Liberals to Pelosi:"Get rid of Stuback Or We won't back HCR"

[saracat]

Liberals to Pelosi: Get Rid of Stupak Language or We Won't Back Health Reform
http://blogs.abcnews.com/george/2009/11/liberals-to-pelosi-get-rid-of-stupak-language-or-we-wont-back-health-reform-.html


Although liberal House Democrats voted over the weekend for the health-care bill with the Stupak amendment, Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo., is collecting signatures from colleagues who are vowing to oppose any conference report that includes the Stupak restriction.
"The Stupak-Pitts amendment to H.R. 3962, The Affordable Healthcare for America Act, represents an unprecedented and unacceptable restriction on women's ability to access the full range of reproductive health services to which they are lawfully entitled," reads DeGette's letter to Pelosi. "We will not vote for a conference report that contains language that restricts women's right to choose any further than current law."
As of early Monday afternoon, DeGette's spokesperson says that the congresswoman has more than 40 signatures -- enough to block passage of health-care reform if the Stupak language is not changed.

More at link

[cleveramerican]

1. They needed to allow Stupak in order to get it passed

she allowed it in, the bill passed
if she hadn't, it wouldn't have passed.
40 members were holding it up.

It was a tough managerial decision.
I'm glad she made it.

[notadmblnd]

2. of course, you're a man.

[TicketyBoo]

5. I'm not a man,

but I agree that this was necessary to get the bill passed.

Now, they'll fight to get it removed.

[notadmblnd]

9. We'll see.

Go to the political videos and watch Rachael Maddow's comment.

41 for taking the amendment out of the bill, out of 258 Democrats in the house, doesn't go far in convincing me it will happen.


I didn't mean to PM this to you, it's early and don't have enough coffee in me yet.

[TicketyBoo]

23. I don't need to go there.

I watched Rachel last night, as usual.

All I know is that it wouldn't have gotten this far without the amendment, unfortunately.

If this goes through, even with the amendment, it will help women as well as men. Also, although abortion benefits are obviously most beneficial to women, it's not like they hold no interest for the men who love those women and who are also faced with a problematic pregnancy.

[noamnety]

3. The tables have turned.

They need to remove it in order to get it passed.

It's quite interesting to me to see who's bothered by the new scenario, but was perfectly fine with the old one.

[TicketyBoo]

6. I understood why the "old scenario"

was necessary. That doesn't mean that I was "perfectly fine" with it.

I "perfectly fine" with the new one.

[trumad]

4. Then they should have let if fail...

Men find it so convenient to throw women under the bus.

[TicketyBoo]

7. Nancy Pelosi

allowed this to go forward, because it was the only way the bill could go forward.

Now they can fight to get it removed. This was the only way. Nobody got "thrown under the bus."

[Bonn1997]

10. I do not have (or want) definitive proof but I do not believe Nancy Pelosi is a man

[trumad]

11. Stupak and his C group cronies are all men.

[Bonn1997]

13. Agreed but it was still a woman who allowed them to put their amendment in

[cleveramerican]

20. very short sighted view

loads of pro choice people can except the position.
If you want an abortion, you got to pay for it.

[Ineeda]

8. Sadly and infuriatingly

this could be a win-win for the repugs/fundies. Either liberals/progressives stand their ground against Stupak and kill the current HCR bill (repugs win) or liberals/progressives support a bill that further diminishes and undermines women's rights (repugs win.) The only alternative is to strip Stupak. Although the repug/fundie Senators won't vote for it, we don't need them. So ALL Democratic Senators need to stand together to pass a semi-decent bill. But then it will go back to the House anyway. sigh

[SIMPLYB1980]

12. Won't happen, and they will cave in and vote for it.

[kelly1mm]

14. I agree that the progressives will fold just like THEY ALREADY DID!

They voted for this to move forward with the Stupac amendment attached on Saturday. What makes you think they would not vote for the final bill with the Stupac language intact?
Further, if you loose the Stupac amendment you lose 40-60 House Democratic members anyway and the bill fails.

The Speaker can count and she has all the proof she needs to believe the progressives will fold.

Ask yourself this - if you were the speaker and had two letters, one from 40 progressives threatening to vote against the bill if Stupac is in and one from 40 blue dogs threatening to vote against the bill if Stupac is out, which threat would you take more seriously?

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. Speaker Pelosi knows which Democrats have spines and which ones are jellyfish

[Major Hogwash]

15. Thank gawd for Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo!!!!

I wish I could vote for someone with guts like her!!

Stand up for yourselves, women!!
Don't let old white-haired men treat you like crap!!

[Sebastian Doyle]

16. Get rid of Stuback AND corporate mandates

or don't fucking bother with this worthless shit.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

17. This cannot end well.

Think about it....

a) Stupak remains in the final conferenced bill, and these 40 House Members vote no as a result. Bill fails.

b) Stupak is removed from the final conferenced bill, those who voted for the initial Bill post-Stupak (Mind you, I'm not talking about the ones who voted for the Stupak amendement and then against the bill here) vote no as a result. Bill fails.

The only option is to try again next session. Rinse, lather, repeat.

Then, what could happen regardless of a) or b) is that angry abortion rights advocates attempt to primary-out the Stupak voters (which it bears noting that many of them have solid Democratic voting records) with the NARAL reps of their choosing, and regardless of whether its the Stupak voter or the NARAL candidate, whoever the Democratic nominee in the general will likely be substantially weakened. Seat goes to a Republican, the Democratic majority is reduced, if not eliminated, and good luck trying to pass any type of meaningful health care reform at that point. Forget single payer, we won't even be able to get a public option on the table at that point.

The only real logical thing to do is keep Stupak in, hopefully the final bill will pass the House and Senate, and then in subsequent sessions if opponents of the Stupak amendment want to remove it from the law, they can go about doing so at that point.

[dana_b]

18. they were played

and played well by the conservative Dems and, imo, the Repubs.

At this point, I think people need to fight what they feel is right. You want healthcare passed no matter what? call your reps and fight for it. You can't stand the bill and/or the Stupak amendment? do the same.

The Senate MAY strip it out (hopefully) but I generally do not trust the Senate.
Then it goes to committee and a lot is riding on who will be in it.
Can you say "clusterf***"?

[optimator]

19. empty threats

they also said the same if the public option was not strong and available on day 1

[LatteLibertine]

21. Get rid of the C street cult while you're at it