House Democrats have 216 votes needed to pass health care reform

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: MSNBC (AP), CNN

chairman of House Democratic Caucus tells CNN.

=========

WASHINGTON - The chairman of the Democratic caucus in the House said on Sunday that his party had the 216 votes needed to pass President Barack Obama's historic health care bill.

Speaking on ABC's "This Week," Connecticut Rep. John Larson said, "We have the votes now — as we speak."

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35961584/ns/politics-health_care_reform/

---

A breaking news on CNN main webpage. Even if it did pass the House today, the reconcilliation would still have to go back to the Senate, despite the M$M's original hysteria that this was it and downplaying the fact that it would have to go back to the Senate and go through a new round of debate and attempts at amendment.

Edit to add MSNBC link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35961584/ns/politics-health_care_reform/ and add excerpt

Apparently this was said on ABC's "This Week" this morning...

[SkyDaddy7]

1. Excellent!!

However, I will believe it when Obama puts pen to paper!!

[thereismore]

2. Git'er done! nt

[placton]

3. 216 sell outs to Obama and the corporations

even including Kucinich. Dem promises are like toilet paper - and they use them to wipe up the crappy bill they are about to inflict on America. Oh, by the way? Pre-exisiting conditions will be cause to dump you for the next 4 years, as one spec-crapular feature of this.

[Frances]

20. What do you want? Totally free health care

It ain't gonna happen

[Honeycombe8]

34. So what's your recommendation? Let's hear it.

Single payer? Most Americans aren't sold on it, and most politicians won't vote for it.

Next up. What's your recommendation? (And don't forget to include how we're going to pay for it...that's a critical ingredient. No, we can't MERELY tax the wealthy. That won't get us enough money, plus there aren't enough politicians who would vote just for that.)

So let's hear it. It's easy to criticize, when you don't have to deal in realities. But let's hear what you have to say, when you ARE dealing with reality.

Let's hear your plan...break it out into provisions, and include the provisions and budgetary provisions on how we're going to pay for it.

Include everything you want. Every little thing you want.

Then, as a lalst thing, list every congress person and senator who will vote for it.

The alternative? Vote NO, and the health care discussion ends. For decades.

So YOU would have our choice to be: A dream that fails....or nothing at all, staying with what we have. Both would result in NOTHING being done for decades. Glad you're not responsible for anything in health care. I would hate for Americans to have to rely on someone like you for help.

[golfguru]

36. How about LIMITS on how high your HC premiums can be raised

by the insurers? Do you really believe they will eat
the additional cost of covering pre-conditions?

If yes, I have a slightly damaged bridge in Minnesota to sell you.

[vduhr]

41. Sadly, we've become a nation of

"I want it all and I want it now, and it's all about me!" Not everything we want is in this bill, but people who want to kill it don't seem to understand the consequences of killing it. As you said, it will be another decade - or longer - before this comes up again. We just CANNOT let this opportunity, no matter how small, slip by again. If we can't get everything we want from this, we at least have something to build on.

[mvd]

43. I wouldn't go that far

The bill doesn't just not have everything we want - it has none of the important provisions progressives want. I don't like this bill and the approach to getting to it one bit. The real reason it should pass is I can't see it being taken up again if defeated. Or we'd get a bill without even marginal improvements.

[mbperrin]

53. Actually, most Americans do support single payer, but the politicians

love them some insurance company money, so they won't vote for it. This is why single payer was kicked out of discussions from the get-go. Too much public support and no money for insurers or their pimps.

http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html

All kinds of polls here by all kinds of organizations, all with one thing in commong.

Single-Payer Poll, Survey, and Initiative Results

Date
Poll, Survey, or Initiative
Highlight
Details
July 2009 Kaiser Health Tracking Poll
Do you favor or oppose, "Having a national health plan in which all Americans would get their insurance through an expanded, universal form of Medicare-for all?"
Favor 58%, Oppose 38%, NA/DK 3%

July
2009 Time Magazine Would you favor or oppose a program that creates a national single-payer plan similar to Medicare for all, in which the government would provide healthcare insurance to all Americans?
Favor 49%, Oppose 46%, NA/DK 5%

Feb.
2009

Grove Insight Opinion Research "When given a choice of the current system or one "like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers," voters overwhelmingly chose the latter. A solid majority (59%) say they would prefer a national health insurance program that covers everyone, over the current system of private insurance offered to most through their emloyer."

Feb.
2009

New York Times/CBS News Poll Americans are more likely today to embrace the idea of the government providing health insurance than they were 30 years ago. 59% say the government should provide national health insurance, including 49% who say such insurance should cover all medical problems.

Nov. 2008 Ballot initiative question in Massachusetts, “Should the representative from this district be instructed to support legislation creating a cost-effective single payer health insurance system that is available to all residents, and oppose laws penalizing those who fail to obtain health insurance?” "....local ballot initiatives supporting single payer and opposing individual mandates passed by landslide margins in all ten legislative districts where they appeared. With almost all precincts tallied, roughly 73 percent of 181,000 voters in the ten districts voted YES...."

Apr. 2008 Quinnipiac Poll in PA, FL, OH
9. Do you think it's the government's responsibility to make sure that everyone in the United States has adequate health-care, or don't you think so?
In Pennsylvania; Yes 65%, No 31%, NA/DK 4%

Apr. 2008 Annals of Internal Medicine, Study of Physician Support of National Health Insurance. (Includes a comparison of 2002 and 2007 surveys.) "...59 percent of them 'support government legislation to establish national health insurance,' while 32 percent oppose it and 9 percent are neutral."

Dec.
2007

AP - Yahoo News Poll
Do you consider yourself a supporter of a single-payer health care system, that is a national health plan financed by taxpayers in which all Americans would get their insurance from a single government plan, or not?
Yes 54%, No 44%, Refused / Not Answered 2%

Dec. 2007 AP - Yahoo Poll
14. "Which comes closest to your view?
34% - The United States should continue the current health insurance system in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance
65% - The United States should adopt a universal health insurance program in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that is run by the government and financed by taxpayers
2% - Refused / Not Answered"


Dec. 2007 New Hampshire Medical Society, Survey of New Hampshire Physicians "Two thirds of New Hampshire physicians, including 81% of primary care clinicians, indicated they “would favor a simplified payor system in which public funds, collected through taxes, were used to pay directly for services to meet the basic healthcare needs of all citizens.”

May 2007 CNN/Opinion Research Poll
30. Do you think the government should provide a national health insurance program for all Americans, even if this would require higher taxes?
64% - Yes,
35% - No,
2% - No opinion


Feb. 2007 New York Times/CBS News Poll
27. Do you think the federal government should guarantee health insurance for all Americans, or isn't this the responsibility of the federal government?
64% - Guarantee
27% - Not responsibility
9% - DK/NA

30. If you had to choose, which do you think is more important for the country to do right now, maintain the tax cuts enacted in recent years or make sure all Americans have access to health care?
18% - Cutting taxes
76% - Access to health insurance
1% - Neither
2% - Both
4% - DK/NA


Feb. 2007 Minnesota Medicine Magazine, Poll of Minnesota Physicians "Of 390 physicians, 64% favored a single-payer system, 25% HSAs, and 12% managed care. The majority of physicians (86%) also agreed that it is the responsibility of society, through the government, to ensure that everyone has access to good medical care."

Oct. 2005 The Harris Poll
“Please indicate whether you support or oppose the policy.”
“Universal health insurance”
75% - Strongly/Somewhat Favor
17% - Strongly/Somewhat Oppose

Nov. 2004 Kaiser Family Foundation
Health Poll Report Public Opinion of "Consumer-Driven" Plans

Oct. 2003 Washington Post/ABC News Poll
49. Which would you prefer – (the current health insurance system in the United States, in which most people get their health insurance from private employers, but some people have no insurance); or (a universal health insurance program, in which everyone is covered under a program like Medicare that's run by the government and financed by taxpayers?)
62 % Universal
33% Current
6% No opinion

[treestar]

83. Then why don't the voter make their opinions known to their elected

officials?

Instead of whining and playing the victim?

Oh, I forgot. That's what you do.

[vduhr]

39. I keep hearing this argument..

However, if the bill is scrapped, it would allow insurance companies to deny for pre-existing conditions for another decade or longer. So what do you want?

[treestar]

84. They want to whine and be victims

They learned there is power in that. Except there is not. Yet they have not figured that out.

Poor, poor, PITIFUL victims of insurance companies, the government, the DOL, the DINOs, the Blue Dogs, the republicans and everything else.

It's all about being a poor victim. Everyone who is actually doing something is a horrible victimizer.

[pampango]

40. All the progressive sold out while all the republicans stood up to the corporations? Is that

your take on things? I suppose someone who wants all the republicans to win and all the progressives to lose has to do some artful spinning. Good job.

[mbperrin]

54. No, the little pubbies have more support from other corporate types.

Insurance is solidly in the dem pocket now.

[pampango]

75. Who would those "other corporate types" be. And tell the health insurance companies

they are in our pocket, so they can stop funding ads to defeat this bill.

[mbperrin]

79. What ads have you seen to defeat the bill? AARP and their insurance

company have been supporting it solidly, and insurance stocks have been rising for days now anticipating the passage.

The other types are Caterpillar, for example, which really is running ads against it.

On Friday alone, the big insurers stocks rose from 2-4% that day while the market overall declined.

Symbol Last Trade Change Volume Intraday Related Info
CVH Mar 19 26.24 0.45 1.74% 2,128,888 Chart, Messages, Key Stats, more...
CI Mar 19 37.08 1.24 3.46% 7,779,686 Chart, Messages, Key Stats, more...
AET Mar 19 34.46 1.22 3.67% 14,334,096 Chart, Messages, Key Stats, more...
WLP Mar 19 65.07 1.25 1.96% 12,464,677 Chart, Messages, Key Stats, more...
UNH Mar 19 34.39 0.80 2.38% 21,827,590 Chart, Messages, Key Stats, more...

Believe it, these stocks would not be rising on bad news for their companies.

[robinblue]

4. Hoyer sitting next to him could not say he had the votes.

[Kingofalldems]

5. Boom shellack lack boom!!

[Jamel]

6. holdouts

MSNBC is reporting that they only have 214. The "ANTI-CHOICE" holdouts want an "executive order" from Obama saying abortion will not be paid with federal money.

[PSPS]

7. That's fine

The Executive Order merely states what is already in the bill. Obama already caved in on everything so this has no effect on anything other than to placate the fundies. Reading isn't their strong suit, you know.

[KTinOhio]

8. Why not an executive order stating that the sky is blue?

Federal funds can't be used for abortion now, and nothing about the HCR bill conflicts with that.

[verges]

11. That would be a nice touch! nt

[No Elephants]

14. If the wiki on the Hyde Amendment is accurate, it must be a rider to each bill

in order to be effective. It is not self-executing.

That conflicts indirectly with Pelosi's claim that the "Hyde Amenment is the law of the land."

Me, I'm too lazy to research it any further.

[No Elephants]

15. Congress, and only Congress, has the power of the purse AND the power to legislate.

I'm getting damned tired of elected officials of both parties tearing up the Constitution whenever it seems to suit them.

[pattmarty]

9. This empty POS bill has now become the political battle of the..............

............Obama presidency.

[bos1]

10. One step for a Congress, one giant leap for America! Yes We Can! History in the making

History in the making

[goclark]

13. This is going to be a good day ~ I just keep repeating it

so that it will come true1

:bounce:

[icee]

17. Disgrace in the making, you mean. The biggest transfer of

wealth to private enterprise in modern history.

[Frances]

21. Exactly what MOrning Joe Scarborough said

Why would insurance companies be spending $800,000 a day to defeat the bill if it is such a good deal for them?

Why would Ailes and Murdoch have Fox news going against the bill 24/7?

Use your brains

BTW the transfer of wealth has been from the middle class to Murdoch and Beck and Murdoch's other toadies

[icee]

25. Because the bill would be the first of more encroachments into

insurance company profits, which would cost them extra money to fight. But remember, the Obama provision that the government would now have a say in setting rates was overturned just a couple of days ago. That means the public will be forced to buy insurance from private industry who can basically charge what they want. Use YOUR brain.

[Barbara2423]

23. Tell that to the people with no insurance.

[icee]

26. Yes, I know... But you don't cut off your nose to spite your face. As

I said above to the other poster. The provision that said the government would be monitoring rate changes was overturned at the last minute. That means people are going to be forced to buy insurance from private companies for products where they can set any rate they want to.

[bos1]

24. Another Repub talking point, please

I like doing skeet shooting on them

[icee]

27. Oh, yeah, you're the dude talking about the wonderfulness of

mandated insurance for poor people, which will be facilitated by Medicaid, CHIP or a newly government agency. Did you bother to read the bill?

[bos1]

12. let's not take it for granted. Call our Representative NOW and say VOTE YES. Here's the website

http://advocacy.barackobama.com/healthcare/campaigns/18/call_scripts/59/call_sessions/new?source=20100319_DNC

Just enter your zip code, get the number and call. Do it now!

[No Elephants]

16. Surprise, surprise, surprise.

:sarcasm:

[ixion]

18. Super freakin' craptastic

They just can't get that whoopin' stick handed over to the GOP fast enough. Apparently, the old whoopin' stick wasn't big enough. :eyes:

[icee]

29. Right. I don't think Democrats in heavily Democratic precincts

will have to worry as much as those in marginally Democratic precints. Depends how much damage the bill does. But those pro-lifer Democrats that vote for this bill that are running in November will be soundly beaten.

[Zambero]

50. I disagree. The Catholic Church will provide plenty of cover

The politically active groups of nuns and bishops -- all enourage a "yes" vote on HCR and would not have done so if there was new language to enable federally funded abortions. The GOP can only overplay their hand so long. Once the bill is signed they run the risk of eroding support once people realize what's been gained -- removal of insurance caps, creation of low cost pools, an eventual ban on pre-existing penalties (effective immediately for children), and closing the Medicare D donut hole. This is essentially a compromise bill that includes a number GOP provisions that they in turn voted against en masse. If there's any backtracking and explaining to do, let them do so at their peril given the current obstructionism.

[metrodetroiter]

19. Why 216 votes?

OK, stupid question that I can't find the answer to anywhere.

Why are there only 216 votes needed to pass the reform bill. Why not 218, which would be the majority of 435, the number of members in the house of rep.

[Barbara2423]

22. Way to Go DEMS

[NYC Liberal]

28. There's actually 5 or 6 vacant seats right now.

I couldn't tell you exactly who (except Massa) but I do know there are vacancies.

[Ozymanithrax]

30. Now lets pass the most Progressive health care bill since Medicare and Medicaid...

We came, we saw, we will kick Republican Corporate ass...

[icee]

32. There is nothing remotely Progressive about this bill.

[Ozymanithrax]

74. Perhaps you should look up the definition of progressive.

Expanding Medicaid to 133% above the poverty line, that is progressive
ending the pre-existing conditions exemption for children is progressive.
getting adults with pre-existing conditions access to health care that can't kick them out is progressive.
Giving 31 million people access to health care is progressive.

By setting up programs that improve the lives of Americans and helping the 45,000 people who will die every year simply because they have no health care to get access to a doctor, fits the definition of progressive.

Calling for the bill to be defeated is not progressive. Consigning people to die and suffer because people don't like the answer chosen isn't progressive, it is regressive and conservative.

We progressivs will have to do a lot to make t his better. I hope the people that opposed this bill will join us in working for more progressive advances here in this country.

[naaman fletcher]

52. lol

you are kicking republican corporate ass by making it a legal requirement to buy their product? That's a good one.

Look, it's not Republican corporate ass.

There is one party. Sure they make a little show out of various issues.. but on the BIG issues, they are one in the same. It's all a fucking sideshow when that when the rubber meets the road and its time to bail out wall street, people think its a good idea because these supposed opponents both agree to do it.

Same fucking thing here. Put on a little show over health care, and end up mandating that everyone buy their shit product.

Gosh there are so many gullible people here.

[Ozymanithrax]

77. We are kicking Republican Corporate ass by defeating them on the biggest item they oppose...

Republicans opposed this bill 100%.
Health Insurance companies spent over 300 million to defeat it.

You damn right this kicks Republican Corporate Ass.

Better yet, they Corporate Republicans are gong to run this fall on a pledge to repeal health care.

So tell me, will you vote with progressives or will you vote with the Corporate Republicans who opposed the bill 100%.

[naaman fletcher]

78. It's all a game...

They pose and posture and in the end both parties bail out the banks, and in this case force 30 million people to be customers of the insurance industry. It's all a f'ing scam.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[icee]

35. Notice how Obama is saying one day last week that one of the

provisions of the bill would allow the government to monitor insurance company rate changes? Then two days after he said it, it was deleted from the bill. It was all a big scam! We now are now forcing Americans to buy health care with private companies who can charge exactly what they want. Pure fascism!

[annabanana]

37. naw.. I celebrated that during the BUSH years....n/t

[Honeycombe8]

38. Oh, puh-leeeez. Some people are so dramatic.

It doesn't "change" profits from where they were before. They were with the ins. cos., and they still will be.

It isn't fascist. You wouldn't say that if you were serious about what Hitler's fascism really meant to millions of unfortunate souls.

This is just a bill that subsidizes ins. policy premiums for the poor, and which forces ins. cos. to insure everyone, and forces everyone (incl. the young, healthy ones) to buy insurance, so that the risk is spread in the "pool." It also throws in some sort of vague "exchange" that no one seems to know what it is.

Nothing more. Nothing less. Not fascism. Not socialism. Not government takeover. Not throwing hte public to the lions.

It is pretty much what O campaigned on, except for the mandates.

No one loves it. But....if it gets passed, at least there can be discussions on amending it in the future. Without it being passed, there would be nothing to discuss for decades.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Codeine]

45. We need a DU moratorium

on the use of the term "fascist." We've long since robbed it of any meaning.

[butterfly77]

33. I will believe it when I see it..

[kirby]

44. "Even if it did pass today..."

Keep in mind, if it passes today, the Senate bill (when signed by Obama) becomes law. It is the so-called 'fixes' that will be part of another bill (to be passed via the budget reconcilitation process) which still needs to go to the Senate. As far as amendments to that bill, I believe it is very hard to amend a budget reconciliation bill. And I imagine Pelosi got promises from Reid that they have the 51 votes to pass the fixes.

[karynnj]

47. The reconciliation package must go to the Senate - no "back", because it never went there before

The fact is that if it passes today - health care IS passed. That's bill one. Then bill 2, which the House may also pass today - improves and fixes the first bill, which will be already passed. (Oddly, the Republicans and media had more of a point before "deem and passed" was passed.)

[BumRushDaShow]

76. To karynnj and kirby

Yes I agree. My intent was to note with the "back to the Senate" statement was that all last week, the gasbags were insisting that "Sunday" (today) was "it" and then the Prez. would sign "it" and there was nothing left to be done... This I know was complete b.s. There was no mention until ~Friday (and even then, done as an aside) that somehow the Senate had to again get involved to finalize the fix process - even after they spent so much time talking about "reconciliation" and that process in the Senate. As we know, today is just another step. Yet they wanted to rile up the teabaggers that "today" was "it".

It's just like how last summer, the same gasbags called Baucus' bill, "the bill", as if what was there in July would be "it" and nothing else would be changed and the House's bill didn't exist at all... until surprise surprise, the House voted on its own version in December. After that, there were crickets. It's like Rove's idiotic "the math" with them.

[brooklynite]

48. Foster (IL-14) a yes on health care

Source: Chicago Sun-Times

(Washington, DC) - Today, after evaluating the final text of the legislation, Congressman Bill Foster (IL-14) announced that he will vote in favor of the Health Insurance Reform bill, and released the following statement.

"After thorough consideration, I have decided to support the health insurance reform legislation because it eliminates pre-existing conditions, protects and strengthens Medicare and will significantly reduce the deficit by $1.3 trillion over 20 years. While the Senate bill itself is not perfect, many important improvements have been made so that the overall package is one that I can support.

This bill will give my constituents freedom from the fear of becoming uninsurable, and freedom to pursue better job opportunities or start a small business without the fear of losing their insurance. As a former small business owner, I was pleased to see that this bill will allow small businesses to thrive and expand without facing crippling health care costs.

In the past year I've heard from thousands of constituents who have passionately argued in favor of or against the legislation. Though there have been spirited disagreements about the details, almost everyone agrees that our health insurance system is broken. I've listened to small business owners who tell me they won't be able to continue to offer health insurance to their employees if costs continue to rise, and I've listened to individuals who have become uninsurable through no fault of their own - like one woman who was denied insurance because her health insurance company cited menopause as her pre-existing condition. I have also made it a priority to carefully read and analyze major pieces of legislation before casting my vote - and to think ahead about what will be best for our country 10, 20 and 50 years from now.

I want to make sure my constituents understand that I have heard their calls, read their emails and letters, seen their faxes, and I have weighed the concerns of those opposed and those in favor. In the last 72 hours, I also consulted with experts like Illinois Insurance Commissioner Michael McRaith, who confirmed the positive impact that this legislation will have on Illinois businesses and consumers. I ran for Congress to find workable solutions to the problems facing the families of the 14th District, and by controlling costs and eliminating pre-existing conditions as a barrier to health care, I have kept that promise.

I am pleased that this bill is endorsed by the AARP, the American Medical Association, the Mayo Clinic and dozens of other organizations. It was also important to my decision that the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office determined that the legislation will cut the federal deficit by $1.3 trillion over 20 years, and will increase the solvency of Medicare by nine years.

While I realize this has been a stressful exercise for our country's democracy, I believe that voices on both sides are to be thanked for actively participating in that democracy. Whether my vote today was one you support or oppose, I have listened to and balanced your concerns and believe that now, we must go forward together, Republicans and Democrats alike, and do everything possible to continue restoring our nation's economy so that everyone needing work can find it."

Read more: http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/03/foster_a_yes_on_health_care.html

[rosesaylavee]

49. My congressman.

Good. Now if he supports the Climate Change bill (unlike last summer), I will work to keep him there.

[dogfacedboy]

85. Foster's alright. Don't let the R-candidate in IL-14 win in November...

[rosesaylavee]

86. Agreed somewhat.

Foster is a bit slow to make decisions and without much if any fire in his belly. I hope we can keep him in there long enough for him to gain confidence to do what's right. I donated to his campaign last night. Last fall I told them in no uncertain terms I would campaign for him only if he voted for HCR and climate change. We're halfway there.

[naaman fletcher]

51. Health Insurance Reform.. LOL

Come on people. They are going to "reform" health insurance by mandating that everyone who is not a customer of the fucking insurance companies become one.

Really?

WTF is wrong with you people who think this is a good thing?

[grantcart]

55. Dems: 'We have the votes now' for health bill

Source: MSNBC

WASHINGTON - House Democratic leaders predicted that a rare Sunday session will produce one of the most significant legislative triumphs in decades: passage of a landmark health care overhaul that promises to provide coverage to millions of uninsured Americans.

The chances for House passage increased Sunday afternoon after a possible agreement between Democratic leaders and Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., who had led a group of anti-abortion lawmakers in opposing the bill, was revealed.

Stupak is now poised to support the bill, NBC's Chuck Todd reported. Stupak told CNN that there is no deal yet but that he and the White House are "close" to an agreement. "It's a work in progress," he said.



Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35961584/ns/politics-health_care_reform/

[Scurrilous]

56. Great news!

:thumbsup:

[Xenotime]

57. Wonderful news for America.

[leftygolfer]

58. A win for all of America

even the morons opposed to this bill

[HughMoran]

59. heh, it lost 2 votes before I could rec it

Utterly amazing...

[azmouse]

60. Thank God!

[Faygo Kid]

61. Unless a deal is struck with Stupak, Dems appear to be short on votes

Source: The Hill

Hours before a scheduled vote on healthcare reform, Democratic leaders don't have the votes.

The decisions of two Tennessee Democrats, Reps. John Tanner and Lincoln Davis, to vote no has put President Barack Obama, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her lieutenants in a major bind.

If every member votes, Democratic leaders can only afford 37 defections. According to The Hill's whip list, there are 39 Democrats planning to vote no.

Furthermore, The Hill also has seven Democrats in the undecided/unclear column: Reps Jim Cooper (Tenn.), Kathy Dahlkemper (Pa.), Paul Kanjorski (Pa.), Alan Mollohan (W.Va.), Mike Quigley (Ill.), Bobby Rush (Ill.) and Loretta Sanchez (Calif.). . .

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/house/88129-democrats-dont-appear-to-have-216-hours-before-a-healthcare-vote

---

Not much to say. It looks grim.

[Uben]

62. Stupak is already voting yes, per MNBC nt

nt

[LiberalLoner]

63. No he is not. Latest news is he is not. I am worried now.

[Faygo Kid]

66. Me too. We are in trouble here.

This should be locked down now.

[gateley]

64. Is it official? I know they reported it, but have we heard it from HIM?

I'm a little gun-shy, understandably. He's been a no, yes, maybe, no, maybe.... :shrug:

[Lil Missy]

65. That's not what other sources are reporting.

[Faygo Kid]

67. That's the latest I have got.

What a nailbiter.

[bluestateguy]

68. Don't pee in my Wheaties

nt

[Rwalsh]

69. Ai Yi Yi!

I am SO confused right now.

My head is spinning.

[icee]

70. Intrade has slipped to 92.5 also. Pelosi needs to postpone

if another Dem announces no.

http://www.intrade.com/

[grantcart]

72. lol

The rate on intrade going down when it is over 85 doesn't mean that there is a significant change in opinion it simply means that people who bought it in the 50s are taking their profit out rather taking any risk.

92 is still an extremely high price.

[icee]

73. OK Thanks.

[leftygolfer]

71. i'm telling you...it's in the bag

Stupak announces 4pm presser to say he will vote for the bill, thanks to the EO. then, we ALL win.

[Kablooie]

80. Couldn't that be contested? It takes 218 to make a majority.

[Xenotime]

81. Lets vote!!

[kestrel91316]

82. I thought today was the END and Obama would sign it tomorrow. W.T.F?????