support, but challenged Republicans to step up.

"We want to see where they are on this," Pelosi said. "It's one thing to talk about it; it's another to say to these insurance companies, 'We must have these reforms.'"

A vote on the anti-trust legislation is expected in the House tomorrow.

From NBC's Mark Murray
By now, any observer of American politics knows that the Republican Party strategy to oppose the Obama White House and congressional Democrats on virtually everything has paid dividends.

The latest example of this opposition was yesterday's Senate jobs bill, in which 29 Republicans (and one Democrat, Ben Nelson) unsuccessfully tried to block a measure that would give companies a payroll tax break on new hires that had been previously unemployed.

In the past year since embarking on its strategy of unified opposition, the GOP has pulled even with Dems on congressional generic ballot in the NBC/WSJ poll; it's fav/unfav in the NBC/WSJ survey has gotten better (from 26%-47% in Feb. '09, to 32%-38% last month); and it's standing on the issues, versus the Democrats, has improved markedly.

And, so far, the GOP hasn't suffered as much backlash as Democrats were perhaps hoping. In last month's NBC/WSJ poll, 48% blamed congressional Republicans for not being able to find solutions to the nation's problems, 41% blamed Democrats in Congress, and 27% blamed President Obama.

But is that about to change? And is this the reason for the White House's televised health-care summit with Republicans on Thursday?

Enter the William Zabka Principle.

Zabka is the actor who played the villain in quite a few '80s movies -- "The Karate Kid," "Back to School," and "Just One of the Guys." 

And just what is the Zabka Principle? In those movies, Zabka played such an unlikable character that he forced audiences to root for the protagonist -- even if you didn't like him/her.

For example, how many young boys in the '80s didn't want to like Ralph Macchio's Daniel Larusso (especially since the girls in their classes thought Macchio was cute)? And there was plenty to admire about Zabka's Johnny: He was the better athlete; Zabka's dojo, Cobra Kai, was the superior dojo; and they certainly had the cooler uniforms.

But after Zabka and his crew jumped Macchio for the umpteenth time, and certainly after Zabka swept the leg, you had to side with Macchio -- no matter what.

And what does this have to do with American politics? As Republicans work to oppose the Democratic agenda -- and, just to be clear, that's what minority parties usually do -- they don't want to go TOO far where they become unlikable.

Opposition is one thing; becoming William Zabka is another. And that's true for the Democratic Party, too...

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro and Carrie Dann
Facebook isn't just for Sarah Palin.

Sen. Scott Brown took to the social networking site to try and explain his vote for cloture on the jobs bill.

"I came to Washington to be an independent voice," he wrote, "to put politics aside, and to do everything in my power to help create jobs for Massachusetts families. This Senate jobs bill is not perfect. I wish the tax cuts were deeper and broader, but I am voting for it because it contains measures that will help put people back ...to work. ... I hope for improvements in that process going forward."

That sparked some nasty feedback in the "comments" section of his status update.

Luke writes: "Who really are you, Senator Brown? I believed in you. Now, I no longer do. How can you sleep having deceived your friends and supporters? Please repent and change your mind of instability."

Sam Adams is apparently no fan. Someone not-so-cleverly named Samuel Adams writes, "I guess fiscal responsibility went out the window that fast... considering how much of the first stimulus is unspent.. another 15 billion in debt won't matter. I have a feeling we may have another RINO.... Glenn Beck had it right about the republicans......"

Simon Urbina quoted the great philosopher Billy Madison: "Mr. [Brown], what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

Annette has praise: "Thank you, Scott! We all need jobs in Masssachusetts." As does Dominic Maschler: "Bravo, sir."

But for the most part, the comments are negative.

Bill Mirabito: "Dumb. This was a jobs bill supported by both parties until Reid stripped out $70 billion in tax breaks for small businesses. Senator, your GOP colleagues only filibustered to force compromise -- hoping to secure the tax relief you campaigned to deliver! Must you break ranks on your very first vote? I don't get it. I campaigned for you, and feel bamboozled."

Brenda Swaringen Shaw Scott: you say"stay tuned" for a broad-based payroll tax deduction proposal. Did you have to cut a deal for that? It'll be interesting to see the outcome of that--how you gonna pay for this stimulus thingy? I'm afraid there may be a steep learning curve for you---didn't you listen to Evan Bayh?

Beth: More wasteful spending. You're going to lose alot of support over this decision from the people that voted you in.

Nicole: I knew he wasn't conservative. Just another case of voting for the lesser of two evils.
about an hour agoDebbie Another fine example of what is wrong with the Republican party. Would Conservatives please stand up...

Rick Thomas: WELL SCOTT BROWN LOOKS LIKE YOUR GUST ANOTHER FAKE REPUBLICAN THANKS FOR NOTHING WE THE PEOPLE PUT YOU IN OFFICE NOW GO DO YOUR JOB AND VOTE DOWN HEATH REFORM AND CAP AND TRADE LIKE YOU SAID YOU WOULD

Good luck managing that and running for re-election in 2012 in Massachusetts.

From NBC's Jim Miklaszewski
On Capitol Hill today, Army Chief of Staff, Gen. George Casey told the Senate Armed Services Committee he had "serious concerns" about attempting to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" while the U.S. military is actively engaged in wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Casey suggested that implement the repeal of the ban against gays and lesbians openly serving in the military could be disruptive and hurt military readiness.

Casey, like Gen. Ray Odierno, top U.S. military commander in Iraq said yesterday, supports Defense Secretary Robert Gates' plan to take a year, poll the troops and study the impact of repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," then take another year to figure out how to implement the repeal.

Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the committee, raised some eyebrows when he suggested that a moratorium on enforcement of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" be slipped into the Defense Authorization Bill, that would protect gays and lesbians from being forced out of the military pending the Pentagon studies.

Sen. John McCain strongly opposed the idea and under tough questioning got the Secretary of Army John McHugh to also voice his objection to the moratorium.

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Tea Party favorites Jim DeMint and Marco Rubio will campaign together in South Carolina next month, according to a Republican source.

The conservative South Carolina senator and the fresh-faced Florida Senate challenger, considered a rising star in Republican circles, will make three stops together March 15th to Charleston, Columbia and Greenville.

The events will be fundraisers for Rubio, the source said -- though there will be a joint fundraising committee, so DeMint will also benefit.

Rubio is running against Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and has gained in the polls of late, particularly with the support of the right. When Rubio spoke at the Conservative Political Action Conference his speech drew the largest crowd of any speaker -- about 3,000, according to reports.

The news of the events, first reported by CNN, has stirred talk of a potential Rubio presidential bid. After all, no Republican has won the GOP nomination without winning the South Carolina primary since 1980, when the primary first mattered.

But the source dismissed that.

"Some are trying to spin this as a 2012 toe in water, and that's just ridiculous," the source said, adding that Crist enjoys a built-in advantage from a money standpoint. "This is going to be a long, tough battle. ... The reason [for the events] is to help Rubio to get the resources he needs to run against more well-funded Crist."

*** UPDATE *** Also, look for the launch of www.DeMintRubio.com coming later this week. "It will simply be a way to encourage folks to come out to these local events," the GOP source said.

From NBC's Luke Russert
Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) became the latest high profile Democrat to praise Sen. Scott Brown (R-MA) for his vote in favor of cloture on the Democrats $15 billion dollar job bill.

"The focus will be on jobs, as you have seen," Hoyer said. "We are starting with jobs in the Senate. Hopefully that bill will move over to us. We passed a bill in December, as you know.

"Last night, the Senate took a major step, five Republicans voted to move forward on jobs; I think that's a good sign. I was interested to see the new senator, who theoretically was going to put in a monkey wrench, did the opposite -- he facilitated moving ahead. I hope that continues, and I think that's appropriate."

Brown has come under criticism from the right for his vote. One has to believe more comments from high-profile Democrats will only hurt Brown's standing among die-hard conservatives.

From NBC's Mark Murray
As we mentioned in First Thoughts this morning, John McCain is now backing away from his vote for TARP back in 2008, telling the Arizona Republic's Editorial Board that Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Bush Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson told him the $700 billion would focus on the housing crisis.

"'Obviously, that didn't happen,' McCain said... 'They decided to stabilize the Wall Street institutions, bail out (insurance giant) AIG, bail out Chrysler, bail out General Motors. . . . What they figured was that if they stabilized Wall Street - I guess it was trickle-down economics - that therefore Main Street would be fine.'"

But in a review of his statements on TARP back in 2008, McCain made no mention that TARP would focus on the housing crisis.

Here's what he said about TARP in the first presidential debate: "This isn't the beginning of the end of this crisis. This is the end of the beginning, if we come out with a package that will keep these [financial] institutions stable."

And here's the statement McCain released on Oct. 3, 2008, after the House passed TARP: "I commend the House of Representatives for coming together to pass the economic rescue bill today. I'm glad I suspended my campaign to go back to Washington to help bring the House Republicans to the table. I believe that the taxpayer protections that have been added have improved the bill. This rescue bill is not perfect, and it is an outrage that it's even necessary. But we must stop the damage to our economy done by corrupt and incompetent practices on Wall Street and in Washington."