I fiddled with cutting down this video…

…of Speaker Pelosi admitting that she’s fine with sending people who don’t want to be insured to jail (H/T: Infidels are Cool); but I’m not all that happy with the results.  Which is interesting, because I’m also not happy with the notion of throwing poor people into jail just because Speaker Pelosi wanted to raid taxpayer wallets and pocketbooks for the benefit of the Democratic Party’s various special interest groups.

Again.

See also Hot Air, AoSHQ - and probably everybody else soon enough.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Watch with some amusement as Missouri Secretary of State (and Senate hopeful) Robin Carnahan (D) refuses to answer two simple questions:

• Does she support the House’s health care rationing bill?

and

• What is her opinion on the Stupak amendment?

(See also: The Conservatives.com)

While Carnahan’s response to the first question might be at least considered a standard attempt at mealy-mouthing, and thus not overly outrageous; I cannot imagine how any progressive watching that could be pleased at her ‘answer’ to the second question. Every credible side in the health care dispute concedes that the Stupak amendment is relevant to the discussion, and people are keeping track of who has what opinion of it. Robin Carnahan’s going to have to choose a side.

Moe Lane

PS: What exactly did the Carnahan family do in Missouri to justify their quasi-hereditary political status in that state? Save St. Louis from a rampaging Mississippi River monster?

*See here and here for the reference.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

Editor’s Note: I’ve taken out the top of this post, which responded to Ramesh Ponnuru’s post about my NRLC criticisms. I’ve been saying we should not let this become a debate on abortion or other single issues and therefore don’t think I can justify in my mind continuing that conversation. But, the larger point on the “Stupak Minimum” is worth keeping as it plays to our larger goal — defeat of the health care legislation.

As I wrote the other day,

I think the Stupak Amendment was an instance of the pro-life community not seeing the forest for the trees and it should have been opposed. But I am willing to admit I could be wrong. What I do know is that the House Republican Leadership has been very, very good at combating the Democrats’ legislative agenda. That House GOP Leadership encouraged a vote for Stupak should not be second guessed lightly. It is a lot easier for me to Monday morning quarterback the vote than it was for these men and women on the front lines to make a decision.

I am not going to second guess them and, in fact, as I wrote this morning, I suspect there will be pro-life language in the final bill, but weak enough for pro-choice votes. After all, the Democrats will throw zealous abortion advocates under the bus as fast as lightening if the end result is a federal take over of 1/6th the American economy.

It may, in fact, turn out that Stupak is the undoing of the health care bill. I don’t know and, again, won’t second guess the House GOP Leadership, which firmly believes it made the right call. Our presumption going forward should be that they made the right call, regardless of our personal opinions.

More importantly, what I would suggest is that conservatives not turn the health care fight into a fight over abortion tactics and policy. The bill is two thousand freedom sucking pages of crap and is, with or without Stupak, very clearly not conducive to a culture of life. Abortion is only one aspect.

Let me also suggest one strategy consistent with what I wrote this morning:

After the GOP is done demanding things come out, not be ameliorated or added, there will be no bill left that the left can support. Additionally, the GOP must orchestrate a strategy to put Democrats up for election in difficult positions — offering up amendments that the Democrats cannot say no to, but that take away votes from the overall legislation once agreed to.

The GOP and outside interest groups should now agitate for the “Stupak Minimum,” i.e. the Stupak amendment language must be the baseline for pro-life language in the health care legislation. Anything less should be opposed.

The Democrats will never go for it. But above all else, we must remember the strategy must be to kill the bill, not improve it.

The Democrats have a number of members being investigated for corruption. The FBI is looking into a few. William Jefferson (D-LA) is going to jail. The House Democratic Leadership is blocking other investigations.

Both Murtha and Rangel have issues. But Lynn Woolsey, Chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, that congressional body that takes pride in the Progressive Movement’s eugenics experiments and efforts to sterilize black women and the mentally disabled back at the start of the twentieth century, does not want Charlie Rangel and Jack Murtha investigated.

Instead, Lynn Woolsey — a friend of Speaker Pelosi’s — wants Catholic Bishops investigated.

The role the bishops played in the pushing the Stupak amendment, which unfairly restricts access for low-income women to insurance coverage for abortions, was more than mere advocacy.

They seemed to dictate the finer points of the amendment, and managed to bully members of Congress to vote for added restrictions on a perfectly legal surgical procedure.

And this political effort was subsidized by taxpayers, since the Council enjoys tax-exempt status.

The take away here is not that a leftist who champions killing babies is upset with a group of men opposed to such barbarity, but that the champion of baby killers thinks it is perfectly legitimate to sick the IRS on the opposition. Because the Bishops operate under §501 of the tax code, they should shut up.

The health care legislation carves out new exceptions in the tax code. Once we are all forced under that legislation, will Lynn Woolsey be able to sick the IRS on us if we dissent? Seems likely. Doctors and health care providers are also on notice. Should you disagree with the government that gives you tax breaks, prepare for the government to treat you as an enemy combatant.

It is more and more clear that the House of Representatives will not keep Bart Stupak’s amendment in the health care legislation.

Harry Reid will put something abortion related in the Senate version, but not so strong as to turn off pro-abortion Senators. Likewise, Obama is already saying this is a health care bill, not an abortion bill, and is instructing Congress not to go overboard.

Stupak will go out. National Right to Life, as per its usual operating procedure, will no doubt eek out some sort of minor compromise that undercuts the rest of the conservative movement and other pro-life groups — a compromise that does very little, but from which NRLC can raise some money. Abortions will get funded by the feds if Obamacare passes. You can bank on it.

Let me be clear to the conservative movement and the organizations participating in the health care debate: the fight over health care is about freedom, not your ridiculous little scorecards.

The Democrat strategy is going to be very simple. If the GOP and its outside interest groups raise an issue, the Democrats with a token Republican will hammer out a Grand Compromise ^TM to appear accommodationist and bipartisan.

Read More →

In the wake of the House vote for President Obama’s government takeover of health care, some conservative commentators are asking what may have been had House Republicans decided to follow Rep. John Shadegg’s (R-AZ) advice to vote present on the Stupak-Pitts amendment.  The amendment prohibits the federal government from spending any funds to provide abortion under the plan’s public option and prohibits anyone receiving a federal subsidy from purchasing a health insurance plan that covers abortion.

Sixty-four Democrats voted with Republicans in passing Stupak.  The argument says that had Republicans voted “present” or “no” on the amendment, it would have failed.  The theory is that those sixty-four Democrats would have abandoned the final bill without the prohibition included, effectively killing the overall effort to socialize the nation’s health care system.

But that thinking represents the triumph of hope over experience.  It supposes that Nancy Pelosi, who has shown herself to be nothing if not a cold-blooded and ruthless political operative, would not take any other necessary steps to find the votes necessary to pass the bill.  The only reason Stupak was allowed to come to a vote in the first place was because Pelosi was willing to shiv two-thirds of her caucus to get the bill passed.  Pelosi, and Obama, would have moved any obstacle, made any promise, and broken any number of arms to get the White House a “victory” on health care, however hollow that victory may ultimately turn out to be.

Read More →

While it was largely lost in the debate over passage of Pelosi-care on Saturday night, it may turn out that the most politically costly vote many Democrats cast was against the Motion to Recommit.

Simply put, the Motion to Recommit gives the minority party one last chance to force a vote on a change to the underlying bill. Here’s a summary sent out by the Republican leadership of the Motion to Recommit on the health care overhaul:

The Republican Motion to Recommit H.R. 3962, Speaker Pelosi’s Government Take-Over of Health Care, would amend the bill to add medical liability reform (savings of $54 billion) and use the savings achieved to create a “Seniors Protection and Medicare Regional Payment Equity Fund.”

The fund would require the Secretary to prioritize funding to protect those seniors hit hardest by the cuts to Medicare under Speaker Pelosi’s bill.  Specifically, the purpose of the fund would be to:

• Preserve seniors’ access to Medicare Advantage,
• Protect seniors’ access to medically-necessary care (including seeing doctors and hospitals without waiting in lines, and preventing coverage determinations based on cost), and
• Address payment inequities and geographic variations in Medicare that hurts seniors who live in areas with high-quality, low-cost services.

The Pelosi Government Take-Over of Health Care cuts more than $500 billion from Medicare, leaving seniors with reduced benefits and fewer choices.  While at the same time, the Pelosi bill protects trial lawyers by not addressing real medical liability reform, a critical reform that would reduce health care costs for all Americans.  The Republican motion to recommit offers Members a choice on who to protect: seniors or trial lawyers.

Read More →

Jay Cost (H/T: @MelissaTweets) has written an article on the Democratic party that is impossible to excerpt properly:

How To Divide a Party, In Three Easy Steps!

So, you’ve decided to become the leader of a big political party. Only one problem: it’s too big! What to do?

Well, you’ve come to the right place. Here at the Horse Race Blog, we’ve developed a three-step guide to making that broad party a little more…narrow. Just follow these simple instructions and your majority party will be smaller and a little easier to handle in no time!

…and summarizing said article (the very short version: it’s a bad idea to run a national party as if it were an urban regional one) doesn’t do it justice. Instead, I suggest that you first read it, then take a look at the maps after the fold.

Read More →

The Democrats’ health care legislation passed the House of Representatives on Saturday by three votes. Under the Democrats’ plan, should you fail to obtain health insurance, you will go to jail for five years.

Leading up to the vote, pro-lifers engaged in a battle against each other over the “Stupak Amendment” offered by pro-life Democrat Bart Stupak. By Sunday, pro-lifers were suffering numerous recriminations from their allies. The logic is that had Stupak not passed, there would be enough votes to ensure the health care bill did not pass.

While I tend to agree with the argument, I think we miss a central point: Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats would have just done something else to get the legislation passed. By using pro-life issues, however, the Democrats were able to divide the GOP.

As the sun rises this Monday morning, let’s consider a few points.

1. Whether Stupak passed or not, the health care legislation would have passed on Saturday. In fact, most of the Republican leaders on the Hill encouraged a yes vote for the Stupak Amendment because (A) its passage would send a strong message that there is a pro-life majority in the House of Representatives and (B) its passage would not affect the final outcome. Regardless of how you view Stupak, we know now there is a pro-life majority in even this Democratic House of Representatives and Stupak very clearly will not affect the final outcome.

2. We know that this House legislation is dead on arrival in the United States Senate. As a result of its passage, a number of Blue Dog Democrats are now extremely vulnerable to defeat, as are a number of others. The act of voting for the legislation, and the anger generated by it receiving a majority vote, will doom a significant number of Democrats.

3. Because the Stupak Amendment passed, NARAL, Planned Parenthood, and a host of power left-wing interest groups that supported Obamacare, now are joined with a bunch of groups on the right in opposition to the measure.

4. Passing Obamacare in the manner it passed Saturday has created fresh, new divisions within the Democratic Party. While the media would prefer to look at Republican divisions, the Democrats are so full of gaping wounds now, they might bleed to death by November of 2010.

I think the Stupak Amendment was an instance of the pro-life community not seeing the forest for the trees and it should have been opposed. But I am willing to admit I could be wrong. What I do know is that the House Republican Leadership has been very, very good at combating the Democrats’ legislative agenda. That House GOP Leadership encouraged a vote for Stupak should not be second guessed lightly. It is a lot easier for me to Monday morning quarterback the vote than it was for these men and women on the front lines to make a decision.

At the end of the day we need to trust the people who said a yes vote was worth casting. Now is also not the time to throw the pro-lifers under the bus. They stand with us and, because of their tough stance, we are now ironically joined by pro-abortion groups standing shoulder to shoulder with pro-life groups in opposition to Obamacare.

Life is fully of ironies. Let’s savor this one and fight on.

(H/T: Big Government) Senator Tom Coburn is living up to his nickname:

Sen. Tom Coburn, the Oklahoma Republican who developed a close friendship with President Obama when they served together in the Senate, is threatening to have the entire health care bill read on the Senate floor.

Senior Senate Democratic aides had heard Coburn was considering having potentially thousands of pages read aloud in effort to stall passage. “If he did this it would be even outrageous for a guy who’s become known as Dr. No around here,” one of them told POLITICO.

Good luck on getting Coburn to back down on this: we’re talking about a guy who has a hold on a veterans’ bill because it’s not addressing his concerns about cost duplication and discrimination. We’re also talking about a guy with an approval rating somewhere around 60 with his constituents - so that argument is out, too.  Ed Morrissey thinks that this could delay the bill for up to half a year; I don’t expect it to go that far, but Coburn’s poised to be able to do one heck of a monkeywrenching job on the health care rationing bill for at least the rest of 2009…

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

You can also download it here.

Tomorrow at one p.m. Congressman King will join his Republican colleagues and Americans from across the nation seeking to have their voices heard in the health care debate for a second House Call press event. Republicans and other participants will deliver a message that the American people reject a government takeover of health care.

What: Second Health Care “House Call” on Washington

Who: Republican Members of Congress Americans concerned about our health care future Other Guests - TBA

When: Saturday, November 7, 2009 at 1:00 p.m.

Where: U.S. Capitol

(H/T: Big Government) I’m actually not upset about this, seeing as I knew all along that he’d break his word.  Fish swim, birds fly, ‘conservative’ Democratic legislators betray their principles on cue.  And so it is, here:

GOUVERNEUR, NY - Congressman-elect Bill Owens was sworn in at noon today.

Owens indicated in a press release that he was now in favor of the bill in direct contrast to his earlier position during his campaign.

According to Politico.com, Mr. Owens assured voters that he felt the public option had no place in the health care reform bill.  Contrary to that position, Mr. Owens now indicates that he intends to vote in favor of the bill even though it now contains a public option.

More at the link, including the three other promises that Owens has already broken. I would like to believe that this is a record of some sort, but it’s probably not.

Moe Lane

PS: Do not expect any so-called ‘Blue Dog’ or supposed ‘conservative’ Democrat to voluntarily get in the way of their party’s health care rationing bill.  They vote as they are bid - and the ones doing the bidding are not their constituents.

Crossposted to RedState.

The debate over health care has reached a fevered pitch in our nation’s capital.  Over the last several months, millions of Americans have spoken out at town halls, have called and written in to the White House, and have even made personal visits to their members of Congress to express their strong opposition to government run health care.  Yet Speaker Pelosi has once again ignored their voices.

Speaker Pelosi’s health care bill H.R. 3962 was drafted without committee hearings or markups behind closed doors by Speaker Pelosi and a very limited number of her inner-circle.  Weighing in at more than 2,000 pages, Pelosi’s bill will cost the American taxpayers $1.2 trillion over the next ten years.

Real reform of our health care system is needed.  We must help those who want health insurance but cannot afford it.  We must expand access to health care in rural America.  We must fix our medical malpractice laws so that doctors can focus on saving patients rather than paying lawyers.  And we must expand our investments in preventative care.  However, that doesn’t mean we should throw out the car because it has a soft tire.  This country still has the best doctors, the best treatments, the best researches, and the best hospitals in the world.  Improvements need to be made, but not at the cost of potentially destroying our current health care system, saddling our children and grandchildren with trillions of dollars of debt, decreasing our standard of care, and burdening American families and small businesses with $729.5 billion in new taxes.

I will continue to oppose Speaker Pelosi’s government run health care legislation and any legislation that comes before Congress that includes a public option.

Congressman Frank Lucas represents Oklahoma’s Third Congressional District.  For more information, visit his website at www.house.gov/lucas.

Dan Perrin has the long list from the Chamber of Commerce below.

I’ve got the short list. I hear these are the members most vulnerable to pressure against the Democrats’ health care legislation:

Allen Boyd (FL) at 202-225-5235

Collin Peterson (MN) at 202-225-2165

Kathy Dahlkemper (PA) at 202-225-5406

Tim Holden (PA) at 202-225-5546

Jim Cooper (TN) at 202-225-4311

Stephanie Herseth-Sandlin (SD) at 202-225-2801

Joe Donnelly (IN) at 202-225-3915

Ben Chandler (KY) at 202-225-4706

Zack Space (OH) at 202-225-6265

Charles Wilson (OH) at 202-225-5705

Gabrielle Giffords (AZ) at 202-225-2542

Harry Mitchell (AZ) at 202-225-2190

Henry Cuellar (TX) at 202-225-1640

Dennis Moore (KS) at 202-225-2865

Mike Ross (AK) at 202-225-3772

Go here to contact your Congressman. Tell ‘em all to vote no.

Here’s where we stand as the sun rises this morning.

Democrats are still short votes by double digits.

Four Democrats from Virginia are “No” votes because of Tuesday night’s elections.

The American Medical Association is in deep trouble. The AMA endorsed the House bill. The state societies claim that they have the votes to win a resolution at the AMA conference, which begins tomorrow, forcing the AMA to rescind its endorsement if it doesn’t do so before the AMA meets.

Blue Dogs had dinner at the White House last night. We’ll see how many flip to Obama’s side. And we’ll keep track of them.

…alternatively, he’s just dumber than soap.  From a CNS interview (H/T: Instapundit):

CNSNews.com: “So, in general, if a person doesn’t want health insurance, do you think they should be required by the government to actually have to get it?”

Senator Burris: “Under state law, we have every one required to have automobile insurance. Now, think about that.

Sure, let’s. You see, ‘under state law’ people are not actually required to have automobile insurance: people are required to have automobile insurance if they want to own a car.  So, either this is not a good analogy - which means that Senator Roland Burris is dumber than soap - or it is a good analogy; which would mean that he thinks that people should be required to have insurance if they want to stay alive.  Heaven forbid that I suggest that any sitting Senator could possibly be about as sharp as a sack of wet mice, so I am forced to assume that he’s ready to have the willfully non-insured executed for their crimes.

Also: the Preamble to the Constitution contains the enumerated right for Congress to mandate that people buy health insurance!  Except that it’s only visible to people using those special glasses that Ben Franklin made…

Moe Lane

Crossposted to Moe Lane.

I wanted to share this video with you, which focuses on the health care debate and outlines the Republican plan for health care reform.

As thousands of conservative activists descend on Washington’s Mall to protest the government takeover of 1/6 of our economy, another protest on the public option ensued [video linked*].

Nearly a score of Marxist protesters filled** the office of Sen. Lieberman, chanting “Everyone in and no one out, universal healthcare now!” and “Represent Connecticut, not AETNA!”. That is, until they were arrested.

I wonder if someone will chastise these protesters for their blatant partisanship and urge to purge the independent Senator from the Democratic Caucus. I won’t hold my breath, lest I die of asphyxiation.

Aaron B. Gardner

* Special treat at about 1 minute in. NTTAWWT

** Well, his office is rather small.

Read More →

Americans have headed to Washington to let Nancy Pelosi know we do not want her risky health care scheme, as the Dems would call it had the GOP done it.

Here’s the main takeaways from the CBO analysis:

• The total cost to the taxpayer would be 61 billion (as Hot Air notes, this is opposed to the 1.2 trillion of taxpayer money that the Democrats want to spend).
• The plan will essentially keep the total percentage of insured individuals at around the current percentage of 83% (The Democrat’s main selling point on their version is that it will insure 96% of the population - including illegal immigrants).
• Premium rates would decrease across the board.
• The plan assumes tort reform, no government-option health care, and the ability to buy insurance across state lines.

In other words, there is no way whatsoever that the Democratic party in Congress is going to support this plan: it clashes horribly with the current ruling party’s shrill insistence that we are in a dire crisis with regard to health care, which just happens to require a solution that will eventually result in no private insurance and a state-run health care system.  It also directly affects the economic well-being of trial lawyers, which will hurt that group’s ability to make political contributions, which will hurt the Democratic party.  So, expect to see much made of the fact that the GOP plan will not expand coverage, and a good deal of pounding the table and shouting about deficit reductions.  Expect to not see much made of the fact that this plan will mostly leave people - and their bank accounts - alone about their health care decisions…

Moe Lane

PS: Twelve hour online GOP health care forum starts at 1 PM.

PPS: You should be up to page 1,062 on the Democrats’ health care rationing bill by now.

Crossposted to Moe Lane.