Stupak Caucus Folding?

So reports The Hill:

Democratic leaders have been able to pick off members of the anti-abortion-rights bloc Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) claimed to have, the congressman said Friday.


[T]he Michigan Democrat, who claimed he had carried with him a dozen votes against the healthcare bill, suggested that his bloc of votes may be cracking, providing Democratic leaders with valuable votes for their pending healthcare measures.

"At this point, there is no doubt that they’ve been able to peel off one or two of my twelve," he said. "The others are having both of their arms twisted, and we’re all getting pounded by our traditional Democratic supporters, like unions.”

Nancy Pelosi may yet be able to attract the 216 votes necessary to pass healthcare reform through the House and send it along to the President. The 30 million Americans without coverage today who would have health insurance as a result of this legislation -- including the 15 million who will be added to the rolls of government plans like Medicaid and CHIP -- may actually be on track to leave the ranks of the uninsured.

Tags: 111th Congress, Bart Stupak, healthcare reform (all tags)



I don't know

I don't know where Pelosi managed to get the votes from, but if she has I'll be amazed.

Ofcourse a big problem which Stupak refuses to consider is - The Senate Bill already forbids the funding of abortion, and it's impossible to include an abortion measure via reconciliation.

Add to that his latest quote of hoping the "GOP regains the majority" - plus the rumours that surfaced last year that he was working closely with the House GOP - I think we can safely say he is no Democrat.


by vecky 2010-03-12 06:44PM | 0 recs
bad bad

Passing this atrocity of a bill will be disaster. Firstly, the GOP csn use the Byrd rule to tear this thing apart as well as other technicality allowing them to stall it or worse. This bill deserves to die. I can almost guarantee that the party will be slaughtered in November and Obama will lose in 2012. This bill is his Bush Sr. "read my lips" moment. The majority of americans dont want this particular bill and passing it through using all kinds of manuevers and procedures never used before wont be forgotten. I can tell you that here in Ohio the party will get bloodied. You gusy keep believing your own hype. This bill passes, we lose the next two elections big time. Go ahead an trash me all you want, I dont give a crap. I am right, while most of you are apparently delusional.

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-03-12 08:10PM | 0 recs
RE: bad bad

The bill already passed the Senate. Some provisions are being changed via a reconciliation bill - but since they all effect the budget and decrease the deficit the the Byrd rule will not be violated. If the GOP wants to go on record and vote against those changes that's certainly their right. But it won't help them come November.

by vecky 2010-03-12 09:37PM | 0 recs
RE: bad bad

Actually, MSNBC outlines why its not that simple:


Democrats must clear three hurdles in order to get to a final version of the health-care bill that most legislators in their party can live with.

First, the House must pass the Senate's version of the health-care bill and send it to the president for his signature. It would immediately become law.

But because most House Democrats don't like the Senate bill -- due to the toxic "Cornhusker Kickback," etc. -- a second step is required. The House would then use a budget procedure called reconciliation to passes a much smaller bill of "fixes."

And finally as the third step: the Senate must pass the same fixes as the House. This is the point at which Senate Republicans believe they can trip up the bill's progress.

This three-step process requires House Democrats to trust the Senate counterparts to pass the exact fixes they want -- and some, says Gregg, are understandably skeptical.

"What the president is asking House Democrats to do is hold hands, jump off a cliff, and hope Harry Reid catches them," said GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander. "And Harry Reid is not going to have much incentive to catch the Democrats because the president will have already signed the bill."

Dropping the 'Byrd" on Democrats
In the Senate, reconciliation is a filibuster-proof budget procedure, needing only a simple 51 vote majority. But the Senate's rules for the process require that every provision must be directly linked to a budgetary impact. Any part of the bill that doesn't impact taxes, spending, or government money risks being eliminated by the non-partisan Senate parliamentarian.

The most-used tool to extract questionable provisions is called the Byrd Rule, named after its author, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV). 

Republicans are prepared to pick the bill apart to make sure that the Byrd rule is followed to the letter. And the result, Gregg said, could be that some of those "fixes" demanded by Democrats in the House just don't pass muster. "I presume that some of the stuff that gets dropped under Byrd are going to be things which were important to people on the House side and influenced their decision to vote for the bigger bill," he said.

Endless votes on amendments
The rules of reconciliation would also allow Republicans -- and Democrats -- to offer an unlimited number of amendments to change the bill.

Members of either party can offer any changes as long as they fall within the jurisdiction of the Senate Finance and Health committees. So, Republicans say, any amendments that deal with taxes, Medicare, Medicaid, education, pension, or labor issues are fair game.

Republicans also are quick to point out that, if the Senate changes even one word of the bill, it would have to go back to the House to be passed again, causing further delays.

Opponents of the legislation don't deny that delaying final passage of the bill is a part of their strategy.

"There's never a problem with giving the American people an opportunity to express themselves on a piece of legislation they care lot about," Sen. Jon Kyl, (R-AZ), said this week. "And the more opportunity they have to do that from our perspective the better."

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-03-12 11:15PM | 0 recs
RE: bad bad

Since yo cannot wait for this bill to die what are you going to do if does to help get HCR on somebody's agenda again? 

I am of the mind that the folks like you, Hamsher and other progressives who are screaming kill the bill should be the ones tasked to get something better passed if you get your wish. 

by jsfox 2010-03-13 12:01AM | 0 recs
RE: bad bad

That's only the procedure for the fixes. If the house passes the reconciliation-senate-bill-package the bill will be law. At that time the Senate GOP can decide if they want a bill with or without the fixes. Jay Cost had an interesting article on this the other day.

by vecky 2010-03-13 12:21AM | 0 recs
RE: More Jon Kyl Quotes

"It would be hard to find a more compelling example of the American dream than Alberto Gonzales."

"The death tax is unfair, inefficient, economically unsound and, frankly, immoral."

by QTG 2010-03-13 04:52AM | 0 recs
Wyden Bennet Bill

I support the Wyden Bennett bill, which by the way had the support of at least a dozen republicans. Instead of creating this massive bill, they coudl have easily put the Wyden Bennett Bill to a vote. If we want to fix this the right way, that bil is the way to go.

by BuckeyeBlogger 2010-03-13 12:03PM | 0 recs
RE: Wyden Bennet Bill

Wyden-Bennett Bill has zero republican support. Even Bennett said he would not vote for it. You act as if all this didn't come up during the 6 months Democrats spent chasing after the GOP.

by vecky 2010-03-13 01:30PM | 1 recs


Advertise Blogads