We’re getting to an end game here, and so the counts will come fast and furious at this point. I think that it’s good to look at the count right when the CBO numbers have been released as a good baseline for the future.
So here was the last whip count. Changes since then:
• Mike Arcuri, a lean no, has told colleagues he’s a No on the bill. He voted Yes last time. In addition, I have enough information to make John Barrow a No.
• Dan Lipinski claims that Bart Stupak has 12 members, including him, switching to No on the bill because of the abortion funding language, but I think it’s a bluff. I think there are certainly some, like Stupak, Jerry Costello (who I’m putting in the confirmed Stupak bloc), Lipinski, and Joe Donnelly, but others might be conflicted. Steve Driehaus says he’s in the bloc, but gives himself a small out. Marcy Kaptur is straight-up lying about what the abortion language in the Senate bill would do, but she’s bringing up other points as well. So it’s completely unclear.
• In fact, I’m taking Kathy Dahlkemper off the confirmed Stupak board and into the Stupak-curious bloc. The anti-reform activists ran an ad in her district that claimed the bill would threaten Americans with cancer, basically. Dahlkemper’s parents both recently died of cancer and she is indignant about that. That could be the peg that puts her to yes. People change their votes for weird reasons.
• We’re apparently going to hear Harry Teague’s decision today.
• Utah doctors are making a major push to get Jim Matheson to Yes, and have gained some free media for their efforts.
• I mentioned the immigration restrictions before. It’s going to be a very tough vote for Luis Gutierrez, but I’m still not seeing him as a No.
• This list of labor targets on the Stupak bloc is interesting, but I’m thinking they’re flying as blind as the rest of us.
• Suzanne Kosmas, a former No, sounds more and more like a Yes. She’s a key get for leadership. Baron Hill sounded like a Yes coming out of the caucus meeting, too. In fact, I’ll take him off the board.
Where does that leave us? Arcuri and Costello and Barrow are No votes. Dahlkemper goes into the undecided category. Baron Hill’s a yes. We’re at 192-208, and with leaners, 205-210. I expect those leaners to get firmed up in the next few hours.
The totals:
Definite YES:
192 Democrats, including Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), who voted No last time, in November.
Definite NO:
178 Republicans, including Joseph Cao (R-LA), who voted Yes in November. He’s in the Stupak bloc.
Definite NO:
30 Democrats.
24 Democrats who voted No in November:
Bobby Bright, Mike McIntyre, Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, Walt Minnick, Artur Davis, Chet Edwards, Frank Kratovil, Mike Ross, Dan Boren, Gene Taylor, Larry Kissell, Collin Peterson, Ike Skelton, Jim Marshall, Mike McMahon, Charlie Melancon, Tim Holden, Ben Chandler, Health Shuler, Rick Boucher, Allen Boyd, John Adler, Lincoln Davis, John Barrow.
6 Democrats who voted Yes in November (“S” for confirmed Stupak bloc):
Mike Arcuri, Bart Stupak (S), Dan Lipinski (S), Jerry Costello (S), Joe Donnelly (S), Steve Driehaus (S).
12 potential Democratic No-Yes flip votes:
7 lean Yes:
Bart Gordon, Brian Baird, John Boccieri (Clyburn Three), Suzanne Kosmas, Betsy Markey, Scott Murphy, John Tanner.
4 undecided:
Jim Matheson, Harry Teague, Travis Childers, Jason Altmire.
1 lean No:
Glenn Nye.
19 potential Yes-No flip votes:
5 additional Stupak bloc (Stupak-curious):
Brad Ellsworth, Kathy Dahlkemper, Henry Cuellar, *Marion Berry, Marcy Kaptur.
6 lean Yes:
Paul Kanjorski, Dina Titus, Betty Sutton, Allan Mollohan, Bill Owens, Tom Perriello.
8 other undecided Democrats:
Zack Space, Chris Carney, Nick Rahall, Solomon Ortiz, Earl Pomeroy, Bill Foster, Harry Mitchell, Melissa Bean.
1 lean No:
Marion Berry.
Democrats need 24 of a combination of the 12 potential No-Yes flip votes and the 19 potential Yes-No flip votes. So they need 24 out of the remaining uncommitted 31. If you’re counting leaners, Democrats need 11 of the last 16 uncommitted.





34 Comments


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Are you willing to throw out a percentage chance of passage forecast, David?
FWIW: NBC reporting that Dem leadership says they are only 5 short. THis would mean Dem leadership has private reassurances behind the scenes.
No, please don’t.
If it in anyway underhandedly screws middle class and poor class Americans and preserves the status quo, I give it a 100% chance of passing.
Was Lipinski the guy who got in because of his father’s connections? I vaguely remember he got the nomination in an underhanded way, though I could be getting confused.
Votes, Schmotes.
Get your walking shoes on, paint your signs, pack your water bottle, march on your own street if you have to and don’t wait until this Saturday. Take a pan and a spoon, a whistle, don’t be quiet.
Kill the bill, and the corporate government too.
And, Dear Dennis, bundle all that progressive money and ship it to Nader. He is not afraid to vote his conscience.
Thanks for the update…It’s like watching the NCAA tournament…Oh wait, I can do that too! Gotta love technology!
Dem leadership is playing a game of momentum. I think they’re probably in that range of being close, based on what I’ve heard. But I’m not willing to put all those votes in their column just yet. We’ll know more later today.
What common threads link the Dem No votes? Are they Progressives? Abortion nuts? Anti tax Anti Insurance company bailout? are they in close races or are they in strong Dem districts and don’t need to bow to Obama’s threats?
Thanks David.
Combination of those things. Some are just conservatives who call themselves Democrats. Some think a Yes vote will kill their re-election hopes. But nobody’s voting against this from the left, I can assure you.
Dave Melissa Bean is from a district that hates taxes forcing people to buy health insurance would kill her election chances. That district hates taxes hates, hates, hates!
Damm! Nobody on the Left has the Stones to want to be the next House Speaker after Nancy loses the Dem’s House majority? We need Leaders.
Plus giving healthcare to poor/ code for Dark people with their money? That is not a selling point in her district.
Any other Dems got reports on the other no votes?
Dave do you or the Lake have files on Dem House and Senate members?
yup.
Wow, thanks for all the legwork in this post.
And I’m relishing the turn of phrase: stupak-curious. :D
this whole thing is making my head hurt. A lot.
Dan Lipinski took over his father’s seat with the support of Rahm Emanuel even though he lived in Indiana at the time and is a fervent anti-abortion nut. Iirc, he faced only one real primary challenger but in order to dilute the opposing vote set up two or three strawman candidates that took more liberal positions on the issues. It worked and Lipinski won the seat. It didn’t take long for him to be named one of the most corrupt members of Congress by CREW. He apparently remains good buddies with Rahmbo.
Us local commentors could help build up maps with history of many districts Melissa replaced a Phil Crane GOPer who held the district for decades and his one issue was he hated taxes.
Lynch from Massachusetts just declared no. What list was he on and does this affect this whip count? I didn’t see him on any of the waverers lists.
Nice sounds like a person we can target to primary. Melissa Bean is someone the GOP will will target as their first choice if they can’t beat her they can’t expect to win the House. But Dan sounds like someone we can beat especially if the anti abortion stuff gets added to this bill.
I am ashamed of Joe Donnelly, my rep. I would write to tell him so, but all I get back are form letters. What a turd.
Edit: not that I am FOR the bill, but Donnelly in the Stupidpak block is simply beyond belief.
Bowers says Lynch is a switch from a definite yes, so it is a bombshell canceling out Kucinich.
Maybe FDL can consider raising funds for Lynch? Or maybe it’s better to hold off until the actual vote (which I’m sure will be held open five hours while faint screams are heard just off camera on C-SPAN as wavering Dems wait to see who gets to vote no).
I think Joseph Cao will vote for the bill. Because he has to survive in a Dem district and also because he is smarter than most Republicans.
He is voting to pass the Senate Bill as well. Who would have thunk that being Jon Stewarts college roommate wouldnt have stopped him from selling us out to the Insurance Cartels? Has he returned his donations yet?
I suggest folks who support him take his own advice, and stop taking him seriously.
I am sooo confused!!!
The article here says the Democrats need 24 of 31 (77.4%) of the remaining votes when they have only picked up 192 of 400 so far (48%.)
The article here says the Democrats need 11 of 16 (68.8%) of the remaining non-leaning votes when they have only picked up 205 of 415 so far (49.4%.)
WHY then is the Democratic leadership claiming EVERY DAY that they already have the votes or are close to having the votes necessary for passage?
What makes it so likely that they are going to pick up such a large fraction of highly contested votes???
I have been watching web sites on the HC bills like a maniac for 72 hours, (actually more like an addict) but no more. Any fool can see where this is heading. The fiscally conservative democrats now have a fig leaf’s worth of cover by the spins their laughable leadership put on the absurdly tentative CBO report this morning. (Absolutely no mechanism for price controls ha ha ah) Stupak will make another deal last minute on abortion funding in the reconciliation measure (that really isn’t) that releases his 6-12 vote block, pisses off the left, and guarantees passage via the Slaughter option with room to spare. When the HC Dominatrix gives Arcuri a pass three days before the vote, you know it is in the bag. Three points, then I swear I am off this stuff for good.
1. I am a strong GOPer from a NE state (which makes me a moderate democrat everywhere else) but I am very impressed by your blogs’ coverage and vote tallying. I looked them all over. RCP; Politco; Roll Call, etc. etc. etc.) and yours was by far the most up do date and incisive. Other than the locofoco rants, it was quite accurate. On the other hand, like most left-wingers you may not have a real job and have as much time to waste everyday as I did the last three.
2. Your carping on liberal Congress people who sold out on the public option and (anticipating your plaintive renderings on Sunday) when the abortion language gets re-inserted into the package is the ultimate in naïveté. The dems who have sold out and will again come from Northeast states or DOJ gerrymandered minority districts down south. The only political threat they face is from the left. And who on that far side is going to challenge an incumbent for giving in to the House leadership to save the Obama presidency – anyone who does will be looked upon as a rambunctious fool. The old “Happy Warrior” phenotype in your party’s left wing has a long storied history precisely because it is so politically advantageous to become one.
3. Rahm is a prodigy, if you take genius to mean selling out your peeps. But then, he studied at the feet of a master.
Thanks to you and your party for giving my party the US Congress for at least a decade to come.
What is it about the Democratic ‘no’s? Why can’t they just abstain, or be otherwise engaged the day of the vote? Pelosi has enough without them to defeat the Republican blockade.
Not voting on big issues isn’t a good option: you piss off both sides AND invite your opponent to run attack ads on your absenteeism. The “empty chair” attack ad is still one of the most effective, esp. if you’re AWOL on the big votes.
How would you explain missing the vote on the biggest issue of the entire Congress? It’s simply aye or nay… anything else won’t fool voters on a big issue.
Good for Lynch!
The MOST IMPORTANT part of this awful bill was just dropped, according to the AP. Obama fails us.
Democratic aides say President Barack Obama’s plan for a watchdog agency with power to roll back excessive premium hikes by insurance companies has been dropped from the latest version of the health care bill.
Talking points aside and given the history of government programs, does anyone really believe it’s possible to add 30+ million new people to insurance rolls and not explode the deficit?
This country doesn’t have a revenue problem, it has a severe spending disorder. Every trick in the book has been used to make this bill look “neutral” yet that only means that we’ll ONLY have a $1,500,000,000,000.00 deficit. How many more years do you think that can be sustained? What happens when it can no longer be sustained? We can’t tax our way out of this.