Just a few odds and ends as debate occurs on the floor of the House on the health care bill. There will be a series of speeches, then voting on the Republican substitute and the Stupak amendment. I don’t think anyone has a handle on what the vote looks like on the Stupak Amendment, but HCAN is whipping the vote against it. Here’s the calling tool.

There’s also going to be a “motion to recommit” from the Republicans, a procedural motion that they are going to lard up with anti-immigrant language that would essentially ban the undocumented from buying health insurance with their own money. There’s actually a shot they get a significant number of Democratic votes on that as well, though I doubt they get 40.

John Boehner is talking right now about the Stupak Amendment. Calls it “grateful” that we’ll have this amendment in the House, but asks Rep. Waxman if the Stupak language will remain in the bill if it passes. Waxman could not possibly guarantee that, and he says so. Boehner then says that Waxman just proved his point, says it’s a trick to secure enough votes to move the bill through the floor today. He doubts that the language will appear in the final version of the bill. I wish he was right.

As Jon Walker notes, a law with the Stupak amendment and an anti-discrimination clause would be in direct conflict and could be used by insurers to shield them from having to pick up low-income customers:

If the insurance companies offering plans on the exchange are not allowed to turn down any costumers, it means no basic insurance plan on the exchange could cover abortion. There would be no way to prevent that at least one of the plan’s costumer would be be using affordability tax credits to help purchase the plan. So the effect is no plan sold on the exchange could offer abortion coverage as part of its basic package.

The contradiction could be solved in a different manner. The decision could be that insurance companies who offer plans covering abortion on the exchange would be allowed to turn down costumer who using affordability tax credits. This would create a dangerous loophole for the new guaranteed issue rule. This could led to the ghettoizing of the health insurance exchange. Insurers would know that offering plans that cover abortion would prevent low income Americans from being able to sign up. Low income Americans tend to have higher medical cost and are therefore less profitable, less desirable costumers. Offering abortion coverage would be a simple way for an insurance companies to keep them out of their risk pool. Since the exchange has dangerously weak risk adjustment mechanisms, this Stupak Amendment could become a profitable tool used by insurers to discriminate against low income Americans.

As I noted in the previous thread, 15 “Democrats” voted against the rule, even though that would include a vote on the Stupak Amendment. These 15 Democrats didn’t want a health care bill to come to the floor, period. Here they are, again:

Jason Altmire, Brian Baird, Dan Boren, Bobby Bright, Artur Davis, Charlie Melancon, Gene Taylor, Travis Childers, Parker Griffith, Jim Marshall, Walt Minnick, Ike Skelton, Heath Shuler, Loretta Sanchez, Frank Kratovil

My guess would be that, with this latest outrage, the leadership has the votes to pass the bill. They’re gambling that, if the amendment does not pass, Stupak and his cadres will say they gave it a shot and they’ll vote to go along; or, if it passes, pro-choice liberals will do the same. Either way, they get the bill through and Rahm Emanuel gets his “win.”

Jim Cooper is voting yes on a health care bill he doesn’t want to see made into law. He’s voting yes to advance the debate.

My reason for voting yes is to advance the cause of health care reform by forcing the Senate to act. Without passage of this House bill, the Senate could delay reform indefinitely. That would be the worst possible outcome because our current health-care system is not sustainable. Congress needs to pass good health legislation in the next few months for the good of the country.

Passing legislation is a little like writing a term paper in school. The first draft is usually not very good. The second draft is better — H.R. 3962 is the second draft. The bill that the Senate will vote on will be the third draft, which I expect to show major improvement. The final draft will be written next month when the House and the Senate vote on the same bill. I will continue to work hard to make sure that the final legislation helps all of our families get quality, affordable health care.”

Per the comments on my whip count bill from yesterday, Bill Foster is a yes. I could update the whip, but the Stupak Amendment really complicates things.

UPDATE: Rep. Stupak says he has the votes, but he’s been bluffing throughout this debate. If Nancy Pelosi wants to twist arms and get that vote struck down, she can. Stupak’s only claiming 220 votes for the amendment. If it’s that close, and Pelosi allows it to pass, you can only conclude that she wants it that way. Same for the President.

UPDATE: Betty Sutton, considered undecided, is speaking on the floor in favor of the bill.