"Yes to No" votes running 5 ahead of "No to Yes" votes; can run only 1 ahead at most

by: Chris Bowers

Thu Mar 18, 2010 at 17:50

There are a lot of whip counts on the health reform bill right now.  In the midst of the confusion, let me suggest a simplified metric on the progress of the health reform bill:

  1. Tally the number of confirmed "No" votes who switched from voting yes in November;
  2. Tally the number of confirmed "Yes" votes who switched from voting no in November;
  3. Subtract #2 from #1.
  4. If the resulting number is equal to, or less than, 1, then the bill looks good for passage.  If the result is greater than 1, passage is in danger.
With droves of members of Congress still playing coy with the public, this should make things easy.

So, here we go:

  1. 8 confirmed "Yes to No" votes: Arcuri, Cao, Costello, Donnelly, Driehaus, Lipinski, Lynch, Stupak

    (Note: even if he is undecided, Cao will never cast the deciding vote in favor.  As such, he should be considered a "Yes to No" for the duration of the vote count)

  2. 3 confirmed "No to Yes" votes: Gordon, Kucinich, Markey

  3. The results in a net of five votes for "Yes to No." That means the leadership needs to pick up four more "no" votes from November to pass the bill
Hopefully, that simplifies things, and makes it easier to understand the run of play.  Then again, some of these supposedly "hard yes" and "hard no" votes have flipped before, so even this count is prone to confusion.

Update--Bobby Rush a no? CNN claims Bobby Rush is now a "no."  Don't quite believe this yet.  Best to wait for more info.

Update 2: Bobby Rush already backing off "no" stance; So much for Rush being a no:

@ryangrim just talked to Rep. Bobby Rush, he's already backing off 'no' vote. House staffer: 'he's a primadonna, he'll be a yes'

That was an interesting five minutes.

Chris Bowers :: "Yes to No" votes running 5 ahead of "No to Yes" votes; can run only 1 ahead at most

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

I think you're wrong on Lynch and Costello (0.00 / 0)
I know what Lynch said, we'll see.

As far as I know, Costello never ruled out voting yes.

You could be right (0.00 / 0)
We will find out on Sunday.

But, I will work to get links justifying all of this soon.

[ Parent ]
Costello is a single payer supporter (0.00 / 0)
I have a hard time believing he'd sink this over abortion. Marcy Kaptur, the only other single payer supporter who voted for Stupak broke with him.  

[ Parent ]
Lynch (0.00 / 0)
He's a hypocrite of the highest order. A gutless puke, a sniveling little coward. Last summer, he expressed concern that the House bill was too expensive and didn't cut costs enough, but then voted for it anyway. Now here's a bill that is less expensive than the House bill he voted for and cuts costs even more and he's looking for another excuse to vote against it. He is the ONLY member of the House opposing this bill from the left. Think about that. Stephen Lynch, the last true liberal in Congress. Give me a break.

[ Parent ]
Panic (4.00 / 2)
I'm seeing the same hints of panic among Democrats that were visible just before Scott Brown was elected. The mutual hatred and recrimination is boiling just under the surface.

Can the Dems snatch victory from the jaws of defeat? Yesterday, there seemed to be an inexorable march to passage of the bill. Tonight, I am not so sure.

This is where Pelosi & Emanuel should be earning their keep. Fasten your seatbelts, its gonna be a bumpy ride until Sunday.

It was no better last november... (4.00 / 3)
they didn't even have the votes until the afternoon of the vote.  There was lots of panicking and backtracking there as well...

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 ]
... (4.00 / 3)
Amazing... I always thought it would be the senate to rape the American people by screwing 30 million people out of healthcare... can't believe it might be the house.   Anyone voting no will never see a dime from me and I will support their primary opponents every session until they are defeated or retire.

[ Parent ]
Most of those voting yes will get the same from myself and others. (4.00 / 5)
The Senate is screwing people out of healthcare, by coercing them into buying junk insurance from crooked monopolies. None of those bought-and-paid-for DINOs gets anything from me except rude noises, and i'll be sure to back a primary challenge against them wherever I can.


[ Parent ]
If this passes (4.00 / 8)
and Republicans campaign to role back this bill, there is no way you will support them.  You won't be in favor of dropping 15 million from Medicare.  You won't be in favor of letting insurance corporations dropping people or charging more with pre-conditions.


You will want to improve what we've got by adding Medicare Buy-in, improving subsidies and so on.  You will continue to push for single payer, or at least state level single payer.  You might not believe me now, and it might take a month or two to get there, but I feel very confident about this prediction.

[ Parent ]
suddenly all those Reps and Senators who abandoned the public option and single payer will morph into mighty jungle cats (4.00 / 2)
gumdrops, falling from the sky

[ Parent ]
Nope (2.00 / 4)
It will still be hard.  In some ways it will be harder, as there will be less leverage over Obama.  In some ways it will be easier because it will be stand alone and simpler.

I never said it would be easy.  I never said it would be successful.  I said when the very definition of the status quo changes, you won't want to go back to what we have now.  Instead, you will want to make what we have (will have) better.

[ Parent ]
Damn, near tone perfect. (4.00 / 2)
"I lay me down to bleed a while but I'll rise and fight again" A politician I love was quoted as saying, the night he lost his own seat on his party's way to creating universal public health care for Canada.

This isnt a victory so much as a loss on the way to victory, and I'll defend every flawed inch of it to make it better.

Lets begin the process of health reform now. This a verb.


The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Are you people real? (4.00 / 2)
I understand that people are disappointed in this product. I am. But the choice, now, is between the status quo or this bill. That's it. No other options are on the table, now or in the foreseeable future. Fairies are not going to come down and bring single-payer if this bill fails. That's just going to be it for another decade or so. Therefore, the bottom line is, is this bill, which is the only plausible alternative to the status quo, an improvement on the status quo, or not? It seems to me that it very clearly is. If you advocate for a "no" vote, you're a purity troll, plain and simple.

[ Parent ]
They're for real. (0.00 / 0)
And you're right on the money.

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!

[ Parent ]
No one is going to improve this bill either. (4.00 / 1)
If this POS passes, that's it, we're all customers of big insurance. There will be no PO fairy coming along to fix it.

Once people realize how this bill sticks it to them, and the DNC starts losing seats, how are you going to get it fixed then (assuming the democrats even want to)?

If you advocate for a "yes" vote, you're a dupe, plain and simple.

Fixed your typo, there.

[ Parent ]
People like this bill better once they understand what is in it. (0.00 / 0)
You're completely wrong that people are going to feel that this bill somehow "sticks it to them."  The only people who feel that way are those who are too blinded by irrational rage and refuse to look at the big picture.

Luckily, about 90% of liberals have come to understand that moving forward is the right thing to do.  That's why you're seeing the bill's popularity rebound, a trend that will only continue after passage.

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!

[ Parent ]
The only people who feel that way (0.00 / 0)
are those who are too blinded by irrational rage and refuse to look at the big picture.

So, about 60% of the electorate, then?

[ Parent ]
Not even close. (0.00 / 0)
And the vast majority of those who are against it are Teabaggers and Republicans, who are also irrationally enraged that a black man is their President.

I suppose they are the ones we should be listening to, eh?

We PTDB! Now, let's pass Grayson's Public Option Act!

[ Parent ]
"Rape" sure is an appropriate term to throw around like it means nothing (4.00 / 2)
yes indeedy

[ Parent ]
Thank you Chris... (0.00 / 0)
While I'm somewhat optimistic, you provide valuable reality-checks to what the rest of the media is presenting now... Even the "liberal" media like Huffpost and TPM is basically presenting things as if all the switchers are heading in the "No to Yes" category, when clearly that's not happening quite enough just yet... Huffpost's headline is now "Dominoes start to fall" as in, No to Yessers are picking up tons of votes... I hope that's the case, but I'm glad you're giving it a good reality check.

No CBO bounce (yet) (0.00 / 0)
Was sort of expecting a handful of movement off the fence for yes once the CBO numbers came out -- that is, I assumed leadership had a number they had to meet and, once met, there would be movement from some on the fence looking for CBO cover. Not seeing it, yet...  

Self-refuting Christine O'Donnell is proof monkeys are still evolving into humans

... (0.00 / 0)
I'm hoping some are playing it close to the vest to avoid a push by the idiots who want this to fail and want to fuck over 30 million people through their selfishness... of course that works both ways so those looking to fuck us could do so by playing it close to the vest.

[ Parent ]
Shuler an emergency no to yes? (4.00 / 1)
Dayen notes that Heath Shuler has quietly left himself some room to vote yes. Pure speculation here, but Shuler's very friendly with Rahm and I wonder if he's quietly told the WH he'll vote yes if there's no other way to get it done.

Self-refuting Christine O'Donnell is proof monkeys are still evolving into humans

I would normally be skeptical.... (4.00 / 2)
but after the "Kucinich switch", I am inclined to say its possible.

[ Parent ]
Pelosi appeared with a doctor from his district today (4.00 / 1)

[ Parent ]
I suspect Lynch, Costello and Arcuri will vote yes (4.00 / 3)
They'll scream about it (esp. Lynch), but given that Lynch relies heavily on union support and given that Arcuri faces a close race in which SIEU and WFP support will be crucial, I think they'll both ultimately vote yes.

Although Arcuri, especially, is an enormous idiot if he flips to no.  

I think you're right about Lynch (4.00 / 1)
Didn't he cite the labor unfriendliness of taxing health insurance benefits as a reason to vote no?  I just got an email blast from the AFL-CIO in support of the current bill.  Seems like that should be plenty of cover for him to vote yes.  

[ Parent ]
note to all "editors"... (4.00 / 3)
the passage of the health care fiasco is not a substitute for a functioning democracy.

in fact, it demonstrates the opposite.

Health insurance reform and the New Jerusalem (4.00 / 6)
Whatever its virtues, and like both Chris and Kucinich, I think it does have some, passage of this bill will confirm an awful precedent -- the same kind of precedent which gives us 300 million dollar warplanes, a war on drugs which is really a war on poor people, and an Israel-can-do-no-wrong foreign policy which persists even as the Israeli government buys our congressmen, commits atrocities with our aid money, and kills our citizens.

Briefly put, this legislation tell us that our government isn't interested in our welfare; it's interested in the welfare and the convenience of its real constituency, which has little if anything to do with us. We give these folks billions -- or more accurately, allow them to steal it from us. In return, they kick back millions to our legislators, then call us in to lick the scraps up from the floor. If you're trying to secure people's welfare, this is about the most inefficient form of political economy that you could imagine.

We all know this, of course. Some day, if we stay focused, we may be able to do something about it. Clearly, though, today is not that day.

Here's the Bill (0.00 / 0)
It has 30 million more people covered, with subsidy, eventually, sadly, for people up to 400% of the federal poverty rate.

This is the analysis from House Ctte's



The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky


Open Left Campaigns



Advanced Search

Powered by: SoapBlox