TPMDC

Health Care Follies: Pelosi Mum On Selling Senate Abortion, Immigration Provisions To House Democrats


Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi held an unexpected press conference today, where she acknowledged--unsurprisingly--that the divide between Democrats and Republicans on health care reform is unlikely to be bridged. But, when asked if and how she can cobble together the votes within her own caucus to pass a bill with controversial abortion and immigration language in it, Pelosi had no answers.

Pelosi acknowledged what has long been known--that neither abortion nor immigration can be dealt with in the budget reconciliation process. The issues, she said, are "not central to the budget--in order for them to be part of the budget bill, they have to be central to the budget."

But she wouldn't say how she plans to overcome the 216-vote threshold she'd likely face if either or both of these issues causes rebellion among members of her caucus. The next step, she said is to send legislation to CBO and, once CBO reports back, to see what the Senate can pass through the reconciliation process. Then it'll be time to sell that to her caucus.

Comments (8) | Join the Conversation!

Recommend Recommend (0)

March 2, 2010 6:11 PM   

Here's how you sell it:

The abortion provisions are not materially different from the Hyde amendment, and are one hell of a lot less restrictive than the bill the House passed. The illegal immigrant restrictions are similar what is already the law for Medicaid.

Do you really want to tank the whole thing over what really are small issues? Do you really?

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

NR

user-pic

March 2, 2010 6:48 PM    in reply to mans_best_friend

The abortion provisions are not materially different from the Hyde amendment,

Bullshit. States will, under the Senate bill, be able to ban all plans on the exchange from covering any abortion for any reason, ever. Not just the plans that take federal dollars. ALL plans. That is a hell of a lot more restrictive than the Hyde amendment.

Do you really want to tank the whole thing over what really are small issues?

Good to know that you think the constitutional rights of half the population is a small issue.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

March 2, 2010 6:56 PM    in reply to NR

It does no such thing. In fact, every exchange is required to offer at least one plan that covers abortions.

Thanks for playing, though.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

NR

user-pic

March 2, 2010 7:05 PM    in reply to mans_best_friend

Um, no. You're talking out of your ass and don't have the faintest clue about what you're talking about.

But thanks for playing, yourself.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

mcc

user-pic

March 2, 2010 7:46 PM    in reply to NR

This is still no different from current law. States have the ability to ban private health insurance plans from covering abortions already. Five do.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

mcc

user-pic

March 2, 2010 6:39 PM   

Wait, why do you need to handle immigration and abortion in reconciliation exactly?

We want the abortion language in the Senate bill to stay. It's vastly superior to what the House passed and the majority of the "controversy" surrounding it has involved blue dogs saying the Senate abortion language doesn't go far enough in limiting abortions. "Fixing" it would very likely mean making it worse. Progressives are better off if the abortion language can't be "fixed" any more than it already has been.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

March 2, 2010 9:36 PM    in reply to mcc

mcc, all true as far as which bill does what goes. But the position that the House Dem Leadership is in is that more than 16 (at known count) people who voted yes last time threaten to now vote no unless the stronger restrictions are in place. Some of them have near 100% pro life ratings, so I would not count on them being pressured into the yea vote for the good of the order.

Reply | Flag Abuse

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

June 13, 2010 12:28 PM   

It does no such thing. In fact, every exchange is required to offer at least one plan that covers abortions.

Thanks for playing, though.

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