Wonk Room » How Did Stupak’s Gang-Of-40 Win On Abortion

How Did Stupak’s Gang-Of-40 Win On Abortion

By Igor Volsky on Nov 7th, 2009 at 1:15 pm

How Did Stupak’s Gang-Of-40 Win On Abortion

StupakPelosi Sources tell the Wonk Room that Rep. Bart Stupak (D-MI) and his 40 pro-life Democratic colleagues successfully won debate for a restrictive abortion amendment on the House floor by moving the goal posts on an earlier agreement.

Stupak had agreed to keep the amendment from the floor if it received a hearing in the rules committee. But, once the Conference of Catholic Bishops refused to endorse the bill unless the amendment was accepted, Stupak and his colleagues demanded a vote on the floor and threatened to derail the bill. Unable to muster enough opposition to Stupak’s ‘gang of 40,’ the Democratic majority agreed to move the the amendment to the floor and vote for the full bill if the amendment passed.The Conference of Catholic Bishops has since endorsed the bill and House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) and Reps. Eric Cantor (R-VA) and Mike Pence (R-IN) will all vote “yes” on the Stupak amendment.

Today, during the Democratic press conference that followed the caucus’ meeting with the President, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said she recommended that the Stupak amendment be voted on the floor. The amendment is expected to pass.

Update Huffington Post is reporting that Stupak "told reporters that regardless of the outcome of the vote on his amendment, which would severely restrict coverage of reproductive health issues, the House health care bill is headed for passage. He is whipping support for the amendment and estimates he has 225 votes. If he's right, the amendment will pass, and he predicted enough pro-life Democrats will vote yes on the final bill to put it over the top. But if it fails, he said, enough pro-lifers -- ten to 15, he said -- will have been satisfied to have had their vote on the floor that they'll turn around and support the final bill anyway. Picking up ten to 15 votes would give the bill a comfortable margin for passage."

Comments
5

5 Responses to “How Did Stupak’s Gang-Of-40 Win On Abortion”

Comrade Rutherford Says:

“How Did Stupak’s Gang-Of-40 Win On Abortion”

Because the Democratic Leadership are under the direct control of the Republicans. The Dems will never, ever lift a finger to stop their GOP slave masters (certainly NOT Obama!)

The sooner all you lefty pundits just accept that glaringly obvious fact and work from that perspective, the sooner you’ll actually be effective.

There are only about 5 actual Democrats in Congress today, all the rest are undercover operatives of the GOP. Pelosi, Reid, Obama? All of them are GOP operatives.

There is NO other explanation for the repeated and continual caving in to even the tiniest objection for the most extreme right wing minority.

The Democratic Leadership sold themselves into GOP slavery back in the Reagan Days. Just to look at Senator Inyoue’s announcement that they wouldn’t dream of holding Reagan accountable to the law and the US Constitution during the Iran-Contra hearings.

Let’s all stop pretending that any Democratic Leader will ever enact the principle s of the Democratic Party. They NEVER have, and they NEVER will. It’s just that obvious.

Let’s call Pelosi and Reid what they have actually proven themselves to be Moderate Republicans.

‘Moderate Republican Pelosi said in Congress today that the Health Care Reform bill will never have any provisions in it that could even remotely impact the profits of the major US insurance industry’

See how much more accurate that is?

Please, Think Progress, stop pretending that the Dem Leaders are Democrats. Their actions and voting record PROVE conclusively that they are NOT Democrats.
November 7th, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Thomas1970 Says:

Interesting article, thanks
November 8th, 2009 at 2:16 am
Michael Williams Says:

I’m sorry but that commentary is nuts. The Dems were forced
to compromise on abortion because they weren’t sure they had enough votes. As it turned out, they barely squeaked by with
2 votes to spare. Your purist, perfect is the assassin of the
good, attitude would leave us with no vital health care reforms.
Personally, I’d prefer a single payer system, but it’s simply
not politically viable now. Providing subsidies to buy insurance, stopping discrimination based on preexisting conditions, eliminating lifetime caps on payouts, etc etc etc,
sounds a sh*tload better than your, “we demand perfection and
if we can’t have it, we’ll keep things how they are” plan.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:13 am
lambert strether Says:

Everybody who uses the “not politically feasible” argument should be required to answer three questions:

1. What did you do a year ago, when the decision was made to scupper single payer?

2. What did you do this year to make sure that the “open and transparent” process didn’t exclude and censor the “little single payer advocates”?

3. What did you do in the last few months to make sure that the Kucinich Amendment, which would have permitted single payer experiments in the states, got passed?

Answer those questions, and we’ll see how serious your expressed preference for single payer — as opposed to the pro-sepsis HR3962 — might be.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:29 pm
guide Says:

great
November 10th, 2009 at 5:54 am