home

20 Centrist Dems: No On Stupak, Yes On The Public Option

Adam Bonin set up this Act Blue page for 20 Democratic representatives in competitive districts who voted No on Stupak and Yes on the public option. This is "moderate centrism" you can support imo. The representatives were:

AZ-01 Kirkpatrick, Ann
AZ-05 Mitchell, Harry
AZ-08 Giffords, Gabrielle
KS-03 Moore, Dennis
NY-19 Hall, John
FL-08 Grayson, Alan
MI-07 Schauer, Mark
NY-24 Arcuri, Mike
WI-08 Kagen, Steve
CA-11 McNerney, Jerry
IL-08 Bean, Melissa
IL-11 Halvorson, Debbie
IL-14 Foster, Bill
MN-01 Walz, Tim
NY-23 Owens, Bill
NH-01 Shea-Porter, Carol
NY-01 Bishop, Timothy
OH-15 Kilroy, Mary Jo
OR-05 Schrader, Kurt
NV-03 Titus, Dina

< Reactions to Colo. Judge's Medical Marijuana Decision | Up Or Down Vote For Health Care Reform >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    If you want to see Dr. Steve Kagen stay (none / 0) (#1)
    by Cream City on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:38:29 AM EST
    in Congress, he will need help -- he's facing quite a fight in his district, based in Green Bay.  I'm sorry to not see my Congresswoman on the list.  A call to make. . . .

    And the call reveals (none / 0) (#12)
    by Cream City on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 05:28:39 PM EST
    that my Congresswoman is overconfident, I think.

    Parent
    Not bad! (none / 0) (#2)
    by Steve M on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 10:50:56 AM EST
    Melissa Bean is making the case here for taking it easy on bad Democrats.  Just look, we left her in office long enough and she finally cast a good vote!

    And BTD, you were so hard on Alan Grayson...

    Here's my problem with Grayson (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:00:03 AM EST
    His personna is of a wacko, but he does not connect that personna with a position on particular issues.

    Parent
    yes, but... (none / 0) (#7)
    by Dadler on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:23:15 PM EST
    ...in our pathetic political climate, anyone with real passion on the left (if there is any) will ALWAYS look like, be framed as, a wacko, simply because there basically ISN'T a left in this country anymore on any scale.

    The middle has simply become the fence everyone sits on when they do not have the nads to take a risk and actually DO something.

    Parent

    and Bill Foster (none / 0) (#4)
    by Julene on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:26:51 AM EST
    I wonder what got into those two... I'll stop my hatefest for the amount of time it took them to vote correctly in this case.

    Well, that's over now.

    Parent

    That district swung HARD for Obama (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:58:28 AM EST
    Regarding Stupak (none / 0) (#5)
    by Spamlet on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 11:51:10 AM EST
    John Hall isn't really a centrist. He's more (none / 0) (#8)
    by tigercourse on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 12:49:41 PM EST
    of a liberal. And he's going to be in a major fight this upcoming election.

    It's possible (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 02:47:28 PM EST
    But I expect the Democratic ticket to do well in that district. Schumer will win, and Cuomo should too.

    Parent
    Stupak is Stealth Attack on Women's Rights (none / 0) (#10)
    by norris morris on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 04:14:50 PM EST
    The Stupak Amendment assault on Roe vs Wade accomplishes what even Bush did not do. As women who fought for decades and finally won the right, to determine their own choices, this is a terrible compromise on the part of Obama and Pelosi in pushing through this terrible bill.

    Obama wants a bill even one as tepid and ineffictive as this  to save his presidency. He's wavered and dodged for political cover all these months, and now the hero of women decides they can be thrown under the bus if it suits him politically.

    The healthcare bill is no excuse to rob women in a Republican coup that makes abortion almost impossible even if a woman is willing to pay.
    The Amendment is entirely prohibitive and Pelosi and Obama will hear about this for a long time.

    It appears that the Republicans have once again outsmarted the Democrats in finding their weaknessness and making a core issue count. The Democrats are sadly showing us  again that they don't know how to govern.

      They cannot  be a party of core values and ethics when this kind of legal swindle of tens of millions of women can be tolerated by their fellow Dems.  When the Senate gets through with this it will even be worse, as Obama's weaknesses have surfaced, and he will do anything to get "a bill" through even if it delivers more victims to the Insurance Monopoly.

    Obama has also made his backroom silent deal with Big Pharma to accept their offer of $80 million over 10 yrs as "drug reform". Ha! After making profits of $77billion last year the Drug monopoly couldn't be more thrilled. This is a piddling amount. And who did Obama make this deal with?

    Billy Tauzin ex Republican congressman/lobbyist who along with Tom Delay screwed the seniors when putting the Doughnut Hole in the current Medicare RX drug bill. The "Hole" is quickly reached in this insurance even as premiums continue. So seniors in a few months find themselves paying for insuranced they can't get when the cap amt reaches "The Hole".

    Tauzin left congress and went to BigPharma at $2million a yr, and currently is BigPharma's lead lobbyist. So Seniors get screwed along with the general public on continued high drug prices.

    Did you watch any of the floor (none / 0) (#11)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 04:48:41 PM EST
    debate over the weekend? The Republicans kept this 12" stack of papers bound in a big black band so they could slam it on the podium over and over again in an effort to drive home to the people how cumbersome and over the top the bill is. The bill is actually 1990 pages. That's about 2 reams of paper, which stacks only half the height of what the Republicans were using as their dramatic prop.

    One can't read the Stupak Amendment and fully understand it unless they actually strike the lines on the pages of the bill, and insert the section where requested. The only possible way to know what the Stupak Amendment does is to also know what it leaves in place.

    Personally, I think it is an insulting amendment that has only one intent, and that is to underscore and re-phrase what was already in the bill just so they could grandstand their personal opinions on abortion.

    If you see something different, it would be so much easier to understand what you are saying if you would quote the bill, and make sure that what you are quoting is the entirety of what the bill says on any single subject.


    Parent

    I think you are right (none / 0) (#13)
    by Spamlet on Wed Nov 11, 2009 at 06:30:52 PM EST
    There are two issues, of course.

    One, the amendment, according to many, doesn't really appear to change what was already in the bill.

    Two, the amendment's passage, though it did gain the 3 votes necessary to pass the bill in the House (for what that's worth), also gave us the spectacle of Democrats using women's reproductive freedom as a bargaining chip and inspiring outrage in many women, including those of us no longer at risk of pregnancy or the need for an abortion.

    The Democrats underestimate that outrage at their peril.

    Parent