Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"Pro-Choice Caucus leader: Stupak doesn't have the votes to kill health 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.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 11:14 PM
Original message
"Pro-Choice Caucus leader: Stupak doesn't have the votes to kill health bill."
Pro-Choice Caucus leader: Stupak doesn't have the votes to kill health bill

By Michael O'Brien - 03/04/10 03:42 PM ET
Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) doesn't have the votes to stop healthcare legislation, the leader of the Congressional Pro-Choice Caucus said Thursday.

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), the co-chairwoman of the abortion-rights-supporting caucus, predicted that abortion would not prove to be a sticking point among Democrats that brings down health reform efforts.

"I don't think Congressman Stupak has the votes to kill healthcare legislation over his language not being in there," DeGette told The Hill.

Abortion rights became a key part of House and Senate debates over healthcare legislation last year, with Democratic leaders in both chambers having offered restrictions on federal subsidies to health plans covering abortion to win over key centrist Democrats' votes.

The House adopted an amendment from Stupak which abortion-rights supporters like DeGette had decried under the assumption that it would eventually be removed. Stupak is now threatening to fell the bill as it comes up for another vote unless it meets the standard set by his amendment.

DeGette said that Stupak's threat to vote against the bill, along with 11 other Democrats who'd previously supported it, meant that the bill would go down.

"He says he has 10 or 11 people who will vote no, but a lot of those people voted no the first time, but there are also a lot of other people who voted no the first time who now want to support the bill," she said.


... and these, my friends, the FORMER "no" voters are the very people the President has been courting the last two days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TheBigotBasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. Brilliant news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 11:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. He is a Pawn of these Guys
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 11:40 PM
Response to Original message
3. Thank you!
Good Courting!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TomCADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-04-10 11:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. Thank God - Plotting To Kill HCR With Mitch McConnell
What exactly makes him a Democrat? Heck, even Lieberman is pro-choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 12:01 AM
Response to Original message
5. There are a number of congresscritters
who may well combine to kill the bill.

Not only Bart Stupak and the pro-lifers, but there are those who will rightfully distrust than the reconciliation bill will A) contain sufficient things to change the Senate bill into something more like the House bill and B) even pass the Senate, which has zero legal obligation to pass it.

Let's not forget the House members who are scared shitless about HCR since watching Scott Brown win in true-blue Massachusetts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChicagoSuz219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. He's pro-choice... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. Yes, Scott Brown is.
But his election put fear into the hearts of those whose districts are turning from blue to purple, and especially from purple to red.

There are at least a dozen Representatives who are making the calculation: "Should I vote no, and hope this issue goes away for the fall so I can get re-elected, or should I just go out in a blaze of glory by voting for the Senate's bill, without any assurances that a reconciliation change will take place?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #5
13. I think they know that already voted for the House bill
and if nothing passes, they still will be harassed for that vote and the Republicans will likely win in characterizing it even more negatively than before. Their BEST chance is to pass it. That victory alone will - as almost always happens - raise Obama's and their approval. Consider that the Republicans against them will be against them either way. The Democrats angry because of gridlock are more likely to approve.

Also consider that many elderly people, who now believe the eye popping idea that the Republicans are protecting Medicare which teh Democrats want to destroy, will see their Medicare is still there and the same - except the donut hole is gone. Consider that among the people just above the Medicaid threshold will get a subsidy that will pay most of the premiums they had no chance of affording before the plan was passed.

Look at the faces of the Republicans when they say passing it "will hurt the Democrats" - and they will run on repealing it. Do you really think that will work? The Democrats have the option of running on the need to fine tune it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 06:40 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. Admittedly
they might be hung out to dry by voters for saying 'yes' the first time, and 'no' the second. But it's easy to justify to both sides, they can say to a progressive audience that they liked HCR, but hated the Senate bill, and didn't trust the Senate to do the right thing.

To a conservative audience, they could say that they were wrapped up in the bubble of Washington D. C. when they voted 'yes', but since then they listened to the voters and changed it to 'no'. Congresscritters often do the "I voted for it before I voted against it" and pull it off a lot better than John Kerry did.

As for Medicare, I asked my dyed-in-the-wool Democratic-voting mother about that today, and even she's worried about the premiums for her and Dad going up. And they're in the Kaiser HMO system, which is a pioneer in controlling costs!

I do think running on repealing the Senate bill, especially if it has not been softened by a reconciliation measure that considerably would make it easier for people to swallow, will be a winning strategy for the Repubes. They'll beat the drum loudly between the day the President signs something, and Election Day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. What John Kerry said to explain it was fine, the media and, the Republicans and later - other
Democrats distorted it.

Kerry voted FOR a version that he and Biden sponsored that would have rolled back the tax cots on the top 1%, he voted AGAINST the Bush supported version that added it to the debt. TWO different bills - two different votes. Not hard to understand at all - and in these days where fiscal conservatism is big, it looks even better than in 2003 when he did it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
customerserviceguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. My point was
Kerry may have done an Olympian job with his vote, but he didn't stick the landing, so he got points taken off.

My point was also that there are ways that congresscritters could vote yes before and no now, and just possibly get away with it, especially if America's attention has moved on to something other than HCR by November.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lamp_shade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 04:32 AM
Response to Original message
7. Rachel beat the shit out of him last night. Let's see what happens now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
City Lights Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 06:55 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. That was a thing of beauty! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polichick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. She sure did - stupid Stupak. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
a kennedy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #7
10. Yup, she sure kick his arse.....
:applause: :applause: :applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HughMoran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 08:45 AM
Response to Original message
12. Stuckin Fupak
Talk about a Dem I'd like to punch in the face. :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
16. GREAT for us-terrible for the "liberal" MSM. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enough already 2 Donating Member (45 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 08:30 PM
Response to Original message
17. If he doesn't have the votes...
...why haven't they called a vote on the Senate bill yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #17
19. They have to work out the exact language of the reconciliation bill first. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueIdaho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-05-10 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
20. Asshats like Stupak have had their moment in the spotlight - time to get the hook.
Time to sideline the dilettantes and primadonnas and finish the damn job. Stupak knows full well that other federal legislation already covers his issue. Enough with the public hand wringing already.
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 Thu Oct 17th 2019, 02:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency 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 |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

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

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC