Looking at the numbers, I don’t see a really good way to evade the Stupak bloc without pulling the trigger on the executive order from the President clarifying no federal funding for abortion services. While Diana DeGette has agreed to such a maneuver, I’ve heard nobody in the Stupak bloc actually do the same. Apparently members are reading the proposed language.
House Majority Whip James Clyburn is going to give members a few hours to review the draft language of an executive order on abortion before he gets back to whipping them. The order is still being drafted and has not yet been circulated.
“I’m sure hopeful,” Clyburn said, of the order’s ability to pickup votes. “I understand the language is being read by various people.”
He says he doesn’t know whether the order will satisfy pro-life Democrats, “but we’re going to be taking a measure of that within the next couple of hours to make sure.”
Stupak has said throughout that he merely wants to affirm current law, and presumably that’s all an executive order would do. But as Suzy Khimm says, Stupak’s kind of backed himself into a corner by arguing that only his amendment would be sufficient. Of course, the executive order is designed to peel off votes softer than Stupak on the issue, like Kathy Dahlkemper, Marcy Kaptur, Steve Driehaus, or the two West Virginia Reps., Nick Rahall and Alan Mollohan.
In a twist, Republicans may offer their own Stupak language inside a motion to recommit. David Waldman tells you more than you ever need to know about that action. But basically, motions to recommit have in recent years been used by the minority to force a distasteful vote on the majority. Certainly the Stupak amendment qualifies. And as it has passed the House already with 240 votes, it certainly good again, which would cause all kinds of problems.
The session tomorrow will begin around 2:00 pm ET. Three votes – potentially four – will be taken. First there will be a vote on the rule, with an hour of debate on it. Expect a vote around 3:00 ET. Then there will be two hours of debate on the reconciliation bill. That will get a vote around 5:00 ET. There would be no debate in between the reconciliation bill and the Senate bill, which would happen around 5:30 ET. If there is a motion to recommit, that would get sandwiched in before the vote on the reconciliation bill.
See you then.




10 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Thank you for the schedule and for all you are doing with the whip count – much appreciated.
I just have one question, just for clarification: since Kucinich caved, is there still anyone in the “Lean No” or “unknown” categories that is a progressive? Maybe a sort of low-key, lesser known, newbie Kucinich-before-castration type? Or is all the remaining opposition in the Stupak and/or fiscal/deficit hawk category?
I would say no. Even Lynch’s opposition may be a cause of his anti-choice stance more than his rhetorical flourish against the excise tax et al.
Thanks, David.
Has Doggett stepped up…our local paper had him still on the fence, I think.
What Executive Order giveth, pixie dust could taketh away.
Well there’s good Pixie dust and evil Pixie dust I guess
Glenn Nye – No http://hamptonroads.com/2010/03/first-term-democrat-nye-voting-against-health-care-bill
I think his opposition is more related to the huge Brown victory in his district, but he actually gave a good liberal case against the bill to NPR. I was impressed.
Thanks, David.
What I was looking for is the possibilty that someone (perhaps Lynch?) might end up being the only progressive (other than on abortion) who votes no and the bill goes down in flames. This would position that lone rep to claim the mantle DK had, and would still have, if he hadn’t choked.