TPMDC

Dominos: Democratic Health Care Skeptics Fall Into Line For Reform


Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA); inset (clockwise): Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN), Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL), Rep. John Boccieri (D-FL) and Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL)

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

Yesterday, it was clear House Speaker Nancy Pelosi had built real momentum for passing health care reform this Sunday--but she was also dealing with a tricky landscape. She hadn't converted enough health care skeptics in her caucus to make up for the fact that several anti-abortion members are threatening to bolt over the Senate bill's abortion language, she was facing revolt from two separate members who were expected to vote for the final package, and the remaining holdouts were never going to be easy pickups.

Today that all changed.

In the course of the last several hours, four key members who voted against the House health care bill in November joined the reform effort. And moments ago, a high-profile anti-abortion Democrat announced that he could vote for the Senate bill.

This morning, Rep. John Boccieri (D-OH)--a pro-life Dem--offered his support. He was followed by Rep. Allen Boyd (D-FL)--perhaps the most conservative Democrat in the House. Then, Rep. Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL) joined in on the fun. And moments ago, Rep. Scott Murphy (D-NY) declared he's good to go.

Apart from them, Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN)--a Senate hopeful and a long-time hold out on abortion--said this evening that he will vote for the final package, just as he did on the House bill in November.

Today, though, there were no major defections. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR)--a progressive who often opposes Democrats from the left--is threatening to vote no over the issue of geographic disparities in Medicare reimbursement rates, but he's negotiating a potential resolution to the problem with the administration and Pelosi herself.

Tomorrow, Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI)--the most adamantly anti-abortion opponent of the Senate bill, who holds sway with several pro-life Dems--will hold a press conference to discuss reform. But his influence is dwindling, and it's no longer clear that he controls enough votes to sink the effort.

Meanwhile, Republican efforts to kill the bill were thrown off track evening, when they circulated a potentially forged memo, in an attempt to bolster their claim that Democrats are fudging the true cost of health care reform. And major health care reform supporters are currently hammering members threatening to switch their votes from "no" to "yes." In a letter sent tonight, the AFL-CIO warned Rep. Michael Arcuri (D-NY) that a "no" vote will not be forgotten. "Congressman, we will not be able to explain to the members of our union why you voted against this bill," the letter reads.

After voting for the House bill in November, the feeling of betrayal will be that much deeper. Our members support elected leaders who understand what it means to work hard to support a family in these tough times. Our members look for elected officials who have the courage to stand up to lies, distortions and political scare tactics. Your vote this Sunday will tell them what kind of elected official you are. Please do not disappoint them or us.

This is still Capitol Hill, though. Things change rapidly. Pelosi's still probably a commitment or two shy of the magic number, and an unexpected freak out or second thought could still complicate her efforts. But if her tenure as Speaker has proven anything, it's that she knows how to count votes. And the rollout these past 48 hours suggests she has this one in the bag.

Comments (110) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

March 19, 2010 7:04 PM   

But if her tenure as Speaker has proven anything, it's that she knows how to count votes.

The Lady is good. I just wish we had more like her -- particularly in the White House.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 11:57 PM    in reply to Peter Principle

I wonder if that's a photo from today. She looks more relaxed than I've seen her in ages.

By their enemies shall you know them, and Nancy has the most disgusting enemies of any Speaker in MY memory.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 9:46 AM    in reply to Cal Gal

I don't think it is. I am sure I have seen it before right here at tpm.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:46 AM    in reply to Peter Principle

Speaker Pelosi has been my favorite among the Democratic leadership. Here's a good article that discusses the details of negotiations to secure Pro-Life votes the insurance mandate package.

http://news.firedoglake.com/2010/03/19/the-stupak-amendment-is-back-whats-an-enrollment-corrections-bill/

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:09 PM   

Pelosi's command of this mess of a Democratic caucus is impressive.

I'm sure that AFL-CIO statement also made quite an impression on Arcuri.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:16 PM    in reply to Dorn76

Arcuri? I thought he is still a holdout. Or do you mean Boccieri?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

LAB

user-pic

March 19, 2010 9:15 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Arcuri is no. He's toast. What kills me is how the right vilifies Mrs. Pelosi--yet claim sexism when we make fun of Palin. I'm really proud of her--she's done a great job.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 10:33 PM    in reply to LAB

I've set aside five hundred bucks to send to whoever's running against Arcuri in the next election. I don't care if it's a Republican. What a toad.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 9:19 AM    in reply to LAB

Me too. This woman is amazing and how she keeps her cool while being called every vile name under the sun.


Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:34 PM    in reply to Dorn76

Seriously, her stock has gone up big time. Obama benefits from passage, but only because it means he didn't fail. After this, Pelosi must be considered on the short list of notable Speakers throughout American history. She truly becomes the second most powerful person in this country. Moreover, she gains a "You don't mess with Nancy" cred with the Dems in the House.

This is a transformational event for her. Not so much for Obama.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:07 PM    in reply to DoubleFelix

Bullshit. Health care was just about dead until Obama got them back up and running. I love Nancy. I will give her all the credit that is due her but it was Obama who brought this back from the dead.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 19, 2010 8:09 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

And I'm not so sure that the real credit for that shouldn't go to David Plouffe. But I guess that something we won't know until at least several years down the road.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:05 PM    in reply to slb

I'd be willing to give Plouffe some credit and as far as Nancy goes, SHE'S DA BOMB!!!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:00 AM    in reply to lousgirl84

Success has 100 parents...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 9:21 AM    in reply to Measure for Measure

Indeed - well said.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:08 PM    in reply to DoubleFelix

really? healthcare reform is not a victory for obama? seriously?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 19, 2010 8:07 PM    in reply to Dorn76

And they called Margaret Thatcher "the Iron Lady".

Pelosi is an awesome Speaker. Wish we could clone her to install as the Majority Leader in the Senate! But Reid has done some cat herding himself lately, so I guess he deserves some credit.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:49 PM    in reply to slb

I just made the comment to someone that Nancy's become our Maggie Thatcher - and I mean that in the best way possible. Remember when some Penn. pol claimed Hillary had "testicular fortitude" - maybe, but she's got nothing on the honorable member from San Francisco.

And Obama deserves mad props for reigniting this - after Scott Brown won, Lynch and others in the Dem establishment wanted to call healthcare dead and over and move on to safer issues. Had Obama listened to those cowards, this never happens.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 10:21 PM    in reply to calbearinillinois

you're exactly right. Plus, we've seen that we can elect a President, we've also seen that we CAN move Congress, if we're loud enough, involved enough, mad enough, and committed enough.

I hope we remember it when it comes to clean energy, financial reform, etc.

At least this year-long fight has brought our strength to the forefront. Congress knows now that the American people, and Democrats in particular, are watching them and waiting for them to enact meaningful legislation. If this health care fight had been an easy win, I wonder how involved we would be for the rest of Obama's first term?

Now, thanks to health care, I would be surprised if we didn't keep up the momentum on reform in general. And we do have to admit, we've got some catching up to do in the "loud and mad" department, compared to conservatives.

Boy, can they holler. We need to holler louder.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 9:45 AM    in reply to Kittylc

This is great political theatre right now. I love it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 1:26 AM    in reply to calbearinillinois

Hey, calbearinillinois! A Chicago area boy here, too.

Hillary had the biggest ones among all the Democratic candidates. If she'd have gotten the WH (I like Obama plenty, except for the times he's stabbed Progressives in the back), this would be much farther along.

And on health care, she would have been a freaking wildcat. With her running it herself, with Prez in front of her name, there wouldn't have been the void over at 1600 PA Ave the first time around. She'd have been on Capitol Hill kicking arse and taking no prisoners.

At the same time, we are going to get a better bill this way. But, yes, only when Obama started pulling out the Claymores and rocket launchers did it come back from the dead. Scott Brown did the country some good - otherwise we would have the original one, signed sealed and delivered, but less good would have come to the American people with that one.

For now, "GO, OBAMA! GO PELOSI! GIVE 'EM HELL, HARRY!"

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 9:26 AM    in reply to SteveGinIL

I liked Hillary too but Steve, we wouldn't be talking about health care if Hillary won. It was not in her playbook and if you think progressives are unhappy about Obama, they would have been screaming their heads off if Hillary were elected. Remember Hillary is part of the DLC - hardly the progressive wing of the democratic party.

I like her = she's was a tough candidate but I am glad she didn't win. We needed a fresh new voice and we have one. Give him a damn chance

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 12:41 AM    in reply to slb

Amy Klobuchar? She's got a great sense of humor, and I think it's time to start making fun of ReThuglicans, big time.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 11:22 PM    in reply to Dorn76

I'm confused. It's nothing new for me. Got my -uri crossed with my -eri...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:11 PM   

It's been obvious for awhile now that the votes would be there. The only interesting question is who ends up in the yes column and who in the no, and if the leadership decides to go with the bare minimum of 216 for passage or get a few more than that.

While for the most part I think it stinks, this is undoubtedly historic legislation for better or for worse (the most historic many of these folks will ever vote on), and I would not be surprised if another factor here is some fence sitters moving into outright support because they are thinking about their legacy as a lawmaker as much or more than their future electoral prospects.

No doubt the at least semi-smart House Dems know it's a crap shoot as to whether this legislation is loved or hated by a majority of their constituents a year (or even six months) from now, and if you are thinking in those terms you might prefer to boldly cast a vote for "historic" reform in the hope that it pays off down the road as an example of "making a tough but necessary vote."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:27 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

I actually think that the Democrats get a lot of credibility out of taking on the big issues and engaging in messy fights for the right reasons.

Everyone knows that this has been a hard fight, and they're not used to seeing Congress stick with a tough issue like this.

When Democrats say, "I take on the tough issues to solve America's real problems," I think they'll have credibility after all this.

Republicans have not taken a political risk for a big cause since the 1960s. People can feel that, even if they are seduced somewhat by the "you can have everything and a tax cut AND we'll reduce the debt" horsesh-t. Republicans seem phony because they don't say anything that isn't popular, even as they count on those popular promises to goose their poll numbers and take potshots at Dems.

Democrats are coming out of this with some serious scars, and I don't think it hurts them.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

AS

user-pic

March 19, 2010 7:11 PM   

SAUDI-WASABI OWNED FOX NEWS AND WALL STREET JOURNAL WAGE JIHAD AGAINST CHRISTIANITY

Saudi Government and Ruport Murdoch Begin Propaganda Campaign against Patriotic Christians!

The 2nd largest share holder of FOX News, the Saudi Wasabi-Islamist Government, has begun the process of attacking the Christian faith by letting their opinion makers like Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck attack our Christian Faith.

By viewing FOX News, you are supporting the Saudi Wasabi-Islamist Government who sent the 17 Saudi hijackers to kill over 3000 people on September 11, 2001.

The goal of the Saudis as I read it years ago, was to own a major news corporation in the USA that would promote attacks against Christianity. Help stop Ruport Murdoch and his Saudi allies by boycotting FOX News, and the Wall Street Journal.

Here is the article on Fox News stance against Christianity.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2010/03/12/are-christians-forgiving-glenn-beck-for-calling-them-nazis.aspx?CommentPosted=true#commentmessage.

Churches are now urging their members to boycott FOX News and the Wall Street Journal. Ever wonder why you never hear any criticism of the Islamists and Saudi terrorists on FOX News?

In this video, Roger Ailes, CEO of Fox News admits that FOX is biased against Obama and the Democrat Party: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/03/03/ailes-legitimate-complaints/ .

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:17 PM    in reply to AS

Wow. Wasabi is more dangerous than I thought. I'll never look at sushi the same way again.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:40 PM    in reply to mrut

Yes, I always thought "This will blow the top off your head" was rhetorical and not literal. Who knew Wasabi and C-4 had no much in common?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 5:08 AM    in reply to mrut

It is amusing watching some fool claim to know "the truth" while railing against a spicy mainstay of the Japanese cuisine. I know I put my faith in the intellectual prowess of someone who can't even type Wahhabi (or Wahhabism).

Next thing we'll be treated to by this unfunny Emily Litella is a polemic about the horrors of tabasco sauce and a rant against "violins" on television.

(slaps forehead)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:54 PM    in reply to AS

9/10

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:14 PM   

The house has passed 290 bills signed by both dems and repugs but are languishing in the senate because they can't get the votes to get them passed. I wish we could blow up the senate

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:26 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

How many of those are actually good bills? Probably a lot of them suck, and simply passing bills (even ones supported by a lot of Dems) is certainly not a sign that things are moving in the right direction.

Don't get me wrong, the Senate is terrible, but so is the other part of the legislative branch, and indeed the entire federal government. It's obviously considerably worse when Republicans are in power, but we should not be happy with any of those people, the current president included. I'm not sure dynamite is the answer though.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:38 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

This takes the "stupidest post of the day" award.

Whether these are "good" bills or not is irrelevant; they deserve action--pass or fail. To have 290 bills sitting in the Senate waiting for action is absurd. It's like have 200 planes idling on the runway for 18 hours.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:12 PM    in reply to FreeRider

Shockingly your comment suggesting that my comment was dumb did not impress me. I did not say that the bills did not deserve an up or down vote, my point was that simply complaining that the House has passed a bunch of stuff that the Senate has not taken up yet doesn't really tell us anything other than that one party is (shockingly) doing their best to block the other's legislation. I was pointing out that it's worthwhile to consider what's in the bills, and surely you agree with that. Also probably a bit of historical perspective is in order--it's incredibly routine for bills to pass one chamber but not another, so I have no idea if the 290 number is wildly out of step with precedent or not (Pelosi claims it's the biggest ever and maybe so, but I'd be curious to see older numbers as well). Finally I imagine that if the situation were reversed and a filibustering Dem minority in the Senate was holding up GOP legislation you'd probably have a different take on the matter. That said, I do hope we pass "H.R. 4495, Naming Jim Kolbe Post Office in Patagonia, Arizona" soon, and that those damn planes finally get off the runway.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:34 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

I never expected to impress someone who wrote such a stupid post.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:50 PM    in reply to FreeRider

Well what did you expect to do, make yourself feel good for a brief moment? It's telling that you ignore the substance of my expanded comment and simply fall back on a petty attack.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:19 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

There is no substance in any of your postings, expanded or otherwise.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:33 AM    in reply to FreeRider

No friend, there is substance, you just disagree with it. And I think you're projecting a bit, because so far all I see from you here is name calling and snark, which most would not consider particularly substantive.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 4:32 AM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

I'm moved greatly by your analysis.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 10:42 PM    in reply to FreeRider

No joke, Geoff. I had to go to the "ultimate reference guide" on bills today--Schoolhouse Rock--which makes it very clear that most bills die before getting to the President's desk.

Here's that definitive authority; we should all watch it once a year to remind ourselves to what extent obstruction was intentionally built into the system.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mEJL2Uuv-oQ

"I'm just a bill!"

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:38 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

Well I can find a list of them and post them. Actually some of them are excellent bills and should be passed. I will get the list.

I disagee with you on this President. I think he's doing an incredible job given the situation he inherited and the fact that the thugs don't want a demorcratic president let alone a brilliant black president to succeed. I don't know what you expected in a year but you can't undo 8 years of reckless behavior and an economy on the brink in a year. Remember through most of his campaign, he thought he was dealing with a sound economy and not until two months before the election, did we almost go into a depression.

A little dose of reality here is in order,

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:06 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

I'm all for doses of reality, but from where I sit the reality is that Obama has been quite a disappointment, even given the external constraints. It's not entirely unexpected, but there are any number of ways in which the administration has failed (or done poorly), a good number of which were/are in large measure their own fault. The health care fight is just one example (torture, state secrets, EFCA, Afghanistan, climate change at Copenhagen, defense budget, etc.). Admittedly I'm well to the left of the Democratic party (though I did vote for Obama), but I'm also able to be realistic about what can and cannot be done given the constraints of America's profoundly dysfunctional and corrupt political system. The fact is that there are millions of progressives and folks on the left who are unhappy with Obama. You might feel differently and that's quite alright, but we're probably coming from different places in terms of our politics. There's nothing wrong with that of course.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:09 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

i reckon you can get the list on rachel maddows msnbc website or blog or whatever.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:40 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

Here's the link. Check it out for yourself

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/83057-290-bills

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:42 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

I prefer a surgical strike on the filibuster, rather than bringing down the whole institution. The Rs, with their No on Everything Campaign may have actually overplayed their hand so far that we may see the filibuster reduced to being a procedural delay, rather than an outright death by minority.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:37 PM   

Nancy Pelosi could have put a public option in the reconciliation bill, but she's too corrupted by insurance lobbyists.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:41 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

You are such a fucking liar. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own set of facts. Health care lobbyists hate her. The facts are there if you would check instead of spewing your lies

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:04 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

From September 2009:

============================
http://rawstory.com/blog/2009/09/lobbyist-fundraiser-pelosi/

Private health insurance lobbyist throws fundraiser for Nancy Pelosi: Report

One day after House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi softened her stance on a public health option, a lobbyist for one of the country's most prominent private health insurers announced a fundraiser for the California Democrat, a news report says.

Writing at OpenLeft, reporter David Sirota says lobbyist Steve Elmendorf of Elmendorf Strategies announced a fundraiser at his own home, under the title "Event with House Speaker Pelosi at my home," to take place September 24. Admission is $2.400 for individuals, and $5,000 for representatives of political action committees.

Elmendorf's Web site lists UnitedHealth as one of his clients.

==============================================

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 19, 2010 8:22 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

The problem is not the House. Pelosi worked hard to get a public option included in the House version of the health care bill. The problem is in the Senate -- there weren't sufficient votes for it to overcome a Republican+Lieberman filibuster. And even though they are now saying publicly that they have the 50 votes they need if it's put in reconciliation, and even assuming that the Senate parliamentarian says that a public option is in conformity with the Byrd Rule, in private, Senators are begging the House not to put them in the position of having to vote on a public option.

The calculation is that the support for a public option in the Senate is not solid enough to risk the House putting it in. If the Senate wants it so badly, let the Senate put it in their own version of the reconciliation bill, and then send it to the House.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:46 PM    in reply to slb

There would be a Senate vote on the public option if Nancy Pelosi put it in reconciliation.

The result would either be a public option, or forcing Senators who lied about supporting a public option to expose themselves.

Dick Durbin has said that he would whip for a public option if Pelosi put it in and whip against it if she didn't.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:28 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

You're as stupid as your mother. Pelosi had to make up for the Stupak Democrats she lost with Blue Dogs.

Kozmas, Boyd, Markey, Murphy, Tanner switched from No to Yes but they would have never voted for a bill with a public option. So even if they had 51 votes in the Senate (which I doubt), Pelosi would not have had 216 in the House.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 20, 2010 4:35 AM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

Yes, there would be a vote, and there is a very good chance that it would fail, because a lot of this talk from Senators about actually voting for it is only for constituent consumption.

No, the House's position (with justification) is that they have done more than their share of the heavy lifting over the last year, and they are done with putting their necks on the line only to have the legislation languish in the Senate. Pelosi has judged that it's simply not worth the risk for the House to initiate another try at a public option. She says the Senate doesn't really have the votes for it, and if there's one thing that lady knows how to do, it is count votes.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 20, 2010 4:44 AM    in reply to slb

As for Dick Durbin, he has said he will whip for whatever the House sends over. He's not going to work to tank HCR over the issue of a public option.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:44 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

Moron. Liar. Take you pick.

Steve Elmendorf is a longtime liberal Democratic activist who helped run Kerry's presidential campaign. So the fact that he would try to curry favor with Pelosi is a big snore.

One lobbyist, a liberal Democrat, comes out for the liberal Democratic speaker and suddenly all lobbyists love her. Fuck off.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:53 PM    in reply to FreeRider

It isn't OK for Speaker Pelosi to go to a fundraising party at the home of a corporate lobbyist if he helped run John Kerry's presidential campaign.

More on Steven Elmendorf from wikipedia:
====================================
In January 2006, Elmendorf was criticized vehemently by some left-wing Democratic bloggers when he was quoted in a Washington Post story as saying, "The bloggers and online donors represent an important resource for the party, but they are not representative of the majority you need to win elections. The trick will be to harness their energy and their money without looking like you are a captive of the activist left." Markos Moulitsas, head of The Daily Kos blog, replied: "Here's notice, any Democrat associated with Elmendorf will be outed. The netroots can then decide for itself whether it wants to provide some of that energy and money to that candidate. There's nothing 'extreme left' with demanding Democrats act like Democrats, no matter how much these out-of-touch and self-important beltway insiders think it is."[3]

Also in 2006, Elmendorf gave his support to U.S. Senator Joe Lieberman's independent re-election bid after Lieberman lost the Democratic primary. Elmendorf was listed on Lieberman's campaign Web site as part of the "national chapter" of "Dems for Joe"[4]
====================================

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:25 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

Yes. It's OK for her to go to a fundraiser for whoever the fuck she wants, you inbred hick!

Pelosi has spent the past 25 years in Congress proving what side she's on and burnishing her bona fides as a liberal Democrat. And as speaker she's done more for the liberal/Democratic agenda than anyone in Congress in the last 50 years.

Asshats like you and Sirota and Hamsher can't sully her with the thinking crowd by saying "she had a fundraiser with a health insurance lobbyist."

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:13 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

So what is your point? Elmendorf Strategies also represents the Federal Judges Association, Delta Airlines, Union Pacific Railroad, and hundreds of other clients. United Health is just one of many. Anyway, the fundraiser is soliciting donations from private parties, not from the health care industry. There is no freaking connection. It's like saying a Congressman is controlled by big oil because they once attended a fundraiser where someone knew someone that was a friend of a friend that works at an oil company. There ain't no smoking gun here.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:43 PM    in reply to John

Thank you! I'm so sick of these fucking firebaggers trying to slime everybody with even the most tenuous connections. They're no better than the "Obama is paling around with terrorists" crowd.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:43 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

And your brain is too corrupted by hooch.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:43 PM    in reply to Eric Jaffa

You are such a fucking liar. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own set of facts. Health care lobbyists hate her. The facts are there if you would check instead of spewing your lies

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:46 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Lousgirl, these folks are obviously full of shit. Just insult them and move along.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:04 PM    in reply to FreeRider

They are everywhere!! I guess Heath Shuler isn't budging huh???

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:29 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Athletes are famously mentally limited. This one is no exception.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:38 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Heath Shuler NEVER votes with the Democrats on anything. I doubt anyone even called him. He's just like Bobby Bright and Walt Minnick, a republican with a D next to his name. If the Republicans take back the house, Shuler, Bright and Minnick will switch parties. Count on it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:08 PM    in reply to FreeRider

Hyperbole is not especially helpful. Shuler is not so good, for sure, however he did vote in favor of the American Clean Energy and Security Act. Also when the Democrats took power in 2007, he voted in favor of all of Pelosi's "100 hours" agenda except funding for embryonic stem-cell research (per http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Heath_Shuler). In case you forgot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/100-Hour_Plan#Plan_components describes what Shuler voted for by siding with Pelosi there. It's no good that he voted against health care and the stimulus package, but it's simply incorrect to say that he's "never" with the Dems on major legislation. An actual Republican surely would have voted against Pelosi's 100 hour agenda and cap-and-trade, Shuler did not. Don't get me wrong, I still largely disagree with his politics and get very annoyed by moderate Dems in general, but it's worthwhile to get our facts straight and not pretend that a Republican in Shuler's seat would make no substantive difference.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:31 PM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

Paragraphs are free. Use them liberally.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:27 AM    in reply to FreeRider

Sorry if seven sentence paragraphs are too difficult for you too parse. However given the childishness of your commentary on this page, I guess I should not be surprised if you're more at the Cat in the Hat level in terms of reading comprehension. And of course no one could miss that you ignore the substance of the matter.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 4:31 AM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

Ohhhh, a two-fer! Paragraph AND substance free.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:06 PM    in reply to FreeRider

I am so curious to know how many votes they have. I wonder if tpm is going to update the story over the weekend.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:16 PM    in reply to FreeRider

Wow, you are impressive with the facts for sure. Wayyy to go friend...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:29 AM    in reply to lousgirl84

I'll be put you down then as someone who thinks facts are stupid, dumb, and annoying, particularly when they are relevant to a particular discussion. Sorry to harsh your fact-free mellow.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 10:09 AM    in reply to Geoff Johnson

What the fuck are you talking about?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:40 PM   

"And major health care reform supporters are currently hammering members threatening to switch their votes from "no" to "yes."

Brian -- Don't you mean from "yes" to "no" here?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 19, 2010 8:25 PM    in reply to barbara63

I must have read that sentence four times before I finally figured out that he had it backwards.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:40 PM   

I think, we are discounting the role of Mr. Clayburn, the whip.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 19, 2010 8:27 PM    in reply to hobbs

Clyburn. And yes, he deserves kudos, too.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 7:42 PM   

Who was the last Democratic speaker of the House who delivered votes like Pelosi apparently can? Does it go all the way back to Sam Rayburn?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:04 PM   

Whatever else I may have thought of Pelosi in the past, she has been magnificent in this effort, even if she ultimately comes up short. She is dealing with a horrid rats nest of political ideologies covering a wide swath from progressive to whisker-short-of-teabag conservative, and with it an opposition party which absolutely refuses to participate in the process and has no qualms about not just distorting but outright lying to do anything they can to derail HCR.

Her sense of calm and poise and the growing list of folks on the Democratic conservative side who now seem to be coming home in the home stretch is to her credit. I pray she can close the deal, but there's not much she can be faulted for given the reality of what she has had to deal with.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 8:35 PM   

Politics is the art of the possible. I want single payer. Failing that, I want a public option. In this fractured political climate, that seems to have been impossible. If there was a public option in the bill, there is very likely no chance that we would be on the verge of passing this bill. Do I like it? I don't love it, but I am also aware that if this current bill does not pass, then we will have a president with a domestic agenda in tatters.

Momentum begets momentum. If this passes, then expect to see climate change, financial reform and other bills come forward.

When I volunteered for Obama in Ohio in 2008, I told undecided voters that I felt Obama was nothing more than a politician. I would support some, but not all of his ideas. He was at heart, a centrist and a pragmatist. I am more liberal than he is. But, the alternative was far far worse.

Today, I feel vindicated with my vote. Assuming this bill passes this weekend, the most important legislation in over several generations will become law. Is it perfect? Hell no. But it is a start. A huge start.

The door is ajar now.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:10 PM    in reply to cswartout

Nice post. I appreciate how you feel. Everyone who wanted health reform preferred single payer, medicare for all or a public option. It became pretty clear with the climate that was not going to happen. This has been very difficult indeed but if it were easy it would have been done 75 years ago. I am a big Obama supporter and yes he is a pragmatist because he's extremely brilliant and he knows if he as a black president was going to get anything done, there was no other way. I believe he's right. I am not giving up after a little more than a year.

I things may have been different had the economy not tanked two months before he took office. He had a lot of campaign promises to keep and no money to do it with and an economy on the brink. I'd say given the hand he was dealt to where we are today - he deserves a fricking medal.

Thanks for listening. Don't give up.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

LAB

user-pic

March 19, 2010 9:14 PM   

I am going to write and call each of the Senators and Congress people who voted yes for this. I can't email most of them, since they limit that venue to their constituents. My own skunk rep. Frank Wolf, has been notified that I will donate to anyone, even a Republican, who challenges him in any way. I also told his staff that he hasn't got an independent bone in his body and that he was, yes, a skunk (I did feel bad for the young woman taking my message, but at least I didn't use the word I really wanted to use: "imagination required here."

I know this bill is far from perfect, but what a big baby step we have taken. I have been involved in politics for over 35 years, and we've never gotten this close. I am still hopeful for the PO sometime next year, and that some day,not in my lifetime certainly, we will move away from the employer based system and to a single payer system. This is only the first step. Be happy. Life is good. Fingers crossed.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:19 PM    in reply to LAB

Amen!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:22 PM    in reply to LAB

I hear you loud and clear. I've been around that long too and this is a major, major achievement which is lost on far too many progressives, and to think that a young Black President who was able to win against all odds, was able to do it. THIS IS HUGE!! My fingers are crossed to.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 9:55 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

Let's hear it Lousgirl - how do you feel about your President?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 10:07 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

I think you're gonna win. What you "win" is what I question. If these lameos actually follow up this yr and next and give this legislation some teeth then I'll be content. What you have to watch for, (remember this - the tigers come at night with their voices soft as thunder) are the lobbyists trying to whittle away what you (not me) may call HCR. The next hurtle will be as hard if not harder than this one bec of the nature and attention span of the pols and the people. Jobs will dominate the front burners and HC legislation will move back. It will get tricky after all the champagne is uncorked.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 10:50 AM    in reply to Cornelius

Sorry sister, but I'm not buying into the gloom and doom. This is a start and a good start. Nothing will be easy but I'm in for the fight. I am standing with this President. He's the best leader this country could have right now.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:00 PM    in reply to lousgirl84

What a creepy cunt/asshat, or whatever amorphus weirdness that 'thing' is...fucking firebagger twit. How do you like your president now? I would love to shove him up sisters ass!! Wingtips and all.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 10:21 PM   

Why are we acting like this is in the bag?

Dayen at FDL: "So it’s 201-209, but with leaners? 207-214. If a Stupak deal is struck, passage looks secure, unless the Pro-Choice caucus revolts. If not, Pelosi will have to draw an inside straight. It’s very tight right now.

UPDATE: If you look hard at the numbers, you can see why Pelosi is talking with Stupak and pro-choice women. With 214 No or lean No votes (including the Stupak bloc), Pelosi would have to prevent Dahlkemper and Kaptur from joining them. Then she would need all the other uncommitted votes, save one. That means she would have to get everyone who voted yes last time, plus Jim Matheson or Harry Teague (and all the lean Yes votes who went No last time, like Brian Baird and John Tanner). It’s just not that plausible."

We are going to LOSE this vote as it stands right now. I simply don't understand the celebration. I want to be wroing, believe me. But the votes ARE NOT THERE.

Weeferdog

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:13 AM    in reply to Weeferdog

Outside whip counts are worthless b/c FDL has no idea what people are going into Pelosi's office and asking for. People threaten to vote no b/c they want a provision changed (Rep. Eliot Engel), they want a better committee assigment, they want a project, they want the Speaker or the President to host a fundraiser.

This is a major vote and now is the time you can get a commitment for something like this. It's ugly but part of the legislative process.


House Leadership is the only ones who really know who are really NO and who are holding out for something. Pelosi seems awfully confident and she and her team are excellent vote counters.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 10:58 PM   

Harry Teague of New Mexico will vote no. Pelosi's margin is now down to ZERO!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 11:39 PM   

Forged memo? Paging Dan Rather. Dan Rather to the white courtesy phone.

Firing: good enough for Dan Rather, good enough for Politico's John Harris.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 11:42 PM   

Reading some of these comments here, I am just curious as to whether most understand the Constitution and the branches of government. Perhaps more of you should take a few minutes to give a read. It's on www.whitehouse.gov I believe. The teabagger/partiers have tried to retrofit their labels of socialist, hitler, fascist, et al to the President without even understanding that it's actually impossible to be all of them at the same time. Others state he hasn't done anything, not understanding that he has done much more...including forcing the people of this country to become much more engaged in the process of the existing governmental system and recognize that it is actually one of the infrastructures so badly in need of repair. Get it? Not yet? Keep thinking. We have a President who plays three dimensional chess. You won't get the positive impact he has had until well after 2016. You also need to understand that he is a man who believes in rule of law, even within a very broken system. So if you really want change you can believe in then it's your responsibility to see to it that you take the last step and put in a Congress he can actually work with on BOTH sides of the aisle. If he doesn't get it done after having what he needs in Congress, I will be right beside you publicly complaining. Until then, you got homework to do.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 10:53 AM    in reply to E_Joyce

great post. thanks

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 19, 2010 11:53 PM   

I like it how conventional Media Inc. is still running cannards about how "unpopular" the bill, is and how "risky" it is for Democrats to vote for it. Sure. It'll play out just like that.

"Wage Americans, I made sure you could finally buy into coverage, and that providers couldn't lock you out for being ill. My opponent opposed it. Vehemently..."

- Balkingpoints / www

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 12:26 AM   

Back room deals in the middle of the night. Pork after pork after pork to buy votes.

This is a national shame.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:05 AM    in reply to RobbyLove

Back room deals in the middle of the night. Scary -- to those who were born yesterday.

...and 30 million insured, with the toughest cost controls of any health care bill in US history. And unlike Bush's giveaway to the BigPharm under Medicare Part D, this bill runs a surplus over 10 and 20 years. It's a remarkable accomplishment, done in the face of the most vicious partisan opposition in 100 years.

All the opponents can whine about is *process*. This is highly ironic, as the Republican's extensive use of the filibuster shatters 220 years of senatorial tradition. And yet modern conservatives can't even *consider* that in their rhetoric -- their dispositions are simply too sensitive.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:09 AM    in reply to Measure for Measure

Oh please. If you think ANYONE knows what the economy or tax revenues will be like in 10 to 20 years, they are lying to you. 30 million insured 4 years from now, with Medicare absolutely GUTTED. You are drinking some serious kool-aid my friend.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 10:56 AM    in reply to RobbyLove

Troll much???

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:08 AM   

Between Obama and Pelosi they will get to 216 by Sunday.

Not to date myself but I worked on the Hill in 1993 during the Clinton Budget bill vote and when they started debate on it they were much further away from passage than Pelosi is now.

One other thing - outside whip counts are worthless b/c you don't know the inside scoop. People threaten to vote no b/c now is the time to get a promise of a good committee assigment, a project for your district, fundraising help.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 2:15 AM    in reply to jmnyc

"People threaten to vote no b/c now is the time to get a promise of a good committee assigment, a project for your district, fundraising help."

You just highlighted how disgusting the political process is in Washington. Don't vote your conscience...just vote your pork. Never mind that the bill is a joke whether you're for or against it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

slb

user-pic

March 20, 2010 5:11 AM    in reply to RobbyLove

Politics is messy. Always has been, here and everywhere else. Doesn't matter whether you are in a democracy or a theocracy or a monarchy or a dictatorship. It's simply a reflection of human nature, and that's not going to change, so you'd better get used to it.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 11:03 AM    in reply to RobbyLove

Welcome to democracy.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 9:02 PM    in reply to RobbyLove

Democracy is ugly sometimes but it is what it is. The good thing is Pelosi knows her caucus and I have no doubt will have the votes will all is said and done.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 10:46 AM    in reply to jmnyc

We love having your input. 1993 wasn't that long ago - was it? Yikes.
This is so exciting. I feel like jumping out of my skin. I love this stuff.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 4:07 AM   

Why can't the wavering Dems understand that we believe in LIFE over profit... it's that simple! A person's life should not depend on a stockholders dividend check.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 10:06 AM   

This thing is finally passing because Obama's risen to the challenge and is showing more of the guy we thought we voted for in 2008. I guess it took him a year to learn that the Republicans were playing him for a patsy, and that politics in DC is a dirty, dirty, rough and tumble business. Enough of the "we're going to change the way things are done in Washington" crap. Things will never change in Washington. The money brought in by special interests is more than the collective economies of all of Africa, and then some, and these folks don't play nice.

I voted for someone who would get things done. Being victorious necessitates playing tough and playing mean with the Republicans who can be the toughest and dirtiest political opponents.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

March 20, 2010 10:15 AM    in reply to jsdc007

It didn't take Obama a year to learn anything about the thugs. He knew exactly what he was doing as far as trying to show bipartisanship. He knew they would never go along but each time they denied him they were exposed for who they are. I don't think he anticipated the kind of opposition but he's entitled to make some missteps. All Presidents do especially in their first year. I think he's done a marvelous job given the hand he was dealt. What most people seem to forget is a lot of what he campaigned for was before the economy tanked which was two months before the election. That changed everything and it seems too many people have forgotten that.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

N/A

user-pic

March 20, 2010 5:31 PM   

I don’t mind individual mandates at the state level. Individual mandates are a part of personal responsibility. But I agree that they should NOT be mandated on a national level. I hope Congress votes against this legislation!

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 12, 2010 5:06 PM   

Well I can find a list of them and post them. Actually some of them are excellent bills and should be passed. I will get the list.

I disagee with you on this President. I think he's doing an incredible job given the situation he inherited and the fact that the thugs don't want a demorcratic president let alone a brilliant black president to succeed. I don't know what you expected in a year but you can't undo 8 years of reckless behavior and an economy on the brink in a year. Remember through most of his campaign, he thought he was dealing with a sound economy and not until two months before the election, did we almost go into a depression.

A little dose of reality here is in order,

m65 kamagra

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

Leave a comment

Your response:

Follow us!

Most Popular

TPM Stories Now Surging on