Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Dale Baker who wrote (131569)	2/26/2010 12:00:55 PM
From: JohnM	Respond to of 541344

I saw that and completely agree with Dionne. Needs to be said every time the claim comes up.

To: Dale Baker who wrote (131569)	2/26/2010 1:10:56 PM
From: Paul Smith	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541344

I think the piece that Dale posted is correct - the Chuck Todd report - BUT what it does is highlight that Pelosi has the hard job of getting the Senate bill thru the House and the situation is not the same as it was when the House last voted on a different version. As I noted in a different post, I don't think Pelosi has the votes. The problem is the House, not the Senate. This is from today's Wall Street Journal - it seems common to attack the source ( WSJ is a right wing rag, etc.) but rather than focusing on that, is this the actual situation or not? ------------------ If the speaker had the votes post-Brown to pass the Senate bill, we'd be living under ObamaCare. She didn't have them then, and yesterday's summit was a sideshow to the problems she has getting them now. A few numbers: Mrs. Pelosi passed her health-care bill in early November, with three votes to spare. The one Republican yes has since bailed. On the Democratic side, one vote has left Congress, one has died, and one retires this week. A smaller Congress means Mrs. Pelosi only needs 216 votes. If all were equal to November, she's at 216. Only it isn't November. It's nearly March, and the speaker is being asked to pass a bill vastly different from her own, in the wake of a crushing electoral defeat and in light of dire public-opinion polls. Mrs. Pelosi has at least 11 Democrats with big problems with the Senate's flimsy language on publicly funded abortions. This is the same crew that nearly derailed her first bill, and whose threats at the time were serious enough to cause Mrs. Pelosi to throw over her liberals in favor of pro-life demands. For many, this is a moral issue that can't be changed with Cornhusker kickbacks or "atmospherics." Rep. Bart Stupak, the Michigan Democrat who spearheaded the pro-life fight, has already declared the Senate bill "unacceptable." And the Conference of Catholic Bishops has no intention of now giving these pro-life Democrats an out. Another reality is Mrs. Pelosi's many announced retirements. The conventional wisdom holds that some Blue Dogs who voted no the first time—say, Tennessee's John Tanner—might now be willing to stick it to their constituents as their last act in Congress. Maybe. online.wsj.com