Posted on 03/19/2010 11:41:40 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I hate to tell readers this, but Obamacare passed on Thursday at 2:22 PM.
That was when the House approved the Slaughter solution 222-203.
A vote for Slaughter was a vote for Obamacare. It did not “barely” pass because a few of those abstentions and maybe a couple of the Nos were green-lighted by the party’s leadership.
The stories about the House votes all get the math wrong.
It is not about how many votes Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco needs — it is about how many votes she can shed.
Pelosi is going to pass it 216-215 if she can, allowing more than 30 Democrats (mainly Blue Dogs) off the hook. They will be granted Indulgences by Pope Pelosi to officially vote against it so they can keep their seats.
Willie Brown, the longest serving speaker in California’s history, explained all this in his November 15 column in the San Francisco Chronicle: “If there’s one thing the recent health care vote proves, it’s that Nancy Pelosi is the most focused House speaker since Tip O’Neill. I’m not talking about the merits of the bill that emerged from the House – the debate on that subject is far from over. I’m talking about Pelosi’s behind-the-scenes leadership to get the job done in such a way that at-risk Democrats can still win re-election.
“The pundits portrayed the 220-215 tally and 39 Democratic no votes as signs of Pelosi’s weakness. What they missed was that Pelosi got her majority while letting Democrats from conservative districts off the hook. Nancy knows that the first thing on every Democratic House member’s mind is getting re-elected. In turn, as speaker, her first and foremost job is to ensure they get re-elected.
“She also knows that the most important vote they cast once they are re-elected will be to keep her as speaker. And if that means letting them be a Republican now and then, so be it. That’s not weakness, that’s politics.”
Jeff Zeleny of the New York Times is the only reporter I know of who gets it. He reported: “But as the week inches along, with momentum steadily building to a Sunday vote, the party leaders are also beginning to decide which politically endangered lawmakers will be given absolution to vote no.”
Politics is an art, not a science. It requires little brains, but much cleverness.
It is about power and Mrs. Pelosi wields it well.
The one remaining hurdle for Obamacare — and it could be 20 stories high — is whether Obamacare passes muster under the second paragraph of Section 7 of Article I of the Constitution: “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. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.”
In order to make budget reconciliation in the Senate, you need a law. The Senate passed the bill. The House must adopt it and then the president must sign it into law for the Senate to revise it without a cloture vote.
If there is any change — even one word — in the House version from the Senate version, you might not have a law.
I dont think it is a done deal yet
Did you read the article?
I’m sick!!! It isn’t a done deal yet, but, I’m still sick.
The vote will be close however.
Are people supposed to read the articles too?
Everyone’s working or on FR.
More from Michelle Malkin:
[previous question] is a vote against the Slaughter Solution. ”
Update 2:26pm Eastern. Final vote 222-203 with six not voting. Remember in November.
More from The Hill:
All Republican lawmakers who voted opposed the measure, which had the effect of ending the GOP’s effort to force a vote. They were joined by 28 Democrats, who broke with party members on the vote.
222 Democrats supported the measure, though, meaning enough to proceed. Three members of both parties did not vote.
Republicans had hoped for the separate vote to get Democratic lawmakers on record on the Senate bill, which includes some provisions on abortion, excise taxes, and other issues that House lawmakers find distasteful.
As this stand[s], Democrats plan a vote on a rule on Sunday that would make changes to the Senate-passed bill while deeming the original legislation to have passed the House.
Update 2:46pm Eastern. Here’s the roll call vote.
Those who didn’t vote:
Dem Ackerman
GOP Hastings (WA)
GOP Hoekstra
Dem Lofgren, Zoe
Dem Stark
GOP Westmoreland (Update: Was on his way to ICU for grandson, according to a constituent who contacted his office)
The 28 Dems who joined Republicans in opposing deem-and-pass cramdown:
Adler (NJ)
Arcuri
Boren
Bright
Carney
Childers
Cooper
Costello
Dahlkemper
Davis (AL)
Giffords
Herseth Sandlin
Holden
Kosmas
Kratovil
Lipinski
McIntyre
McNerney
Melancon
Michaud
Minnick
Mitchell
Nye
Perriello
Shuler
Stupak
Taylor
Teague
Question: Why did Democrats Jason Altmire and Stephen Lynch, who both have voiced public opposition to Deem-and-Pass tactics, support the Slaughter House resolution?
Jim Geraghty breaks out the vulnerable Dems including Altmire and Lynch who cast seppuku votes.
Ace of Spades: “I am getting really worried, because if 222 Democrats voted for this unconstitutional, very-unpopular maneuver, doesn’t that mean that all 222 will also vote for the bill itself? Why vote for this if you’re not going to vote for that?”
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/03/18/the-house-vote-on-barring-the-slaughter-solution-waiting/
They won't.
And as much as this guy wants to be a pundit, IF Pelosi had 216 for any bill ( even the Slaughter dance) she would have just voted that. Truth is there are still folks on the fence ( ie waiting to see which way the crap statrs to roll)...
If they are forced to pass this Bill with that false method, even though they have a 70 vote majority in the House, it will expose the Bill as a fraud and abomination.
You’d better tell Rush and the others. They don’t seem to have this secret information.
Another Easter as sickening as the killing of Teri Schaivo and the taking of Elian Gonzalez
And that is the writer’s take on what the vote for a GOP lead bill means.
You're on your way, right?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.