Donate to DU!
Democratic Underground Latest Threads
Latest		 Greatest Threads
Greatest		 Lobby
Lobby		 Journals
Journals		 Search
Search		 Options
Options		 Help
Help		 Login
Login
Google

Representatives (D) that voted FOR Stupak but then voted AGAINST the bill

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
First thread | Last thread
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Donate to DU! Sun Nov-08-09 12:12 AM
Original message
Representatives (D) that voted FOR Stupak but then voted AGAINST the bill
Edited on Sun Nov-08-09 12:25 AM by Solly Mack
Thanks to The Magistrate for the idea!



List of Democrats that voted YES to include the Stupak amendment but voted NO on the bill itself



Altmire
Barrow
Boren
Bright
Chandler
Childers
Davis (AL)
Davis (TN)
Griffith
Gorden
Holden
Matheson
Melacon
Peterson
Ross
Shuler
Skelton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague

YES votes on the Stupak amendment

Altmire
Baca
Barrow
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Boccieri
Boren
Bright
Cardoza
Carney
Chandler
Childers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Cuellar
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (TN)
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Ellsworth
Etheridge
Gordon (TN)
Griffith
Hill
Holden
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Langevin
Lipinski
Lynch
Marshall
Matheson
McIntyre
Melancon
Michaud
Mollohan
Murtha
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Ortiz
Perriello
Peterson
Pomeroy
Rahall
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Shuler
Skelton
Snyder
Space
Spratt
Stupak
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Wilson (OH)Altmire
Baca
Barrow
Berry
Bishop (GA)
Boccieri
Boren
Bright
Cardoza
Carney
Chandler
Childers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Cuellar
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Davis (TN)
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Driehaus
Ellsworth
Etheridge
Gordon (TN)
Griffith
Hill
Holden
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kildee
Langevin
Lipinski
Lynch
Marshall
Matheson
McIntyre
Melancon
Michaud
Mollohan
Murtha
Neal (MA)
Oberstar
Obey
Ortiz
Perriello
Peterson
Pomeroy
Rahall
Reyes
Rodriguez
Ross
Ryan (OH)
Salazar
Shuler
Skelton
Snyder
Space
Spratt
Stupak
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Wilson (OH)



NO votes on the bill itself

Adler (NJ)
Altmire
Baird
Barrow
Boccieri
Boren
Boucher
Boyd
Bright
Chandler
Childers
Davis (AL)
Davis (TN)
Edwards (TX)
Gordon (TN)
Griffith
Herseth Sandlin
Holden
Kissell
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Markey (CO)
Marshall
Massa
Matheson
McIntyre
McMahon
Melancon
Minnick
Murphy (NY)
Nye
Peterson
Ross
Shuler
Skelton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
   Replies to this thread
   Thanks. This is an important list..  BrklynLiberal   Nov-08-09 12:14 AM   #1 
   There outta be a rule. If you are going to demonize the bill, you don't get to amend it  emulatorloo   Nov-08-09 12:15 AM   #2 
   damn straight.  robinlynne   Nov-08-09 10:08 PM   #14 
   Peterson and Pomeroy suck!!!  Odin2005   Nov-08-09 12:19 AM   #3 
   All of Rahm's favorite folks. funny how many lists Schuler is on.  saracat   Nov-08-09 12:26 AM   #4 
   My representative voted for the bill (which he said he was not going to)  rebel with a cause   Nov-08-09 12:28 AM   #5 
   As a Democatic fan of the Washington Redskins  MadBadger   Nov-08-09 12:29 AM   #6 
   Thank You For Putting This Together, Sir! Your Effort Is Much Appreciated  The Magistrate   Nov-08-09 12:34 AM   #7 
   I'm still trying to figure this out. We got one Republican vote. WHAT purpose did the Stupak  patrice   Nov-08-09 12:42 AM   #8 
   It was for anti-choice Democrats, not Republicans.  Unvanguard   Nov-08-09 12:56 AM   #11 
   ooopps  patrice   Nov-08-09 12:43 AM   #9 
   Hmmm  buchols   Nov-08-09 12:52 AM   #10 
   I suspect the amendment was voted on to give some congress people political cover back home  happyslug   Nov-08-09 01:24 AM   #12 
   A Kick, Sir, For Your 'Little List Of Those Who'd Not Be Missed'....  The Magistrate   Nov-08-09 02:26 PM   #13 
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thanks. This is an important list..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emulatorloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
2. There outta be a rule. If you are going to demonize the bill, you don't get to amend it
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 10:08 PM
Response to Reply #2
14. damn straight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Odin2005 Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:19 AM
Response to Original message
3. Peterson and Pomeroy suck!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saracat Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
4. All of Rahm's favorite folks. funny how many lists Schuler is on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rebel with a cause Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Donate to DU! Sun Nov-08-09 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
5. My representative voted for the bill (which he said he was not going to)
and for the Stupak amendment. I don't like it (the Stupak vote) but I imagine that he voted the way most of his constituents would want him to.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadBadger Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:29 AM
Response to Original message
6. As a Democatic fan of the Washington Redskins
Fuck you Heath Shuler, you piece of dogshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
7. Thank You For Putting This Together, Sir! Your Effort Is Much Appreciated
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Donate to DU! Sun Nov-08-09 12:42 AM
Response to Original message
8. I'm still trying to figure this out. We got one Republican vote. WHAT purpose did the Stupak
amendment serve? Pelosi et al HAD to have known the Republicans weren't going to vote yes, no matter what. Federal money is already prohibited from supporting abortion by law anyway. So the Stupak amendment was to . . . ?

I understand it's going to get stripped out in conference anyway, so all it really ended up doing was to show that even when Democrats "go all of the way" some people will NEVER support Progressive legislation, no matter what. The amendment was a lose:lose, but perhaps THAT was what it was meant to do. Shine a light on who the HCR-obstructionist Dems are . . . ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Unvanguard (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #8
11. It was for anti-choice Democrats, not Republicans.
As close as the vote was, they could have derailed it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Donate to DU! Sun Nov-08-09 12:43 AM
Response to Original message
9. ooopps
Edited on Sun Nov-08-09 12:44 AM by patrice
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buchols (6 posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
10. Hmmm
I'm in Murphy's district... I wonder if he voted down the bill because of the abortion clause? He doesn't seem like such a hardcore progressive, though he did say he supported a deficit neutral public option. Interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
happyslug Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Donate to DU! Sun Nov-08-09 01:24 AM
Response to Original message
12. I suspect the amendment was voted on to give some congress people political cover back home
For example, my representative Murtha, voted for the Amendment AND then for the bill WITHOUT the amendment. This way Murtha (and others) can go back home to their districts and if someone brings up why they voted for a bill that permitted Government funding of abortions (an accusation made against the bill, it is unimportant if that is true or not) they can say they TRIED to stop such funding by voting for this amendment when all along they planned to vote for the bull with or without such funding. Politics is NOT always straight up and down voting, you have to help your fellow party members get elected in their home districts AND often the best way to do that is give them a chance to vote for something, popular in their home district, but has no chance of ever getting a majority of votes. In such situations the congress person can go back home and said he or she tried to do what was popular in their home districts even while they voted for a bill that, like this bill, contains the opposite of what the people back home wanted. This is why most congress people, like Murtha, voted for the amendment and when it was defeated voted for the bill. Just saying why people would support this amendment AND when it was defeated voted for the bill without this amendment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Magistrate Donating Member (1000+ posts)  Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov-08-09 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
13. A Kick, Sir, For Your 'Little List Of Those Who'd Not Be Missed'....
Those who voted for the Stupak amendment and against the Bill are beneath contempt: they got their price and failed to deliver the goods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Sat Nov 21st 2009, 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals  |  Links  |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2009 Democratic Underground, LLC