« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Repeal is Real

By: Matt Kibbe (Diary)  |  January 19th, 2011 at 06:08 PM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

As its first major act, the new Republican majority in the House of Representatives voted today on a bill promising the complete repeal of Obamacare. The bill passed with a unanimous Republican vote along with the support of 3 House Democrats, proving that the demand to repeal Obamacare is a real, bipartisan fight that will lead to a serious debate in the Senate.

While many have tried to downplay the vote as merely symbolic, it is far more important than that: repeal is real. I believe that repeal is achievable, and in fact likely, because the American people want and expect it. The new class of Republicans campaigned on repeal in this election, and we intend to hold each and every one of them accountable to their own promises.

From here, we need to keep in mind that while this is the first giant step in the right direction, this fight is far from over. From here we must continue to build momentum and push Harry Reid to bring it to a vote in the Senate. Ultimately, we will push forward until this is on the desk of President Obama.

This is unprecedented and historic.  For the first time ever, a house of Congress has voted on a bipartisan basis to repeal a major social welfare entitlement program.  It’s also a huge victory for the tea party movement and the Contract From America.  This vote would never have happened without the tea party.  This victory creates huge momentum for repeal.

You can help us take this fight to the next level. First, be sure to thank your representative if he voted Yes on the repeal bill. This is how we keep them on the right track. If your Representative voted the wrong way, let him know (in a polite way, devoid of “violent rhetoric”) of your disappointment with his vote.

From here, the ball is now in the Senate’s court. Call and write your Senators, and tell them you want Majority Leader Harry Reid to schedule a debate and vote on the House-passed repeal bill as soon as possible.

For further commentary, listen to FreedomWorks VP of Public Policy Dean Clancy’s response to today’s proceedings, and where we can go from here.

Click for podcast!

Matt Kibbe is the President and CEO of FreedomWorks in Washington, DC.

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • powertothepeople

    this will do little to end Obamacare, but that is OK. It is the start we need and it allows the country to take note of who votes how.

    Even if it slips through Congress, Obama will veto it and we would not have enough votes to end the veto. But what this allows us to do not is show our resolve and gets the members ready to end funding. I have always thought that stopping funding would be the answer to the problem and a temporary fix until we can take back the presidency and a majority in both houses. That will happen in 2012 and then we can once again repeal the law. Until then, stop all funding for all the programs and that will cause the whole thing to wither up until we can cut the thing off the branch.

    • powertothepeople

      But what this allows us to do not is show our resolve and gets the members ready to end funding

      Should be “do now” instead of “do not” Minor error but changes the whole message.

  • carolina

    House Republicans are planning to hold a vote on January 25 on a resolution allowing House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) to reduce certain spending levels to 2008 levels or less for the remainder of FY 2011, without the need for a full House vote.

    The House Rules Committee this afternoon approved an amended H.Res 38, which instructs the Budget Committee to allocate funds for non-security discretionary spending for remainder of FY 2011 at 2008 levels or less.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/138865-republicans-indicate-budget-vote-planned-for-tuesday

  • walter_hanson

    President Obama and the Senate Democrats have to do a debt increase pretty soon. Put it in det increase and force the Democrats in the Senate and President Obama to vote for it because they don’t get their debt increase without this!

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • tlhanger

    All I am hearing is how much the people love Obamacare and only a few are opposed, so we just have to keep getting the message out. Lying through their teeth like always.

  • bclare

    I

  • KC

    The Left is screaming that Boehner should stop wasting time with healthcare and focus on jobs. The ones screaming the loudest are those who ignored jobs for two years to steamroll over the will of the American people to pass this collosal disaster.

    Boehner could (and should) argue that repealing Obamacare is directly related to jobs because allowing it to stand will result in widespread job LOSSES.

  • billybaa

    Dems in red states were allowed to vote no on Obama to help them get reelected

    • earlgrey

      They were against it before they were for it. How does that work for 2012. They obviously think Obama will push them over the finish line in 2012, but that is a risky assumption. Those that got re-elected had to vote against the repeal to avoid a primary challenge. Now they are crossing fingers for 2012 and hoping that redistricting doesn’t work against them.

      When you lay down with dogs. . .

  • miroco

    Making ones point is not nearly the fun when one doesn’t go to extremes, GROW UP! Much of this noise has deterred us from getting where we need to be. A close friend has a real issue with gays, for whatever reason I have none, we both agree we don’t want to pay for their parade. With each of these moral points, then the big abortion issue and Dollar wise the immigration issue, we could easily solve if we just got to the point. I have figured out the Dems don’t really care about any issue except to divert attention and accrue power. They NEED more welfare, they don’t want the border closed. They want a steady flow of drugs—it is weird but documentable.

    • scottb

      symbolic vote, nothing more

  • IJB

    I thought we’d get at least 250 ‘Yes’ votes – we only got 245.

    What that tells me is that, for good or ill, the modern Democrat Party has decided to tie their fates to this law. (It’s also tells me that there will be no more than 1 Senate Dem willing to vote for Repeal, no matter what…)

    IOW, they are going to go to the *mat* to defend this, regardless of the consequences.

    If we’re going to repeal this, it will be completely without the help of any Democrats nationally.

  • redneck_hippie
  • msctex

    Just because they are holding their ground now does not mean when some time passes, the ’12 vote is closer and things have only grown worse, that there won’t likely be more than a few who realize the nature of the wagon to which they have hitched their horse. It’s one thing to sacrifice your career for a good cause. Quite another when it is an unmitigated, indefensible disaster from Day One.

    Another way of looking at it is that loyalty to principle is not among their strong suits.

  • NeoKong

    I knew it. That means that all the “Blue Dogs” who voted against it before lying through their teeth.
    So what is their reasoning to not vote for repeal ?

    I didn’t like it before when I was up for reelection but now that I have almost two years to change the subject I sort of like it. It grows on ya’.

  • kenjames

    245. A month ago we couldn’t.

  • kenjames

    245. A month ago we couldn’t.

  • izoneguy

    ObamaCare now needs to be defunded & deconstructed.
    The dems need to be embarassed, demoralized & humilated.
    That is the “new tone” I want to spread.

  • IJB

    …in terms of Dem support for Repeal: if they aren’t going to support repeal immediately after an election in which their party was slaughtered because of its *passage* of ObamaCare, they aren’t ever going to vote for Repeal. I suspect support for repeal among Dems just goes lower from here.

    If anything, I’d bet there will be *no* Dem House votes for Repeal even just 6 months from now…

  • izoneguy

    As we see – ObamaCare is a national disaster.

    Use the “No on repeal vote” against the dems just like we used the “Yes on ObamaCare” against in the 2010 elections.

  • http://freedom-light.org solvoreor

    Hiding behind procedures is a form of cowardice.
    If you believe in health care, if you believe that people will support it, if you believ that

  • IJB

    So that would be 3 Dem ‘No’s', and 1 non-vote(?).

  • renny

    if it is defeated. We need to have Harry and His Henchmen on record.

  • redneck_hippie
  • pilgrim
  • http://freedom-light.org solvoreor

    Hiding behind procedures is a form of cowardice.
    If you believe in ObamaCare, if you believe that people will support it when they know about it, BRING IT TO A VOTE, HARRY!

    Of course if you know that it is all lies, and the American people will not stand for Senators who vote for the bill, just hide it in committee.
    We can wait to remove you.

    Anyone have a bumper sticker business.
    BRING IT TO A VOTE, HARRY!
    just might be the motto of the year.

    He isn’t likely to cooperate much with Congress, and you know where they stand.

  • bobojake
  • msctex

    And given the degree that it would insult the voters, that might be the best thing that could happen in the long run. We’ll just have to wait and see if self-interest can overcome what amounts to faith in a provably false idol. I’m still betting there will be a bit of both, but with the majority, as you think, still dumb enough to go down with the ship. To have scales fall from your eyes and see the world as it is, you have to have been able to see in the first place.

  • IJB

    The Dem ‘No’ votes were:

    Dan Boren, D-Okla.
    Mike Ross, D-Ark.
    Mike McIntyre, D-N.C.

    the three D’s from pretty much *the* most GOP districts in the country (not including Mattheson of UT – his district now needs to be targeted for elimination in redistricting…).

    The one non-vote was Giffords of AZ, of course.

  • nilram

    My understanding is that 10 Blue dogs who voted against Obamacare also voted against repeal. I don’t understand what they possibly hope to gain from this. If they had voted yea on repeal it would not have affected the outcome of the vote and they wouldn’t have come out of it looking like lying hypocrites.

    I simply don’t understand why they would do this.

    Any insights?

  • carolina

    The blue dogs that voted against obamacare…… but also voted against repeal today, will have some explaining to do.
    The dem senators up for reelection will get to answer to obamacare also.
    Today was a ‘promise kept’ by the House repubs. Now they can proceed with the REAL work of cutting spending.

  • carolina

    The blue dogs that voted against obamacare…… but also voted against repeal today, will have some explaining to do.
    The dem senators up for reelection will get to answer to obamacare also.
    Today was a ‘promise kept’ by the House repubs. Now they can proceed with the REAL work of cutting spending.

  • Tbone

    seems a tad short on membership.

  • runner12

    repeal ObamaCare so soon after taking office. Well done and keep up the good work.

  • runner12

    repeal ObamaCare so soon after taking office. Well done and keep up the good work.

  • concap

    Most of the political spectrum is moving right of center.

    The left-right wing has become saturated with blue dog and other moderate Democrats

  • Superheater

    Now you know why Heath Shuler isn’t Minority Leader and why his “candidacy” was as successful as his NFL career. When Cruella DePelosi says “rollover” and “play dead” all the blue dalmations will do it, and fast.

    Blue Dogs are a made up species.

  • Superheater

    Now you know why Heath Shuler isn’t Minority Leader and why his “candidacy” was as successful as his NFL career. When Cruella DePelosi says “rollover” and “play dead” all the blue dalmations will do it, and fast.

    Blue Dogs are a made up species.

  • carolina

    “McConnell Vows That House-Passed Repeal Will Get Senate Vote”

    http://www.rollcall.com/news/-202594-1.html

    I’m not registered at roll call……. so I don’t know how McConnell will do this.

  • carolina

    “McConnell Vows That House-Passed Repeal Will Get Senate Vote”

    http://www.rollcall.com/news/-202594-1.html

    I’m not registered at roll call……. so I don’t know how McConnell will do this.

  • nessa

    I could forgive a lot of squishyness and his utter lack of a spine with this particular vote.

  • Tbone

    of your analysis.

  • edintexas

    Unless I didn’t understand the ‘left-right wing” terminology, you claim that the Social Conservatives are the left side of the right and the new home of those Democrats forced somewhat to the right by the Far Left takeover of the Democrat party. You then claim that the Fiscal Conservatives are splitting from the Social Conservatives and thus moving further to the Right.

    As a generalization, the Fiscal Right is often the home of those who don’t object to social programs, only the cost of the social programs. These people are not Conservatives, at best they are conservatives. I used to call these people “cheap Liberals”. Some of those who are not also Social Conservatives often have no problem with the nanny state, as long as it doesn’t cost too much. Obviously there are exceptions.

    I think it is difficult to find many Social Conservatives who are not on the Fiscal Right, but there are some claiming to be Fiscal Conservatives who only pretend to be fiscally conservative.

    You are correct that there are many social issues. I could be in error, but I believe you are mistaken in believing that the Social Conservative is on the Left of the Fiscal. Personally, I’d claim to be a Constitutional Conservative. If you can give me an example of a number of Social Conservatives who are really big tax and spenders (other than a former Governor of AR, I already know about him) to support your contention, I’d appreciate it.

  • edwyrd

    after having had a super majority, that is the hat trick, owning washinton, and in two short years pissing it away for the glory of some marxist jackass in the white house, and then sitting there watching, muted, as the republicans methodically wrought their revenge, and to light forcefully appears the cosequence of poor stewardship and currupt politics…

  • carolina

    Elections have consequences!

  • carolina

    Elections have consequences!

  • lineholder

    I hope the people of NC are paying attention.

    Shuler went against Obamacare originally and stood against it in the elections during November. The folks over in the NW mountains are going to be very interested in his “it’s immoral to repeal it now” point of view.

    And Kissell pulled a Richard Burr, justifying his cop-out as being a result of the “inevitability” that ObamaCare will stand as law, same as Burr did last month when voted to repeal DADT.

  • IJB

    I think this will probably cook the goose of these three in 2012 (though redistricting will likely contribute to their “goose cooking”).

    Similarly, if this ever comes up in the Senate, and Manchin of WV votes “No”, I think his 2012 reelection chances will be put in serious jeopardy…

  • http://www.nighttwister.com NightTwister

    Hey, if they can use the worda that way, so can I.

  • davesinsanantonio

    to bring this up with a guarantee it doesn’t pass, then he hasn’t grown a spine, he has just gotten cozier with the Left and almost as sneaky bad as they are. So, it must actually pass the Senate before he gets a pass. But, if he actually gets a clear repeal through the Senate, then I will give him a great deal of credit and support for other (conservative) efforts as long as he doesn’t revert to his usual squishyness.

  • annas

    Republicans don’t go squishy! I was happy about this vote, but the agreeing for everyone to sit together so the Dems won’t look pitiful and caving in to call the repeal of Obamacare something other than a “jobs killer” is pathetic! Where is the stamina for the fight on our side? They predictibly cave in to the Democrats–so afraid of being called racist and now “inciting the mentally ill.”

  • chamberD

    We demand that Obamacare be consigned to the dustbin of history. If it takes 100 such votes, it matters not at all. Nothing gets done in Washington UNTIL IT IS REPEALED.

    End of story.

  • walter_hanson

    In 2010 Nancy won narrow victories because she sequeezed enough votes out of her large majority to allow members to vote no. Now that they’re in the minority some of the No votes like Collin Peterson who must be dreaming of being Agriculture Chair again doesn’t want his fellow democrats to remember he supported repeal. That’s why he voted no.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • paulmarcelrene

    It doesn’t matter what Manchin of WV votes on repeal or any other issue. His win is good for the next 5 elections minimum. He has been the anointed crown royal of WV politics for many years and like his predecessor Robert C. Byrd, he has a free pass till death on the Senate seat. It is why he accept the job because he knows it is a life long seat and the governors seat in WV is term limited.There is no real Republican Party in WV other in the Eastern Panhandle, and will not be anytime this century. The Democrats have a lock on the state for the Senate Seats and all but one Congressional Seat. The peculiar thing about the voting population in WV, they occasionally elect a Republican Governor and tend to go be a Red State for President without seeming to realize it. (Obama had no chance of winning WV as they would never vote for a non-white President.)

    For additional info on all things political feel free to visit:

    paulmarcelrene.wordpress.com

  • Spiral

    Every Senator should have to cast an up or down vote on Obama-care repeal.

    It’s the second most important issue facing this country right now, the first being the national debt. But Obama-care will explode this nation’s debt, so they are related.

    For the Senate to duck the Obama-care repeal issue would be irresponsible.

    LETS HAVE AN UP OR DOWN VOTE IN THE SENATE!!

  • edintexas

    How many of those who voted against passage then, are still in the House to vote against repeal today? I suspect the number of the former is much lower today (not that this is a bad thing, let’s make sure the Democrat party is shown for what it is).

  • edintexas

    Just read your extensive bio post. From that:

    “Many have read a version of the following statement from ‘moderates,’ defined here as people who want to seem high-minded and objective by staying ‘above the fray.’

    ‘I

  • concap

    Fusionism saw its height during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, who had brought together the divided factions after Gerald Ford’s loss in the 1976 election. Rich Lowry has argued that Reagan maintained a fusionist ‘sweet spot’ of both ideological flexibility and respect for conservative principles.[1] In the immediate aftermath of the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994, fusionism was also at its height.

    When I say, the fiscons

  • edintexas

    Missed this the first time around. You wrote: “(yes, the 100% fiscally conservative people have social issues to, but elect not to place the burden on the government or it

  • concap

    You kind of proved my point.

    When Conservatives talk 100% fiscal, they are in 100% agreement.

    When they shift the conversation to there own personal social issue concerns (non of which are the same) most of the time it will end in a disagreement.

    That

  • concap
  • edintexas

    I thought a good part of your point was that Social Conservatives were the Left side of the Conservative movement and Fiscal Conservatives were to the Right of, and more Conservative than, Social Conservatives. I didn’t spend much, if any, time on your commentary about Social Conservatives agreeing, etc. (frankly, I don’t know of any group of people who agree on anything 100%, not even Fiscal Conservatives all agree when it comes to details of where to cut and how much). So I don’t believe I proved, for you, what I addressed as a primary point (Social Conservatives are to the Left of Fiscal Conservatives), but if you insist I’ll agree to agreeably disagree. :-)

  • edintexas

    Better than “Dubya”, who isn’t considered to be any sort of “Conservative” by most Conservatives here in TX. Running for Governor, he “Wasn’t Ma Richards” and was good on Concealed Carry. Running for President he “Wasn’t Algore (or Kerry)” and was good on the 2d Amendment. George HW was, and is, a Rockefeller Republican. George W didn’t fall far from that tree. IMO Rove is simply interested only in what is best for Karl Rove as a political advisor. Rove showed his true colors in the Delaware Republican Primary. All in all, this isn’t much of a recommendation for election to a mythical Conservative Hall of Fame.

  • concap

    wouldn’t replacement all or in part, advocate the notion that the U.S. Government should be in the Health Care Business or govern how it should be run.

    Just a thought.