The topline news is that Scott Murphy, who has gone back and forth on health care, has come out in favor of the legislation. Murphy was a No last time. His vote makes it 7 Democrats who voted against the bill last time coming around to voting for it this time.

That means that Democrats could survive a Stupak bloc as big as 8 and win this thing, if you do the math. However, Stephen Lynch and Mike Arcuri are No votes. So that brings it down to 6. And there are potentially more than 6 Nos out there. We know about Stupak, Donnelly, Lipinski, Costello and Driehaus. But there’s also Joseph Cao. And Marcy Kaptur. And Kathy Dahlkemper. And Chris Carney. And Nick Rahall.

Rahall told the Charleston Daily Mail that the lack of abortion language in the Senate bill is a deal-breaker for him.

When asked if he would vote against a bill that didn’t include such language, Rahall said, “Correct.”

Unless the Dems can peel some of those votes away, it would be very tough for them. They’d have to pick up practically all the remaining No to Yes votes.

So that could explain this tweet from The Hill’s Jeffrey Young:

Pro-choice female Dems are shuttling in and out of Pelosi’s office and they won’t say why.

The Speaker is probably preparing them for pulling the trigger on a Stupak deal. Not saying it’s definitely going to happen, but that it’s in the realm of possibility.

My running count shows 201 yes, but I’m adding Rahall and Carney to the Stupak-curious bloc and making them lean no votes. So it’s 201-209, but with leaners? 207-214. If a Stupak deal is struck, passage looks secure, unless the Pro-Choice caucus revolts. If not, Pelosi will have to draw an inside straight. It’s very tight right now.

UPDATE: If you look hard at the numbers, you can see why Pelosi is talking with Stupak and pro-choice women. With 214 No or lean No votes (including the Stupak bloc), Pelosi would have to prevent Dahlkemper and Kaptur from joining them. Then she would need all the other uncommitted votes, save one. That means she would have to get everyone who voted yes last time, plus Jim Matheson or Harry Teague (and all the lean Yes votes who went No last time, like Brian Baird and John Tanner). It’s just not that plausible.

The numbers…

Tuesday, 3/16/2010 Voted Retiring Stupak PVI No Leaning No Unknown Leaning Yes Yes
Aye Nay
Definite No (32):
1 Adler, John X R+1 1
2 Barrow, John X D+2 1
3 Boren, Dan X R+14 1
4 Boucher, Rick X R+11 1
5 Bright, Bobby X R+16 1
6 Chandler, Ben X R+9 1
7 Childers, Travis X R+14 1
8 Davis, Artur X D+18 1
9 Davis, Lincoln X R+14 1
10 Edwards, Chet X R+20 1
11 Herseth-Sandlin, Stephanie X R+9 1
12 Holden, Tim X R+6 1
13 Kissell, Larry X R+2 1
14 Kratovil, Frank X R+13 1
15 Marshall, Jim X R+10 1
16 McIntyre, Mike X R+3 1
17 McMahon, Michael X R+4 1
18 Melancon, Charlie X R R+12 1
19 Minnick, Walt X R+18 1
20 Peterson, Collin X R+6 1
21 Ross, Mike X R+7 1
22 Shuler, Heath X R+6 1
23 Skelton, Ike X R+14 1
24 Taylor, Gene X R+20 1
25 Arcuri, Mike X R+1 1
26 Costello, Jerry X S D+3 1
27 Donnelly, Joe X S R+4 1
28 Driehaus, Steve X S D+1 1
29 Lipinski, Dan X S D+11 1
30 Lynch, Stephen X D+8 1
31 Stupak, Bart X S R+3 1
32 Altmire, Jason X R+6 1
Potential No-Yes Flips (5):
1 Baird, Brian X R D+0 1
2 Matheson, Jim X R+15 1
3 Nye, Glenn X R+6 1
4 Tanner, John X R R+6 1
5 Teague, Harry X R+6 1
Potential Yes-No Flips (16):
1 Bean, Melissa X R+1 1
2 Berry, Marion X S R+8 1
3 Cao, Joseph X S D+18 1
4 Carney, Chris X S R+8 1
5 Dahlkemper, Kathy X S R+3 1
6 Foster, Bill X R+1 1
7 Kanjorski, Paul X D+4 1
8 Kaptur, Marcy X S D+10 1
9 Michaud, Mike X D+5 1
10 Mitchell, Harry X R+5 1
11 Mollohan, Alan X R+9 1
12 Ortiz, Solomon X R+2 1
13 Owens, Bill X R+1 1
14 Pomeroy, Earl X R+10 1
15 Rahall, Nick X S R+6 1
16 Space, Zack X R+7 1
Committed Votes
Democratic 201
Republican 177
TOTAL 209 5 10 6 201