Mitt Romney's PAC announced today that the former Massachusetts governor is endorsing Nikki Haley in the South Carolina gubernatorial primary. Along with the endorsement comes a $3,500 donation and a joint campaign event in the state on April 1 -- April Fools Day.

“Ann and I got to know Nikki Haley during my campaign for president and came away enormously impressed with her as a person of character and as the spokesperson for a new generation of leadership for South Carolina. She has a proven conservative record of fighting wasteful spending and advocating for smaller, more efficient government. I'm honored to call her my friend and prouder still to endorse her campaign for governor," Romney said in a statement.

This will be one of the first purely political trips for Romney to such an important early primary state in some time; he's on the road now selling his new book. It's also a notable move in a competitive primary. Romney stayed out of the New York special Congressional election that involved both a Republican and Conservative line candidate.

A new Rasmussen poll on the Pennsylvania Senate Democratic primary finds Rep. Joe Sestak closing in on Sen. Arlen Specter, trailing the former Republican by just 11 points (March 15, 481 Dem LV, MoE +/- 5%). The primary will be held May 18.

The margin hasn't been this small since a mid-October Rasmussen survey, and a recent Quinnipiac poll found Specter up by as much as 24 points.

Specter 48 (-3 vs. last poll, Feb. 8 )
Sestak 37 (+1)
Und 9

Specter now leads Sestak by 17.8 points in the RCP Average

Illinois Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk has launched his first ad of the campaign, touting himself as an "independent-minded Republican" who will work to "stop the wasteful spending in Washington and end the corruption in Illinois."

The good news for Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) in a new Rasmussen poll (500 LVs, 3/11, MoE +/- 4.5%): her lead has widened over two of her three potential GOP opponents since last month's survey. The bad news: her lead over the third is down to two points, and she doesn't poll higher than 46 percent in any of the potential matchups.

General Election Matchups
Boxer 46 (unch vs. last poll, 2/11)
Fiorina 40 (-2)
Und 10 (+5)

Boxer leads Fiorina by 9.5 percent in the RCP Average.

Boxer 46 (-1)
DeVore 40 (-2)
Und 9 (+4)

Boxer leads DeVore by 10.3 in the RCP Average.

Boxer 43 (-2)
Campbell 41 (unch)
Und 10 (unch)

Boxer leads Campbell by just 5 percent in the RCP Average.

Boxer has a net favorable rating of +3, with 48 percent viewing her favorably and 45 percent unfavorably.

President Obama remains popular in the Golden State, with 58 percent approving and 42 percent disapproving of his job performance. Arnold Schwarzenegger fares much worse, with just 24 percent approving and 75 percent disapproving of the celebrity governor.

Remember Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi,  otherwise known as the bomber of Pan Am flight 103 that exploded over Lockerbie in 1988? Seven months after being released on humanitarian grounds with only "three months to live," the London Daily Mail reports the convicted terrorist's health is now "greatly improved:"

The health of the freed Lockerbie bomber has 'greatly improved' now he is home in Libya, Colonel Gaddafi's son boasted yesterday.

He said Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi was doing much better since being released seven months ago by the Scots on compassionate grounds because he had 'only three months to live'.

In words which will confirm the suspicions of Lockerbie victims' families, Saif Gaddafi - widely tipped to succeed his father as Libyan leader - also finally admitted that the convicted killer's release had dominated trade talks with Britain.

This would have included discussions about lucrative oil deals, despite the fact that Megrahi was officially released purely on compassionate grounds. Five months after the release, Libya announced plans to invest £5billion in the UK.

Megrahi, 57, has acquired national hero status in Libya, with babies named after him and an extraordinary 30,000 well-wishers reported to have visited his 'death bed'. Queues of pilgrims form outside the sumptuous villa in Tripoli where he remains with his family despite doctors' predictions that he would be dead by Christmas.

A record number of people in Nevada are running for office this year, and the Republican primary for Harry Reid's U.S. Senate seat "typifies the high-volume, raucous contests expected this election season," the Las Vegas Sun reports.

Before Friday's filing deadline, the record for the most candidates on a Senate primary ballot was six, which happened in 2004 when Reid last ran for re-election. This year there will be 13 Republicans on the ballot.

More from The Sun:

The candidates will be forced to spend money to stand out from the pack. And dark horse candidates with strong bases, such as former Reno Assemblywoman Sharron Angle, have a potential path to victory.

This is all good news for Reid's re-election hopes even though the reason so many are eager to take on the most powerful Democrat in Congress is he's vulnerable.

While Reid will have no problem winning his party's nomination, he does face four Democratic challengers, a reflection of his unpopularity, even among some Democrats.

Even after June's primary there will be more than a binary Democratic/Republican choice for U.S. Senate. Four nonpartisan candidates, including a candidate from the newly formed Tea Party of Nevada and conservative Independent American Party, will be on the ballot.

Full text of President Obama's remarks on health care in Strongsville, Ohio:

"Hello, Ohio! It's great to be here in the Buckeye State. And it's even better to be out of Washington for a little while.

"I want to thank Connie and her family for being here on behalf of Natoma. It's not easy to share such a personal story. I appreciate your willingness to do so. I want you to know that she is the reason that I am here today. I know that she felt it was important that her story be told.

"Last month, I read a letter from Natoma. She's self-employed, trying to make ends meet, and has for years done the responsible thing: buying health insurance through the individual market. The thing is, sixteen years ago, she was diagnosed with a form of treatable cancer. And even though she had been cancer free for more than a decade, the insurance company kept jacking up her rates anyway, year after year. So she increased her out-of-pocket expenses. She raised her deductible. She was doing everything she could to maintain health insurance that would be there for her in case she got sick.

"But even as she upped her deductible to the maximum, last year Natoma's insurance company raised her premiums by more than 25 percent. Over the past year, she paid more than $6,000 in monthly premiums. She paid more than $4,000 out-of-pocket for co-pays, medical care, and prescriptions. So she ponied up more than $10,000 dollars. But because she never hit her deductible, her insurer only spent $900 on her care. And yet what comes in the mail at the end of last year? A letter telling Natoma that her premiums would go up again by more than 40 percent.

"She just could not afford it. She didn't have the money. And despite her desire to keep her coverage – despite her fears that she would get sick and lose the home her parents built – she finally surrendered and gave up her health insurance. January was her last month of being insured. Like so many responsible Americans – folks who work hard every day, who try to do the right thing – she was forced to hang her fortunes on chance. She hoped against hope she would stay healthy. She feared terribly she would not.

"That was the letter. And I understand Natoma was pretty surprised when she found out that I read it – word for word – to the CEOs of America's largest insurance companies – including the company that hiked up her rates by more than 40 percent.

"This was less than two weeks ago. But then Natoma's worst fears were realized. Just last week, she was working on a nearby farm, walking outside – apparently, chasing after a cow – when she collapsed. She was rushed to the hospital. She was very sick. She needed two blood transfusions. Doctors performed a battery of tests. And on Saturday, Natoma was diagnosed with leukemia – a serious form of cancer.

"The reason Natoma is not here today is that she's lying in a hospital bed, suddenly faced with this emergency – suddenly thrust into a fight for her life. She expects to face a month or more of aggressive chemotherapy.

"And she is racked with worry not only about her illness but about the cost of the tests and treatments she will surely need to beat it.

"I'm here because of Natoma.

"I'm here because of countless others who have been forced to face the hardest and most terrifying challenges in their lives with the added burden of medical bills they cannot pay.

"I'm here because I remember my own mother, in the last six months of her life, on the phone in her hospital room arguing with insurance companies when she should have been spending time with her family.

"I'm here because of the millions denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions – or dropped from coverage when they get sick.

"I'm here because of the small businesses forced to choose between health care and hiring.

"I'm here because of the seniors unable to afford the prescriptions they need.

"I'm here because of the folks seeing premiums going up by thirty, forty, fifty percent in a year.

"I am here because this is not the America I believe in – and it's not the America you believe in.

"And so when you hear people say “start over” – I want you to think of Natoma. When you hear people saying that this isn't the “right time” – think of what she's going through. When you hear people talk about who's up and who's down in the polls – instead of what's right or what's wrong for the country – think of her and the millions of responsible people – working people – being hurt by today's system of health insurance. And I want you to remember: There but for the grace of God go I.

"This status quo on health care is simply unsustainable. We cannot have a system that works better for the insurance companies than it does for the American people. We know what will happen if we fail to act. We know our government will be plunged deeper into debt. We know millions more people will lose coverage. And we know that rising costs will saddle millions more families with unaffordable expenses – and will force many small businesses to drop coverage altogether. A study just came out yesterday – a non-partisan study – which found that without reform, premiums could more than double for individuals and families over the next decade. Family policies could pass $25,000. Can you afford that?

"We have debated health care in Washington for more than a year. Every proposal has been put on the table. Every argument has been made. I know many people view this as a partisan issue, but both parties have found plenty of areas where we agree. And what we've ended up with is a proposal that's somewhere in the middle – one that incorporates the best ideas from Democrats and Republicans.

"On one side of the spectrum, there were those who wanted to scrap our system of private insurance and replace it with government-run health care. But I didn't think that was practical or realistic.

"On the other side of the spectrum, there are those who believe the answer is to simply unleash the insurance industry, by providing less oversight and fewer rules. I call this the “putting the foxes in charge of the hen house” approach. It would only give insurance companies more leeway to raise premiums and deny care.

"I don't believe we should give the government or the insurance companies more control over health care in America. I believe it's time to give you – the American people – more control over your own health insurance.

"That's why my proposal builds on the current system where most Americans get their health insurance from their employer. If you like your plan, you can keep your plan. If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor. I wouldn't want any plan that interferes with the relationship between a family and their doctor.

"Essentially, my proposal would change three things about the current health care system. First, it would end the worst practices of insurance companies. Within the first year of signing health care reform, thousands of uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions will be able to purchase health insurance for the first time in their lives. This year, insurance companies will be banned forever from denying coverage to children with pre-existing conditions. This year, they will be banned from dropping your coverage when you get sick. Those practices will end.

"If this reform becomes law, all new insurance plans will be required to offer free preventive care to their customers starting this year – free check-ups so we can start catching preventable illnesses on the front end. Starting this year, if you buy a new plan, there will be no more lifetime or restrictive annual limits on the amount of care you receive from your insurance companies. And if you're an uninsured young adult, you'll be able to stay on your parents' policy until you're 26 years old.

"The second thing that would change about the current system is this: for the first time, uninsured individuals and small businesses will have the same kind of choice of private health insurance that Members of Congress get for themselves. If this reform becomes law, Members of Congress will be getting their insurance from the same place the uninsured get theirs. Because if it's good enough for the American people, it ought to be good enough for the people you send to Washington.

"My proposal also says that if you still can't afford the insurance in this new marketplace, we will offer you tax credits to do so – tax credits that add up to the largest middle class tax cut for health care in history. After all, the wealthiest among us can already buy the best insurance there is, and the least well-off are able to get coverage through Medicaid. But it's the middle-class that gets squeezed, and that's who we have to help.

"Now, it's true that all of this will cost money – about $100 billion per year. But most of this comes from the nearly $2.5 trillion a year that America already spends on health care. It's just that right now, a lot of that money is being spent badly. With this plan, we're going to make sure the dollars we spend go toward making insurance more affordable and more secure. We're also going to eliminate wasteful taxpayer subsidies that currently go to insurance companies. And we will set a new fee on insurance companies that stand to gain as millions of Americans are able to buy insurance. Here's the point: our proposal is paid for.

"Finally, my proposal would bring down the cost of health care for families, businesses, and the federal government. Americans buying comparable coverage to what they have today in the individual market would see premiums fall by 14 to 20 percent. For Americans who get their insurance through the workplace, costs could fall by as much as $3,000 a person. By now, we have incorporated most of the serious ideas from across the political spectrum about how to contain the rising cost of health care – ideas that go after the waste and abuse in our system, especially in programs like Medicare. Our cost-cutting measures would reduce most people's premiums and bring down our deficit by up to $1 trillion over the next two decades. And those aren't my numbers; they are the savings determined by the Congressional Budget Office, the nonpartisan, independent referee of Congress.

"Now, the opponents of reform have tried a lot of different arguments to stop these changes. But maybe the most insidious is the idea that somehow this would hurt Medicare. And I know we've got some seniors with us today. So let me just tell you directly: this proposal adds almost a decade of solvency to Medicare. This proposal would close that gap in prescription drug coverage – called the doughnut hole – that sticks seniors with thousands of dollars in drug costs. This proposal will over time help to reduce the costs of Medicare that you pay every month. And this proposal would make preventive care free so you don't have to pay out-of-pocket for tests that keep you healthy.

"Yes, we are going after the waste, fraud, and abuse in Medicare. But that's because these are dollars that should be spent on care for seniors, not the care and feeding of insurance companies through subsidies and sweetheart deals. Every senior should know: there is no cutting of your guaranteed Medicare benefits. Period. This proposal makes Medicare stronger, makes the coverage better, and makes its finances more secure. Anyone who says otherwise is misinformed – or is trying to misinform you.

"So that's the proposal. And I believe Congress owes the American people a final up-or-down vote. Of course, now that we're approaching this vote, we're hearing a lot of people in Washington talking about the politics. Talking about what this means for November. Talking about the poll numbers for the Democrats and the Republicans. But that's why I wanted to come here today.

"Because in the end, this debate is about far more than the politics. It's about what kind of country we want to be. It's about the millions of lives that would be touched and, in some cases, saved by making private health insurance more secure and more affordable. It's about a woman, lying in a hospital bed, who wants nothing more than to be able to pay for the care she needs.

"And the truth is, what is at stake in this debate is not just our ability to solve this problem, but our ability to solve any problem. The American people want to know if it's still possible for Washington to look out for their interests and their future. They are waiting for us to act. They are waiting for us to lead. And as long as I hold this office, I intend to provide that leadership. I don't know about the politics. But I know what's right. So I am calling on Congress to pass these reforms – and I look forward to signing them into law.

"Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America."

A new Susquehanna Polling and Research survey runs counter to some other recent polling, and shows Republican Pat Toomey with a lead over Sen. Arlen Specter (D).

General Election Matchup (700 LVs, 3/3-6, MoE +/- 3.7%)
Toomey 42 (+1 vs. last poll, 10/7-12)
Specter 36 (-6)
Und 18 (+6)

Toomey leads among Republicans (75-9) and independents (40-30). Specter, just over 10 months after switching parties, has the support of only 59 percent of Democrats.

After the jump, see results of numbers in the governor's race.

(more...)

Ryan Grimm reports:

The Speaker, in a press briefing with progressive media in her Capitol office, said that three options were under consideration. One of them involved a vote on the Senate health care bill, followed by a vote on a reconciliation package. "Nobody wants to vote for the Senate bill," she said. She wouldn't rule out that option, she said, because there is no official bill language yet, which she said she needs first before she makes a decision on process.

A second option would entail a vote on a rule followed by a vote on the reconciliation package. The Senate parliamentarian, Pelosi said, has told Democrats that such a strategy would not be acceptable, because the Senate bill must pass the House before the reconciliation amendments can.

So the third option is to write the rule so that the passage of the reconciliation package deems the Senate bill to also have passed, a parliamentary maneuver she said the Senate parliamentarian had said was acceptable.

It's a technical distinction and Democrats hope that it's deep enough in the weeds that average voters will focus instead on the substance of the legislation instead of the confusing process. Asked if she had firmly decided to pursue the third option, she answered, "I like the third one better."

Pelosi said she expects the Congressional Budget Office to return with a cost analysis of the final amendments shortly, at which point she'll call for a vote.

"Get the bill," she said, punching her fist into her hand. "Go for it."

If you woke someone from a 15-month slumber and explained to them that despite starting with a very popular leader and a reservoir of political goodwill, the President and the Democrats are now in the position of defending back room deals and inventing arcane parliamentary loop holes to jam through on a party line vote a 2,700-page piece of legislation that's opposed by the American public, they'd have thought you were crazy.

Yet that's exactly where we are. Democrats have apparently convinced themselves that "average voters" 1) have been terribly misled by Republican lies about the bill and 2) won't care about the manner in which this bill is passed.  Both of those assumption spring from an exceedingly arrogant mindset, and both are quite possibly wrong. Perhaps more to the point, the "average voter" isn't the kind who turns out for an off year election.

A second poll in the last 10 days now shows Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter (D) leading former Rep. Pat Toomey (R) in his bid for re-election. The DailyKos/Research 2000 survey also finds Rep. Joe Sestak (D) trailing Toomey by just 3 points, though he trails Specter in the Democratic primary by 19 points.

SENATE
Dem Primary
Specter 52
Sestak 31

Specter leads by 18.7 points in the RCP Average.

General Election
Specter 47 - Toomey 41

Toomey 42 - Sestak 39

Toomey now leads Specter by just 1.5 points in the RCP Average and Sestak by 8.0 points.

GOVERNOR
Meanwhile, in the open governor's race, the survey finds Republican Tom Corbett leading Democrat Dan Onorato by 6 points, as well as three other potential Democratic opponents.

Corbett 40 - Onorato 34
Corbett 41 - Hoeffel 31
Corbett 41 - Wagner 32
Corbett 47 - Williams 19

The survey was conducted March 8-10 of 600 LV with a MoE of +/- 4%.