« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Have the Democrats got the votes?

By: Dan Spencer (Diary)  |  March 15th, 2010 at 03:30 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Friday, we reported that the Democrats were within four votes of passing Obamacare.

Today, we are told that four Democrats are changing their votes from “NO” to “YES” on Obamacare:

  • Boccieri, OH – (202) 225-3876
  • Altmire, PA – (202) 225-2565
  • Gordon, TN – (202) 225-4231
  • Baird, WA- (202) 225-3536

On the other hand, the corner reports the Democrats are still about 10 votes of the 216 required to pass Obamacare, or execute the unconstitutional Slaughter gambit. It is also possible the Democrats could be losing votes.

Either way it wouldn’t be a bad idea to call the offices of the representatives listed above and let them know how you feel about the Democrats’ Obamacare bill.

UPDATE by Erick:

Call Mike McMahon (D-NY). He is against Obamacare. He is under attack from unions. Call and tell him thanks and encourage him to stick with his no vote. His number is (202) 225-3371.

Suzanne Kosmas (D-FL) is wobbling and she’s easy pickings in November. Call her and tell her to vote no. Her number is (202) 225-2706.

REPUBLICAN Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) voted with the Democrats today on a health care deform amendment. Call and tell him to vote no. His number is (202) 225-2778.

Tags: ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • WoodstockRedCat

    I hope they don’t but they are moving forward like they do.
    This is “All In” for Pelosi, she has never lost a vote like this.

    • redneck_hippie

      The vote has not been “scheduled” yet, only “planned.”

      No one has seen the final so-called reconciliation bill. Read Malkin’s blog with the live-blogging of House Budget Committee markup meeting. Especially what Paul Ryan had to say:

      http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/15/liveblogging-the-house-budget-committee-wreckonciliation-mark-up/

      When does CBO score reconciliation if the final bill has not been written?

      • 308winchester

        I checked with the lefty site ” Firedog Lake ” and they are reporting 190 yes & 205 NO. They’re not there yet, but the arm wrestling and knee capping is continuing
        Keep calling the the leaners
        Mike

        • renny

          They are either busy, the voice mail is full, or a menu refers you to another extension. They must be getting pummeled.
          At a Cong. John Adler (D-NJ) “townhall” Sat. (3/13), Adler said he will still vote NO (he did org.), that he will not vote for the Slaughter “rule” as he thinks it is illegal and unConst., and he thinks 12-15 are no’s that the libs. need.
          He voted for cap and trade because he was convinced it was somehow “good for NJ” because we could “sell” all of our “pollution,” but I think he sees that differently now. He holds meetings nearly every weekend and the tea party dogs him all over S. Jersey. He should switch parties now, and then he would find his meetings not quite so lively.

  • stigmo

    And I’m worried about everything. I think that these four were in the bag for awhile…Gordon’s office told me a week ago that he was a yes, so I’ve got to imagine that The Hill folks know about it.

    • redneck_hippie

      My thought was that some of these four may have been back-pocket votes from the original House bill vote, months ago. If so, that means that things aren’t going swimmingly, because any back pocket votes would be the last to cave because they are the ones who needed cover the first time around.

      The Budget Committee reported the bill with no recommendations this afternoon. What are they waiting for, HMMMMMM?

      see live blog link in my comment above

      “3:31pm Eastern. Committee casts 21-16 vote ? reported to the House without recommendation.”

  • Swamp_Yankee

    They are close, but it still seems like spin to me. At least we know who to attack. We have to make their lives so miserable, that by Friday anyone on the fence will not wnat to be associated with Treason Four.

    The Hill now reports that the GOP is one vote away from block the bill. And their are 72 undecides on their list.

    • redneck_hippie
    • LibertarianHawk

      They have 36 Dems on their list as “Firm/Lean/Likely No”. And 38 Dems would have to vote “No” to defeat the bill.

      There are 71 on the list as “Undecided.” Assuming the 36 above remain “No” votes, then if 69 of those 71 vote “Yes”, the bill will fail. If 70 of those 71 vote “Yes” it will pass.

      Granted, that all depends on the 36 the Hill presently counts staying in the “No” column. And I’d be willing to bet that there will be names among those 36 who, when the votes are counted, will be in the “Aye” column.

      Still, if there are 71 undecided Democrats and the Dems need to get 70 of them for passage, I think that’s a pretty tall hurdle.

      • Swamp_Yankee

        I plan on kidnapping Ed Markey and locking him in my basement until the vote is over. So they really only need 37.

        j/k

        • eburke

          would certainly be service above and beyond the call, Swamp.

          Promise to not let him out?

  • Trelaina

    Are they being hounded by the GOP as well as the dems and the O Admin?

    I know it’s probably wishful thinking, but I would like to think that the GOP leadership is talking to these people as well. If all they see is the deals and the arm-twisting from the left, even calls from us may not break through. We shouldn’t make deals, but the GOP should be in touch with these people…..

    • redneck_hippie

      My representative, Roskam, was on local radio today, almost pleading with us to call, email, visit offices and write this week. The End Is Near! If nothing else, we need to call so that the collectivists are unable to get through!!

  • LibertarianHawk

    They’re closely monitoring 113 Democrats they don’t consider to be a “Firm Yes” and putting them in one of four categories (current count in parentheses):

    1) Firm No, Leaning No, Likely No (36)
    2) Firm Yes (2)
    3) Leaning Yes (5)
    4) Undecided (71)

    The magic number is 38. If 38 Democrats vote “No”, the bill will fail. If only 37 do, it will pass by a one vote margin.

    Assuming their count of 36 Firm/Lean/Likely “No” votes and 7 Firm/Leaning “Yes” votes holds up, that means that 70 of the 71 Dems that The Hill considers to be undecided (days prior to the seminal vote of their political career) will have to be persuaded to vote in favor of it for it to pass.

    That seems like a tall order, IMO. I’ve no doubt they’ll get most of those 71. But 70? If that high a percentage can be persuaded to vote for the bill, why are they still undecided at this point?

    Must they run the table? Yes. Can they? Yeah, then can.

    Is it the most likely outcome, given that current breakdown? I honestly don’t think it is.

    • LibertarianHawk

      But Jeffrey Anderson at TWS seems to think that recent statements by Rep. Nye sound like somebody preparing to vote “No” on the final bill.

      http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/rep-nye-virginia-looks-no

      We’ll have to wait and see. But I do know that, if The Hill’s count is right, the Dems simply cannot afford anymore of those 71 Undecideds (and Nye is one of them) voting against them. They can lose one, but they can’t lose two.

    • writeblock

      …that some districts, according to Cook, have moved from fairly safe to toss-up and there will be at least a few undecideds who will vote no rather than buck their constituents. The Chamber of Commerce is also weighing-in with ads in swing districts.

  • cahc

    In a March 12th Collins Stewart note, analyst Brian Wright said, “A recent Health and Human Services report claiming 56% earnings growth in 2009 for health insurance companies is we believe either intentionally misleading or shows a severe lack of judgment by the Secretary in our opinion.” He continues to outline that the numbers used by HHS are completely off base. “We estimate 2009 health segment operating earnings as being up just 1.2% in 2009 from 2008. This compares to 13.5% growth in estimated S&P 500 earnings.”

    His conclusion is pretty clear: “Given Secretary Sebelius?s clear disregard for an honest debate regarding the true causes of healthcare cost inflation and her misleading statements that have focused solely on the ~4% net margin of health insurance companies, we question the Secretary?s ability to serve appropriately in her official capacity. How can she be considered an impartial regulator of the government healthcare programs?”

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      I have yet to see a DoD contract yet that didn’t have an initial fee of at least 7%. Where the contractor is a sole source, think 17%!

  • WarEagle01

    Per Michelle Malkin:

    “3:57pm Eastern. GOP Rep. Connie Mack?s motion limiting powers of government comparative research committee fails, 14-23.”

    http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/15/liveblogging-the-house-budget-committee-wreckonciliation-mark-up/

  • GT350

    I’ve been calling non-stop for 9 months. I call my current Rep + 2 Senators, then follow up with my hometown politicians. I call their DC office first thing in the morning (6:30am Pac Time) and the local office in the afternoon.

    I’ve reserved the most vitriol for my local Congressman, John Garamendi. He’s a hard-left who tries to put on a veneer of pro-business for election purposes. Keep in mind: I am always polite & well spoken. I never curse or make threats, but I make sure to get the message across: I am a voter and I’m watching.

    So I dialed the number, from memory, and rolled into my opening schpiel: “Hi, this is Eric XYZ, calling about the healthca…”

    She cut me off: “Oh, ERIC how are you? You haven’t called in a week! I was worried something happened to you…. You’re the one from XXXX Street, you’re a CPA, with XYZ email address….”

    A little surprised, I went on to say, yes, it’s me again. And I’m calling to tell you that I do not support the healthcare proposal, and so on.

    Clearly, at this point the aide was wanting to embarass me and get me to stop hogging up the phone lines. She clearly had permission from the boss (whoever that is) to do so.

    At this point, I guess I’ve put my point across. From here, I guess the only thing to do is either ramp down my advocacy, or really ramp it up. I’m trying to do the latter, by spending more time talking to friends & acquaintance about this guy’s shortcomings. I also plan to visit his town hall meetings to heckle the guy and stop by his local office unannounced.

    • tdpwells

      …schedule it with your morning coffee break or what have you. That kind of response would only spur me on to call incessantly just out of petty spite if nothing else. Two can play the patronizing game.

    • makemyday

      We start calling him and saying “Hi! I’m calling for Eric and I want to remind you that he does not support ObamaCare”

      • tdpwells
        • GT350

          I’m looking for some R-leaning friends to call and say exactly that: “Hi, I spoke to my friend/neighbor/coworker Eric XYZ, and I agree that Healthcare is a fraud.”

          Usually, I just give a first name and a zip code. They don’t usually ask for an actual address I’ve been known to use about a half-dozen first names & alternate pronounciations of my last name. Like “Smith”, “Jones”, “Taylor”, you get the message.

          John Garamendi is the prototypical California machine politician. There’s no chance that he will vote against it. Instead spend most of my phone time calling Reps & Senators in my family’s hometown, which is in a true purple state. I also know enough about local politics & pronounciations to be able to “walk the walk” and not sound like an obvious carpetbagger.

    • LibertarianHawk

      You’d have more impact if you could get others you know to call….because it sounds to me like your calls are going straight into the circular file cabinet.

      I suppose it can’t hurt. But we need to exerting effort in ways that help, not merely in ways that won’t hurt.

    • http://www.voteforteri2010.com teridavisnewman

      If more people were like you, we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re in! God bless and don’t give up!!

    • dudette

      Erick says he still is against healthcare so vote no!! I call the reps for my family since they are so busy they dont call — also been internet faxing which is great it goes thru no matter whose constituent you are, and with my toll free fax # they do not know where it is from.

  • Jeffrey Malbis (malbis)

    FireDogLake is moving Boyd to a “firm no” vote based on the fact that he just voted “no” on forwarding the Reconcilliation bill out of committee for a House vote. As Dayen puts it, “I see no logic behind a member voting against the committee resolution and for the bill on the floor. Boyd looks like a no.”

    Somewhat of a pleasant surprised since Boyd is listed as “undecided” by The Hill:

    “Allen Boyd (Fla.) (N) Facing primary challenge. Voted no on education reform bill expected to move with healthcare reform as part of reconciliation.”

    This would move The Hill’s tally to 37 no votes, one away from the magic number if they are correct.

    • tdpwells

      I don’t consider them firm until 1) Pelosi *schedules* the vote (I don’t think she’ll do that until she knows she has them in her pocket, checked and counted already) and 2) the votes are cast.

      Someone saying no today can say maybe tomorrow, and we’re back to counting the same spineless congress critters all over again.

      I’ll start paying more attention to the ‘yes’, ‘no’ and ‘maybe’ columns when I know a scheduled date. Right now it’s just “planned” for the weekend. The fact that it’s not happening tomorrow, Weds, etc tells me she doesn’t have them right this second…BUT until we get a schedule, they’re all getting bombarded equally from my phone.

      I don’t want us to ignore the ‘no’ people. We need to make sure they stay that way.

      • LibertarianHawk

        I don’t think anybody can look at those names that The Hill (or anybody else trying to do a whip count) thinks will vote “no” and consider them in the bag.

        I’m sure that Obama, Pelosi & Co. aren’t looking at them that way.

      • writeblock

        …She may just want the issue finished one way or the other. This is killing them in the polls.

        • tdpwells

          Look at congress’s approval ratings for the past year – she could give a rip about the polls. Hasn’t stopped her from doing anything.

          • writeblock

            …in caucus. Up or down she wants it over.

  • mavericktime

    Uh-oh. Keith Hennessey is saying today that he thinks that there is a 2 in 3 chance that the bill will pass, and Intrade is saying that there is a 70% chance of passage.

    • stigmo

      Everything seemed to bottom out late Friday night and the news has seemed much better today. What gives?

      • earlgrey

        Is this based on the recent committe votes for the reconciliation package? I was feeling great today until now. Where is hennesseys article. National review seemed to indicate they were losing votes not gaining them. The move to jeep sweetheart deals smells of desparation and the flipped votes today were rumored as flips all along.

        • stigmo

          I know the way stories are posted these days that lag times are much shorter…but maybe Hennessey and InTrade are operated with the Friday/Saturday information rather than the Monday information.

          • LibertarianHawk

            Honestly, I put about zero stock in it. It always seems to make violent adjustments close to nut-cracking time on whatever it is it’s tracking.

            But I am pretty curious about what specifically moved Hennessey to where he is. Because, I’ve been following all the developments pretty closely myself — and, as recently as last Friday, I’d have agreed with him.

            But with Nye’s recent statement, Boyd’s committee vote, Kucinich not being flipped, and (most importantly) the lack of any discernible wave of “Undecideds” to finally proclaim their support, I like our chances better now.

          • Finrod

            If you have money to blow, you can bid up contracts on InTrade as high as you want them. I’d be surprised if some Soros-funded liberal organization wasn’t doing exactly that.

          • Adjoran

            Only 582 contracts traded today, just over 11,000 TOTAL. On minuscule volume like that, no predictive value can be assigned.

            It’s different with Presidential elections, where interest is high and so is volume. They were WRONG on Hoffman in NY-23 and Corzine in NJ for just this reason.

          • Finrod

            With volume that low, it’s easy for liberals with money to throw away to manipulate the market. Expect it to change dramatically just before the vote, though, once people with inside knowledge decide to cash in.

      • LibertarianHawk

        I’d be interested in knowing why Keith thinks this. He’s obviously not certain of passage (thus the “2 in 3 chance”). So I wonder what information he’s obtained which moved him in this direction.

        Based on what I’m reading and hearing, my confidence that the bill won’t pass is higher than it’s been in quite some time (including when Scott Brown was elected).

        I’m not saying that passage isn’t still a distinct possibility. The only votes that matter are the ones taken on vote day….and even those are subject to change before the vote is closed.

        So, if Hennessy knows something that Bob Cusack either doesn’t know or isn’t telling us, then he needs to spill the beans pronto.

        • mavericktime

          http://keithhennessey.com/2010/03/15/repeal-new-entitlement/

          • stigmo

            Too bad he give no background for his estimation.

            Here’s an interesting post from Huffington on “Deeming” and how the Parliamentarians will allow it:

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/03/15/pelosi-get-the-bill-go-fo_n_499338.html

          • writeblock

            …Supreme Court justices. Let them try this. I hope they do–though I doubt they will. The constitutional challenge is real–and they know it.

          • MF

            A key question I haven’t seen an answer to is whether or not SCOTUS can rule on this. For example, in the Senate, VP Biden can overrule the parliamentarian and SCOTUS has no standing. The Senate decides its own rules. I know the Constitution (or an amendment) says the following:

            Every bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a law, be presented to the President of the United States; if he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the objections at large on their journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the bill, it shall be sent, together with the objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a law. But in all such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays, and the names of the persons voting for and against the bill shall be entered on the journal of each House respectively.

            Two key parts: “Every bill which shall have passed the HofR…” and “…in all such cases the votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and nays…” If they try the Slaughter rule, can’t they have both the vote for the Senate bill and the “reconciliation” bill concurrent, thus meeting the requirements of the law? Will SCOTUS have jurisdiction on this, or will it be a determination of the House rules?

      • mavericktime

        I’m not sure what Hennessey is basing his assessment on.

  • momma

    His website brings up his Dec. 2009 message that he is retiring at the end of this session. So he has no concerns about re-election. Also has a statement from Mar. 12, saying he would not vote for the proposed health care bill until he knows what’s in it. And it’s been out there and available for him to read for how long? And he has spent how much time reading it?

  • Menlo

    They don’t have them now, but they don’t have the votes against it either. I do believe that almost every Democrat who is not a firm and confirmed vote against will end up supporting it. I think they are either decided and not talking, waiting for a special deal, or waiting until a bill comes out so it will look like they’ve “considered” it before voting on it.

    • http://barnettlaw.org Frozen_Man

      the difference between not having the votes for it (needing 70) and not having the votes against it (needing 2) is a really big difference when there are only 72 votes out there. I’m not saying that there won’t be flips and some of those no votes won’t become yes votes but that is still a tall order for the dems to fill. Just keep calling congressmen making it harder and harder for them to vote yes.

      • Menlo

        I am one hundred percent certain that they are no longer being influenced by public opinion or future electoral prospects.

        • LibertarianHawk

          It’s a mistake to look at Congressional Democrats (or Republicans, for that matter) as a monolithic “they”.

          I think it’s obvious that there are Democrats — a lot of them — who don’t care about public opinion or what their votes will mean in terms of the upcoming election.

          But we’re already looking at roughly 30 Democrats who can somewhat safely be said to be voting “No.” And there are another 7, as of now, who seem to be leaning that way.

          All of this despite intense pressure being exerted on them by the White House and party leaders.

          Don’t these examples provide evidence that not all elected Democrats are willing to walk the plank for Obamacare? And why can’t there be more where they came from?

        • tdpwells

          I’m totally hearing Dana Carvey from the old SNL church lady skit…

        • eburke

          kick back, and have a margarita.

          The rest of us will continue to fight until the dying gasp.

    • writeblock

      …surely there are a few who REALLY are undecided.

      • Menlo

        If they are undecided or if they may still vote against it, it won’t be because of public opposition or public pressure or future electoral prospects, the latter of which does not improve by voting against the bill.

        • writeblock

          Electoral prospects clearly improve with a no vote. It’s one reason I think somebody like Ellsworth of Indiana will vote no. He won’t have a snowball’s chance in Hell running for Bayh’s Senate seat if he supports this thing. Just one example.

          • mavericktime

            n/t

  • Swamp_Yankee

    Fight the spin!

    Its close, but The Hill count has No Dems at the magic 37, the max the Dems can afford to lose.

    http://thehill.com/homenews/house/85693-whip-watch-the-hills-survey-of-house-dems-positions-on-healthcare-

    • AndrewHyman

      Thanks for the info.

      What would you do for a free ride on Air Force One?

      Maybe even a seat in the cockpit. Ooh.

    • Thomas_Hauber

      How many undecideds are there left?

      • Swamp_Yankee

        But some are more important than others. A lor are saying thar to look judicious, but are heavily leaning towards one camp.

        There about fifteen critical fence sitters out there.

        • eburke

          If SanFranNan let them vote ‘no’ the first time because they had the votes they already needed, they’ll get *crucified* if they now switch.

          We only need to get a couple of them to hold.

          Fight! Call! Email your friends! Contribute to groups that are running effective ads (as much as I do not like Dick Morris, his group puts together some rather effective ads…i.e. the one on Mattheson in UT-2)

          • writeblock

            If she had that many in reserve the first time, she wouldn’t have caved to Stupak. She needed Stupak’s votes.

          • eburke

            My whole point was to take the worse case scenario and that SanFranNan had a couple extra votes in her back pocket and therefore *may* have been able to let a couple vote no that if she leans on hard enuf this time they’ll flop. If that scenario is true, she’d have to have had 9 extra votes all 9 of which she’d now have to flip.

            The Stupak group is irrelevant to any point I was making.

  • michellem

    The 4 mentioned were never really voting NO anyway. They have been sold on ..”the Senate bill is less costly than the House bill…reduces deficits”. Can someone tell them if they strip away the union money from Cadillac plans and increase subdsidies up to $96,000, they are heading in the wrong direction deficit wise. The extra Medicare on the “rich” might not get anywhere if the Senate has anything to do with it.

  • JHancock

    John A Boccieri (D) VS James B. Renacci (R)
    Ohio 16th
    (202)-225-3876
    Jason Altmire (D) VS Keith J. Rothfus (R)
    PA 4th
    (202)-225-2565
    Gordon, TN (D) VS Lou Ann Zelenik (R) and Jim Tracy (R)
    TN 6th
    (202)-225-4231
    Baird, WA 3rd (D) not running next term (202) 225-3536

    I looked up each at risk (D) vote’s opponent for next election cycle and called them asking that they oppose the Health Care bill, or I (and everyone on my e-mail list who I can convince) will support/contribute to their opponent.

    • woosterbrushman

      is a better choice than JIM RENACCI. Miller got over 45% of the vote in the republican primary in 2008 for this open seat. He won 3 of the 4 counties and only lost in Canton where his opponet was from. He was involved in a car accident the weekend before the primary and I think that cost him the race. This seat was an R for over 30 years…. so BOCCERI has always been a pocket YES vote the dems… this district went for MCCAIN by 54% and if MATT MILLER COULD RAISE SOME MONEY HE WOULD BE THE BETTER CHOICE. Renacci is a millionaire who loaned his campaign $150,000 to get himself noticed and grab some early fundraising $$$.
      Matt Miller is the only TRUE CONSERVATIVE in this race.

    • rightwingmom52

      so he’ll vote yes. I live in AL, but keep calling his office on behalf of my many family members who live throughout TN. He’s a hack who will do as he pleases and to heck with the country and his constituents.

  • Praying

    But as a Tennessee resident, I did call Bart Gordon and leave a message. 92 of 96 counties in TN went for John McCain in 2008, and this guy thinks he can vote YES? Ha! Scum bag.

  • earlgrey

    That we can stop Obamacare. That was depressing

    • redneck_hippie

      There is still the very real threat that if the votes aren’t there to kill it that they will invoke the Slaughter Rule. We simply have to keep at them and stop trying to handicap it like it’s a running of the Kentucky Derby.

      • writeblock

        He has a tendency to shoot off his mouth unwisely. His comment about hc being Obama’s “Waterloo” only stiffened resistance on the left. Now he’s spreading discouragement. Let people get fired up–we can stop this thing.

    • stigmo

      I think we’re in trouble. I think today might have set the record for my biggest optimism-pessimism swing. The volatility is going to kill me.

      • earlgrey

        I found the link at Hot Air. He said that he is concerned because it is now just a matter of flipping a few votes.

      • http://www.thesubstratum.com GJ Merits

        Or he could be wrong. I personally blame the Republicans for thinking that sending a stupid letter to Reid was enough to do the trick. They should have started obstructing and shutting down the Senate: http://www.redstate.com/gman2008/2010/03/14/healhcare-time-for-the-senate-gop-to-show-some-spine-obstruct-obstruct-obstruct/

        DeMint is tired of dealing with these bozos. You will see a link in the story that will let you now that extent the GOP was prepared to stab us in the back last year. It will be enough to make your skin crawl.

        • mavericktime

          From the HotAir site:

          “Exit question: Is there anything the GOP can do this week to sway fencesitters? I was thinking this morning that it might not be a bad idea for McConnell and Boehner to pledge publicly that if the bill fails, they?ll make health-care reform their number two priority next year behind jobs. One of the big worries for centrist Dems is that if they vote no this time, health-care reform will be headed for another 16-year legislative limbo. If the GOP can somehow alleviate the ?now or never? fear, it might give just enough Blue Dogs the comfort they need.”

          I think seriously promising to address the health care issue next year is a very good idea. I don’t know if McConnell and Boehner would be the proper messengers though. You need someone who would have major credibility with the Democrats.

          • JHancock

            right now for Dems to trust anybody. After what they have tried to do for the past year, neither the Republican leadership of conservative elements of the Nation (the 50% who HATE the bill), are likely to feel charitable, and the Dems know it.

        • writeblock

          …of “shutting down the Senate.” It’s never happened. Ever. Nothing ever seems dire enough for the GOP.

      • writeblock

        It’s a kick in the teeth. We don’t need it–especially when things are looking favorable. There are plenty of no votes piling up. Pelosi may still need about a dozen votes whereas we only need about two or three–if that many.

  • RealQuiet

    That’s what Obama and Pelosi want. It’s the old inevitability tactic. Here’s a great article on the climb Obama and Pelosi have.

    http://healthcare.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGUxNTIwYjhmNjRmMDNiZmIyNTNlNzQ4ZWViOGFiODM=

  • RealQuiet

    http://www.courierpostonline.com/article/20100315/NEWS01/100315049/1006/news01

    • stigmo

      The whip counts keep getting better and better, but the prognosticators and officials are getting more and more pessimistic.

      • redneck_hippie

        having to invoke the Slaughter Rule to win passage. They’re lying their pants off.

        The right can’t be really optimistic because the left is proposing operating outside the Constitution to win passage.

        We need to fight fight fight and fight some more to force them to have to pull their theivery and tricks and bribes and seal their final ruin.

        Capiche?

        • RealQuiet

          n/t

      • RealQuiet

        Turn up the heat big time. I’m just happy we have made it to the march that will take play tomorrow at the Capitol. Democrat leaders are already handing out pamphlets and bracing themselves.

      • mavericktime

        http://firedoglake.com/

        • Finrod

          .

        • earlgrey

          DeMints position.

      • earlgrey

        Have the vote shortly so they are letting the nos speak up and get off the hook.

        Fred Barnes predicted Kucinich would vote yes.

  • tdpwells

    …where we’d be right now if the repubs had never voted for the Stupak amendment during the first run through the House, thereby giving pro-life Dems (still an oxymoron to me, but whatever) and those in iffy districts the green light to vote yes.

    • writeblock

      …why Stupak ever went for the House bill in the first place, knowing the Senate would strip his amendment from the bill. It could never have survived the process–yet he let it live on instead of killing it while he had the chance.

      • JHancock

        Are troubled by the life issue, but tend to be more concerned with other “social justice” issues–so they will sacrifice another 40 million unborn for the sake of their ideology.

        • JSobieski

          nt

          • JHancock

            heat from me too!! I’ve sent him a nasty note with thirty fake pieces of silver and contributed to his opponent’s (Benishek’s) campaign!!

      • JSobieski

        If you look at the debate on this topic, Obama consistently said that the goal was not to alter the Hyde Amendment framework,

        Stupak took Obama at his word—which was wishful thinking, but I think his optimism was sincere.

    • JSobieski

      (1) Passage of the Stupak amendment caused the pro-choice caucus to start an internal revolt, and it caused the abortion issue to have a higher priority in the Senate. The Stupak amendment is similar to operation chaos.

      (2) Politicians in March 2010 know that the bill is unpopular. In November 2009, many Congressmen were still lying to themselves and thinking it was popular—so the Stupak amendment bought us some time

      (3) It got people on the record. Why did you vote for an amendment unless there in fact is a difference between the Stupak language and the non-Stupak language.

      Bottom line: It is more likely a pro-life Dem will show a backbone now than back in November 2009.

  • retail1

    I have been calling everyone on the list and when they tell me I am not in their district and or state I come back with “I may not be able to vote in your district but my money is good for your opponent!” I will send money all year long to your opponent and look what it did for Scott Brown!

  • tritonspolartiger

    Agreed – we can’t count the chickens before they hatch… Especially THESE chickens. Still, I believe we have reason to hope. Axelrod, Pelosi, Obama, etc, are doing their darndest to give wavering house members the impression that the prevailing winds are blowing in the direction of passage, hence all this bloviating about this thing being law by the end of the week. If Pelosi had the votes, there’d be a vote just as soon as she could get the members in-chamber. She doesn’t have the votes. All they have is their efforts to generate a hurricane blowing towards passage, in hopes it’ll roll over 70 members into the World of Yes. Granted we don’t see the backroom junk that’s going on, but you’ve gotta believe that it’s not going as well as they hoped, or they’d NOT be out there yapping it up like passage is a done deal. So stay strong!!!! DON’T allow yourself to think the worst. Trust in God! And call those waverers!!!

    Triton

  • eburke

    by one or two votes, my bet is that it fails by 25. The *only* thing that will get it to pass is if it is within a couple of votes and the Dems can hang the “don’t be the vote that undermines your President and party on our #1 priority of the last 50 years” (that, and we’ll have to fit you for cement shoes).

    If this thing ain’t within 2 or 3, the rats will jump overboard like you’ve never seen. *That* is why we’re hearing this incessant “we’ve got the votes’ when *every* whip count from across the spectrum shows they don’t. Their *only* hope is to create an aura of inevitibility for this crap sandwich in the hope they can stampede enuf votes to ‘make it close’ and then they can push the last 2 over the edge. If the “no’s” get above 40 before the vote? It’s over.

    Call! Write! Contribute! Email friends. Email Democrat friends who would be disgusted by the process (and yes, they’re out there. I *know* because I have forwarded them stuff on the Slaughter rule. They’re stunned.)

    Screw the Marxists! Screw their sycophants in the LSM. FIght! Fight! Fight! Do not let your courage grow dim in this hour that our nation needs you!

  • sammyc

    Every call I made ran into a full maibox so had no luck there. Last night we were at 211/215 votes, what the heck happened??
    I truly blame the Repubs who attempted to “FIX” the problems with the initial bill rather than voting it down right from the very beginning when we had the chance to stop it cold. Every one of them should be taken out of office in 2010. I just have one question does the CBO have to weigh in on this bill before it can be passed?

  • scubadiver49er

    AFP is conducting a live protest in front of his local office in Batavia, IL late this afternoon (Tuesday). I plan on being there. If you can’t reach ‘em by phone, get a group together & show up at their local offices. I hope AFP has a bunch of these going on this week! “KILL THE BILL”!!!!!

    • scubadiver49er

      AFP ran the event yesterday afternooon/evening. 500+ were there in front of his Batavia, IL. office, to let him know that the folks in IL-14 are watching what he does. Hannity has him listed as being on the fence on “Healthcare”. On the fence to dodge all of us in IL-14 until it’s time to vote; He’ll eventually cave, I predict. And if he votes “yes” on the “Slaughterhouse” Reconciliation Bill, he’s as good as saying “yes” on the Senate version as well. Mass chaos ahead for the USA, me thinks; he only listens to Pelosi & Obama.

  • shermantank

    Don’t know about anyone else, but my finger’s ready to break; been dialing around the clock and every Senator’s phone line is “busy.”

    • rightwingmom52

      I’ve found the local folks much more amenable to talking about the issues anyway.

  • rsexteriors

    phone numbers. The washington numbers are busy and it is better to overload their home districts. Here are the district numbers of the four mentioned in this article.

    Jason Altmire
    Aliquippa Office (724-378-0928)
    Natrona Heights Office (724-226-1304)

    Baird
    Vancouver (360) 695-6292
    Olympia (360) 352-9768

    Gordon
    Murfreesboro Office (615) 896-1986
    Cookeville Office (931) 528-5907
    Gallatin Office (615) 451-5174

    Boccieri
    Canton (330) 489-4414 or (800)826-9015