Posted on 03/19/2010 8:31:13 PM PDT by Ravi
Leaders of the Pro-Choice Caucus, some 30 minutes after storming into Pelosi’s office, renewed that threat.
“This concurrent resolution which Congressman Stupak and several others have filed, from the position of the people who signed my letter back in November, is a non-starter,” said Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), a Pro-Choice Caucus co-chairwoman. “We compromised to the concept 'no federal funding for abortion,' which is current law -- we don't like that. And so if Mr. Stupak and a few members, along with the Republicans, decide to use this to take healthcare down, then that loss on healthcare coverage is going to be on their hands.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Or if done concurrently, DeGette and others vote no and big bill dies.
Too many moving parts.
Do I sense a rat meltdown in the making?
“Do I sense a rat meltdown in the making?”
I htink they will go ahead and DEEM it OK anyway...they are, after all, Deemocrats.
I hope Stupak and the others in the Pro-Choice Caucus hatched a sheme to engage in an irrational chaos and finger pointing that sinks the bill. I hope the GOP is secretly helping them.
Absolutely. The pro-choice caucus will want a vote on Stupak before the 3590 vote so they can defeat it. The Republicans will probably vote "present", but if they try to pass it, then they might just trade Stupak's 12-ish votes for about 30 pro-abortion votes.
The RATs are in a Catch-22. Pass the popcorn indeed!
I completely understand the abortion issue is an article of faith for the Democrats.
But I wonder just how serious the Pro-choice and Progressive caucuses are about voting NO on the health care bill?
The issue of govt-controlled health care (for the Dems) seems to be as big of an issue.
If Stupak’s pro-life language is kept in the bill, I wonder how many of the Pro-Choice and Progressive members will bite the bullet and vote for the final bill?
Huh?! Not pushing for federally funded abortion is a “compromise”?! WTF is wrong with these people? so that expected taxpayers to contribute to morally objectionable medical procedures?
A-holes!
How does Stupak group go to CHURCH Sunday morn and then vote for taxpayer funded abortions in afternoon??? NO WAY!!!!
I meant if the GOP jumps on board and helps Stupak, then they could trade 12 for 30 (votes).
Abortion is a drug to them. They could never even for a moment vote against it
That’s the million dollar question imo. It looks like Stupak wants his to be a concurrent resolution only. Don’t know about the rest of his block. I don’t think he’d settle for a vote beforehand. Then what does the pro-choice caucus do - hopefully vote no? Because Stupak’s block including Cao would be back supporting the bill.
Then this thing goes to the Senate with Stupak’s amendment in it - how does this fly with Boxer et al and what happens to Nelson’s language.
The leadership can argued that the bill will so empower HHS bureaucrats. who are generally pro-choice that the regulatory process can be used to allow abortions.
Watch the vote count. It wouldn’t be the first time the ‘rats declared a defeated bill passed and ignored the howls of protest.
they pass this by ‘deeming’ it passed and no vote, there will no doubt be revolution in this country.
Many states are not going to put up with this. Many individuals are not going to put up with this. This is tyranny masquerading (poorly) as proper governance.
People are not going to stand for a government board telling them they cannot have treatments they want, and can pay for. They are not going to be for government deciding what options are available to them, if any. Not for the sake of saving “the government” money.
Be a good citizen and die for us. Excuse my french but f@@@ that. YOU DIE FIRST, government ass-faced bureaucrats and politicians. Government will not be allowed to play God at the whim of a faceless, appointed, unaccountable healthcare choices board. Seriously, f$@# that.
No! Boehner and Cantor get the Republicans (minus the RINO Anh "Cash" Cao) to vote "present". Since "present" votes count just as much as "Aye" or "No" votes, the Ayes can't get a majority, and the Stupak language goes down in flames.
The only question remaining is whether Stupak and his cohorts stay focused on voting No, or will they change their votes to Yes.
Scenario two involves the Republicans helping out Stupak on this issue and attempting to force the hand of the pro-choice caucus, but I find this one too risky.
From FDL:
“Nobody really knows if Stupak can pull this off; there’s very little precedent.
If the vote occurs after the vote on the final bill, it would have to go through a very dicey reconciliation process. And as a concurrent resolution, it might have to exist as a standalone measure entirely, meaning it’s eligible for a filibuster.
Now, we don’t know what assurances are being made on the Senate side to keep this in. Remember, if anything from the House reconciliation sidecar gets changed, the sidecar has to go BACK to the House for another vote. At which point we’re in exactly the same boat that we’re in right now. Democratic Senate leaders have already said they would whip to make no changes whatsoever to the sidecar. So there could end up being a “conspiracy of silence,” where nobody says anything about the abortion language (though presumably a Republican might) and it passes through the Senate without incident. Or Joe Biden overrules the chair on the point of order, and Democrats are whipped to sustain it (though Republicans have said they would not agree to that and would vote en masse against it).
It’s about as clear as mud. But somehow, when something has to be done, the rules tend to melt away. It’s clear the House cannot pass the health care bill without Bart Stupak. That tends to concentrate the mind.”
In that same interview, though, Stupak said unequivocally that he could live with Senate bill becoming law at the end of the day.
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.