-
Adieu, Adieu, Remember Me
March 25, 2011 | 39 comments
-
DeMint's Defense of RomneyCare is Ignorant...And Dangerous
March 17, 2011 | 85 comments
-
McConnell Pushing Vote to Block the EPA from Regulating Carbon Emissions
March 17, 2011 | 9 comments
-
More Barbour on Afghanistan
March 16, 2011 | 8 comments
-
House Passes Three Week Spending Bill
March 15, 2011 | 8 comments
The Spectacle Blog
Earlier this afternoon, House Democrats voted down a Republican measure that would have prevented the use of the "deem and pass" strategy, or Slaughter rule, paving the way for the House to pass the Senate bill without directly voting on it. It was a 222 to 203 vote, which, by one way of looking at it, reaffirms the sense that Democrats will find some way to ram the health care bill through. But looking at the roll call vote, we see an odd collection among the 28 Democrats who voted with Republicans -- some of those who voted against the use of the Slaughter rule were thought to be leaning "yes" on the underlying bill, while some of those who voted for the Slaughter rule were thought to be leaning "no." Sean Trende rounds up the key names, and argues, "In the end, you probably can't read too much into this. It's a procedural vote, and some of the members will probably be eventual 'nays' who wanted to support the leadership on a tough procedural vote. Some of the members are probably voting 'nay' so that they can say, I tried to stop the Slaughter rule, and preferred and up-down vote, but I had no choice."
With that said, it is particularly weird that some of those Democrats who voted for the Slaughter rule today have gone out of their way to specifically condemn the use of the procedure to pass the health care bill.
Earlier today, Rep. Stephen Lynch, a Massachusetts Democrat who voted for the House bill in November announced he would vote against the latest version. Among the reasons he offered was his beef with the process: “It’s disingenuous,” he said, according to the Boston Herald. “It would really call into question the credibility of the House.” Yet he voted for the Slaughter rule anyway.
And then there's Rep. Jason Altmire, who was a "no" the first time around, and has done so much public hemming and hawing over how he might end up voting, that if he loses his seat in November, he might want to consider a role in a local theater playing Hamlet. Earlier this week on Fox, Altmire attacked the "deem and pass" strategy. “I have a big issue with the way they are doing the process," he said. "I think it’s wrong, and my constituents don’t like it." And yet he went on to vote for that very strategy.
If Altmire and Lynch wilt so easily on a procedural vote, are opponents of the legislation kidding themselves by thinking there's a chance they may actually stand up to President Obama and Speaker Nancy Pelosi and vote "no" on the final bill?
Video of Altmire condemning the Slaughter rule below.
View all comments (25) | Leave a comment
Leave a Comment
More Blog Posts by Philip Klein
http://spectator.org/blog/2010/03/18/altimre-lynch-reverse-stance-o
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Herbert Hoover's Long-Awaited Magnum Opus
- The United Nations' Rogue Agency
- Religion Is Not the Enemy
- Digital Subscription (Save 78%)
- Buy a single issue (Save 50%)
- Send Spectator as a gift
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
MarkJ| 3.18.10 @ 6:29PM
"Altmire": I think in German that means "Lying weasel."
Pingback| 3.18.10 @ 8:29PM
Trouble in Nancy’s Kingdom: Pelosi’s Floor Whip Rep. Stephen Lynch Won’t Condone “De links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Spicy Joker| 3.18.10 @ 9:52PM
Jason Altliar and the rest of the Lap Dog Democraps will vote for this bill because they know they're going to lose their seats anyway.
Lazy Jack| 3.18.10 @ 10:03PM
The Democrat Mantra:
Always say nay before voting yea
What better way to increase your pay
Because as we’ve learned, that’s the Chicago way
The legislators designated "Democrat" will all likely cave by Sunday. Congressman Jason Altmire is just one more terrible example. They all now appear to buy the premise that if healthcare is not passed, the President and the Democrat party will pay the ultimate price.
Never mind that the legislation itself appears to violate Article 1, Section 8 of the constitution.
Never mind that the legislation violates Amendment 10.
Never mind that the 10 year cost will likely be more than double the mathematically inept CBO estimate.
Never mind that the Massachusetts experiment is an economic disaster for both the state and the citizens of the state.
Never mind that our suddenly monstrous debt will likely send the dollar into a spiral, with the trigger point being this bill, thereby causing inflation and robbing the poor of more hard earned wages.
Never mind that there is ample proof that government run healthcare in Great Britain, Canada, and Cuba are significantly inferior to the U.S. and rely on the technology generated in the U.S. market for any semblance of innovation.
The President now is collecting votes by stating that a loss will cost the party of the Democrat his Presidency. Never mind that no President or presidency is worth the terrible price of this horrible legislation.
The irony is that the sob story the President is telling (That his Presidency is doomed if this pig is not passed) is probably wrong. If this legislation passes, it is more likely that his agenda ends here. The opposition, lawsuits, and repeal movement will be so steady little else will likely be done until the 2012 election, costing us not only the terrible economic and human toll in the bill, but also at the expense of any other meaningful legislation. The democrats will be forced to spend endless months defending such a harmful action instead of working on their agenda. Finally, political illiterates like me will likely open our wallets and our mouths in the hope we can hire enough Republicans - even if we disagree with their more septic ideas – in the hope this injustice can be remedied.
As for Jason Altmire, here is hoping his constituents say nay next time around. He and the rest deserve it.
Best,
Lazy Jack
For More See
http://thanksforthelaughs.word.....onscience/
reebok| 3.18.10 @ 10:33PM
Welcome to Shop reebok wholesale shoes' online shop. Here, you can see our main sales are reebok easytone wholesale and reebok easy tone. If you buy reebok shoes in our store, you can get more discounts and privileges. And this is our wholesale reebok shoes Shop. This website sells reebok easytone. Reebok easy tone is the best pair of your all shoes,you can make a purchase for reebok easytone shoes online.I guarantee you will be fond of reebok easy tone shoes.
rayv| 3.19.10 @ 5:48AM
With each passing season,ray ban sunglasses sale styles change.ray ban 2010 sunglasses are like any other fashion accessory.So newer styles
can be seen at red-carpet and glamour queens on magazine covers andeventson the faces of Hollywood stars,at the same time,old
styles become the kind of ray ban wayfarer that "your grandmother used to wear,"Eventually those old styles stage comebacks as "retro"
ray ban sunglasses, and the fashion cycle comes full circle.
At the time,you can choose one kind of ray ban 2010 sunglasses if you guys want to look like Heath Ledger on the beach.
Pingback| 3.19.10 @ 12:20PM
Democrats in the Deathmobile | America Watches Obama links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.21.10 @ 11:53AM
Democrats in the Deathmobile « Thoughts Of A Conservative Christian links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
office 2007| 3.26.10 @ 9:37PM
office pro 2007 VS office ultimate 2007 !
louis vuitton| 4.26.10 @ 10:41PM
This illustrates the awkward position red- and purple-district Democrats find themselves in after a year of tough votes forced by the Obama administration and the congressional Democratic leadership. canada goose another ACORN revelation (presumably from the O'Keefe/Giles video duo) is coming tomorrow, and he characterized it as "devastating.
luna33| 6.30.10 @ 12:15PM
Pelosi says bipartisanship is just way overrated. You gotta love her… Rampes de Chargement
cody| 7.16.10 @ 2:34PM
Vote in November.