Senators

Reporting from Washington — A pair of influential senators presented President Obama with a three-page blueprint for a bipartisan agreement to overhaul the nation’s immigration system, but the proposal’s viability is threatened by politics surrounding the healthcare debate.

Sens. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), in a 45-minute meeting Thursday in the Oval Office, also asked for Obama’s help in rounding up enough Republican votes to pass an immigration bill this year.

Although details of their blueprint were not released, Graham said the elements included tougher border security, a program to admit temporary immigrant workers and a biometric Social Security card that would prevent people here illegally from getting jobs.

Graham also said the proposal included “a rational plan to deal with the millions of illegal immigrants already in the United States.” He did not elaborate on what the plan would be. But in a recent interview, he suggested that onerous measures were unrealistic.

“We’re not going to mass-deport people and put them in jail, nor should we,” Graham said. “But we need a system so they don’t get an advantage over others for citizenship.”

In a statement after the Obama meeting, Graham predicted that their effort would collapse if Senate Democrats proceeded with a strategy to pass a healthcare bill through a simple majority vote — a process known as “reconciliation.” Senate leaders say they are committed to doing just that.

“I expressed, in no uncertain terms, my belief that immigration reform could come to a halt for the year if healthcare reconciliation goes forward,” said Graham, who portrayed the document handed to Obama as “a work in progress.”

Graham added: “For more than a year, healthcare has sucked most of the energy out of the room. Using reconciliation to push healthcare through will make it much harder for Congress to come together on a topic as important as immigration.”

In their own statements, Obama and Schumer sounded more upbeat.

The president said: “Today I met with Sens. Schumer and Graham and was pleased to learn of their progress in forging a proposal to fix our broken immigration system. I look forward to reviewing their promising framework, and every American should applaud their efforts to reach across party lines and find common sense answers to one of our most vexing problems.”

Immigration has gotten scant attention of late. Obama had initially promised to address the issue in his first year, but the deadline slipped as he struggled to pass a healthcare bill. Latino voters, who were a crucial piece of Obama’s winning coalition in the 2008 campaign, have grown impatient. Some advocates of an immigration overhaul warn that Latino voters will stay home in the November mid-term elections if the issue is delayed again.

In an attempt to defuse the anger, Obama met with a group of 14 immigration advocates in the Roosevelt Room of the White House, hours before his meeting with the two senators.

Afterward, some of the guests described the atmosphere in the room as tense. They said they told Obama that families were being severed by widespread deportations. In the fiscal year that ended in September, the U.S. deported 388,000 illegal immigrants, according to the Department of Homeland Security — up from 369,000 the year before.

“I don’t think the president liked hearing that the immigration system is tearing apart families. But that’s our reality,” said Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, who attended the meeting.

Obama agreed to have them meet with Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano to discuss deportation policies, the White House said.

Even without the healthcare obstacle, passing an immigration bill would be difficult. Schumer has been trying to line up additional Republican co-sponsors in hopes of broadening the bill’s bipartisan support. None has signed up.

Those who attended the meeting said that Obama committed to helping find Republican votes. But he also conceded that in a polarized Senate, that was a difficult mission.

“He was very frank about the challenge of moving this or anything else in the U.S. Congress,” said John Wilhelm, president of the labor union Unite Here.

peter.nicholas@

latimes.com

Reporting from Washington — As they wrestle with how to replace the Affordable Care Act, Senate Republicans face a critical choice between cutting taxes or preserving health coverage for millions of Americans, two competing demands that may yet derail the GOP push to roll back the 2010 healthcare law.

House Republicans, who passed their own Obamacare repeal measure this month, skirted the dilemma by cutting both taxes and coverage.

Their bill — embraced by President Trump — slashed hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes, a key goal of GOP leaders and the White House as they seek to set the stage for a larger tax overhaul later this year.

At the same time, the House legislation cut more than $1 trillion in healthcare assistance to low- and moderate-income Americans, a retrenchment the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates would nearly double the ranks of the uninsured over the next decade to more than 50 million.

In the Senate, coverage losses on that scale are worrisome to many rank-and-file Republicans whose states have seen major coverage gains under Obamacare. That makes the preservation of benefits one of the biggest challenges confronting Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and other GOP leaders.

“Coverage matters,” Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said last week on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, noting the importance of preserving Medicaid spending in the current law. “To someone [who] is lower-income, you’re going to need those dollars to cover that person.”

Yet moderating cuts to Medicaid and other government health programs without driving up budget deficits could force Republican senators to also dial back the tax cuts that many in the GOP want.

“It’s not that complicated. … If you want to use money for tax reform, you can’t have it for health coverage,” said Gail Wilensky, a veteran Republican health policy expert who ran the Medicare and Medicaid programs under President George H.W. Bush. “You can’t do both.”

McConnell convened a group of GOP senators — quickly panned for including only white men — to develop Obamacare replacement legislation, though the panel largely excluded Republican lawmakers who are most concerned about coverage, including Cassidy. McConnell has since said that all Senate Republicans would be involved in developing an Obamacare replacement.

The trade-off between cutting taxes and preserving Americans’ health protections reflects, in part, the legislative procedure that congressional Republicans have chosen to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

That process, known as budget reconciliation, allows Senate Republicans to pass their Obamacare repeal with a simple majority, rather than the 60-vote super-majority that is usually required to pass controversial legislation. (Republicans have only a 52-48 majority in the Senate.)

But to qualify for budget reconciliation under Senate rules, the bill must reduce the federal deficit over the next decade.

Tax cuts alone typically do the opposite, driving up budget deficits.

The tax cuts in the House Republican healthcare bill total more than $600 billion over the next decade, according to independent analyses by the Congressional Budget Office and the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

They include most of the major taxes enacted in the 2010 health law to fund the law’s program for extending health insurance to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.

On the chopping block are taxes on medical device makers and health insurance plans, which together account for about $165 billion in tax cuts over the next decade.

Couples making more than $250,000 a year (and single taxpayers making more than $200,000) would see two tax cuts, including one on investment income, that the budget office estimated would cost the federal government nearly $300 billion over the next decade. (That estimate may be revised down as House Republicans delayed one of the tax cuts in the final version of their bill.)

Also eliminated would be a host of limits on tax-free spending accounts that many Americans use for medical expenses. Republicans argue these taxes are unnecessary and even undermine efforts to control healthcare costs.

“It’s bad for economic growth,” House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) told Fox News during the House debate.

The tax on health plans, for example, is widely seen as contributing to higher premiums, as insurers customarily pass the costs along to consumers.

But eliminating so many taxes isn’t cheap.

So the Republican healthcare bill — known as the American Health Care Act — slashes hundreds of billions of dollars in federal healthcare spending, including an estimated $880 billion in federal money for Medicaid, the state-run government health plan for the poor that currently covers more than 70 million Americans at any one time.

That would in effect cut federal Medicaid spending by more than a quarter over the next decade, an unprecedented reduction that independent analyses suggest would force states to sharply limit coverage for poor patients.

The House bill would also reduce insurance subsidies now available to low- and moderate-income Americans who get health plans through Obamacare marketplaces such as HealthCare.gov.

The reduction in federal aid would, in turn, dramatically increase the number of uninsured Americans. Overall, the Congressional Budget Office has estimated that 24 million fewer people would have health coverage by 2026 under the original version of the House bill.

By contrast, the wealthiest Americans stand to get a large tax break. By 2023, families making more than $1 million would see their taxes decrease by an average of more than $50,000, an analysis by the independent Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center suggests.

That means that in a country of more than 300 million people, nearly half of all the tax breaks in the House healthcare bill would go to only about 780,000 households.

The combination of tax breaks for wealthy Americans and historic reductions in assistance to low-income patients has fueled widespread criticism of the House GOP healthcare legislation, particularly on the left.

“The math is pretty clear,” said Edwin Park, vice president for health policy at the liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “They are sharply cutting Medicaid and insurance subsidies to pay for tax cuts.”

Whether GOP senators will be able to moderate the reductions in healthcare assistance remains unclear.

The early version of the House bill was projected to reduce the federal deficit by about $150 billion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office analysis.

That number has likely shrunk slightly, as House Republicans added more spending to the legislation before it passed last week. An updated budget analysis is expected next week.

But under the budget rules adopted by GOP lawmakers this year, Senate Republicans will not be able to add any spending into their legislation without enacting cuts elsewhere or shrinking the tax cuts further.

That is because according to those rules, their bill must reduce the deficit by as least as much as the House bill.

Obamacare vs. Trumpcare: A side-by-side comparison of the Affordable Care Act and the GOP’s replacement plan »

Obamacare 101: A primer on key issues in the debate over repealing and replacing the Affordable Care Act. »

[email protected]

@noamlevey

Brandt Clarke scored a power-play goal with 6:10 to play to lift the Kings to a 2-1 win over the Ottawa Senators on Monday night at Crypto.com Arena.

Clarke’s slap shot from just inside the blue line came with just two seconds left on the man advantage and ended the Kings’ losing streak at three games.

Warren Foegele also scored for the Kings and Joel Edmundson assisted on both of the team’s goals. Darcy Kuemper made 27 saves.

Foegele opened the scoring 5:31 into the third period when he tapped in a pass from Joel Armia, who skated the puck down the right wing. Armia has points in three straight games.

Fabian Zetterlund tied it at 1-1 with 9:11 to play in the third with his third goal of the season and second in two games, but the Senators went scoreless on three power-play opportunities.

Leevi Merilainen made 20 saves for Ottawa, which was coming off wins over Anaheim and San José, the first two games of a seven-game road trip.

Up next for the Kings: vs. the Ducks at Honda Center on Friday night.

HALIFAX, Canada — Several U.S. senators said Saturday that Secretary of State Marco Rubio told them that the Trump administration’s plan for ending the Russia-Ukraine war that it is pressing Kyiv to accept is a Russian “wish list” and not the actual plan.

A State Department spokesperson denied their account, calling it “blatantly false.”

The 28-point peace plan was crafted by the Trump administration and the Kremlin without Ukraine’s involvement. It acquiesces to many Russian demands that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has rejected on dozens of occasions, including giving up large pieces of territory. Trump says he wants Ukraine to accept the plan by late next week.

At a security conference in Canada, independent Sen. Angus King of Maine, Democratic Sen. Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Republican Sen. Mike Rounds of South Dakota said they spoke to Rubio after he reached out to some of them while on his way to Geneva for talks on the plan.

King said Rubio told them the plan “was not the administration’s plan” but a “wish list of the Russians.”

“This administration was not responsible for this release in its current form,” Rounds said. “They want to utilize it as a starting point.”

Rounds said that “it looked more like it was written in Russian to begin with.”

Rubio, who serves as both national security advisor and secretary of State, was expected to attend a meeting in Geneva on Sunday to discuss Washington’s proposal as part of a U.S. delegation, according to an American official who was not authorized to publicly discuss the U.S. participants before the meeting and spoke on condition of anonymity.

Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesperson, denied the senators’ claim.

“As Secretary Rubio and the entire Administration has consistently maintained, this plan was authored by the United States, with input from both the Russians and Ukrainians,” Pigott wrote on X.

The senators earlier Saturday said the plan would only reward Moscow for its aggression and send a message to other leaders who have threatened their neighbors.

The senators’ opposition to the plan follows criticism from other U.S. lawmakers, including some Republicans, none of whom have the power to block it.

“It rewards aggression. This is pure and simple. There’s no ethical, legal, moral, political justification for Russia claiming eastern Ukraine,” King said during a panel discussion at the Halifax International Security Forum in Canada.

Russian President Vladimir Putin welcomed the proposal late Friday, saying that it “could form the basis of a final peace settlement” if the U.S. can get Ukraine and its European allies to agree.

Zelensky, in an address, did not reject the plan outright, but insisted on fair treatment while pledging to “work calmly” with Washington and other partners in what he called “truly one of the most difficult moments in our history.”

In its 17th year, about 300 people gather annually at the Halifax International Security Forum held at Halifax’s Westin hotel. The forum attracts military officials, U.S. senators, diplomats and scholars, but this year the Trump administration suspended participation of U.S. defense officials in events by think tanks, including the Halifax event.

A large number of U.S. senators made the trip this year in part because of strained relations between Canada and the United States. Trump has alienated America’s neighbor with his trade war and claims that Canada should become the 51st U.S. state. Many Canadians now refuse to travel to the U.S., and border states like Shaheen’s are seeing a dramatic drop in tourism.

“There’s real concern about that strain. That’s one reason why there’s such a big delegation is here,” the New Hampshire Democrat said. “I will continue to object to what the president is doing in terms about tariffs and his comments because they are not only detrimental to Canada and our relationship, but I think they are detrimental globally. They show a lack of respect of sovereign nations.”

Gillies writes for the Associated Press.

Drake Batherson scored the tiebreaking goal with 1:58 to play, and the Ottawa Senators held off a furious Anaheim rally after the Ducks pulled their goalie in the final minutes for a 3-2 victory Thursday night.

Batherson was camped in front of the Ducks net when he deflected a blue-line shot from Jake Sanderson past goalie Petr Mrazek to snap the Ducks’ six-game home win streak.

Nick Cousins and Shane Pinto also scored for Ottawa, and Linus Ullmark stopped 24 shots.

Beckett Sennecke and Mason McTavish scored in the second period for the Pacific Division-leading Ducks. Mrazek, the backup who made his fifth start of the season in place of Lukas Dostal, had 22 saves.

The Ducks were playing their third game in four nights and the second game of a back-to-back, and it showed during a sluggish first period in which they went eight minutes — including a two-minute power play —without a shot on goal and put only three shots on net.

Cousins gave Ottawa a 1-0 lead when he took a pass from Nick Jensen in the high slot, wound up and rifled a shot over the glove of Mrazek with 3:21 left in the first.

But the Ducks scored twice within a span of 1:26 in the second to turn that 1-0 deficit into a 2-1 lead.

The comeback started with a whiff, Cutter Gauthier misfiring on a snap shot from the slot. But the 20-year-old from Sweden was able to control the puck, poke it through the legs of defender Artem Zub and slip a pass to Sennecke, who snapped a shot into a nearly open net for a 1-1 tie with 6:52 left.

Moments later, Ducks forward Chris Kreider, playing in his 900th game, streaked down the right side on a two-on-one break and slid a pass to McTavish, who beat Ullmark stick-side for a 2-1 lead with 5:26 left.

A McTavish interference call with 2:52 left gave the Senators a man advantage, and Pinto took advantage, slipping a puck under Mrazek’s pads with 57 seconds left for his 10th goal of the season and a 2-2 tie.

BREAKINGBREAKING,

Senate takes the first step toward ending the 40-day shutdown, advancing a funding bill after weeks of gridlock.

Senators in the United States have voted to move forward with a stopgap funding package aimed at ending the longest government shutdown in the country’s history.

In a procedural vote on Sunday, some eight Democrats broke rank and voted in favour of advancing the Republican measure that will keep the government reopen into January 30.

The bipartisan deal would also fund some parts of the government, including food aid and the legislative branch, for the next year.

But it does not guarantee an extension of healthcare subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Instead, it promises a vote on the issue by December.

The subsidies have been a Democratic priority during the funding battle.

Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna, reporting from Washington, DC, said the procedural vote passed with 60 in favour and 40 against.

“Now, this is what is called a cloture, a procedure by which the Senate agrees to continue the debate about the legislation and begin introducing and passing the bills aimed at ending the shutdown,” Hanna said.

“The important thing about the cloture vote is that once it is passed, at that 60 percent majority, every subsequent vote is by a simple majority. So it would appear to be plain sailing in the Senate to pass this bill and the continuing resolution to refund the government and ending the closure,” he added.

If the Senate eventually passes the amended bill, the package still must be approved by the House of Representatives and sent to President Donald Trump for his signature, a process that could take several days.

The Democratic senators who voted in favour of advancing the bill include Dick Durbin of Illinois, Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire and Tim Kaine of Virginia.

Angus King of Maine, an independent who causes with the Democrats, also voted in favour of the measure.

Democrats, John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, Catherine Cortez Masto and Jacky Rosen of Nevada, also voted yes.

Democratic and Republican senators in the United States are working through the weekend to find a compromise and end the longest government shutdown in the country’s history.

But the bipartisan talks yielded few signs of progress on Saturday as the workday ended without a deal on reopening the government.

The Senate is set to try again with a rare Sunday session.

The impasse has now lasted 39 days and is taking an increasing toll on the country as federal workers go unpaid, airlines cancel flights, and food aid has been delayed for millions of Americans.

Saturday’s session got off to a rough start when President Donald Trump made clear he is unlikely to compromise any time soon with Democrats, who are seeking a one-year extension on an expiring health insurance subsidy under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare.

Trump urged Republican senators on social media to redirect federal money used to subsidise health insurance premiums towards direct payments to individuals.

“I am recommending to Senate Republicans that the Hundreds of Billions of Dollars currently being sent to money sucking Insurance Companies in order to save the bad Healthcare provided by ObamaCare, BE SENT DIRECTLY TO THE PEOPLE SO THAT THEY CAN PURCHASE THEIR OWN, MUCH BETTER, HEALTHCARE, and have money left over,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, without offering details.

The ACA marketplaces allow people to buy policies directly from health insurers and mainly serve people who do not have coverage through employers or the Medicare and Medicaid government programmes.

Some 24 million people in the US use those subsidies.

For those enrolled in ACA exchanges, premiums, on average, are expected to more than double next year if Congress allows the enhanced subsidies to lapse.

Democrats demand that Republicans agree to negotiate an extension of federal healthcare subsidies before reopening the government. Republicans say the government must reopen first.

‘Another path forward’

Senator Jeanne Shaheen, a Democrat from New Hampshire, who is leading the talks among moderates, said on Friday evening that Democrats “need another path forward” after Republicans rejected the offer from Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York to reopen the government and extend the subsidies for a year.

Shaheen and others, negotiating among themselves and with some rank-and-file Republicans, have been discussing bills that would pay for parts of government – food aid, veterans programmes and the legislative branch, among other things – and extend funding for everything else until December or January.

The agreement would only come with the promise of a future healthcare vote, rather than a guarantee of extended subsidies.

It was unclear whether enough Democrats would support such a plan. Even with a deal, Trump appears unlikely to support an extension of the health benefits. House of Representatives Speaker Mike Johnson also said this week that he would not commit to a health vote.

Republicans hold a 53-47 majority but need 60 votes to reopen the government.

Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna, reporting from Washington, DC, described the Senate’s weekend session as “very unusual”.

“But no vote was taken in the course of the day. The Republicans are not wanting to hold a vote unless they are certain that they can get those 60 votes needed to pass a legislation or change the procedure,” Hanna said.

Trump, for his part, has once again urged the Republicans to end the filibuster, which requires agreement by 60 of the Senate’s 100 members to pass most legislation.

“The Republicans could do this with a simple majority,” Hanna said. “However, Republicans are concerned about doing this because they feared that the lack of an investor would act against them, if… the Democrats take power in the Senate.”

With the Republicans rejecting Trump’s call, Senate Republican Leader John Thune is eyeing a bipartisan package that mirrors the proposal the moderate Democrats have been sketching out. What Thune, who has refused to negotiate, might promise on healthcare is unknown.

The package would replace the House-passed legislation that the Democrats have rejected 14 times since the shutdown began on October 1. The current bill would only extend government funding until November 21.

A test vote on new legislation could come in the next few days if Thune decides to move forward.

Then the Democrats would have a crucial choice: Keep fighting for a meaningful deal on extending the subsidies that expire in January, while prolonging the pain of the shutdown; or vote to reopen the government and hope for the best, as Republicans promise an eventual healthcare vote but not a guaranteed outcome.

Schumer on Saturday persisted in arguing that Republicans should accept a one-year extension of the subsidies before negotiating the future of the tax credits.

“Doing nothing is derelict because people will go bankrupt, people will lose insurance, people will get sicker,” Schumer said in a floor speech. “That’s what will happen if this Congress fails to act.”

WASHINGTON — Senators are working through the weekend for the first time since the government shutdown began more than a month ago, hoping to find a bipartisan resolution that has eluded them as federal workers have gone unpaid, airlines have been forced to cancel flights and SNAP benefits have been delayed for millions of Americans.

As the weekend session was set to begin Saturday, it was uncertain whether Republicans and Democrats could make any headway toward reopening the government and breaking a partisan impasse that had lasted 39 days.

President Trump made clear Saturday that he is unlikely to compromise anytime soon with Democrats, who are demanding an extension of the Affordable Care Act tax credits. He posted on social media that the ACA is “the worst Healthcare anywhere in the world” and suggested Congress send money directly to people to buy insurance.

Senate Republican leaders have signaled an openness to an emerging proposal from a small group of moderate Democrats to end the shutdown in exchange for a later vote on the ACA subsidies.

Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who is leading the talks among moderates, said Friday evening that Democrats “need another path forward” after Republicans rejected an offer from Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York to reopen the government and extend the subsidies for a year. “We’re working on it,” she said.

Moderates continue to negotiate

Shaheen and others, negotiating among themselves and with some rank-and-file Republicans, have been discussing bills that would pay for parts of government — food aid, veterans programs and the legislative branch, among other things — and extend funding for everything else until December or January. The agreement would only come with the promise of a future healthcare vote rather than a guarantee of extended subsidies.

It was unclear whether enough Democrats would support such a plan. Even with a deal, Trump appears unlikely to support an extension of the health benefits. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) also said this week that he would not commit to a healthcare vote.

Republican leaders need only five additional votes to fund the government, and the group involved in the talks has ranged from 10 to 12 Democratic senators.

Some Republicans have said they are open to extending the COVID-19 tax credits as premiums could skyrocket for millions of people, but they want new limits on who can receive the subsidies.

“We have had really good discussions with a lot of the Democrats,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.).

Republicans eye new package of bills

Trump wants Republicans to end the shutdown quickly and scrap the filibuster, which requires 60 Senate votes for most legislation, so they can bypass Democrats altogether. Vice President JD Vance, a former Ohio senator, endorsed the idea in an online post Saturday, saying Republicans who want to keep the filibuster are “wrong.”

Republicans have rejected Trump’s call, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) is eyeing a bipartisan package that mirrors the proposal the moderate Democrats have been sketching out. What Thune might promise on healthcare is unknown; he has refused to negotiate thus far.

The package would replace the House-passed legislation that the Democrats have rejected 14 times since the shutdown began Oct. 1. The current bill would extend government funding only until Nov. 21.

A choice for Democrats

A test vote on new legislation could come in the next few days if Thune decides to move forward.

Then Democrats would have a crucial choice: Keep fighting for a meaningful deal on extending the subsidies that expire in January, while prolonging the pain of the shutdown? Or vote to reopen the government and hope for the best as Republicans promise an eventual healthcare vote — but not a guaranteed outcome.

After a caucus meeting Thursday, most Democrats suggested they would continue to hold out for Trump and Republican leaders to agree to negotiations.

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said Democrats are “obviously not unanimous” but “without something on healthcare, the vote is very unlikely to succeed.”

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent who caucuses with the Democrats, said they need to stand strong after overwhelming Democratic victories on election day this week and demand an extension of the subsidies.

Jalonick and Freking write for the Associated Press. AP writers Seung Min Kim, Joey Cappelletti, Stephen Groves and Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report.