Skip to main content

WaPo reports today that a number of anti-choice holdouts among Democrats are "threatening to oppose the measure over the issue of abortion to create a question about its passage."

"I will continue whipping my colleagues to oppose bringing the bill to the floor for a vote until a clean vote against public funding for abortion is allowed," Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) said Monday in a statement. He said last week that 40 Democrats could vote with him to oppose the legislation -- enough to derail the bill.

To be clear, Stupak and his colleagues are joining with Republicans in trying to prevent the bill from coming to the floor at all if their extreme anti-choice amendment is not allowed. Stupak wants to prohibit abortion coverage completely in the exchange, meaning that if a woman wanted reproductive health coverage that included abortion servcies, she'd have to purchase an additional insurance rider. That would mean that a young woman covered by her parent's plan would have to negotiate with her parents for the coverage. Or a woman in an abusive relationship would have to negotiate that with her partner. Women would have to plan in advance, think ahead to whether any circumstance in their future life might lead them to have an unplanned or unwanted pregnancy and buy that extra insurance, just in case.

It's a backdoor attempt by Stupak and his colleagues to get abortion coverage excluded from private insurance, as well as public--which has been in place since 1976 with the Hyde Amendment, a rider that has been attached to appropriations bills for the past 33 years. The proposed House bill already goes much further in restricting access to abortion services than pro-choice advocates like, and in many ways marks a significant step back for choice. One of the primary issues is that it would codify the Hyde Amendment, making it permanent law.

But the Stupak amendment is much worse. He says he as some 40 Members with him to vote no on letting the bill onto the floor without banning abortion. It's not clear that he actually does have 40. We know of these 29 who are with him. Incidentally, 28 of them are men. Shocking, I know.

  • Jason Altmire
  • John Barrow
  • Dan Boren
  • Bobby Bright
  • Chris Carney
  • Travis Childers
  • Jerry Costello
  • Kathy Dahlkemper
  • Artur Davis
  • Lincoln Davis
  • Steve Driehaus
  • Parker Griffith
  • Tim Holden
  • Dale Kildee
  • Frank Kratovil
  • Dan Lipinski
  • Jim Marshall
  • Jim Matheson
  • Mike McIntyre
  • Charlie Melancon
  • Michael McMahon
  • Alan Mollohan
  • Jim Oberstar
  • Collin Peterson
  • Nick Rahall
  • Mike Ross
  • Heath Shuler
  • John Tanner
  • Gene Taylor

As Chris says, this makes just 30 members along with Stupak, not enough to stop the bill from coming to the floor unless he can find nine more. He says he has 40 some, so it's possible. So if you happen to recognize any of those above names as being your Representative, give them a call and let them know that you don't appreciate they're working with Republicans to attempt to derail this reform.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:22 PM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Agreed. (9+ / 0-)

      I work full-time with the FDL team on health reform thanks to your donations.

      by slinkerwink on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:29:15 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I'll grant you Bobby Bright. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      CornSyrupAwareness

      But Jim Oberstar?

      "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

      by James Allen on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:39:38 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  getting rid of moderates is working so well for (10+ / 0-)

      the Republicans, we might as well do it too.  Not.

      ---
      Fight the stupid! Boycott BREAKING diaries!

      by VelvetElvis on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:44:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, come on. (9+ / 0-)

        If you hate women so much that you'd derail health care reform unless you get to add your super-duper "we hate women" amendment, you're no moderate.

        We've got plenty of moderates who don't hate women.

        Medicare for all, goddamnit.

        by Kaili Joy Gray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:46:04 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  well I posted this elsewhere... (3+ / 0-)

        but it needs repeating.

        When Republicans loose big, like last election, they try to purify thier party to some conservative ideal.  However when we Democrats loose big we abandon our liberal ideals and try to become more like them to get elected.  Gradually the political environments shifts to the conservative side.  So much so people like war hawk Lieberman can be considered a Democrat and blue dogs that care more about money and business than people are not laughed out of the party.

        So all in all maybe the rights purification has bad short term outcomes but better overall results.

        We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

        by delver rootnose on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:47:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  That's a really good point. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NotActingNaive

          That's how we ended up with Reid as majority leader, after all.  The great "values voters" debacle of 2004 led the Dems to want to prove "hey, we have values too."

          Medicare for all, goddamnit.

          by Kaili Joy Gray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:50:11 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Gee, Center-Left Obama ain't good enough ????? (0+ / 0-)

          How soon people forget what happens when fascists win the national elections.

          Angry White Males + Personality Disorder delusionals + sane Pro-Lifers =EQ= The GOPer Base

          by vets74 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:05:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Uh, no he's NOT... "center-left," -- that is (0+ / 0-)

            True, he campaigned more or less "left of dead center" ...

            But that was "then", this is "now" ...

            And increasingly, I'm having a problem understanding just exactly how Bush's direction  was that much worse (or different) than where we're headed now ... or how Obama's is conspicuously better.

            He SPEAKS more meliflously, intelligently, and softly. He doesn't make insulting finger-pointings when he speaks. He doesn't use Religous-Right dog-whistles.  But we ARE getting at least one new war, and we're not exactly going to completely stop fighting the other one.  And the "War on Terror" paradigm is just as firmly in place as it ever was.

            So no.

            Not "good enough."

        •  i venture to say (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          NotActingNaive

          that the Democratic party is more "left" than it ever has been. You think John F Kennedy would get nominated today by us? Carter? Truman!!! Look who is the Speaker of the House, for crying out loud! Look who is the President! Look who we nominated in '04!

          OK, can't use "!s" for the rest of the month.

      •  This isn't a "moderate" position (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sngmama, eclare

        A "moderate" position is someone like pro-lifer Tim Ryan (Oh-17) whose name I don't see on that list. He's probably too concerned with preventing unwanted pregnancies, which is his approach to the matter.

        Stop Rob "The Job Outsourcer" Portman. Jennifer Brunner for Senate http://www.jenniferbrunner.com/

        by anastasia p on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:59:07 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  seriously, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        VelvetElvis

        can we at least agree that a Democrat is allowed to have pro-life views? Is that allowable? I want to know if we are so close-minded as to disallow pro-choice people from serving as Ds.

        •  Actually, if I had my way... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          arlene, big annie, CalliopeIrjaPearl

          Being anti-choice is inherently discriminatory and patronizing.  I don't want to share my party with that.

          But I know, I know -- Democrats are supposed to be so proud of how big the tent is.  We'll let just about anybody in.  And gee, isn't it just so great that we can have people who support women's autonomy and people who oppose women's autonomy, all holding hands together in this great big giant tent?

          So pragmatically, I understand we're supposed to tolerate the enemies of women as long as they have a "D" after their name.

          But that doesn't mean I have to like it.  And I will never vote for someone who wants to strip me of my most fundamental personal rights.

          Medicare for all, goddamnit.

          by Kaili Joy Gray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:55:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  How about... (0+ / 0-)

            ...if you believe as I do... Abortion is a non-issue. It's between a WOMAN, and her concsious, doctor, mate(if non abusive).. NObody has the right to deny a person choice in matters that personal.

            But at the same time.. a person has every right to be against paying for abortion with his/her tax dollars.

            When it comes to those who cannot afford it.. how about those who'd demand tax-funding for it, organize private, charitable funding ?

            Choice would not be denied, and those who are genuinely (not pollitically) opposed to abortion would be at least respected.

            •  Sure, when I don't have to pay for bombs (3+ / 0-)

              It's naive to suggest that we all don't pay for things we despise:

              torture
              bombs
              bank bailouts

              just to name a few.

              •  My thoughts exactly. nt (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                big annie, Back In Blue

                Medicare for all, goddamnit.

                by Kaili Joy Gray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 05:52:19 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  Agreed.. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                big annie

                .. and we all pay for schools, kids of our own, or not... We could go off on tangents and make comparisons.. but abortion is a unique, sensitive issue. It can't be lumped in with debates about how wars are funded, or run. The bailout stuff IS more debatable.. but really, it's a new, first-time phenom. Hopefully we've learned something.

                An honest, pro-lifer (I'm firmly pro-choice), can't inflict his morality here, anymore than a pro-choicer can expect him to quietly fund abortions. Protecting the right to choose is important. Not respecting taxpayers objections to paying for it, subjects that important right to dilution.

                •  How does abortion rate such special status? (0+ / 0-)

                  I don't see the difference between killing babies (pro-life mantra) or killing innocents in another country that did nothing to ours. Why is an unborn fetus more important than the life of a child (born or unborn) in another country that we're destroying?

                  •  You cannot.. (0+ / 0-)

                    ..compare the casualties of war, to abortions. As pragmatic as it sounds..  civillian war casualties aren't deliberate, INDIVIDUAL descisions. They're the byproduct NATIONAL policies. Even if the country is 100% behind a war effort.. innocent civillians will still die. If a country attacks us, we WILL end up killing innocent citizens in that country. Equating that to a woman's PERSONAL reproductive decisions, is ludicrous.

                    •  I'm not equating them on those factors. (0+ / 0-)

                      Without minimizing the distinct differences you point out, they can still be compared as paying for something you don't want to pay for.  

                      Giving a pass to those who don't want their tax dollars to pay for someone else's HEALTH decision because they disagree with it on moral gounds, is no different than paying for torture on moral grounds.

                      I don't want my tax dollars paying for torture, wars of convenience or profit.  But I don't get that choice.

                      They don't want their tax dollars paying for abortions.  Why should they get that choice?   As you say, it is a PERSONAL decision.   Nobody on either side of the equation should be allowed to have a say, including whether their tax dollars pay for it or not.

      •  Absolutely, bad strategy. (0+ / 0-)

        Put pressure on 'em, push 'em, find a better candidate and take the office, but the GOP's center tent peg has now left the building because of their split with the Twelfthers.

        In any case let's not lose sight of the fact that this isn't a Democrat - Republican thing, it's a religious thing. They're intentionally not doing their jobs in this case because it happens to be at odds with their own personal faith. "Religion Before Country" or something like that. Don't get me wrong, everyone should have a moral code and all, but if some employee in a drugstore won't sell a paying customer a condom because they don't believe in fornication, that druggist should stop wasting customers' time (and losing drugstore sales) and find work that won't interfere with his religious beliefs.

        "These guys are in their 50's and 60's and still getting high on the golf course. They may be your followers and is really good for you and yours." - Anonymous

        by pakaal on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 06:40:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  delete my fucking majority, nancy! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      James Allen

      my rep is on this list and i will not be calling him. i don't know how many on the list this applies to but in the case of my rep this is simply the price you have to pay if you want to elect dems in republican districts (like mine).

      it sucks but being in the minority sucks worse.

      "I don't think they're going to be any more successful in 2010" -Yes On 8 co-manager

      by jethropalerobber on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:47:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't buy that. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brooke In Seattle

        I just don't believe that our choice is to either let these people in the party or live in minorityville.

        This list represents opposition to the Democratic party's supposed principles.  It's really that simple.

        That's the kind of majority you want?

        Medicare for all, goddamnit.

        by Kaili Joy Gray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:53:39 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't see the percentage... (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Angry Mouse, Johnny Q

        ...in keeping your views secret from your member of Congress under any circumstances.

        Prison rape is not funny.

        by social democrat on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:59:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, go on - call him (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Angry Mouse

        Seriously, and taking all your points on board, I can't see how it hurts to let your own Rep know that he is not representing your views on this particular issue.

      •  Why won't you be calling him? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        acerimusdux

        If he doesn't know that his constituents don't like this, do you think he will moderate his position? I don't care HOW Republican your district is — in fact, the more Republican it is, the more essential it is you call him. Not to rant or threaten, but merely to voice your opinion and suggest that this bill shouldn't be an abortion battleground.

        Stop Rob "The Job Outsourcer" Portman. Jennifer Brunner for Senate http://www.jenniferbrunner.com/

        by anastasia p on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:04:25 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  This makes sense (0+ / 0-)

        Much better to have a majority that doesn't support your principles than to be in the minority to a different party that, um, also doesn't support your principles. Because, er, the parties are better when you're in the majority. Or something.

    •  I am with you Mouse (3+ / 0-)

      I had as much as I can take of the Blue Dog Coalition.

      I want Harold Ford the fuck out of the Democratic Party along with his bunch.  So we lose control of House, big deal.  It's time to build a party that stands for something.

      Let's target Stupak first for a take out.

      I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

      by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:54:27 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Interesting that there's only a single woman (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      big annie
      on that list. And if they want to ban the government from being involved in any health-care situation that doesn't ban abortion even if we pay the premiums ourselves, then I want to ban any funds from going  to the pedophile-concealing Catholic church for ANYTHING, no matter how charitable. Why should my tax dollars fund a church whose beliefs I don't support that has enabled the abuse of young people?

      Stop Rob "The Job Outsourcer" Portman. Jennifer Brunner for Senate http://www.jenniferbrunner.com/

      by anastasia p on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:58:10 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Most opposition to abortion is sane, caring, ... (0+ / 0-)

      based on the status of the tiny pink fetuses, and reinforced by seeing photos of these fetuses in utero on the Christian church bulletin boards.

      Claims otherwise ??? Horse shit.

      The most of the anti-abortion people are poor to middle class.

      Many are religious. What's wrong with that ?

      BTW: these 40 Congresspeople can likely be assuaged with a compromise amendment.

      This is not, however, an issue where a serious two-party area candidate can act stupid and remain competitive.

      Angry White Males + Personality Disorder delusionals + sane Pro-Lifers =EQ= The GOPer Base

      by vets74 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:02:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  They already have an amendment. (5+ / 0-)

        It's called the Hyde Amendment, and it prohibits government funding of abortion.

        Insisting on any additional amendments, language, or prohibition is just gratuitous face-spitting.

        And I would argue your point that opposition to abortion is sane or caring.  Scott Roeder thought he was doing god's work when he murdered Dr. Tiller.  Doesn't make him right.

        And any asshole who wants to tell me what I can and cannot do with my body isn't sane or caring, even if they dress it up in their religious beliefs.

        Medicare for all, goddamnit.

        by Kaili Joy Gray on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:09:57 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  One more thing... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      NotActingNaive

      Illinois is destined to lose a House seat next year, so I'm sending a letter to the Assembly Leader (Michael Madigan), the State House Leader (Emil Jones) and the Governor (Pat Quinn) to suggest that, if they need to lose a Democratic seat for any reason, why not let it be Dan Lipinski's?

      In every race, in every district, in every state, the leftmost electable person! Primary the Blue Dogs! BE LEFT OR GET LEFT.

      by ultrageek on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:04:39 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  You are so right, Lipinski = slime on scum (0+ / 0-)

        He acts like a Blue Dog, hasn't joined the caucus, as if he is too much of an independent thinker to sink to that level.  Who does he think he is fooling?  His political instincts are so failing, he influences no one.  

        Dementia, you better treat me good. ~Conor Oberst "Slowly (Oh So Slowly)"

        by NotActingNaive on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 08:26:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Next... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Coilette

    Anybody else with another request...

    They gave Bush 8 yrs to wreck the country, They want Obama to fix it in 8 months.

    by The Simple Canadian on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:24:39 PM PST

    •  Lapinski was ... (0+ / 0-)

      ..primaried but his father is a big time player in Chicago Machine politics and won the primary.  Which in his district is the election.  It is another example of horrid Democratic politics and how the corrupt Daley administration and the Illinois state democratic party is an embarrassment.  It is a wonder that Obama came out of that cesspit somewhat unscathed.  Too bad he hired Rahm.  The stink came with him.

      We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

      by delver rootnose on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:46:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Primary.Every.Single.One.Of.These.Fuckers. (12+ / 0-)

    It's often said that life is strange. But compared to what? --Steve Forbert

    by darthstar on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:24:57 PM PST

    •  That's the attitude that's killing the Republican (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Harkov311, VClib, JC from IA

      Party.

      Without the big tent, we have no majority.  A Democrat who votes with the party 75% of the time is better than a Republican who votes with their party 75% or more of the time.

      ---
      Fight the stupid! Boycott BREAKING diaries!

      by VelvetElvis on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:46:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Party over policy is the problem. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Johnny Q

        The entire house gets reelected every two years.  That's one year of complaining about the other party and one year of campaigning for another two year cycle.  It's bullshit.

        It's often said that life is strange. But compared to what? --Steve Forbert

        by darthstar on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:59:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  stupidest.idea.ever (0+ / 0-)

      do you realize the kind of the hard right freaks that are the GOP candidate alternative to many of these blue dogs?

      if any of those guys are in safe blue district be sure to let us know which ones they are.

      "I don't think they're going to be any more successful in 2010" -Yes On 8 co-manager

      by jethropalerobber on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:52:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'd rather have a split house than a fake (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Brooke In Seattle, Johnny Q

        majority. Too often we find ourselves held hostage by a handful of people harping on one issue.

        It's often said that life is strange. But compared to what? --Steve Forbert

        by darthstar on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:56:13 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  there ARE some in safe districts (0+ / 0-)

        Oberstar for one and I'd see Peterson for two.  Mike McMahon represents Staten Island and part of Brooklyn.  It's a mixed bag with a lot of conservative Catholics in Staten Island, but I think there's plenty of cover for anyone on this issue when they present it as part of a greater good--health care reform.

        Chris Carney and Jason Altmire--I think a lot of progressives contributed to and worked on those campaigns.  I think this behavior, which threatens the passage of the legislation MOST important to the Democratic agenda, is a reason for many of us to be pissed off.  I would not contribute to either in the future.

        If looks could kill it would have been us instead of him.

        by jhannon on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:04:17 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Lipinski IL-03 (0+ / 0-)

        Dementia, you better treat me good. ~Conor Oberst "Slowly (Oh So Slowly)"

        by NotActingNaive on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 08:29:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Unfortunately, darthstar... (0+ / 0-)

      ...it is already too late to primary either Lipinski (IL-03) or Costello (IL-12).  The petition filing period here in Illinois ended yesterday, exactly one year before the date of the General Election.  (And to be fair to the Rethugs, they are not the ones responsible for the obscenely-early date; that onus falls on the head of Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, the Chairman of the State Democratic Party, who moved the Illinois Primary up six weeks on a permanent basis "to help Barack Obama" in the 2008 Primary.)

  •  I dare them to do it. (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, big annie, Jeff Y, Johnny Q, Coilette

    And if they do, I might even thank them, given how noxious this health care bill has become.  They might just be doing us a favor.

    Nothing is true; everything is permitted.

    by jumpjet on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:25:17 PM PST

  •  I am so sick of this. (20+ / 0-)

    These people have literally nothing else to live for.  I think that if they ever actually succeeded in overturning Roe, they wouldn't know what to do next...

    No politician ever lost an election by underestimating the intelligence of the American public. PT Barnum, paraphrased...

    by jarhead5536 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:25:37 PM PST

  •  But we're a "centerist" party now so that (4+ / 0-)

    means that the anti-abortion lobby gets to call the shots...

  •  We've tried more (23+ / 0-)

    now we need better.

    Women didn't vote for a Democratic Majority so Democrats who hate Democratic Policies too could take over from Movement Conservative Republicans in trying to govern their private parts from afar.

    It's not my fault that you brought a spoon to a gun fight.

    by LeftHandedMan on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:27:04 PM PST

    •  We need to pursue an offset strategy (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      geomoo

      Target a Blue Dog and a Republican in another district who is vulnerable to offset the Blue Dog loss.

      Trade Mike Ross for a liberal African American to replace wanker Republican Joseph Cao. You get a better Congressional majority one step at a time.

      The argument that if you object to these backstabbing bastards you just want to toss away the majority if fucking bullshit. You can get rid of these pricks AND maintain a majority in the House.

      It's not my fault that you brought a spoon to a gun fight.

      by LeftHandedMan on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:29:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  howmany of these people are 'MORE" democrats (10+ / 0-)

    what I mean is how many of them were supported by people who truely believed that MORE DEMOCRATS was better than GOOD Democrats in the last election...  and have they learned, yet, that MORE is not better if the MORE you get is really just more obstructionism.

    CNN aka CRANK Network Non-news

    by KnotIookin on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:27:26 PM PST

    •  Probably Also to Some Extent the Result of Repub (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      geomoo, Coilette

      meltdown.

      Everyone who's not quite insane enough to stay there is coming over here.

      Along with much of the normally Republican big money.

      We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

      by Gooserock on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:30:37 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't know about that. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        eclare, arlene

        Republicans are more likely to be pro-choice than Democrats pro-life, if you're talking about actual voters.  When it comes to elected officials, Democrats are more likely to be pro-life than Republicans pro-choice.

        "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

        by James Allen on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:38:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  A few of them are usually good Democrats, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      geomoo

      but another few of these folks, Like Bobby Bright, Parker Griffith, are class of 2008 that have proved entirely worthless.

      Jim Oberstar is usually a good guy.  Stupak himself is usually not so big a problem.

      "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

      by James Allen on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:31:12 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Isn't he a member of "The Family?" n/t (0+ / 0-)

        "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

        by Loge on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:42:47 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No (0+ / 0-)

          That's unsubstantiated tabloid bullshit.

          "Rahm Emmanuel bit my cat." - LaFeminista

          by TooFolkGR on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:43:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Fellow Traveler (0+ / 0-)

          To use Joe McCarthy's term; he lives in their "church."  Old Joe has some fans who are still alive in Bart's district who think the closet commies railroaded him.

          Don't look back, something may be gaining on you. - L. "Satchel" Paige

          by arlene on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:47:32 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Oops, meant to reply to you: (0+ / 0-)

          he's been accused but AFAIK there is no proof.

          He is generally a progressive guy on issues other than abortion.  Same with Oberstar and a few others on the list.  Tossing him out would likely mean electing a much more conservative person, especially with his district.

          "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

          by James Allen on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:50:19 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Stupak has been accused, (0+ / 0-)

        but AFAIK there is no proof.

        He is generally a progressive guy on issues other than abortion.  Same with Oberstar and a few others on the list.  Tossing him out would likely mean electing a much more conservative person, especially with his district.

        "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

        by James Allen on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:49:31 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  If they accurately represent the beliefs of their (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Superribbie, James Allen

      constituents I don't see the problem.  Some of these guys like Gene Taylor couldn't win if they were pro-choice.

      ---
      Fight the stupid! Boycott BREAKING diaries!

      by VelvetElvis on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:49:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Right, This is WAAAY Beyond Gov't Paying For It (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, JC from IA

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:28:42 PM PST

  •  Lipinski. (0+ / 0-)

    Ugh.

    Bright and Griffith can eat my shorts.

    "Intolerance is something which belongs to the religions we have rejected." - J.J. Rousseau

    by James Allen on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:28:50 PM PST

  •  It's why Pelosi won't allow amendments (6+ / 0-)

    on the floor from the CPC for a robust Medicare 5% public option. It's because of these Blue Dogs.

    I work full-time with the FDL team on health reform thanks to your donations.

    by slinkerwink on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:29:03 PM PST

    •  Pallone's staffer admitted that to me (4+ / 0-)

      I asked him point blank if this is why no amendments were allowed.

      So one way or the other the Blue Dogs have wrecked HCR.

      I say it's time to wreck the Blue Dogs.  I don't care if we lose the majority.  We need a majority that can work together on common values not this sort of nonsense.

      I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

      by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:59:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  So is Miss Off The Table (0+ / 0-)

      throwing a bone to the Blue dogshit or just trying to avoid the embarrassment of having them vot e against real reform?

      You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

      by Johnny Q on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:24:07 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  These psychopaths are the Republicans only hope (7+ / 0-)

    Without them, Dems would be looking at permanent majority.

    Everything the Man of Steele touches turns to Kryptonite.

    by PorridgeGun on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:29:16 PM PST

  •  Theocracy much? (7+ / 0-)

    These are ideological beliefs taking precedence over the health of Americans.  I called Stupaks office the other day about this.  

  •  Charlie Melancon (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, gchaucer2

    keeps writing me asking for money for his campaign. He can go to hell.

    "The Work Begins Anew, The Hope Rises Again, And The Dream Lives On" ____________Ted Kennedy

    by pollbuster on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:31:08 PM PST

  •  For those saying Obama is not doing enough (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    askew, Timbuk3, Brooke In Seattle, jriches

    this is one of the reason.

    When you have people in your own Party ready to screw you at every turn, it makes governing difficult.

    "This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected". -Barack Obama

    by indepenocrat on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:31:54 PM PST

  •  Anti-choice wingnuts come in all stripes. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CoolOnion, Brooke In Seattle

    The thing to do with them, is defeat their measures at every opportunity.  There is too much money in it for them to ever stop them outright, I think.

  •  Haven't we already been through this? (8+ / 0-)

    Hey assholes, what about the LIVES of the 40,000 already born adults that die because of shitty or no health care? Don't they count in your whole whole PRO-LIFE worldview?

    Your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore - John Prine

    by blueyescryinintherain on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:32:33 PM PST

  •  What the hell is taking so long (0+ / 0-)

    People are dying here (literally). Vote on it already. The longer they drag this out the weaker it gets.

  •  This is posturing. (3+ / 0-)

    Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

    by khyber900 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:33:27 PM PST

    •  khyber - this is not posturing (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      julifolo

      I watched Stupak on CSPAN last week and this is not posturing. The only question is - does he have all 40 votes? If he does the Dems are going to have to decide if this is the hill that HCR dies on or not. Stupak is committed to this and is comfortable with his position. In his view Obama, and the Dem leadership, committed that no federal fund would be used for abortions and he is just holding them to their word. He and his group will vote for HCR if they put the Hyde language in the that portion of the bill regarding federal subsidies to private plans and the PO. This group's position is not based on politics. We may not like it, but it's not likely that political pressure will change their mind. However, he may be a few votes short of 40.

      "let's talk about that"

      by VClib on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:58:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The leadership has said for months (0+ / 0-)

        that it would not allow abortion to derail HCR.  The fact that these folks are bringing this up now is really a cover for something else that they want (pork).  

        Alternative rock with something to say: http://www.myspace.com/globalshakedown

        by khyber900 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 05:47:14 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  khyber - I don't think so (0+ / 0-)

          While that may be the case for some of the "40", and Pelosi only needs to peel off a few of them, with Stupak this has nothing to do with pork. He will block HCR unless there is strong no abortion language in the bill. The real question is does he have 39 other Dems who feel as strongly as he does?

          "let's talk about that"

          by VClib on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 07:24:31 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  Call their bluff, and any Maryland residents (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, Coilette

    pay attention to our local DoucheBag in Cheif, Frank Kratovil.

    He is still dying for someone to pay attention to him.

    I cant wait for him to lose next year.
    I will be happier having a Republican I hate, then a Democrat I hate.

    •  On the phone with staffer (0+ / 0-)

      helping her find article.

      •  Interseting call here (4+ / 0-)

        First I ask "why is the congressmen joining a fillibuster against the bill over abortion,  abortion was never part of his platform at all"

        She told me she was surprised and this was news to her.
        She asked me to direct her how to get to the article.
        Well WashPo is not easy to use, I tried to find it on their main page, but failed.

        So I fessed up, told her I was a Kossack and read it there, so then (here is where it gets fun) I helped her get to the site ("no, its not thedailykos its dailykos.com)

        She was very nice and helpful and took my name and address.

        I will tell you folks, people in district 1 are not calling this man.

        Before I hung up with the nice and helpful staffer I informed how confused I was about this as a political strategy.

        Who is Frank playing to?  His seat is not that important that the DNC or DCCC will protect his seat.
        So far this year he has voted "obstruciton" on every major bill.

        So I dont get why he is so after the Blue Dog heart, when the blue dogs dont need him, they dont tout him, and he burns all his bridges in the end.

        I suggest to folks to call congressmen on this list and frame it that way, when was anti-choice part of your platform, and how do you think this is a political win for you?

  •  The political football that keeps on bouncing. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Eloise, Radical Moderate

    Thanks for the clarity.  You are a treasure. When the facts are laid out correctly, an issue can be clarified in an instant.  

    I was relieved to finally hear the clear pro-choice explanation on NPR (they're not completely worthless) a few weeks ago.  Advocates of HCR are attempting to pass a bill which maintains the status quo on the issue while opponents of abortion rights are attempting to hold health care hostage in order to gain ground.  Of course, opponents of HCR are cynically using one of their most productive political footballs to stop HCR.

    The only law which is really lived up to whole-heartedly and with a vengeance is the law of conformity. - Henry Miller

    by geomoo on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:33:58 PM PST

  •  See? The Opposition Doesn't Cave preemptively (6+ / 0-)

    They threaten to withold their votes to get what they want.

    That's what the Progressive Caucus also needs to do.

    People on this site who have criticized FDL and others who have called upon the Progressive Caucus to take this kind of strong stand should now see the error of their ways, and recant.

    They should, but they won't.

    The crooks are leaving have left office, unprosecuted and scot-free.

    by BentLiberal on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:34:01 PM PST

  •  Fund it, assholes. (11+ / 0-)

    It's a medical procedure whether you agree with it or not.

    Are you going to deny funding of antibiotics because there's are Christians who think any medical intervention is as bad as an abortion?

    Didn't think so.  So cram it or wave bye-bye to your seat.

    Please check out my Etsy shop! http://www.hedwiggraymalk.etsy.com

    by Coilette on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:34:18 PM PST

  •  Medical Fundraisers (6+ / 0-)

    Yes, Bart.  Please do sabotage the healthcare bill with your anti-abortion amendment.  I want to see you explain to your constituents in the U. P. and Northern Lower Michigan why you think your religious purity is more important than their health.  

    I double dare you to show up at one of the community fundraisers to pay the medical bills of someone who has a job but no insurance or junk insurance and explain to them why you are willing to sacrifice them and their families on your "pro-life" alter.

    Don't look back, something may be gaining on you. - L. "Satchel" Paige

    by arlene on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:35:32 PM PST

  •  Go to Dahlkempers website & vote for healthcare (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Subversive, KingofSpades

    http://www.dahlkemper.house.gov/...

    right now the no's are ahead.

    I'm going to call her...as the only female in that list of men.

  •  Fuckers! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CoolOnion, Brooke In Seattle

    They would find any reason to derail, any reason at all.

    BuhddyDahrma was right!!

    "We have to make them do it"

    by bagman on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:36:04 PM PST

  •  take out coverage for abortion for sure votes. (0+ / 0-)

    Though I think it is already specifically not covered in HR3200 and Senate bills.

    But politics is about compromise so in return for no abortion, the right wing Democrats have to agree to strong public option available to any member of the public who wants to sign up for it.

    We can vote later to add abortion or to fund it directly.

  •  Gone in 2010 if they keep it up. (0+ / 0-)
  •  I really don't understand the furor. (0+ / 0-)

    I don't give a flying f*** if abortion is covered.  To me, abortion is like plastic surgery.  It's elective and it shouldn't be covered.  If it's medically necessary, that's one thing, and I do think it should cover that, but I assume this isn't what we are talking about.

    This is not worth derailing health care reform.  Let people pay for abortions.  mMst places like Planned Parenthood offer a sliding scale based on income.  No one is dying because they can't have an elective abortion.  Let it go.

    •  Abortion is like plastic surgery? (13+ / 0-)

      What a fucking stupid thing to write.  And you and your ilk are the arbiters of what is necessary?  You make me sick.

      •  I stick to it (0+ / 0-)

        It's an elective procedure.  You should absolutely have the right to have one, but why should it be insured unless your health is at risk?  If carrying that aby to term isn't going to endanger your health, then it is purely elective.

        •  my mother's (7+ / 0-)

          knee replacement surgery was elective -- why don't you write her a note and tell her it shouldn't be covered.  You are fucking unbelievable.

        •  Elective or not is not the question (3+ / 0-)

          For one, this bill is blatantly interfering with the free market, with the government writing the terms of insurance policies.

          Secondly, whether or not a procedure is elective -- even under your ridiculously expansive definition, which presumably includes abortions as a result of rape or incest -- the relevant distinction is between risks against which someone would like to insure or not.  

          Women may want policies that insure against unplanned pregnancies by enabling them to get a safe, affordable termination.  This amendment prevents women from ensuring against that risk if they are participants in the federal insurance exchange.  

          "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

          by Loge on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:59:30 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  People say this (0+ / 0-)

            but I swear I cannot for the life of me imagine a woman leafing thru a potential insurance policy to make sure it covers abortion.  NO ONE plans on having an abortion.

            •  Not too many people plan on having cancer, (7+ / 0-)

              getting injured in an accident, or getting diiabetes or appendicitis.  

              Shit happens.  That's what insurance is for.  Including unplanned pregnancy.  If insurance is going to cover prenatal, maternity and postnatal care for an unplanned pregnancy, why shouldn't it cover abortion?

              My dogs think I'm smart and pretty.

              by martydd on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:08:29 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Prenatal, maternity and postnatal care save lives (0+ / 0-)

                Elective abortion does not.

                •  But it can save money (3+ / 0-)

                  The insurance company would rather pay for an abortion than for the whole battery of neo-natal care, childhood immunizations, ear infections, etc.  And women may terminate a pregnancy because they just can't afford a kid.  

                  What's wrong with letting the insurance company and the insured, who for once may have a meeting of the minds, draw up an acceptable contract without the contributions of blue dog Democrats?  

                  And it's only threatening to "derail" health insurance reform because the anti-choicers are using their leverage over final passage to restrict abortion rights.  Take away Stupak's amendment, nobody's talking about abortion in the context of HCR.  

                  "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

                  by Loge on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:18:59 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Someone upthread said we should trade it for (0+ / 0-)

                    making these Blue Dogs support Medicare + 5 on reimbursement rates.  I am for that.  If we want to make them pay for this instead of giving it tohem for free, that's okay.  But in the larger scheme of things, allowing coverage for elective abortions is not a top priority for me.  I am not opposed to it, really.  I'm just surprised that anyone would expect to have it covered by insurance and I am mystified that so many people think it is that important.

                •  Who decides what is elective, YOU? (0+ / 0-)

                  Patients and doctors decide, not insurance companies, not bureaucrats, not religions, not senators, not congressman, not presidents, not you.

            •  That's the point of the story! (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              eclare, Brooke In Seattle, martydd

              Women would now have to buy excess coverage riders if they want abortions paid for thru insurance.  You might not want it, but other women might.  And if you're correct, this amendment is unnecessary, since insurance companies just wouldn't offer abortion as a covered procedure.  If not, you're letting wingnuts go even further than insurance companies do in denying coverage.

              "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

              by Loge on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:10:11 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's not all (0+ / 0-)

                The idea is basically that women won't think to buy excess coverage riders, and when they find themselves pregnant will have to pay for the procedure out of pocket, or go through the potential agony of carrying and giving birth to a child simply because they cannot afford the procedure.

                This whole thing is making me feel stabby.

            •  No one plans on getting cancer, either. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              martydd

              No one plans on getting raped and not wanting to carry the rapists baby.

              No one plans on having a life risking pregnancy.

              No one plans on breaking their leg.

              No one plans on having a tumor.

              No one plans on plans on any of the things they are getting insurance for. They shouldn't have to look through a policy to make sure every possible thing that may happen to them is covered.

              This is exactly the problem with our insurance industry and why truly universal, single payer is what is really needed.  Patients and doctors should decided what is necessary.  Oversight should be conducted to limit abuse and fraud.  Health care insurance should be non-profit.

        •  How is it more elective than childbirth? n/t (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          martydd
    •  This isn't about elective (12+ / 0-)

      it's BANNING insurance companies who want to participate in the exchange from offering abortion services as part of their standard policies.  There's no choice in the matter.  

      Comparing it to plastic surgery, like the decision to get an abortion is a function of vanity, trivializes the reasons many women choose to terminate pregnancies.  

      And, not for nothing, not all plastic surgery is elective.  

      "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

      by Loge on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:45:55 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  This will not go well.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gchaucer2

      "Republicans drove the country into a ditch and now they are complaining about the cost of the tow truck"-Jim Cornette

      by justmy2 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:48:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I hope not (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        justmy2, Brooke In Seattle, martydd

        I didn't dump a donut because I'd like more folks to see what an assoholic comment this one is (the above, not yours, of course)

        •  I undumped my donut. (4+ / 0-)

          Yes, abortion is like plastic surgery because its all about us self centered girls and the vain demands we make.  If we could only stop thinking about ourselves so much ....

          A lot of health care isn't medically necessary, but sure as hell improves the quality of life.  Viagra springs to mind.  Oh, wait, that's about the social importance we place on the erect penis and male sexual satisfaction.  Nothing vain or self centered about about that.  Nope, nothing at all.  Having a hard dick is a human right.  Controling your own uterus?  Not so much.

          My dogs think I'm smart and pretty.

          by martydd on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:56:43 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Maybe you'd care if... (10+ / 0-)

      the next thing this bunch decides not to cover is birth control. Or in vitro fertilization. The point is, these people are trying to make their religious beliefs the law of the land.

      "You can never guarantee victory, but you can guarantee defeat."--Hall of Fame baseball writer Leonard Koppett.

      by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:50:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  almost no one covers in vitro (0+ / 0-)

        as it should be.  In virtro is really expensive and it is e-l-e-c-t-i-v-e.

        I had my daughter thru in vitro and am currently pregnant with twins thru the use of very expensive fertility drugs.  We are middle class and paying for these things was a hardship.  But there is no way I think that insurance should have to pay for it.  Or for adoption.

        I said it was like plastic surgery not to suggest it is vain, but that it is elective.  DEome people feel really bad about something in their appearance.  It can cause depression.  And plastic surgery can fix it.  But it's still elective and I still don't thik insurance should pay for it.

        If I had ever had to have an abortion, it never even would have occurred to me to file it with my insuirance.  Not for a moment would it have crossed my mind that they would even consider paying for it.

        And what ABOUT those people with insurance thru their parents or with abusive husbands.  Do you really think they want to file a claim so that their parents/husband get an explanation of benefits?  They won't file it anyway.

        •  I'm glad you think my cleft lip operation (5+ / 0-)

          was elective.  Perhaps we can go back in time and have blue cross send my parents a bill.  

          "This world demands the qualities of youth: not a time of life but a state of mind[.]" -- Robert F. Kennedy

          by Loge on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:05:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Two can play the game of throwing particulars out (0+ / 0-)

            Do you think my friend's breast enhancement should be covered?

            I have no problem with a cleft palate being covered, though I do believe there are some medical risks associated with it making it not purely elective.  I also thik that repair ansd reconstruction post-cancer and post-accident should be covered.  But I don't think we should be covering rhinoplasty and breast enhancement.  I suspect that you also think some plastic surgery should be covered, but not everything.  So, where we draw the line is tough.

            I don't mind if abortion is covered, but I don't think it is worth risking health care reform over.  I really don't think very many peole have abortions that are paid for by insurance.  I kow of five friends who had them, and they all paid cash.  I kow that is a small sample, but still...  When they say 85% cover it (or whatever they say), I really think they are talking about things like a D&C following an incomplete miscarriage.  I don't really believe many plans actually cover elective abortion, tho I have no way of finding out.  It just doesn't seem like something employers would be willing to pay to include when they are putting together a health plan.

            •  So it all comes down to what YOU think. (0+ / 0-)

              Who the hell made you the decider? The point here isn't whether insurance should cover it.  The point is that these guys want to make sure you can't get it covered.  

              Why would it be a problem for any insurance company to insure any option if you want to pay for that coverage?  If someone wants to pay to have elective procedures covered, why shouldn't an insurance companies (public or private) not be able to offer that?

              The only reason any procedure should not be covered is if the insurance provider can't offer a plan that makes financial sense.

        •  Oh so that's where you're coming from (0+ / 0-)

          people who are trying to have kids and can't do so (easily) are commonly against the idea that those who don't want to be pregnant are ... different. Wouldn't want to facilitate that aberrant behavior, would we?

    •  And so you want unwanted babies brought (4+ / 0-)

      into this world?  You want to see all these babies up for adoption?  You want to see parents who are not ready to be parents and who knows what will happen to the children?  And where's your proof no one is dying because they can't have an elective abortion?  

      Go away troll.

      •  It is not for me to say what women choose to do (0+ / 0-)

        I just don't think insurance needs to be paying for it.  I am very much pro choice.  I don't know what an abortion goes for.  When I had to drive a friend of mine for one in college it was $350, but that was 20 some odd years ago.  But I think that most people could put it together if they really wanted to.  And I do know that many clinics offer a sliding scale price based on income so that poorer women would pay significantly less.

        •  What they are talking about (10+ / 0-)

          is a public option YOU would pay for not allowing YOU to have access to the health care YOU want. Yet I have to pay for Catholic schools and charities and I don't support the Catholic church. Something's wrong here.

          The misperception is that "government" or "tax dollars" would be paying for abortion, and that's untrue. And if you think it's easy for the average woman in this economy to put $350 together (I couldn't do it and I'm sorta middle class hanging on by the tips of my fingers), you are out of touch with the reality of most women's lives. It would take me 4-6 months to find an extra $350. If you're pregnant, time is of essence.

          Stop Rob "The Job Outsourcer" Portman. Jennifer Brunner for Senate http://www.jenniferbrunner.com/

          by anastasia p on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:07:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  "It's elective..." (6+ / 0-)

      Okay, then let's strip out coverage of childbirth-related care, because that's "elective" too.  Don't want to have a child?  Then don't have sex.  So if you do, it's on your dime.  

    •  call me when you go into labor n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Back In Blue, martydd
  •  Fine. Let em. (0+ / 0-)

    "Man is free at the moment he wishes to be." - Voltaire

    by DrFrankLives on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:38:47 PM PST

  •  why oh why oh why (5+ / 0-)

    did the Dems start supporting anti-choice candidates in the first place??!!!

    I'll tell you why, post Clinton, Dems like Schumer thought the answer to getting more Dems elected was to start supporting conservative - basically Republican lite - candidates. Total genius - NOT. It was a losing strategy for the Democratic Party because then people like me quit donating and cancelled their membership in the party

    Dems didn't start winning until they starting embracing a truly Democratic and progressive platform again.

    But the damage has already been done and look how it is coming around to bite us in the ass...

  •  1/3 of American women get abortions (10+ / 0-)

    according to NPR. And it's LEGAL. Yet these "Democrats" want a backdoor ban on abortion.
    Makes my fucking blood boil.

    "Reagan is a conservative. An extreme conservative. All the blockheads and dummies are for him." -Bush H.W. Bush

    by plok on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:39:14 PM PST

  •  So is this full moon or NY23 (0+ / 0-)

    kind of wacko?

    Afghanistan:Graveyard to empires-It's not just a bumpersticker

    by JML9999 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:39:21 PM PST

  •  Only rich people are allowed to have abortions... (7+ / 0-)

    don't you know.

  •  Bart Stupid and the RTL morons (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, Johnny Q

    Let em try! Bart Stupid and his RTL morons care more about fetuses then voters. Good try and pass you extreme bill Bart you fucking nit wit. Go back to your voters and tell them you stopped HCR because it didn't stop every possible abortion and also stop Birth control you asswipe. Isn't it time to get rid of creepes like this in the Demo. party? let Bart and Conrad, Nelson and the rest of the bluedog DINOcrats go to hell or the other party same thing!

    "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

    by Blutodog on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:40:20 PM PST

  •  Money well spent.. thanks DCCC (4+ / 0-)

    I won't fall for that one again

    http://www.arianascure.com Please help in any way you can

    by CornSyrupAwareness on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:40:46 PM PST

    •  Boy, are you on the mark with that one. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sally in SF, CornSyrupAwareness

      Great call.

      Health insurance companies are nothing more than middle management money launderers. Why, oh why, do we accept that?

      by gooderservice on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:44:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Amen. Neither will I. Actually, I gave up (2+ / 0-)

      supporting the DCCC and the DSCC during the Dean days when they worked so hard to kill a progressive run for the POTUS.  Since then, I give money only to the progressive candidates I BELIEVE IN.

      •  I gave monthly to the DNC when Dean was in charge (0+ / 0-)

        Then I stopped when he left.

        Health insurance companies are nothing more than middle management money launderers. Why, oh why, do we accept that?

        by gooderservice on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:55:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  A few weeks ago I got a call from the DSCC (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        CornSyrupAwareness

        for money.  The guy had no clue what he was talking about.  He "tried" to start to tell me that we need a filibuster proof Senate.  What a frackin idiotic thing for him to say. I cut him off and told him we already have one.  

        He told me we need to fight for healthcare reform, and I told him I would donate to the DSCC as soon as the Senate passed a bill with a strong public option.

        He "tried" to tell me that the Senate Dems were in favor of a public option.  I cut him off again and reminded him that the two bills in the Finance Committee that included a PO were voted against by Dems and didn't pass.  (That had just happened before he called me)

        He had the nerve to ask me how many didn't vote for it?  I'm not kidding.  I said it didn't matter how many Dems didn't vote for it:  IT DIDN'T PASS.

        Then he pulled out what I assume he thought were the BIG GUNS:  He mentioned that Governor Dean was in favor of healthcare reform and that I should help Dean.  

        I laughed at him and said I agree.  He got a little happy then, thought I was going to contribute.  Then I told him I had just contributed to Democracy for America to help Governor Dean and me and everyone else fight for HCR.  

        Poor guy, he still kept trying to tell me things that were totally inaccurate.  I knew more than he did about everything he mentioned.

        I pledged to him that I would contribute to the DSCC right after the Senate passed heathlcare reform with a strong public option included.  

        Health insurance companies are nothing more than middle management money launderers. Why, oh why, do we accept that?

        by gooderservice on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:02:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Let's purge all the moderates! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      KingofSpades

      It's working so well for the Republicans.

      Seriously, if there people are from blue states, we can do better.  If they represent areas where a pro-choice candidate couldn't win, they are still better than a Republican.

      ---
      Fight the stupid! Boycott BREAKING diaries!

      by VelvetElvis on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:53:30 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Nor will I (0+ / 0-)

      No more money from DCCC until they address the problems we have of a total lack of common values in the Democratic Party.

      I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

      by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:10:43 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  one issue politicians (0+ / 0-)

    The system breaks down when so many members close their eyes to the whole picture to ride one issue favored by their constituents.  Democracy can't function with legislators willing to hold their breath over any single issue--kills the give and take. Because of this--and the current economic depression fostered by the rich Republicans--I expect a new form of government --with new boundaries--to be formed. They're breaking up our old gang--the bastards.

  •  when Repulicans (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gooderservice

    ...loose big, like last election, they try to purify thier party to some conservative ideal.  However when we Democrats loose big we abandon ou liberal ideals and try to become more like them to get elected.  Gradually the political environments shifts to the conservative side.  So much so people like war hawk Lieberman can be considered a Democrat and blue dogs that care more about money and business than people are not laughed out of the party and people like Dan Lapinski, who got his position through nepotism and keeps it through machine politics and nepotism in a highly Democratic district, should be run out of the party.

    So all in all maybe the right's purification has bad short term outcomes but better overall results.

    We Glory in war, in the shedding of human blood. What fools we are.

    by delver rootnose on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:42:04 PM PST

  •  If men could get pregnant, (8+ / 0-)

    abortion would be a sacrament performed in temples and churches.

    "Wide acceptance of an idea is not proof of its validity." Dan Brown

    by Bulldawg on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:43:26 PM PST

  •  I don't understand Stupak of C Street (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dump Terry McAuliffe

    If the C Streeters' leader didn't care if a member of theirs raped a child, then why in the heck would C Streeters care about abortion?  Trying to think like them in the most crudest and horrific sense, I would think they wouldn't have a problem with abortion just because "their people" would be the ones who probably wouldn't abort because of religious reasons, and therefore they'd have more voters to vote for them.

    Or maybe I just don't understand C street the way it was explained to me.

    Health insurance companies are nothing more than middle management money launderers. Why, oh why, do we accept that?

    by gooderservice on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:43:47 PM PST

    •  He's A Catholic First (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      gooderservice, CalliopeIrjaPearl

      And a "C" streeter second.  That's why he opposes abortion and why he's always opposed abortion.  He's wrong, but there you have it.

      Abortion aside, he's on the "right" side of Health Care Reform.  He pledged when he was first elected not to accept Government healthcare until his constituents could get it too, and he's stuck to that.

      I don't think the people of the UP at large and the parts of northern michigan he supports would agree with him on this though.

      "Rahm Emmanuel bit my cat." - LaFeminista

      by TooFolkGR on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:47:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I didn't realize he's Catholic. (0+ / 0-)

        That changes things, then... he's not one of the "elite" Christians as they like to think of themselves.

        Strange, though, that a Catholic would live and partake among them.  (I only say that because my Catholic friends live a completely different lifestyle than my Christian friends, and that's the extent of my knowledge of the two.)

        I didn't know about his pledge.  But I've got to wonder if he's for real on that or not, especially since he seems to be willing to hold up healthcare for millions of other people.   I'm so cynical, so my next question is does his wife have a great job with benefits that he just thought he'd used that as a campaign issue?

        Health insurance companies are nothing more than middle management money launderers. Why, oh why, do we accept that?

        by gooderservice on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:54:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I thought pro-choice Dems didn't want to (0+ / 0-)

        write anti-abortion legislation.  That's always been the claim I heard from pro-choice Dems.  So now I have to regard pro-choice Dems as being basically Republicans.  What good are they?  I think it's time to have our own purge.

        I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

        by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:09:16 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The "right" side of Health Care Reform (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gooderservice

        I honestly do not see how anyone can say that he is on the "right" siide of HCR when he is threatening to hold up the whole process unless access to abortion is COMPLETELY ELIMINATED from the insurance exchange.   This is NOT about public funding for abortions.  It's about universally denying coverage for abortions.  This is NOT a moderate position.

        •  Where is the legislation that the plans that (0+ / 0-)

          Congresspeople and their staff choose from this "exchange" from several insurance companies ban the coverage of abortions?  Huh?

          Health insurance companies are nothing more than middle management money launderers. Why, oh why, do we accept that?

          by gooderservice on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 06:32:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I live in Stupak's district... (0+ / 0-)

      ...and he's not a C-streeter or a "woman hater" like some commenters suggested below.  He's a progressive on economic issues, more conservative on social issues, just like (I believe) the majority of his constituents in MI-1.  I know just a few days ago, he was pleased with the progress being made on the Health Care Reform bill but had concerns about abortion coverage in the public option.  I believe he supports the public option with the exception of abortion coverage.  That being said, I disagree with his move here.  He's cutting of his nose to spite his face.  I'm shooting him an e-mail as soon as I finish writing this.  But let's keep it in perspective, he's not a woman-hater or a C-streeter.  

      Be alert, look alive, and act like you know. --A Tribe Called Quest

      by cheese weasel on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 05:00:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  And the only woman listed is my rep :( (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gooderservice
  •  A couple of weeks ago... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, gooderservice

    I was fairly optimistic that we were going to get a decent bill with an OK, not great, PO that could develop into something in time for my children to get coverage when they graduate college.  I was feeling pretty good.  Now, I'm not so sure that we will get anything.  It seems as soon as there is any momentum, some faction in the Dem caucus seizes upon it to make some point.  Now, I'm not sure we are going to get anything.  This is beyond stupid.

    To the WH: "It's your job to f*ck-up power; it's Fox's job to f*ck-up truth.' - Jon Stewart

    by RichM on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:45:17 PM PST

  •  Here is an idea... (0+ / 0-)

    lets just let blue dogs write the whole bill...I wonder how different it would have been?  

    Maybe no watered down public option, but at this point, that isn't a huge difference.

    "Republicans drove the country into a ditch and now they are complaining about the cost of the tow truck"-Jim Cornette

    by justmy2 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:45:45 PM PST

  •  I'm fucking sick & tired of democrats (5+ / 0-)

    working agains our own best interests.  If they don't want funded abortions, they should become a rethug and join them in opposing any compassionate, live saving health care reform.  I'm tired of them drinking the fucking kool-aid.

  •  So to make sure they don't accidentally (5+ / 0-)

    trust women to make a choice they'd  disagree with these stalwart protectors of the public good will dump actual needed healthcare for flesh and blood children.

    Before you win, you have to fight. Come fight along with us at TexasKaos.

    by boadicea on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:46:27 PM PST

  •  When this issue arose before by the (0+ / 0-)

    republicans, word was that the Hyde amendment prohibited federal funding for abortions.  Has that changed?


    The religious fanatics didn't buy the republican party because it was virtuous, they bought it because it was for sale

    by nupstateny on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:47:28 PM PST

  •  I just called Driehaus' local office (5+ / 0-)

    since he's my congresscrittur. The nice young man (Jay) who answered the phone explained patiently to me that Driehaus is only concerned about the abortion language...

    I told him that this was no excuse to hold up the health care reform bill - that this is the wrong place to legislate abortion - which is legal in the US. & that they can revisit the abortion issue later on, in some other way. (I'm assuming that's true.)
    Finally Jay said he'd pass along my 2cnts worth - but I didn't hear much conviction in his voice that Driehaus will listen...alas.

    Admittedly, Driehaus probably would NOT have been elected to District 1 if he had not been anti-choice...he's a Cincinnati west-sider. Without his particular point of view, we would still be suffering with Steve Chabot's combover. But I sure as heck hope he backs off on this alignment with Stupak.

    •  You know your district better than me (0+ / 0-)

      but I got to wonder if the claim that we can't elect progressives has become a self-fulfilling prophesy at this point.  I think most districts tend to have a large number of people who are sick of the status quo.
      We need to raise the bar a bit.

      I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

      by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:05:59 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  There are some who are sick of the status quo (0+ / 0-)

        But different people define it differently and blame different factors and not all go "Wow- we've got to elect a Dennis Kucinich clone." In Oh-01 or Oh-06 and Oh-18, that won't happen because of who lives there and what their life experience is. We can raise the bar a BIT, but you have to realize, these districts were DRAWN to be safely Republican. That Democrats hold them all (including Blue Dogs in Oh-06 and Oh-18) is testimony to how badly Ohio Republicans have screwed up.

        Stop Rob "The Job Outsourcer" Portman. Jennifer Brunner for Senate http://www.jenniferbrunner.com/

        by anastasia p on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:11:15 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Up to a point, I agree with you... (0+ / 0-)

        What happens down here Cincinnati way is that progressives don't even RUN unless they think there's a good chance they'll win. Are you aware that it has been virtually impossible to get ANY Dem to run against our RW Hamilton County Sheriff? Simon Leis was appointed to the position in 1987 & has won every election since. He is a legend in his own mind, & his track record with elections has convinced the local Dem party that running someone against him is pouring $ down a rat hole. No one wants to be the martyr who loses again & again.

        It infuriates me to see voting tickets with no one opposing the incumbent...not only for Sheriff but for judges etc. But I'm sure we're not the only area that faces this sort of shrug the shoulders, "what's the use?" attitude. What to do about it? Ya got me...

    •  Thank you for calling (0+ / 0-)

      Because only if their constituents call will they start to think about what they are doing. Otherwise, they assume you all agree.

      Stop Rob "The Job Outsourcer" Portman. Jennifer Brunner for Senate http://www.jenniferbrunner.com/

      by anastasia p on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:09:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  More and shittier Democrats (4+ / 0-)

    Just when you think Capitol Hill Democrats have run out of ways to screw their base, they come up with another one.

    I've begun to seriously question the wisdom of having spent time and money to elect this mangy bunch of losers.

    "You can never guarantee victory, but you can guarantee defeat."--Hall of Fame baseball writer Leonard Koppett.

    by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:48:11 PM PST

    •  raise your hand if you think he won't get (0+ / 0-)

      his way?

      No raise your hand if you think Kucinich or Weiner will get there way?

      That would be an interesting poll...

      "Republicans drove the country into a ditch and now they are complaining about the cost of the tow truck"-Jim Cornette

      by justmy2 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:49:29 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Too much random mouthing off here (0+ / 0-)

      We have two Blue Dogs in Ohio. I don't see either name on this list. State health-care activists who have talked to them say they will vote for the public option, no mention of abortion.

      Stop Rob "The Job Outsourcer" Portman. Jennifer Brunner for Senate http://www.jenniferbrunner.com/

      by anastasia p on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:13:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Same thing with Gabrielle Giffords (AZ-8). (0+ / 0-)

        I have multiple e-mails from her stating that she supports a strong public option, and she considers that the house bill is deficit-neutral.

        The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat falsehoods is with truth. - William O. Douglas

        by PSzymeczek on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:33:51 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Gatekeeping out liberalism (6+ / 0-)

    rather than putting Democratic Policies in place, suppressing the Democratic turnout in 2010 by demoralizing the party, and then claiming that liberals and progressive policy overreaches are to blame for any electoral setbacks.

    This is not the work of a moderate.

    With friends like these, who needs Movement Conservatism?

    What's worse, a woman's abortion rights have already been sacrificed in this healthcare reform effort. You cannot appease regressive people, they just want more.

    If you fund abortion, they want it limited.
    If you limit abortion funding, they want abortion funding banned.
    If you ban abortion funding, they want it banned in 10 different places in the bill.

    This is fucking ridiculous.

    A woman has a right to choose in this country.

    It pisses me off that so many men want a veto right over a woman's right to control her own body, even if thousands of people die every year because they don't have affordable access to healthcare.

    I'm not in favor of driving women to the back alley as a part of getting those lacking healthcare access to that care. That's trading one Culture War problem plaguing our country for another.

    1. Don't ever donate money directly to the Democratic Party, or its House or Senate campaign arms. Ever.
    1. Candidate by candidate, issue by issue donations only.
    1. If you have donated directly to the party and somebody in DC asks why you don't do it anymore, tell them exactly why.

    It's not my fault that you brought a spoon to a gun fight.

    by LeftHandedMan on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:48:49 PM PST

  •  This would tie the measure up in the courts, no? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Steve15

    Could the strategy behind this be to ensure that the bill ends up in litigation long before it goes into effect? Just wondering?

  •  And the GOP still wouldn't vote for it (2+ / 0-)

    Dems can cave as much as they want, but Republican'ts will never vote for a Democratic health care bill.

    C'mon, Dems, pass a real, strong, pro-choice DEMOCRATIC plan that we can get behind.  No more compromises, no cherry picking, no delays, no triggers.

    Stop trying to appeal to Republican'ts--they won't like anything, anyway.

    Watching Pete Sessions and reporting from the Taliban-controlled 32nd Congressional District of Texas.

    by CoolOnion on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:51:33 PM PST

  •  Reminded again how getting shit done during (0+ / 0-)

    a presidential campaign is galaxies apart from achieving anything in domestic politics as POTUS.

    Sort of like comparing a sprint with a steeplechase filled with landmines, 20 foot walls and shark-infested water jumps. The same holds true in with plenty of other countries with regard to their forms of congress/parliment as well.

    With democrats like these.....

    The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts. Bertrand Russell

    by gereiztkind on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:51:43 PM PST

  •  Put the Kucinich Amendment Back in the Bill! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Johnny Q, CalliopeIrjaPearl



    ````
    peace

  •  I no longer want health care to pass (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Johnny Q

    I did, at one time, but I now see that we're just not ready to do it right.

    Mandating that people making 150% of the poverty level MUST buy insurance would be one of the most regressive "taxes" in history, and put the profits squarely in the pockets of those who opppose reform in the first place.

    Let me be clear; I still like President Obama, but the Democrats in congress have completely disappointed me.

    Having the majority kept the SCOTUS from falling into the hands of the religious extremists, but that's about it. Subpoena power wasn't used, wiretapping goes on, the patriot act hasn't been rescinded, there's no attempt to repair our broken electoral system...

    We've wasted months on health care reform, putting everything else on the back burner, and for what?

    To make being stupid one night illegal? To force women married to abusive rapists bear their children? To make the next "profit center" for the insurance companies people who can barely afford to buy gas to get from their hovel to their shitty employer?

    Nope. It's time to move on. Fix some other things that we CAN fix. The health care "debate" is over, and the the insurance companies won.

    "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

    by Timbuk3 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:52:46 PM PST

    •  Fuck you (7+ / 0-)

      I'm uninsured and disabled without medication that's costing me $300 a month out of pocket.

      I'll take any plan that can pass.  We can fix it up with more bills in the future.

      ---
      Fight the stupid! Boycott BREAKING diaries!

      by VelvetElvis on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:55:36 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Tell me how you really feel (0+ / 0-)

        Look, I'm truly sorry about your situation, but I can't let that saddle future generations with the most regressive tax I've ever seen.

        The house bill says if you make more than 150% of the poverty level you MUST buy insurance. For a family of 4, that's about $35,000. For a single guy or gal just starting out it's about $15,000.

        After buying gas to get to work, paying rent, and eating mac and cheese all month there's not enough left to buy insurance. So they'll pay a fine, instead?

        We're not ready for health care reform. More people will be hurt. That's the reality of it.

        Don't be mad at me. Be mad at congress.

        "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

        by Timbuk3 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:09:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  there will be subsidies (0+ / 0-)

          don't forget

          ---
          Fight the stupid! Boycott BREAKING diaries!

          by VelvetElvis on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:47:41 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  That's not enough (0+ / 0-)

            My daughter is a "debt slave". She called me last winter, practically in tears at having to ask, to see if I'd pay her heat bill for her. (She lives in a cold climate.)

            Someone had raided her checking account and taken the $300 she had set aside to pay it.

            $100 might as well be a million to someone like her.

            Please don't understand me. I WANT national health care.

            Just not like this. Not when it's punitive on the working poor, and puts the full force of law behind demanding their money goes into the insurance company's pockets.

            This congress is incapable of passing meaningful reform. I have NO REASON to believe the next one will be better, so pleas to "pass something, we'll fix it later" are falling on deaf ears.

            This will take a generation. Our kids are going to have to fix it. We're too greedy.

            "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

            by Timbuk3 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 05:24:41 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  look at the premium (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Back In Blue

          First off, the House bill expands medicaid to cover anyone up to 150% of FPL.

          If you are just over that, at the 150% poverty level, the premium is limited to 3% of income. So for that single person, that would be about $450 a year. For that family of 4, about $1000 a year.

          Even at 250% FPL, the premiums are capped at 8% of income, so about 2k for the single person making 27k, or 4.4k for the family of 4 making 55k.

          •  Please see my post, right above yours (0+ / 0-)

            It's here.

            $450/year is too much for some people to pay.

            Don't they matter, too?

            How about their kids?

            "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

            by Timbuk3 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 05:26:16 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  37.50 a month? (0+ / 0-)

              Not that I don't agree with your point about requiring to buy. I think that only works if there an public option or an option to buy into Medicare.

              But I don't think this will last for generations. We just need a beach-head. Then we can fix it over time. I firmly believe it might be worse in the short-term, but I also believe if we don't get that beach-head, health care will be out to sea forever.

    •  Bullshit! (0+ / 0-)

      The health care debate will never be over until something really is done.

      I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

      by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:03:03 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fair enough (0+ / 0-)

        The "debate" can continue. Heck, I'll even go so far as to add "I hope not for another 40 or 60 years."

        But THIS congress isn't capable of reforming anything. They lack the will.

        What more do you need to see to know that's true?

        "Doing My Part to Piss Off the Religious Right" - A sign held by a 10-year old boy on 9-24-05

        by Timbuk3 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:11:18 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I NEED Health Care (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Back In Blue, CalliopeIrjaPearl

      And I live in Massachusetts! If the private insurance that controls Medicare D- medications-does not approve the brand name drugs that heve been PROVEN I need, will you pay for them? I have to get "recertified" every year. Last year I cried in despair during a conference call. WTF about this year?

      When the brand name drug helping to prevent a recurrence of breast cancer goes generic next year, there is no lab test to prove the generic is not working. You want to take a generic every day and think about getting the other breast chopped off?

  •  Fuck these Blue Dog pieces of shit (4+ / 0-)

    I had it with this crappy bunch.  They share no common values with the Democratic party.  Let them become Republicans and let's try to build a truly progressive Democratic party.

    I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

    by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:52:58 PM PST

  •  I demand that the U.S. Government abolish the (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    acerimusdux, Subversive, Back In Blue

    SNAP (Food Stamps) program until they can assure me that impoverished citizens can only buy free-range chickens, not caged chickens.  Some poor kids might starve to death until this can be arranged, but there are certain principles I must live by.

    Barack Obama in the Oval Office: There's a black man who knows his place.

    by Greasy Grant on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:53:08 PM PST

  •  Just give them a call (0+ / 0-)
    and ask them not to be opposed to abortion and stuff. I'm certain that'll be effective.

    I got my country back.

    by Coss on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:53:25 PM PST

  •  Just give them a call (0+ / 0-)
    and ask them not to be opposed to abortion and stuff. I'm certain that'll be effective.

    I got my country back.

    by Coss on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:54:18 PM PST

  •  If NARAL was smart.. (4+ / 0-)

    They would primary the fuck out of Stupak. Even 'moderate' Republicans rarely went against the NRA. Politicians are only scared of one thing. They have to start playing hardball.

    I don't buy the whole 'doing it for their district' thing, by the way. A lot of swing voters don't have intense feelings about most issues. These guys are going out of their way to throw a wrench into the process.

    And for those who want to cave,the Bobby Brights of the world are voting against HCR no matter what and will still lose in 2010.

  •  We are talking about... (0+ / 0-)

    restricting coverage to a procedure that is a couple of hundred dollars...most can and should pay out of pocket for this procedure...to keep HCR going...

    Obama - Change I still believe in

    by dvogel001 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 01:59:22 PM PST

    •  OK, so what procedure is next, eh? (0+ / 0-)

      What other health care issues will be on the chopping block next?

      •  None... (0+ / 0-)

        right or wrong...this is a hot button issue for a substantial minority of Americans who feel as passionate as we do that abortion is just another medical procedure and no big deal that it is something that should not be covered...

        I disagree with that position...but I would rather donate to PP clinics to support free and low cost abortions than have that hold up HCR...

        Obama - Change I still believe in

        by dvogel001 on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 03:29:33 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Catch-22 (6+ / 0-)

    A lot of these guys are as good as we'll get from their particular districts.  Still, as someone who's weakly pro-life, this goes too far.

    GOP=Grand Obstructionist Party

    by Christian Dem in NC on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:00:52 PM PST

    •  They'll get a compromise amendment. (0+ / 0-)

      No big deal.

      BTW: "Angry Mouse" is... twice.

      Angry White Males + Personality Disorder delusionals + sane Pro-Lifers =EQ= The GOPer Base

      by vets74 on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:08:13 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Exactly (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      eclare, thegood thebad thedumb

      This is by no means a protective vote because my district is too conservative, this is actively advancing right wing postures against the core principles of your party by holding hostage the most important legislation Democrats have put forward in decades and threatening a filibuster with republicans!?!?!? This is way over the top, and Stupak is the leader of this and should be punished

  •  Well (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, KingofSpades

    It's our fault and progressive organizations fault because obviously we are not putting enough pressure on this blue roaches. For example Heath Shuler, he would never get elected again without progressive votes and women votes and their money. All women organizations should be right now pressuring the hell out of this guys. I mean it call them now call their offices now

    Heath Shuler
    Washington D.C. Office
    422 Cannon House Office Bldg.
    Washington, DC, 20515
    Phone: (202) 225-6401
    Fax: (202) 226-6422

  •  So we kick to the curb the ones that weren't (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Back In Blue

    aborted:  Adults and children, for the maybe, if, the promise of, who knows what a woman will choose, possibility of another life being brought into the world -- maybe if they're lucky and can afford prenatal care, and if not, well, let's see what the luck of the draw is without the proper prenatal care.

    It's way, way, way, way past time that elected officials and, frankly, everyone else TAKES A GOOD LONG LOOK AT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALIVE AND HERE AND HURTING and first help them... not what could be, what may be, whatever.

    Health insurance companies are nothing more than middle management money launderers. Why, oh why, do we accept that?

    by gooderservice on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:09:26 PM PST

  •  Dear KOS: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KingofSpades

    This is why NARAL has to support some Republicans.  There are at least 29 democrats who would hold up simple health care reform for abortion.  So, quit with the shit about NARAL.

  •  Regulating Morality... (5+ / 0-)

    When will these people take Abortion out of the equation? Simply put, if it's a legal and sometimes necessary procedure for women how can you force your own morals on the rest of the country? The Healthcare bill is not the place for playing "moral roulette". If they don't like Abortion then try to make it illegal. Don't try to regulate morality through our Healthcare Reform bill.

    "I think it's the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately." -- George Carlin, Satirical Comic,(1937-2008)

    by Wynter on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:15:24 PM PST

  •  Abortions arn't that expensive.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    exploring

    According to a study I'm reading the average cost of an abortion is $468.  Of the people I know who have had abortions they generally spent around $400 on them so 468 sounds about right.  I don't see abortion coverage as that big of a deal, people can pay for it themselves.  I'm personally pro choice as far as the laws are concerned, but I don't want to pay for other peoples abortions.

    And with flaming swords the Aramites did pierce the eyes of their fellow men, and did feast on what flowed forth.

    by Knat on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:22:04 PM PST

    •  True, Abortions are cheap (6+ / 0-)

      They're even cheaper when you use the guy in the back alley or a coat hanger.  That's where these Democrats, fundamentalists, and self-righteous Catholics want to lead us back to.  

      I can hear the nostalgia now.  "Remember back in the good ole days when abortion was illegal and the leading cause of female deaths in America.  Let's go back to the days when the poor die while my little trust fund baby gets to fly over to Switzerland and have her little accident taken care of in the privacy of a high end medical clinic overlooking Lake Geneva."  

      Don't Bet Against Us!

      by Pacific Blue on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 02:43:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Back to? (0+ / 0-)

        Currently the government doesn't pay for peoples abortions.  How will keeping the same policy change anything?  This isn't a Roe V Wade argument, this is a me not paying for others abortions argument.

        And with flaming swords the Aramites did pierce the eyes of their fellow men, and did feast on what flowed forth.

        by Knat on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:37:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Um... (0+ / 0-)

      Your empathy is really astounding.

      You know someone named Arsenio Billingham? No.

      by Mikey on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 04:49:08 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Empathy? (0+ / 0-)

        If the decision was left up to me I would tell the girl to keep it.  If she was set on an abortion I would pay for it.  So yeah its hard to empathize with people who are unwilling to do neither.

        And with flaming swords the Aramites did pierce the eyes of their fellow men, and did feast on what flowed forth.

        by Knat on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 10:32:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  It's really about access (0+ / 0-)

      The House bill isn't going to require you to pay for anyone's abortion. The fight is over whether people who want abortion coverage will be allowed to choose to buy such plans through the exchange, or the public option.

      As I understand Stupak, his intent is to not allow this coverage to be made available. The argument is going to be that you can still go buy your own in the private market. But abortion only coverage in the private market is going to be impractical, inefficient, and not widely available. And there are already plenty of existing plans which include abortion coverage and would be required to change or not be able to participate in the exchange.

  •  Any stick will beat a dog ... (0+ / 0-)

    The "dog" in this case being the three legged, one eyed, castrated, excuse for Health Care Reform that will deliver 30 million or so new customers to the Insurance Cartel -- and at their own price and under their own conditions, to boot.

    This year "nothing" may really be better than securing Mr. B's legacy on paper and further enriching the Cartel.

    Given a little taste of failure .... delivered soon enough that he can actually "do better" before it's too late ... the president might, just might, shake loose from those Chicago School economists he's surrounded himself with and  get  back on track with the people who elected him.

    There really WILL be a "next year" in which to at least try to get it right.

    But singing
    Hey Bama ho Bama Bama Bama ho
    Bama hey Bama ho bama
    as if this were the the opening number of Jesus Christ Superstar is NOT going to get us the Change we Hoped for.

  •  Choice means it is not necessary.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Knat

    If it is not necessary, then taxpayer funds should not be used for elective procedures.  

    •  Is it necessary that people have 5 or 6 kids? (0+ / 0-)

      Just asking.

    •  No. Sometimes an abortion is necessary. (0+ / 0-)

      Sometimes a pregnancy endangers the life of the woman. To save her life, it is necessary to have an abortion.  But if she has no choice, she won't be able to have the simple procedure that would save her life.

      Sometimes a woman is raped and becomes pregnant. Should she not have the choice to carry or not carry the child of the man who raped her?

      Do you really have a problem using taxpayer dollars for that? What about you Knat?

  •  "And I promise..." (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Back In Blue

    that no bureaucrat will get between you an your doctor."  Oops.  Here comes the Democrats who want to do what?  Put the government bureaucrat between you and your doctor and make sure that the decisions you make in private are scrutinized and not funded if they break what the bureaucrats in Washington deem to be wrong even though the law allows it.

    These Democratic Representatives are using their power in the worse way. Roe vs. Wade was in the beginnning all about privacy and the right for a woman to choose in consultation with her own doctor, the best way to proceed with an unwanted pregnancy.  If Democrats are going to become the nanny state then there is no hope.

    Whatever happened to personal liberty and freedom?

  •  CAN WE PRIMARY THIS BRAD STUPAK (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Back In Blue

    I am so sick of this Brad Stupak trying to derail health care reform...Can he be primaried?  I am a big tent guy but when you put yourself completely ahead of the national interest, I draw the line

  •  My challenge to the Blue Dogs (0+ / 0-)

    So, your coalition claims to be fiscal conservatives. The CBO estimated that we would save taxpayers 80 billion dollars if payments use Medicare + 5% rates.  How is it that the fiscal conservative caucus opposes saving taxpayers 80 billion dollars?

    I find your lack of faith disturbing -- message to ConservaDems.

    by noofsh on Tue Nov 03, 2009 at 03:09:31 PM PST

  •  Mollohan is VERY pro-public option (0+ / 0-)

    That's a lot more than can be said about some of the others on the list. At least Mollohan is consistent in his voting record, and he's very reliable on gay rights legislation.

  •  Oy (0+ / 0-)

    Why do we even HAVE Democrats?

  •  I just sent Jason Altmier (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    big annie

    a scathing email. He won re-election in a semi-conservative part of PA (outside Pittsburgh) by Barack Obama sweeping in many new and incumbent democrats. Now, he wants to eff the guy over that helped him get re-elected. The Democrats have NO BALLS!

  •  We need healthcare reform to pass (0+ / 0-)

    I know we want the world in this bill, but I think we need to leave out abortion--allow it to be by insurance rider--in order to get this through this year.

    There was always going to have to be some give: the nation is increasingly divided in a wide chasm between the extremes: progressive and Palinistas.

    The people in between have to be willing to give a little to get a lot.

    The Palinistas are not going to give anything, because their idea, I think, is to promote a theocracy--of their religion, of course, running this country and the world.

    Let's get healthcare reform done this year.  Let's insist on a public option.  Let's let the abortion thing hot issue go to an insurance rider.

    Please.  There are so many people who need this, the government needs it to save Medicare, and we all need it to get our budget back into some semblance of balance.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site