Stupak situation still not settled

by: Chris Bowers

Fri Mar 19, 2010 at 13:05


Stupak says he is negotiating with the leadership on the bill:

This morning, during an appearance on Good Morning America, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) reaffirmed that he might vote for the Senate health care bill if Democrats pass the Stupak abortion amendment as a separate measure. Stupak said that Democrats have shown a "renewed" interest in tying his amendment to the Senate bill

Pelosi says she isn't negotiating:

ABC News' Jonathan Karl reports: Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi was asked about Bart Stupak's suggestion that there could be another bill to address abortion funding and she said, "I haven't heard any of that."

"If you don't want federal funding for abortion... and you want to have a health care bill," she said. "This is it."

Leaving the he said / she said aside for the moment, Stupak still appears to hold the balance on the bill.  He may not have a dozen members anymore, but the vote is so close he doesn't need that many anymore to sink the bill.

To pass the bill, the leadership needs to have only one less "no to yes" votes than "yes to no" votes.  Right now, "yes to no" is running at least four ahead, and at least six of the "yes to no" votes are cited the lack of the Stupak amendment as their main rationale.

What this means is that, at least based on public whip counts, there isn't a clear path to passage at this point without either getting the Stupak group to cave, or caving to the Stupak group. And it isn't even clear if Democrats could make a deal with Stupak if they wanted to, given both opposition in the Senate, the threat of losing new "no to yes" votes such as Betsy Markey, and the rules on reconciliation generally.

I don't have any particularly deep insight into this, or any clever solutions.  It is just worth noting that the Stupak situation is far from settled at this point.

Chris Bowers :: Stupak situation still not settled

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
if the Democratic Party (0.00 / 0)
joined hands and passed a stand alone anti-choice bill, that would either spell disaster for the Party or mean a total collapse of the pro-choice movement.

? (0.00 / 0)
who's suggesting such a thing? You couldn't get a standalone anti-abortion bill through the House or the Senate.

Apparently there are no effective women's health groups in DC. How did the Stupak coathanger provision pass in the first place? (rhetorical question)


[ Parent ]
From the Hill (0.00 / 0)
http://thehill.com/homenews/ho...

At least six anti-abortion Democrats are open to supporting the healthcare bill if they can get a guarantee from the Senate that it will move separate legislation containing the House abortion language, one of those Democratic holdouts said Friday.


[ Parent ]
Hmm (0.00 / 0)
And Obama could veto it right if it passes the Senate?

[ Parent ]
From that same article (0.00 / 0)
In a Wednesday interview with The Hill, however, Stupak said he was dubious of promises made by any Democrats.

"Right now, they got the trifecta: They got the House, they got the Senate and they got a president," he said. "So basically, they said, 'Your right-to-life amendments are over.' And they've proven that.

Stupak won't go for that but the others might. He knows that if it is taken up Obama would veto it. He ASSUMES that Obama wouldn't veto the bill right now over abortion because he wants the bill to pass at any cost.  

I say give the six dems the agreement. They apparently just want an opportunity to vote on it.  


[ Parent ]
if this is true I don't understand why no one has written about it (0.00 / 1)
Stupaks son killed himself at age 17 with his fathers gun. According to what I read apparently the Senior Stupak found religion AND became anti choice AFTER his sons suicide My husband committed suicide and I know about the ripple effect.
Us survivors feel guilt and that guilt can get twisted...

say hi to your wife...


Sound unlikely (0.00 / 0)
Not sure what you read, but Stupak's son committed suicide in 2000 and Stupak has a clear anti-abortion voting record even before then.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

[ Parent ]
Stupak Is A Liar (4.00 / 2)
Whatever else we know, we know that as a fact.

We also know that even a single vote could be enough, either way.

So my utterly-uninfomred, but-hopefully-common-sense-based take on things is that Stupak doesn't really have anyone he controls for sure, there are no negotiations ongoing (because there's nothing, actually, to discuss), and Pelosi has no intention of inflating his sense of importance, but that there very well may be a game going on where Pelosi has people talking to him, just to help restrain him, even as she's reaching out to those still being influenced by his delusional rhetoric, trying to patiently explain why the Senate preserves the Hyde Amendment.  

But I repeat: the most important thing to remember in the midst of all this is that Bart Stupak is a liar.

Also, delusional.

"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


Solution (4.00 / 1)

Ike Skelton: Armed forces chair -stripped of seniority and denied DNC and DCCC money.
Nick Rahall: Natural resources chair - stipped of seniority and denied DNC and DCCC money.
Collin Peterson: Agriculture chair -stripped of seniority and denied DNC and DCCC money.
Everyone else: No DNC or DCCC money.
Joseph Cao: offered place in Democratic caucus.

How can 3 committee chairs get away with voting no?

John McCain won't insure children


Good points (0.00 / 0)
And with a voted system of committee chairs in the next session I would assume that lots of them are going down.

--

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


[ Parent ]
Discredit Stupak (4.00 / 1)
1. He's a liar, as Paul Rosenberg says.

2. He lacks a commitment to HCR. His abortion stance appears to be a pretext for opposing a bill that he dean't want anyway.

3. He has a radical agenda and is trying to kill abortion coverage in ALL health insurance plans.


Not that it matters anymore... (4.00 / 1)
...but FireDogLake has just put up a great "Fact Sheet" about the "health care bills" the House is about to inflict on us. Read it here.

Democrats in Congress are about to vote for a bill that will guarantee and unprecedented asskicking next November. This bill has something to irritate almost every American, left, center, or right, and next-to-nothing that will win votes for Democrats. Even worse, if possible, because the bill's provisions kick in gradually over a period of several years, it's going to be the gift that keeps on giving for Republicans.

The possible upside: it will be repealed; if not by Republicans, then state-by-state, by court actions, or popular insurrection. Most likely by Republicans that will sweep not just Federal offices over the next few years, but Statehouses as well: and repealing this "health care bill" will be just the beginning.


And I'm sure their fact sheet is soooo unbiased..... (0.00 / 0)
When did the left suddenly become the right?

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 ]
The day they sold out the poor and middle classes (4.00 / 3)
to the corporate insurance companies on HCR.  That was the day lord_mike, I'm surprised at this stage in our discourse you still have to ask.

[ Parent ]
what a weird comment (4.00 / 1)
did you read the fact sheet?  then by all means comment and analyze how biased it is.  Enlighten us.  Have a discussion.

But just throwing out the tired "left is now right" accusation is annoying & doesn't accomplish much.  It just seems like simplified fear-mongering.....which actually does remind me of right-wing talking points. Which doesn't seem to fit in with your usual comments.  We are all getting testy, overwhelmed, and frustrated as hell.


[ Parent ]
Solution part 2? (4.00 / 3)
If Obama promised to make a "signing statement" that bill would be enforced and interpreted consistent with the Hyde Rule, would that satisfy some members of the Stupak bloc?

John McCain won't insure children

Srupak is a serial liar... (4.00 / 2)
I wouldn't trust anything he says about anything at the moment.  He may be negotiating with leadership in his delusional mind for all we know.

He's probably floating that meme to try and pretend he's relevant again.

I mean, he may be telling the truth, but one should always assume he's lying until proven otherwise.

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!


I hope Stupak wins (4.00 / 2)
There could be no greater irony than Obama's massive corporate giveaway HCR bill getting killed from the right.  

It doesn't matter, at this point I'd welcome any path that kills this monster.  I just can't sacrifice so many millions to the corporations as casually as some here.  Life is too precious to be boiled down to profit margins and death by spreadsheet.  This bill gives us little else to look forward to.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox