House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159

The House tonight passed an expansion of SCHIP with a resounding 265-159 vote, yet fell short of a veto-proof majority. 151 Republicans voted against expanding access to healthcare for millions of children whose families can't afford private insurance but don't qualify for Medicaid, while 45 Republicans voted with the Democrats (more than supporters thought would defect.)

From WaPo:

The compromise package would expand the $5 billion-a-year children's health insurance program by an average of $7 billion a year over the next five years, for total funding of $60 billion over the period. That would be enough to boost the program's enrollment to 10 million, up from the 6.6 million, and dramatically reduce the ranks of America's 9 million uninsured children, supporters said.

Bush repeated his veto threat again today citing a slide toward government-run healthcare and budget concerns. As for the former, well, the private insurance industry was so concerned about it that they endorsed the bill:

Indeed, the compromise worked out between the House and the Senate has garnered the support of the health insurance industry, AARP, the American Medical Association, governors from both parties and a platoon of children's health advocates.

And as for the latter, Rahm Emanuel said it well on the floor of the House: it's not about money, it's about priorities.

The senate will take the bill up later this week (they reportedly do have a veto-proof majority) and then Bush will have to decide if he wants to set operation alienate women and moderates in motion next week and veto it. If he does, the House would have to produce 24 more Yes votes to override.



Display:


Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

can anybody tell us why Kucinich voted against it?
What sort of game was he playing? It's beyond weird.
Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:17:22 PM EST

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Because he's crazy?


by hwc on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:24:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (2.00 / 1)

Kucinich could easily lose his seat in the Democratic primary.  Here is what his opponent said on his vote:

"On one hand, President Bush vows to veto the bill, and on the other, Dennis Kucinich votes against it because he doesn't think it is perfect. This is a perfect example of what is presently wrong with Washington decision-making. Polarizing positions work against functional compromise resulting in a government that cannot serve in the nation's best interest. While fringe politicians like President Bush and Congressman Kucinich rant like petulant children, the nation remains stagnant and desperately needing effective leadership. Unfortunately, children in Northeast Ohio and around the country will pay the price for their obstinate actions."

http://www.buckeyestateblog.com/dennis_a nd_his_progressive_screw_you_salute_to_o hios_children


Bill Richardson: "Get out now. Get all our troops out now. It is the only right and responsible choice."
by Stephen Cassidy on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:26:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (2.00 / 1)

i was just about to post that. i post over at buckeyestateblog.com, and i would encourage you all to check out Rosemary Palmer, the Democratic challenger in OH-10. www.rosemarypalmerforcongress.com. also, check buckeye state, as we regularly report on the OH-10 campaign and kucinich's frequent foolish maneuvers.


by 2010 buckeye on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:29:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (2.00 / 1)

It's a good thing Dennis Quixotic is so rarely a needed vote; he's so 'principled' he votes with the right half the time... :-/


by frankies on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:29:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Kucinich needs to be taken out, period. I'm just so sick and tired of his antics.


Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:48:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (2.00 / 1)

I have to scratch my head about Kucinich and alot of other liberals.  As a dyed in the wool Democrat I believe that half a loaf is better than no loaf at all.


by changehorses08 on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:04:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

He's a purity troll.

He's not as bad as Gravel--who's crazy and probably is just building his name recognition for a Green Party candidacy--but he can be a detriment.


by Bush Bites on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 09:10:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

I envy the Republicans their party loyalty.  We Dems can sometimes be our worst enemy.


by changehorses08 on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 11:19:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Maybe all his netroots supporters could take an afternoon off from their Hillary bashing and put a little heat on Krazy Kucinich to vote for children's health care.


by hwc on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:26:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Can you stop making every diary about Hillary?


by Bush Bites on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 09:12:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

How can a discussion of SCHIP not include Hillary Clinton. She was instrumental in the creation of the program.


by hwc on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:47:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

It was going to pass without his vote.  He claims he couldn't vote for it because it didn't go far enough.  He said it was discriminatory because it left out legal immigrant children.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:27:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

That is a classic copout.  I guess we'll see if he changes it around to become one of the 20 votes needed to override the veto.  Somehow that seems unlikely.


by georgep on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:37:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

I'd contribute to his primary opponent if he didn't vote for it on an override vote.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:46:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

That just pisses me off. We have lifelong progressive Democrats like Hillary Clinton busting her ass for 15 years to provide health care to children and this crazy little nutjob in Ohio votes against the damn bill. Yet, the frickin' lefties in the blogosphere think CLINTON is the sell-out. Go figure.


by hwc on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:41:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

The only thing she busts her ass on is raising lobbyist $$$


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:45:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

If you truly mean that, you're either not a Democrat or horribly ill-informed.  If you don't truly mean that, you have to be a little more careful in what you post.


by frankies on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:46:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (2.00 / 1)

I'm just a pissed off Democrat tired of pay for play politics and the status quo.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:50:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

He does not truly mean it, just wants to mix things up here.  You should have read what he wrote about Clinton a couple of months ago.  With the gushing I seriously thought he would be ditching Edwards for her before too long.    He stated basically the opposite of what he claims today, which shows that what he claims today is obviously not what he means.


by georgep on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 08:50:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Proof?


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 10:07:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

You stated that she has moved up to a strong #2 with you, that she was brilliant in the debate (don't recall which one,) that you would happily vote for her in the General.    You also had nothing but bashes for Obama, who could not do anything right in your book.   That has all turned around 180 degrees, with both Clinton and Obama?  That does not seem logical to me.

On any blog you find people who are there to mix things up, make noise.  Nothing wrong with that, per se.  It is a noisy world.


by georgep on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 10:18:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

I said she was a clear second in my book over Obama but still far behind Edwards.  She does perform well in debates, you won't see me say otherwise even now.  I will vote for her in the general, but there won't be that real "excitement" behind the vote and I've maintained I won't contribute to her or volunteer in any way.

Think what was going on at that time.  Obama was on the path to become the front-runner.  He had made some mistakes ("play chicken with the troops," missing events, etc).

Then came pay for play, Norman Hsu, and I would say the specific moment was when she said there's not a difference between me and a lobbyist.  Her dedication to lobbyists, and equating them with people like me, was the nail in her coffin.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 10:46:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Yawn.  Find a new slur please.


by realistic democrat on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 08:53:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

HWC -- I totally agree. Average Dems will never be perfect enough for the Liberals.  


by changehorses08 on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:07:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

I don't think it's fair. Many liberals are mainstream, reasonable. Unfortunately, some blogs are infested with some Naderites and Pinos. They are not real liberals, they just want to destroy the democratic party from within. Read the comments by some posters, it's astonishing many of them actually voted for the traitor Nader. They are not liberals, they are just as bad as freepers.


Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:16:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

I never understood what made them think that Nader was a viable alternative and I agree alot of the blogs just want to destroy the Democratic Party from within.  They say you fall in love during the Primaries and fall in line for the General Election.  The blogs have alot of power now, I hope and pray they will see that this country will be alot better off with a Democratic President.  I'm a glass is half full person.    


by changehorses08 on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:24:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Blasting "liberals" is a pretty cool thing to do on Mydd.  WTF?

Personally, I hate those terrible "liberal" programs like Social Security, Medicare, and SCHIP.  Awful awful stuff.  

Look, reasonable people can disagree about policy and there is ample room in the Democratic party for self-identified moderates.  But blasting liberals, and equating the word with Dennis Kucinich, is ridiculous.  Moreover, it plays into republican frames.  Not cool and not productive.


by HSTruman on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 09:41:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

I agree with your take on the grandparent post's use of 'liberal' as a pejorative, but I have to take exception with "there is ample room in the Democratic party for self-identified moderates."  Just look at how Lieberman has been demonized.  On abortion, civil liberties, education, gay rights, he is on the left.  For foreign policy, he's hawkish/to the right.  He's about as moderate as moderate gets, but if many people on DailyKos/MyDD had their way, he'd be out of the caucus.  Too many people on this site don't want the Democrats to be the big-tent and moderate-inclusive party.


by frankies on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 02:37:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

There are two fundamental problems with Lieberman, none of which have anything to do with his largely left of center views on social issues (I disagree that he's liberal on economic issues).  First, the issue on which he is the most conservative is also, in my view, the single most important issue facing the country right now.  That he openly says that he agrees with the GOP more on issues affecting national security is a pretty significant thing.  As is the fact that he has often been MORE hawkish than the Bush administration -- an impressive accomplishment.

Second, and this also relates to my first point, Lieberman doesn't just diagree -- he BASHES the democratic party; to the point that he explicitly says that those who disagree with him on Iraq.  Do a google search on lieberman and Iraq, and you'll find more fear mongering quotes than from most repupblicans, implying that failure to support Bush's war policies (1) constitutes turning away from the troops; and (2) is generally unpatriotic.  That kind of perspective, on such an important issue, shows rather clearly that the problem is NOT the party being unwilling to accept disagreement, but that JOE is unwilling to accept disagreement with HIM AND THE BUSH administration.  

Honestly, how can you still defend Lieberman after all of that?    


by HSTruman on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 03:12:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Can you stop making every diary about Hillary?


by Bush Bites on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 09:11:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Can anybody tell me why Kuchinich is allowed on the stage at the Democratic debate tomorrow night? He's not a Democrat. He should go debate Ralph Nader or something.


by hwc on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:48:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

I agree. Hopefully he'll be taken out in the primary.


Hillary: We will finally have a president who doesn't mind pulling over and asking for directions. Am I right, ladies?
by areyouready on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:49:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

When the Political Parties picked the candidates you knew these candidates were vetted.  Now whoever shows up for the debate gets to have a podium.  I am disappointed in Dennis.  I do wish the Dems had the discipline the Republicans but  if they did they would march like lemmings off a cliff for their leader.  Actually, although its messy I would rather have the Dems as they are. We are a "big tent" party  


by changehorses08 on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:17:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Can't you just picture Kucinich with his little self-satisfied smirk as he cast his vote with George Bush and the Republicans?


by hwc on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 01:30:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's a tactical vote (none / 0)

I'm willing to give Kucinich the benefit of the doubt and assume he was voting tactically. That is, he realized the bill was going to pass by a comfortable margin but wasn't close to a veto-proof majority. Therefore, he probably felt that a protest vote saying it didn't go far enough would raise more awareness of his position on universal health care, and wouldn't damage the prospects for this bill.

If this bill comes back and the Dems are close to an override and Kucinich still votes against it, then I'll be the first in line to tar and feather him :-)


by loon on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 02:27:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Bush will veto (none / 0)

Can we find 20 more votes in the House?  This is Pelosi's biggest challenge to date.   If she wins it is huge.  Start promising some new bridges.


by dpANDREWS on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:21:44 PM EST

Re: Bush will veto (none / 0)

Yeah, just get it over to Bush's desk.

Then, get everybody on the record for the override vote.

Even if the override doesn't pass, we got another issue next year that we can use to target individual Repubs.

I can hear the commercials now:

"[plaintive, sad voiceover] Congressman XXXX XXXXX even voted against health care for children!"

(The plaintive, sad voice saying "John Kerry even voted against the Lacy Peterson Act" still sticks in my craw. We need to shove something like that up the Repubs' asses next year.)


by Bush Bites on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 09:20:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Why only women? (none / 0)

"The senate will take the bill up later this week (they reportedly do have a veto-proof majority) and then Bush will have to decide if he wants to set operation alienate women and moderates in motion next week and veto it."

Don't men want health coverage for their children, too?


by Coral on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:42:31 PM EST

Re: Why only women? (none / 0)

No. Most men are Republicans.


by hwc on Tue Sep 25, 2007 at 11:46:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why only women? (none / 0)

They want to get health care for their families by themselves...  they don't want no stinkin' charity from government...  Better that they let their families starve and die... at least they still have their pride...

It's this macho "I can do it myself... I will work harder" idea... which is noble to a certain extent, until it is manipulated by the right to such an extent that one cuts off their nose to spite their face...

It's a frustrating phenomena with right wingers... they'd rather starve than give their families an opportunity for a better life...  'cos they want to "do it themselves"... well, my 2 year old wants to do everything herself, too... but, that doesn't mean that it's likely to happen.


by lordmikethegreat on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:41:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why only women? (none / 0)

That's not it. They object to bills like SCHIP because they don't want to be helping "those people" (and you know what they mean by "those people").


by hwc on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 01:08:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why only women? (none / 0)

That's certainly part of it... But, a lot of these guys wouldn't take that benefit even if they wanted it...

The sad fact is no macho man will ever admit that they are poor... even when they are.

Thanks,

Mike


by lordmikethegreat on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 02:13:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why only women? (2.00 / 1)

it's more about who will be most offended by the veto, not about who will be most impacted. depriving children of health insurance could be for women what the immigration debate was for hispanics -- the final nail in the GOP coffin.


by Todd Beeton on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 01:27:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: House Passes SCHIP Expansion 265-159 (none / 0)

Todd:

Good point. Specifically, it could be the nail in the coffin with white, married women -- the only group of women that has tended Republican. If the Democrats can attract support from white, married women, the Republicans are history.


by hwc on Wed Sep 26, 2007 at 12:51:59 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.