As House leadership continues to search for the votes to pass the health care reform package, the issue of abortion remains a thorny one. We all know about Bart Stupak's claims of having 12 votes against the bill if his amendment is not included. I've doubted this claim, and in recent days, some of his group have announced their intentions to vote for the bill. But what about the others? Could they be convinced to vote for the bill, even without the amendment as part of it? It appears so.
From The Hill:
At least six anti-abortion-rights Democrats are open to supporting the healthcare bill if they can get a guarantee from the Senate that it will move separate legislation containing the House abortion language, one of those Democratic holdouts said Friday.
Nick Rahall of WV claims theat the group is in discussions with House leaders and Democratic Senators to ensure the commitment. He also claims that such an agreement could deliver 6-10 votes for the HCR bill.
Rahall claimed that he and Stupak have spoken to Speaker Pelosi about the issue, but Pelosi claims she's heard nothing about it:
Pelosi, however, said she is unaware of any such idea. "I haven't heard any of that," she said at a press conference Friday, though she conceded, "There are members who may be talking." Pelosi also indicated that, on abortion and other areas under dispute among Democrats, the legislation will undergo nothing more than "technical" adjustments before the planned vote on Sunday.
For his part, Stupak is less than enthused:
In a Wednesday interview with The Hill, however, Stupak said he was dubious of promises made by any Democrats.
"Right now, they got the trifecta: They got the House, they got the Senate and they got a president," he said. "So basically, they said, ‘Your right-to-life amendments are over.’ And they’ve proven that.
"So one of the offers is, ‘Why won’t you just drop this for now? We’re going to work on it later. This thing doesn’t kick in till 2018," Stupak continued. "Well, jeez, after you tell us no to our face — ‘You’re never going to get anything’ — why would I suddenly think you’re going to give me something now? I’m a little slow, but I’m not that slow."
Don't sell yourself short Bart. You're incredibly slow.
All along I've thought this was the most logical course of action. The Senate language cannot be changed, and abortion is not eligible for reconciliation. The only thing abortion opponents can be offered is a separate vote on the Stupak amendment. I find it interesting that this group doesn't even require a vote first, but just a promise of a vote. It seems like they actually do want to vote for the bill. I'm not convinced Stupak feels the same.
I think the Dems should go along with this. If for no other reason than I doubt such an amendment would have a good chance of passing the Senate.
UPDATE: I want to add a link to this blog post from Jonathan Chait @ TNR, which offers another scenario for this amendment: include it in the HHS appropriations bill. The problem with this would be that it would require 60 votes in the Senate to remove it, pretty much a guarantee that it would become law (thanks to BennyToothpick for pointing out this post).
Also, 2 more notes: President Obama will address the House Democratic caucus tomorrow.
CNN is reporting that Joseph Cao is considering voting for the bill. Since he has no chance in hell of winning re-election in November, he might as well.