House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she has the votes to pass the health-care bill . . . but no vote is scheduled.
So her plan is to what, sit around and give nervous House Democrats a lot of time to change their minds? Give those House offices more time to be inundated with calls from irate constituents? Give those Blue Dogs and red-district Democrats more time to think about how they're effectively ending their careers?
You know how we'll know when she really has the votes? She'll schedule the flippin' vote.
'Our latest whip count shows no progress for House Dem leadership.'
Reid Wilson: "Our latest whip count shows no progress for House Dem leadership."
Joe Donnelly (D., Ind.) has switched from "yes" to "no."
There was somewhat bad news earlier today when Dale Kildee (D., Mich.) indicated he will probably vote "yes," as he's a pro-life Democrat who was considered a possible switch. But even there, this is a "yes" staying "yes," not a "no" flipping, as Pelosi needs.
I see 216 "no" votes right now, enough to kill the bill.
De Old Democrat Will Kildee Pro-Life Street Cred He Once Had (UPDATE: Maybe Not?)
Rep. Dale Kildee of Michigan, allegedly pro-life Democrat, looks set to abandon Stupak and vote "yes."* (You can courteously and warmly tell his staff what you think of the decision at (202) 225-3611, (810) 239-1437 in Bay City, (989) 755-8904 in Saginaw, and (989) 891-0990 in Flint.)
The 80-year-old Kildee has been in Congress since 1976.
As mentioned, his district includes Bay City, where the unemployment rate is a mild 13.7 percent, Saginaw, where it stands at a modest 14 percent, and Flint, where the unemployment rate is a cheery 16.6 percent.
Rick Wilson is running against him on the GOP side. It's a pretty Democratic district, but one wonders how this vote will play among some demographics in this heavily Catholic region.
* I originally had him "flipping" but because the old version had the pro-life Stupak language, he was a yes and is sticking to the 'yes'.
UPDATE: One of my Michigan politics guys weighs in: "His district is rather pro-life, so flipping on health care is bad enough, but he'll lose the RTL endorsement here for this. But I'm pretty sure that Kildee no longer actually serves in Congress and he's been replaced by one of the creations from the wax museum. Have you seen him lately?"
Linsey Beck, Kildee’s legislative staffer, told us that the media reports were inaccurate, and that the representative has not decided to vote for the Senate language bill.
Funny how "I'll probably vote for the bill" can be interpreted as meaning that Kildee will probably vote for the bill. But if this latest word from Beck means Kildee is standing with Stupak, it's good news.
Kucinich Had Better Start Sweating His 2012 House Primary
Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas last night threatened to support a primary challenger against Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D., Ohio) if he doesn't support the health-care bill. "What he is doing is undermining this reform," he said. "He is making common cause with Republicans. And I think that is a perfect excuse and a rational one for a primary challenge."
Filing deadline for federal candidates in Ohio for the 2010 election: February 18.
You would think that meant that unemployment was going down in most states, huh? Nope.
A total of 30 states and Washington, D.C., reported rising unemployment rates in January, down from the number in the previous month, according to a government report released Wednesday. Jobless rates decreased in nine states, according to the Labor Department's monthly report on state unemployment. Eleven states reported no change.
The day President Obama travels to Missouri for another rally for health care, the Bureau of Labor Statistics tells us that Missouri's economy had the worst January out of all the 50 states, losing 12,800 jobs from December to January.
However, the state's unemployment rate is only 9.5 percent.
New Jersey's new governor, Chris Christie, raised quite a few eyebrows with his brutally blunt discussion of his state's budget woes. He's continuing to do so, and his communications team has finally started putting these remarks on YouTube.
We've just gone through the roof on those taxes. Think about this: When Governor Byrne instituted the income tax in 1977, the top income-tax rate was 2.5 percent. When Governor Corzine was leaving office, it was nearly 11 percent. We now have a sales tax that is 7 percent, among the highest in the country. We have a corporate business tax that is in the top ten in the country. And when you combine that with our property taxes and our other taxes, we are now the champion — and this is one you don't want to win the championship in, but we have — of being the most overtaxed people in America. This has all been, in large measure, to feed the growth of government both in Trenton but even more so, the growth of government at the local school board, municipal level, and since most of our money goes out the door in that way . . .
. . . I will tell you now, having been in Trenton for a couple of months, you do not want to get anywhere near those bridges going over the Delaware River around four-thirty or five o'clock, because people are steaming from working in New Jersey over to Pennsylvania, to pay that lower tax rate, to pay the lower property taxes.
He hates taxes, is fed up with the usual excuses, isn't going to sugar-coat hard truths, and looks like he eats too much. Do I support Chris Christie? Heck, I am Chris Christie.
There's a Reason We Call It Pelosi's Political Suicide Squad
How is health care polling in those key swing House districts? Well, as lousy as you might guess.
The Start Over! Coalition — a group of 248 employers —contracted the Tarrance Group to gauge support for the health-care bill being debated in Congress. On March 7 and 8, they surveyed 300 likely voters in each of 11 key congressional districts. As you would expect, its popularity ranks somewhere between Tiger Woods and Toyota accelerator pedals.
The numbers show ominous news for House Democrats Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona, Betsy Markey of Colorado, Baron Hill of Indiana, John Adler of New Jersey, Steve Driehaus and John Boccieri of Ohio, Dina Titus of Nevada, Mike McMahon of New York, and Jason Altmire and Chris Carney of Pennsylvania.
The highest level of support for the bill is 40 percent, in Titus and McMahon’s districts; even there, opposition runs 52 percent and 46 percent, respectively. The lowest level of support is in Carney’s district, at 28 percent.
Opposition is pretty strong across the board, lowest at 46 percent in McMahon’s district, highest in Markey’s and Carney’s districts at 58 percent.
Voters in every district said the vote would be “very” important to their decision this November, ranging from 63 percent in Giffords’s district to 81 percent in Altmire’s district.
While the sample size is a bit small, there’s not much reason to think this poll doesn’t catch the public mood fairly accurately.
Last fall, Giffords, Hill, Driehaus, Titus, and Carney voted "yes"; Adler, Markey*, McMahon, Boccieri, and Altmire voted "no."
The firm also polled the district of Michael Arcuri of New York, who has since indicated he will vote “no”; 32 percent support the bill, 53 percent oppose.
* I originally misread a chart and had Markey as a "yes" from last fall.
What I Meant Was That Election Is Over, Now I've Got Another Campaign
Not long ago: President Obama, seeming to be reaching the end of his rope with Sen. John McCain: "Let me just make this point, John, because we're not campaigning anymore. The election's over."
The "campaign" may be over, but not the activities of a campaign: today Obama attends two fundraisers in St. Louis, his sixth and seventh of the year and the 34th and 35th of his presidency.
You know, it’s possible that the sordid allegations against Massa are true AND his tale of the Bath-time Brouhaha is accurate. If a broken clock can be right twice a day, it’s not that unthinkable that there’s some truth to Massa’s claim that the House Ethics Committee has been strong-armed into becoming a branch of the Majority Whip’s office. We’ve seen a slew of party-line-voting Democrats get slapped on the wrist for some seemingly glaring ethical breaches in both chambers — Chris Dodd, Roland Burris, all of the House members tangled up in PMA — and we now know that complaints about Massa have been around for a year. So why did they all catch up with Massa at such a convenient time for Nancy Pelosi?
To pass the health care bill, Democrats have embraced the Cornhusker Kickback and the Louisiana Purchase; why would it be so unthinkable to see them embrace the Shower Showdown?
The MSM seemed to beat the drum on a big, ‘the right embraces Eric Massa’ story yesterday that wasn’t quite accurate (surprise!) ; of course conservative media are interested in a story of Obama, Pelosi, Hoyer and Rahm forcing out a House Democrat who doesn’t toe the party line. That doesn’t mean we want to take a shower with embrace him. As J.P. Freire put it, “So where was this outraged bemusement when Democrats nominated him? And why are they mocking conservatives for temporarily embracing him?”
Ann Althouse: “I wonder how much substance there is to this staffer-groping business? Was it annoying over-friendly arm-around-the-back stuff or something more? "Groping." There's a loaded word. Can we have some details? Are the Democrats really policing their own? Does every member of Congress at Massa's level of touchiness get investigated, or was this selective investigation?”
Besides, is there any greater indicator of sanity than Nancy Pelosi declaring you to be “a very sick person”?
The Time for Talk Is Over. Come on, Mr. President, You Promised!
Mark Knoller of CBS News remarks that tomorrow in St. Louis, President Obama will give his 52nd speech or remarks on health-care reform — out of 463 speeches/remarks since taking office.
Back on July 20, President Obama declared "the time for talk is through."
Pelosi Can't Have Much More Than 197 Certain 'Yes' Votes
A lot of people are wondering, justifiably, about the count in the House. Jay Cost and Reid Wilson have made serious efforts, and I hear the NRCC will be upgrading a new site that spotlights those Democrat members who are wavering and who face the toughest reelection bids next year.
But in the end, any given lawmaker's statement of "I have problems with the Senate version" is not quite ironclad. After all, wavering votes will be offered the world and their brothers will be offered positions in the federal judiciary; when that fails, Rahm Emanuel will pop up in their showers like Norman Bates.
So here's what is absolutely certain: Of the 220 "yes" votes, three are gone from Congress with their seats currently empty (Wexler, Abercrombie, and Murtha) and one has said, definitively, he will flip to no (Cao).
That takes the 'yes' votes to 216.
Of the 215 previous "no" votes, Nathan Deal is sticking around, Eric Massa is gone (214), and Cao has been added to their ranks. This brings them back to 215.
In other words, right now Pelosi cannot permit anyone who voted "yes" to flip. If every "yes" vote stays on board, she can pass the bill.
Obviously, there are a lot of Democrats who voted "yes" in the fall who have indicated that they want to vote "no" or are considering voting no: Jerry McNerney, Steve Kagan, Henry Cuellar, Kathy Dahlkemper, Dan Lipinski, Marion Berry, Baron Hill, Brad Ellsworth, Dina Titus, Michael Arcuri, Dennis Cardoza, James Oberstar, Bart Stupak, Shelley Berkeley, Dan Maffei, Earl Pomeroy, Nick Rahall, John Spratt and Kurt Schrader. There are probably more, but that's a starting 19.
There are a very few "no" votes who are talking about flipping to "yes." Occasionally, you'll hear someone make vague noises about this, but I haven't seen anything definitive. Bart Gordon's a possibility, as is Brian Baird.
Audience members decried the health insurance industry's plans to raise premiums next year and the prohibitive cost of healthcare for those who are uninsured. McNerney criticized the current version of healthcare reform passed by the U.S. Senate for the deals it makes with certain states, its lack of a public option and the inadequate number of people it extends coverage to. He said he would not vote in favor of that version of the bill if it comes back to the House.
This Health-Care Vote Is Vitale to the Nation's Future
At least 32 House Democrats want to vote "no"; and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi can only permit a few — a final four? one? — to do so. How to decide? Perhaps an elimination tournament . . . or would that be considered March Madness?
As with that other tournament full of folks from all over the country trying to avoid elimination, there is talk of it expanding to 96.
GOP Prospects in Massa's District Look Pretty Healthy
A few days ago, a reader in Massa's district gave me his sense on how the race to fill the seat will shake out:
The Democrats are likely to approach Monroe County (Rochester) DA Mike Green, who would be trouble for the GOP if he runs. He's extremely popular and competent, though highly charisma challenged. Great DA, but nobody is studying the crease in his pants leg. Doubt he'll run . . . Just don't see any Democrat of note getting involved in this climate, and this is as red a district as it gets in New York.
Kuhl is out there still . . . He only narrowly lost to Massa in a rematch last time in the general anti-GOP wave. With as bad as the Dems are in NY these days, he'll probably win easily this time, warts and all . . . Monroe Co. Exec Maggie Brooks (R) probably won't run . . . What's left is mostly small-town mayors or a random assemblymen.
My money's on Kuhl winning it back in a special election, for better or worse, over a no-name Dem, then getting re-elected easily in November.
Of course, Corning mayor Tom Reed was already running for Massa's seat, and would seem to have a head start in any special election. Local Republicans are lining up behind him, so a bid by Brooks seems less likely . . .
Missouri Republicans are wondering if the Democrats' near-certain 2010 Senate candidate, Robin Carnahan, is being quietly abandoned by her party.
On Wednesday, President Barack Obama will travel to St. Louis in an attempt to resurrect his takeover of our health care system, revive his sagging political fortunes, and fill Claire McCaskill’s campaign war chest. But several questions linger about Robin Carnahan’s role in the event.
Press reports indicate that the money raised at the Obama fundraisers will benefit Claire McCaskill’s 2012 campaign and the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee—but it is unclear if this money will benefit Robin Carnahan.
Has the White House written off the Carnahan campaign or have they found a way to secretly funnel these donations to her?
“Barack Obama should be campaigning his heart out for Robin Carnahan—after all, Carnahan has pledged to rubberstamp his agenda of a government takeover of healthcare, job-killing cap-and-tax, and the failed stimulus bill, and much more. But maybe Obama sees the writing on the wall and realizes that Carnahan is way too liberal for Missouri,” said Lloyd Smith, Executive Director of the Missouri Republican Party. “It appears that the White House has written off the Carnahan campaign. We are not aware of another example of the President ignoring a U.S. Senate candidate on the ballot in less than 8 months and instead raising money for someone who is not up for reelection until 2012.”
Or, you know, maybe she's not eager to be associated with a guy who has a 40 percent/58 percent job approval/disapproval split in the most recent poll.
41% of Americans say they are more likely to oppose a candidate that supports the current health care bill, according to the IBD/TIPP poll. Just 27% say they would be more apt to vote for that person. Among independents, the ratio is 2-to-1 against.
Normally, Wisconsin and New York Democrats Wouldn't Be Sweating a Health-Care Vote
You see comments like this one from Rep. Steve Kagan of Wisconsin, previously a yes vote on health care:
"Let me put it this way: you're asking whether or not I trust the United States Senate, where they came up with a deal for Nebraska that the other states didn't get; where Louisiana would get a special deal. No, I don't trust the U.S. Senate," said Rep. Steve Kagen (D-8th District). "So I think I'd like to have a vote on something very meaningful."
Kagen said the health care bill should be split up into smaller bills.
"I have made the case to the speaker and also to the White House that we should take small pieces, small bites," Kagen said. "In the practice of medicine, I can't give a child a big pill. What do we do? We cut it up into pieces. Let's find things we can agree on."
Or this one, from Rep. Michael Arcuri of New York, another yes vote:
President Obama has once again called on Congress to get moving on passing a health care reform bill. On Sunday, Congressman Michael Arcuri of Utica says he intends to vote no on the Senate's version of the bill as it stands now.
Or this one, from Rep. Dan Maffei of New York, another yes vote:
"I will trust the president, but I will not trust the Senate," Maffei said. "The Senate bill, in my view, burns the village in order to save it. I will say, however, the president's direct involvement gives me hope they will come up with a compromise."
Or this one, from Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas, another yes vote:
Cuellar said he is worried about the bill’s impact on farmers and ranchers. Employers have said they would face financial stress if they are forced to buy health insurance for their workers.
“As an (agriculture committee) member I have a lot of rural areas that I have to contend with,” he said. “They had a problem with seasonal workers. I think it does address the issue, but we are still looking at it. We are trying to get more information on that.”
And I start to wonder if the House will ever vote on the Senate bill at all. Obviously, most of these guys won by healthy margins last time (Arcuri won by 4), and they're generally down-the-line Democrats. But if they're making noises that they can't be counted on as automatic "yes" votes, how is Pelosi going to flip the dozen or so she needs to make up for the Stupak Democrats?
Budget Committee Chairman John Spratt (D-S.C.), Science Committee Chairman Bart Gordon (D-Tenn.) and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) are undecided.
Interesting, since Gordon sounded like he was likely to flip. He's retiring at the end of this year.
Rahall was a "yes" last time around.
Also note The Hill is reporting: "Meanwhile, Transportation Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.), who supports Rep. Bart Stupak’s (D-Mich.) anti-abortion rights language, is leaning yes, according to his spokesman." An Oberstar constituent told me last week he thought a compromise on his pro-life views was pretty much unthinkable.
I think the "maybe" members of Congress are going to be giving a lot of blurry, contradictory statements until the bidding stops.
All of Washington Basically Agrees the Chief of Staff Is At Least a Little Unhinged, Right?
From this morning's Jolt (disturbing imagery warning):
Rahmrod
Picture it: a naked Rahm Emanuel confronting you in the shower and thrusting his . . . finger at you.
I’m Jim Geraghty, and I approved this nightmare you’ll be having tonight.
The Massa Saga (Massaga?) is starting to feel like the Mark Foley scandal, not so much in the particulars of scandalous sexual behavior but in the ever-weirder twists and turns it’s taking. At the precise moment that Obama needs the White House team, the Senate Democrats, and the House Democrats to trust each other, Massa’s decided he’s going to go out like James Cagney in White Heat. And the interpretation of events most generous to the White House is that in 2008 the DCCC did everything it could to ensure a crazy person represented New York’s 29th District.
Highlights: Massa declaring that “Rahm Emanuel is son of the devil's spawn” — Mr. Applegate’s grandson? — and “an individual who would sell his mother to get a vote. He would strap his children to the front end of a steam locomotive.” Notice no one in Washington jumped up to deny that characterization; it’s not like any Democrat could honestly say, “oh, come now, that doesn’t sound like our Rahm.” It’s kind of tough to deny allegations of maniacal aggression when one of the most famous stories about Emanuel involves him violently stabbing a table with a steak knife and screaming that all of his enemies would be dead, the most bloodthirsty dinner interruption by a Chicagoan since Al Capone went Babe Ruth on his underling’s noggin.
Then Massa describes a confrontation with Emanuel in a shower: "I am showering, naked as a jaybird, and here comes Rahm Emanuel, not even with a towel wrapped around his tush, poking his finger in my chest, yelling at me."
Read Tom Maguire of Just One Minute, this way I can justify stealing every word of this golden post: “They told me that if I voted for McCain, Democratic Congressman would be hounded on trumped-up ethics charges. And they were right! Oh, I confess — actually, they told me that if Obama were elected we would see raw, bare-knuckle Chicago-style politics brought to Washington. But I didn't realize the bare-ness would extend so far beyond the knuckles. Sometimes the non-cover-up is worse than the crime.”
Sistah Toldjah: “This could be just a case of sour grapes, but as we all know, this WH — and the Dem 'leadership' in the House and Senate — will stop at nothing in order to get some form of healthcare 'reform' passed before the November elections, and have even encouraged Congressional Democrats to sacrifice via putting their careers on the line in order to get it rammed through. So it is by no means outside of the realm of possibility that he was pushed out over his healthcare 'reform' vote.”
Bruce McQuain at QandO draws an interesting contrast: “Of course, he has a point considering the outcome of the Rangel ethics probe in which Rep. Charles Rangel got off with nothing more than a virtual slap on the wrist (the ethics panel nor Democratic leadership requested he step down from his chairmanship of the Ways and Means Committee, pressure from other Democrats drove it) and he still retains his seat. He’s also a 'yes' vote on the health care bill. Massa, of course, is a ‘no’. I’m not sure which side is right on the allegations or their seriousness (here’s Massa’s side of it), but it is clear there’s a double standard at work given the treatment of Rangal v. Massa. And one can only hope that Massa will change his mind and continue to sound off about his treatment and expose the double standard. As someone said, if it is true, it amounts to extortion by the House leadership (vote our way or we do an ethics probe). But on top of the bribery we see daily, I’m not sure anyone should be surprised.”
