As senators jet home for the July 4th recess, the Democrats’ bloated financial-regulation bill remains in flux. Will Sen. Scott Brown (R., Mass.) vote for it? He tells us that he remains undecided . . . for now. Before Brown makes any final judgment, “I want to read it,” he says. “It’s a 2,300-page bill. The American people expect us to read the things we vote on.” The bill, he adds, without further comment, “has morphed into something different” following the removal of a $19 billion levy on large banks.

You can be sure that Brown will be wooed while we all munch on hot dogs and hamburgers:

“So, last night I got off the plane and I’m driving through Wrentham saying, ‘Man, I just can’t believe I’m a United States Senator,’ ’’ he crowed to his adoring interlocutors. “And then Tim Geithner calls me on the phone and says, ‘Scott, I just wanted to go through some things that we’re working on right now . . .’ He just called me a minute ago, too . . .
“Obviously, I am the key vote. They know they have to keep me in the loop.”

Daniel Indiviglio explains the politics of Brown’s recess mulling:

It’s not entirely clear whether a last-minute change to how the regulation will be paid for was enough to satisfy several centrist Republicans, including Senators Brown (R-MA), Grassley (R-IA), Collins (R-ME) and Snowe (R-ME), who voted for the measure initially. But even if it is, this additional time could still put the legislation in jeopardy.
If the other Republicans convince these few defectors to unite with them against the measure, then the bill will be in trouble. Democrats need at least one Republican vote to prevent filibuster. They may need a few, since two of their own voted against it originally, and Senator Byrd’s death leaves an empty seat for the time being.

The vote on the financial-regulation bill will likely come in mid-July.