House Health Care Floor Debate Begins--Whipping Continues

by: Paul Rosenberg

Sat Nov 07, 2009 at 14:12


At 2PM EST, floor debate has just begun.

Above all, the Stupak Amendment needs to be whipped against.  It will ban all abortion coverage to any plan in the exchange that get federal subsidy.  There will be no option to pay for it out of pocket.  It's extremely authoritarian and anti-womean.  It's a massive extension of the Hyde Amendment.

HCAN's whip tool is here.

As an HCAN email explains:

* The core premise of health reform is that - if you like the coverage you have - you can keep it. Yet for the millions of women whose current insurance plans include coverage for abortion care, that promise may be broken.

* Congressman Stupak wants to place new restrictions on abortion and deny women this coverage.

* The House bill already contains a compromise that reflects the status quo & current law: it prohibits federal funds from being used for abortion but still allows women to use their own money to buy the coverage they need.

Whip list(s) on the flip
Paul Rosenberg :: House Health Care Floor Debate Begins--Whipping Continues
*         Vote NO on the Stupak amendment

*         Leaning anti-choice
o    Altmire (D, PA-04)
o    Barrow (D, GA-12)
o    Berry (D, AR-01)
o    Boccieri (D, OH-16)
o    Bright (D, AL-02)
o    Capito (R, WV-02)
o    Donnelly (D, IN-02)
o    Hill (D, IN-09)
o    Jenkins (R, KS-02)
o    Kildee (D, MI-05)
o    Lance (R, NJ-07)
o    Lee, C. (R, NY-26)
o    Matheson (D, UT-02)
o    Mollohan (D,
o    Ortiz (D, TX-27)
o    Paulsen (R, MN-03)
o    Perriello (D, VA-05)
o    Rahall (D, WV-03)
o    Ross (D, AR-04)
o    Spratt (D, SC-05)
o    Wilson, C. (D, OH-06)

*         Leans pro-choice but needs shoring up

o    Arcuri (D, NY-24)
o    Bean (D, IL-08)
o    Bishop, S. (D, GA-02)
o    Boswell (D, IA-03)
o    Butterfield (D, NC-01)
o    Cardoza (D, CA-18)
o    Chandler (D, KY-06)
o    Cooper (D, TN-05)
o    Costa (D, CA-20)
o    Doyle (D, PA-14)
o    Edwards, C. (D, TX-17)
o    Etheridge (D, NC-02)
o    Gordon (D, TN-06)
o    Kratovil (D, MD-01)
o    Langevin (D, RI-02)
o    McMahon (D, NY-13)
o    Michaud (D, ME-02)
o    Minnick (D, ID-01)
o    Neal (D, MA-02)
o    Nye (D, VA-02)
o    Obey (D, WI-07)
o    Owens (D, NY-23)
o    Ruppersberger (D, MD-02)
o    Ryan, T. (D, OH-17)
o    Salazar (D, CO-03)
o    Space (D, OH-18)

*         Unknown

o    Biggert (R, IL-13)
o    Carney (D, PA-10)
o    Castle (R, DE-AL)
o    Cuellar (D, TX-28)
o    Davis, A. (D, AL-07)
o    Dent (R, PA-15)
o    Ellsworth (D, IN-08)
o    Frelinghuysen (R, NJ-11)
o    Kirk (R, IL-10)
o    Lynch (D, MA-09)
o    Pomeroy (D, ND-AL)
o    Snyder (D, AR-02)
o    Tanner (D, TN-08)
o    Visclosky (D, IN-01)

Tags: (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
House Health Care Floor Debate Begins--Whipping Continues | 21 comments
I called Boswell (IA-03) (4.00 / 1)
No one answered the office phone, and the voice mail box was full.

I am optimistic that he will vote no on this amendment. I've never been in Boswell's fan club, but he stuck his neck out on some pro-choice votes way back when in the Iowa Senate.

Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.

Can we make vaccines a matter of personal choice (0.00 / 0)
like abortion?
Huh? (4.00 / 1)
I don't get your point.
[ Parent ]
I'd be satisfied (4.00 / 5)
if we could make abortion a matter of personal choice.

Montani semper liberi
[ Parent ]
Three questions (0.00 / 0)

 1. Does the greenlighting of the Stupak amendment mean that Weiner's single-payer amendment now goes to the floor as well?

 2. How many Republican votes will the Democrats get in 2010 if the Stupak amendment passes? Zero or zero?

 3. Is there any reason for the existence of the Democratic Party?  

"We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

Three Answers (4.00 / 4)
(1) You're kidding, right?

(2) Isn't the better question how many Democratic votes will the Democrats get in 2010 is the Stupak amendment passes?

(3) It's a site of struggle.  It's never been anything else, and probably never will be.  If you don't realize that going in, you are bound to lose all sorts of battles that you really ought to be winning.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I do think we.... (4.00 / 1)
...need to rethink this third party thing. I think the Greens are ineffectual but the Working Families Party in New York shows potential....

Philip Shropshire
http://www.threeriversonline.com
[ Parent ]
Third party (4.00 / 3)
means abandoning the battlefield. No thanks.

Montani semper liberi
[ Parent ]
Fusion doesn't (4.00 / 1)
Unfortunately, right now it's only available in a handful of states. I'm all for expanding WFP in states where fusion is available, and for pushing for fusion as part of a larger package of electoral reforms (like clean elections, universal voting rights for adult citizens, and uniform paper ballots).

Fusion may well make it easier to do battle within the Democratic Party, as WFP sometimes endorses at the primary stage and uses its field operation to support primary candidates.  

Support a Pennsylvania Progressive for Governor - Joe Hoeffel

[ Parent ]
Third party isn't abandoning the battlefield (0.00 / 0)
It's taking up positions on a nearby ridge and calling down artillery on them.

Third party alone won't do it. But if it gets Democrats running scared, that's a card we didn't have before.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

[ Parent ]
Third Party State -based Fusion Politics Can Work (4.00 / 2)
And the WFP shows how that can be done.

Otherwise, Sadie's absolutely right.  It's purity for purity's sake, and means letting the worst elements prevail indefinitely.

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I would add this divided answer to 3. (0.00 / 0)
House Dems have begun to prove their worth, at least a few hundred of them anyway.

In the Senate, the answer would have to be NO fu*!@#$ way!
-In fact,we keep going deeper in the Red.  Seriously. Only 30 out of 60 signed up for the PO..??

Nationalism is not the same thing as terrorism, and an adversary is not the same thing as an enemy.

[ Parent ]
I voted for Corzine ... (0.00 / 0)
... and now I regret it.

Is that an immature emotional reaction to the Democrats caving on abortion?  Yes.  So what?  Fuck the Democrats!

Full Court Press!  http://www.openleft.com/showDi...

[ Parent ]
Why? (4.00 / 1)
Corzine wasn't the problem...

The problem is we only have 190 Democrats in the house caucus.  The rest of them are something else... what, I don't know...  

The teabaggers are right... Had we purged our caucus earlier, we would have been in much better control over it when we regained power.  We will now have to do that after the fact...

People we should have counted on, like Kissel and Murphy and Engler stabbed us in the back.  The leadership was forced to acquiesce to Stupak and his merry band of obstructionists.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

[ Parent ]
Because I walked an entire block to the voting booth when I could have been at home watching cartoons! (4.00 / 2)
Forced?  Their families were kidnapped?  Someone threatened to kill their dogs?

The right is crazy, stupid and irrational.  But they keep moving the country to the right.  The liberal pundits smirk at the teabaggers because it means more votes for the Democratic Party.  I don't smirk because their intimidation tactics are working in terms of policy.

The Democrats keep being so smart and calculating as their throats are cut.  They need to discover that they will face crazed irrational rage from their left if they keep playing the game.

As the Hulk once said, "All I know is that you try to kill me and for that you must pay!"

Full Court Press!  http://www.openleft.com/showDi...

[ Parent ]
some names to remember in 2010 (4.00 / 3)
Here are Democrats who voted against allowing the bill to go forward to debate (it passed 241-192):

Jason Altmire
Brian Baird
Dan Boren
Bobby Bright
Artur Davis
Charlie Melancon
Gene Taylor
Travis Childers
Parker Griffith
Jim Marshall
Walt Minnick
Ike Skelton
Heath Shuler
Loretta Sanchez
Frank Kratovil

We'll see how many join these "heroes" in voting no on the bill.

Brian Baird and Loretta Sanchez??? (0.00 / 0)
WTF are they thinking?

Also Artur Davis WTF.

[ Parent ]
Davis is running for governor... (4.00 / 1)
...so, he feels he must stab his constituents in the back...

Let's make sure he fails in his quest.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

[ Parent ]
Heh... (4.00 / 1)
Shuler and Boren will survive.  Gene Taylor is going all "anti democrat" in a pathetic attempt to retain his seat.  As a person who has been actively trying to sabotage this bill, we should make sure he loses next year.  It shouldn't be hard at all.  Ms. Sanchez has a lot of explaining to do.  Baird needs a big ol' primary challenge.  Melancon is running for Senate of LA.... he has a chance, so we need to make sure he fails there, too, then the house seat will take care of itself.  Last thing we need is another Landrieu in the Senate.

The others are politically dead anyways...  The pathetic attempt to appease teabaggers will not save them, and the Obama base that got them elected in the first place will certainly stay home...

So, that's the bright spot... 90% of those assholes will no longer be obstructing us next year.

REID: Voting against us was never part of our arrangement!
SPECTER: I am altering the deal! Pray I don't alter it any further!
REID: This deal keeps getting worse all the time!

[ Parent ]
NARAL Republicans? (4.00 / 1)
There are some pro-choice Republicans (still) and occasionally NARAL will endorse them over the Democrat.  Does anyone have a  list of these Republicans?  The assumption is all Republicans will vote for this poison pill in lockstep, but that isn't completely a given.  It seems to me that there could be pressure applied to them as well.

If anyone is represented by a pro-choice Republican, I'd suggest getting on the phone.  If anyone has a list of these Republicans, that might be useful.

The core premise is probably flawed (0.00 / 0)
Yes you can keep your insurance untill the govt insurance drives it out of business.  About 5 years.  

Conservative......CNN news:Nopenhagen: US PRES 2 WKS LATE ATTEND 1 DAY, GORE JOURNEY BY TRAIN.
House Health Care Floor Debate Begins--Whipping Continues | 21 comments
Donate to Open Left







QUICK HITS

Friends of the Earth thanks the OpenLeft community for the ideas you generate and your contributions to the progressive movement.
As an anti-spam measure, there is a 24-hour waiting period after registering before new users can comment.
blog advertising is good for you
blog advertising is good for you
LIBERAL INSTITUTIONS
STATE BLOGS
SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2009, Powered by SoapBlox