Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

CURRENT WHIP COUNT -- DEMS DOWN BY 9 VOTES!!!
The Hill ^ | 03-16-2010 | cww

Posted on 03/16/2010 6:46:26 AM PDT by CWW

According to The Hill, there are currently 37 definite or leaning no votes by DEMS and 58 undecideds. The DEMS would have to win ALL undecided votes to eek out a 216-215 win. Of the 58 undecideds, however, the following 9 are leaning “no”. If any of these 9 vote no, then the bill dies.

Jason Altmire (Pa.) * (N) Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) told McClatchy he's targeting Altmire, who many view as key to passage. Altmire said on Fox News he has an "open mind." Voted no in committee and on floor, but bottom line is his yes vote is gettable.

Brian Baird (Wash.) (N) Retiring member who bucked party on Iraq war surge.

John Boccieri (Ohio) * (N) In a bad sign for the White House, Boccieri did not appear with President Barack Obama at his March 15 speech in Ohio. Boccieri, a GOP target, told Foxnews.com, "I'm not afraid to cast a tough vote..." Clyburn has publicly said he is leaning on Boccieri, whose vote could go a long way in determining whether healthcare reform will pass.

Bart Gordon (Tenn.) * (N) Retiring committee chairman. Clyburn especially wants his vote.

Suzanne Kosmas (Fla.) (N) Easily won her race in 2008; her 2010 race will be tighter.

Betsy Markey (Colo.) (N) Was a late no last time. In early March, Markey declined to be interviewed by Denver Post on her position on bill. Likely target for Democratic leaders.

Scott Murphy (N.Y.) (N) Reelection race looks good, for now. Told local media he might vote yes.

Glenn Nye (Va.) (N) In toss-up race

John Tanner (Tenn.) * (N) House deputy whip not running for reelection, but he still will need to be convinced to get to yes. Voted no in committee and on floor

(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: healthcare; obama; stupak
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last
To: gosnaps8

ITs 10 06 What did Maffei say?


21 posted on 03/16/2010 7:06:41 AM PDT by GUNGAGALUNGA (Democratus Suckus Teatus is the Latin root for Democrat and it means to tax)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CWW

Each one of them just wants to be the last member to switch his vote to yes, because that means they’ll get the biggest bribe when they do so.


22 posted on 03/16/2010 7:07:58 AM PDT by Junior_G (Funny how liberals' love affair with Muslims began on 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johniegrad
Dear johniegrad,

“I can’t imagine they will bring it to the floor for a vote if they don’t have the votes to pass it. Why would they?”

I wouldn't expect that they would.

But I wonder about what would happen if a modest, but firming majority of folks decided that they were going to vote “no,” and the leadership refused to bring the bill to the floor for a vote. The issue would continue to linger on, continuing to harm Democrats, especially Democrats who are vulnerable this autumn. And the longer the issue goes unresolved, the worse it is for these folks.

Bart Stupak has been going around saying that members just want this issue to go away, and soon.

One wonders whether the anti-Obamacare Democrats would join with the Republicans to petition for discharge of the bill. Of course, if a majority of the House petitions for discharge, my understanding is that the bill goes on the Discharge Calendar and becomes a matter of privileged business.

In this way, if the anti-Obamacare Dems really want to kill the beast, to get it out of the way before the election season begins in earnest, it could be done.

Just a thought.


sitetest

23 posted on 03/16/2010 7:08:20 AM PDT by sitetest ( If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MrChips
Should be Art. I, Sec. 7:

"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"

The bill must receive an up or down vote!!!

This is why the US Sup. Ct. struck down the line-item veto.

24 posted on 03/16/2010 7:10:15 AM PDT by CWW (Palin & Jindal in 2012!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog
time for the Republicans to offer a Safe Haven strategy to a couple of these wavering Dems. (join our party, vote no, we will guarantee you no election opponent and all the money/support you need). May gain us a couple more RINOS but will be worth it to kill this thing.

I have wondered if any such offers have been made. Why the hell is Stupak a pro-life democrat anyway? He needs to leave the party of death if he is pro-life. This might be the way.

25 posted on 03/16/2010 7:13:01 AM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CWW

How many Dems tell the truth? I am more than a little skeptical.


26 posted on 03/16/2010 7:15:02 AM PDT by sarasota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CWW
I'm guessing:
Koochie-koo
Gutierrez
Lpinski

all cave.

27 posted on 03/16/2010 7:25:14 AM PDT by stylin19a (Never buy a putter until you first get a chance to throw it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johniegrad
I can’t imagine they will bring it to the floor for a vote if they don’t have the votes to pass it. Why would they?

Well she wouldn't call for a vote, too humiliating. The talking heads on Fox seemed to think no call for a vote by Sunday and its dead...for now. Santorium ,who I respect shares some of the negativity here , he thinks unless we have 40 proclaimed, rock solid Democrat NOs , it's not looking good. I don't share his opinion, but we will see pretty soon.

28 posted on 03/16/2010 7:27:15 AM PDT by pburgh01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

And if the no vote count gets that high, it’s possible that Pelosi will postpone the vote. Rather than risk the embarrassment of a losing vote, they might delay it further, saying that they are still meeting with members, addressing concerns, and all the other behind the scenes stuff that happens. They might need more time for Rahm to get in people’s faces and twist arms and all that.


29 posted on 03/16/2010 7:27:49 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: CWW
Altmire was on Fox with Bill Hemmer this a.m. and said he will NOT vote against the wishes of his constituents...he is taking their calls and visits to his office. Sounded like a NO to moi.
30 posted on 03/16/2010 7:29:02 AM PDT by Miss Didi ("After all...tomorrow is another day." Scarlett O'Hara, Gone with the Wind)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wolf24

If they won’t pass this one, they certainly won’t pass the other. It is even worse for them if they use the Slaughter Rule because all they will be passing are the bribes that got them to vote yes, meanwhile passing the legistlation they don’t particularly care for. Any way you look at it, it looks bad for them, and in the case of the slaughter rule, REALLY bad.


31 posted on 03/16/2010 7:30:52 AM PDT by marstegreg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CWW

Man the phones, people.


32 posted on 03/16/2010 7:33:07 AM PDT by Antoninus (It's a degenerate society where dogs have more legal rights than unborn babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hal ogen
people-to-be

Correction: "people". There's no "-to-be" about them.

33 posted on 03/16/2010 7:36:52 AM PDT by ctdonath2 (+)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GUNGAGALUNGA

Can’t find a report. The Hill said it would be 10:00 but they haven’t provided an update yet.


34 posted on 03/16/2010 7:37:11 AM PDT by gosnaps8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: GUNGAGALUNGA

No word yet, The Hill said 10:00 announcement but no update.


35 posted on 03/16/2010 7:37:11 AM PDT by gosnaps8
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

Good suggestion.


36 posted on 03/16/2010 7:51:32 AM PDT by FroggyTheGremlim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Junior_G

If any of them are retiring, consider it a yes vote. They will be easy to buy off.


37 posted on 03/16/2010 7:51:47 AM PDT by chopperman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye McFrog

That is brilliant!


38 posted on 03/16/2010 7:51:52 AM PDT by diamond6 (Expose Planned Parenthood: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cYaTywSDmls)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: stayathomemom

Exactly how many times has this thing been pronounced dead? It’s zombie legislation that won’t die completely until November.


39 posted on 03/16/2010 7:56:59 AM PDT by SoDak (bitter clinger)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sitetest
Here's my take on it.
A vote FOR the Slaughter rule is worse than a vote for MaoCare because the member has just "voted" to overrule the Constitution.
A vote for MaoCare is FAAAAAAAAAR less treacherous than a vote for Slaughter.

OBTW, does Slaughter have a Republican challenger?
Is she from a safe Stainist district?
40 posted on 03/16/2010 8:03:20 AM PDT by TxAg1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson