64 Dems Ask for Primary Opponents
By: Rayne, Firedog Lake
Saturday November 7, 2009 7:37 pm
4 updates.
Chris Bowers looking for a pony–
Stupak amendment passes easily: Well over 60 Democrats supporting the Stupak amendment. Once it got over 45, it became a “freebie” and lots of people piled on. Anyone who votes against the overall bill, but voted in favor of this amendment, should be primaried. And defeating them with a pro-choice, pro-health care candidate should be doable, in any district in the country.
The amendment can still be stripped in conference committee. Supposedly, President Obama promised Henry Waxman that he would personally work to do just that. We’ll see…
64 Democrats Voted To Put A Bureaucrat Between You, Your Insurance Provider, And Your Doctor On The Issue Of Abortion
By: Jon Walker
Saturday November 7, 2009 8:08 pm
64 Democrats votes yes on the Stupak amendment. The Stupak amendment would effectively ban insurance companies from selling insurance plans that cover elective abortion on the individual and small group market. It would be one of the most far reaching national restriction place on abortion in decades. It could also potential be used by insurance companies to allow them to legally discriminate against low income Americans.
Abortion would be the only legal medical procedure which the bill would ban insurance companies from covering. Abortion will be the only legal medical procedure the bill will offically “ration.” By voting for the amendment 64 Democrats and all but one Republican voted to put a government bureaucrat between you, your insurance provider, and your doctor. If you choose to have an abortion, your doctor is willing to prefer the procedure, and your insurance provider is willing to pay for the procedure, this amendment will have a government bureaucrat prevent that from happening. For all the talk about small government, thees representatives are more than happy to give the government more power as long as it is used to restrict a woman’s right to choose.
Barack Obama calls tonight “history.” AFL-CIO calls it a “great step forward.” SEIU calls it “courage.”
76 comments
Skip to comment form
Author
Anyone for actual power? Or would the progressives rather march down the streets chanting “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good”?
…but you have got to be Fkng KDng! I cannot believe I live in this stupakidy society.
220/215
39 dems vote no.
1 rep votes yes. Guy from Loisianna I think.
You can all go to Orange and participate in a diary by a constituent who yelled at Eric Massa for standing up for his beliefs!
Thanks, ek hornbeck!
Fork ’em all!
…since Pelosi has been speaker, I actually reached a staff memeber who allowed/b> me to speak and did not flush me down the toilet of voice mail.
I expressed my amazement that he actually answered and allowed me to speak and didn’t flush me dttovm!!!
Told him that when Dennis Hastert was speaker, even tho a Repug & from Illinois, while I am a dem and from Berkeley Ca, I could always speak with his staff folks, but not with Pelosi. No, no!!! Down the Voice mail toilet you go.
I told him that maybe he was allowing me to speak because they had broken out the champagne and were overjoyed that they had gotten their victory and made them feel ebullient even though it is a sell out of us folks…
He broke in and told me I was irrational…..and we said bye bye!!
the past trroubles me. They get something but give nothing. One vote.
fines and jail times. Is that in there? How in the hell is that going to fly?
They just put woman’s reproductive rights back 50 years to the days when poor women who couldn’t afford to go overseas for abortion went to backroom clinics and those who couldn’t afford that used coat hangers. They have allowed the Catholic Church and the religious right, in other words, the American Taliban to dictate women’s health care. This makes me sick.
This bill should be defeated and everyone who voted for this amendment should be primaried.
This is a mix and match mess. You would think with the Republicans being totally insane (each and every last one of them) that the Democrats would be able to put some differences aside. But no; their egos just too big and bank accounts too important to really care at all about the people.
The abortion amendment was just lying in wait, lurking in the background, ready to pounce at the last moment with 64 “Democrats”. WOW! I thought we had an election last November? I would have sworn it was Dems vs. Repubs.
Fat chance this amendment will be dropped in conference.
Now on to the Senate. Something will pass there; I wonder what it will be? Will Olympia make her next appearance?
here is the list of Democrats who voted “Aye” on the Stupak Amendment:
AL-2 Bright, Bobby; AL- 5 Griffith, Parker; AL-7 Davis, Artur; AR-1 Berry, Robert; AR-2 Snyder, Victor; AR-4 AR-4 Ross, Mike; AR-4 Ross, Mike; CA-18 Cardoza, Dennis; CA-20 Costa, Jim; CA-43 Baca, Joe; CO-3 Salazar, John.
GA-2 Bishop, Sanford; GA-8 Marshall, James; GA-12 Barrow, John; KY-6 Chandler, Ben; IL-3 Lipinski, Daniel; IL-12 Costello, Jerry; IN-2 Donnelly, Joe; IN-8 Ellsworth, Brad; IN-9 Hill, Baron; LA-3 Melancon, Charles; ME-2 Michaud, Michael.
MA-2 Neal, Richard; MA-9 Lynch, Stephen; MI-5 Kildee, Dale; MI-1 Stupak, Bart; MN-7 Peterson, Collin; MN-8 Oberstar, James; MS-1 Childers, Travis; MS-4 Taylor, Gene; MO-4 Skelton, Ike; NM-2 Teague, Harry
NC-2 Etheridge, Bob; NC-7 McIntyre, Mike; NC-11 Shuler, Heath; ND Pomeroy, Earl; OH-1 Driehaus, Steve; Wilson, Charles; OH-9 Kaptur, Marcy; OH-16 Boccieri, John; OH-17 Ryan, Timothy; OH-18 Space, Zachary.
OK-2 Boren, Dan; PA-3 Dahlkemper, Kathleen; PA-4 Altmire, Jason; PA-10 Carney, Christopher; PA-11 Kanjorski, Paul; PA-12 Murtha, John; PA-14 Doyle, Michael; PA-17 Holden, Tim; RI-2 Langevin, James
SC-5 Spratt, John; TN-4 Davis, Lincoln; TN-5 Cooper, Jim; TN-6 Gordon, Barton; TN-8 Tanner, John; TX-16 Reyes, Silvestre; TX-23 Rodriguez, Ciro; TX-27 Ortiz, Solomon; TX-28 Cuellar, Henry.
UT-2 Matheson, Jim; VA-5 Perriello, Thomas; WV-1 Mollohan, Alan; WV-3 Rahall, Nick; WI-7 Obey, David.
Here is the list of 26 Democrats who voted “Aye” on Stupak but “Nay” on the final bill:
Altmire, Barrow, Boccieri, Boren, Bright, Chandler, Childers, Davis (AL), Davis (TN), Gordon (TN), Griffith, Holden, Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, Melancon, Peterson, Ross, Shuler, Skelton, Tanner, Taylor, Teague
Definition
Didn’t see them at OL and the only thing at dkos is the tribe boiling Kucinich in oil for being one of the few to have the guts to mean what he says. Stupak gloats at bluffing progressives and that bunch grabs their pitch forks to make sure progressives never grow a pair.
If expanded Medicaid with no price controls is historic, thank god Johnson and FDR had higher ideals and expectations or we would have ended up with $10 and a bandaid instead of Social Security and Medicare.
Because it has pretty much passed half way through. The ones on the edge just went with it seeing as it seemed a popular decision.
Typical conformist thinking and the old if you aren’t with us you’re a purity troll crap.
Apparently alot of people at DK are into serious masochist tendencies which I have no problem with specifically we all have our kinks we are into. My thing is not handing the overseer the stick to beat me with which is what this bill amounts to.
I do wonder whether we will have public option funding for “boner” medicine which clearly nearly all of our elected representatives need along with balls and brains. And many private insurers do. Oh. By the way I have nothing against erections either. I think they are a good thing.
At least my private plan covers birth control not all of them do. And at least I don’t live near a pharmacist that won’t dispense it.
I was always pretty sure Dems would be more than willing to undermine abortion access when given the chance so no big suprise. In a way the lack of funding is a moot piont since there are so few places women can get one anyway. But it is symbolic and confirms what many pro-choice women suspect. With some exceptions mainly here and a few other isolated places, this is one area of support you can’t count on the boys for.