« Consider the Source: Scarantino Busted on Exaggerated Claims on Denish Spending | Main | Obama Speaks in Rose Garden on House Passage of Health Insurance Reform, and Iraq »
Saturday, November 07, 2009
(Updated) Dems Make History in US House: Health Insurance Reform Passes 220-215
Update: Here are statements released about tonight's vote by Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (pdf) and Rep. Martin Heinrich (pdf).
************
In an historic vote that ended at 11:14 PM Eastern Time, Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 3962 by a margin of 220-215. Every Republican except one -- Rep. Anh Cao (LA-02) -- voted nay. A total of 219 Democrats voted for the bill and 39 voted nay. Click for official roll call vote. The New York Times provides a cool map of how the vote went by district, as well as coverage on the process of gaining passage today.
Unfortunately, the bill contains the so-called Stupak amendment to limit women's reproductive rights and the right to choose. A total of 64 Democrats voted for the amendment including Rep. Harry Teague (D, NM-02). Read about it here. Shame on Congressman Teague, who also voted against the main bill. Why did he think he had a right to support an amendment to a bill he never intended to vote for? A total of 22 other Dems did the same.
Rep. Martin Heinrich (D, NM-01) and Rep. Ben Ray Lujan (D, NM-03) both voted for the main bill and voted no on the Stupak amendment. Bravo to both of them! It was a long, hard fight and we appreciate their hard work to get the best bill possible. Elections have consequences!
November 7, 2009 at 09:17 PM in Healthcare, Obama Health Care Reform, Rep. Ben Ray Lujan, Rep. Harry Teague (NM-02), Rep. Martin Heinrich (NM-01) | Permalink
Comments
If Harry Teague won't be with us on health care reform or a woman's right to choose why show we be with him in the primary or the general election.
Where will we find a brave soul to primary this jerk?
Posted by: mwfolsom | Nov 7, 2009 9:40:17 PM
Harry Teague's vote was not required to pass the house bill. He is a representative of a traditionally conservative part of the state and his opponent is disastrously a far right-wing radical. Like as often the case when Heather Wilson voted against Republican bills, Harry Teague was likely given permission to take one of the spare "no" slots on this bill. It is called strategy and served to keep Heather Wilson in power for many years in a "blue" district. The left can not afford to be idealogical purists mimicking what occurred in the NY race on the right recently.
Harry Teague is our guy. Having voted no on the bill could be construed by the left that he voted against that appalling anti-reproductive freedom amendment in the bill as well as other weaseling measures. Besides that, the bill made too many concessions to the for profit health industry to curb costs.
Who of all our representatives would know better than Harry Teague having provided health insurance for his business, what real health care reform should look like? He is known to have taken very good care of his employees balancing compassion with successful business.
Harry Teague has my support.
Posted by: qofdisks | Nov 8, 2009 10:26:10 AM
Correction.
I guess that Teague did promote the Stupak amendment. That should further appease the social conservatives east of the state. We will have to trust him for now and hope that we can change this onerously impractical law later over the years.
Posted by: qofdisks | Nov 8, 2009 10:30:32 AM
gofdisks: I understand the strategy you discuss as being smart on some bills. I think most of us have given Teague a pass on many issues. This one, however, was the signature issue upon which Dems were elected in 2008.
Even worse, I don't think it's a strategy that will help him in this race. He's trying to appease the right wingers and they are not appeasable. I don't believe any right wingers will vote for Harry because he voted no on the hc reform bill. What will happen, however, is that many of the young Obama supporters, new voters and independents who put Teague over the finish line will sit at home because he has given them next to nothing to be excited about.
I can't see Pearce and his attack machine giving Teague a pass because he voted no here. They'll just point to his vote on the energy bill and still paint him as a Pelosi clone. If there were no votes to complain about, they'd just make something up or have Scarantino or someone else find some "scandal."
I think more people would have respected Teague is he stood up and said I know some of you won't support my vote for hc reform but it is the right thing to do. If we don't start reforming the system now, then when? Sure it's not a perfect bill, but it's a meaningful start and will help so many people in NM's second district.
I think he's listening too closely to the conventional wisdom consultants who think Rahm Emanuel has the answer. Pretend to be a Republican and Republicans will choose you over a real Republican. Hasn't that strategy been totally debunked?
Posted by: barb | Nov 8, 2009 1:02:10 PM
Several people have spoken out agains Congressman Teague but it is interesting to note that Congressman Dennis Kucinich also voted NO and his explanation is very similar. Maybe Congressman Teague is not "selling us out", maybe he would have voted yes if the bill had not been so poor.
Terry Riley
Posted by: Terry Riley | Nov 8, 2009 2:15:08 PM
I don't think it's a great idea to wait for perfection while people are suffering and dying.
Posted by: Lynn | Nov 8, 2009 2:38:33 PM
Sorry, Barb's right. The amendment would have passed without his vote, and the bill too.
So he had a choice: Send a message to progressives with the language he used in explaining his No vote on the bill and abstaining on the amendment--or try to cater to the irrational right in his district, in the hopes that somehow Pearce will have to lay off reproductive rights in the campaign.
Bad policy, bad politics: It's the Blue Dog Combo Plate. Too bad about the aftertaste.
Posted by: PhoenixRising | Nov 8, 2009 3:01:49 PM
Look, I would be the first to vote for a real progressive in a primary. But, given a choice between Teague and Pearce, I would choose the Democrat. These are our choices.
So, who would that true blue progressive candidate be? Is it even safe to say at this time? Could a real progressive candidate win in that district?
Very good argument Barb. It was logical, persuasive and likely true.
Posted by: qofdisks | Nov 8, 2009 5:00:53 PM
If I could, I would still vote for Teague. He is a very good human being in many respects. I think he's been convinced to think a certain way strategically that I don't agree with. We didn't need his vote.
I just think many young voters, independents and progressives will be put off because of this vote. They're not thinking strategically and coming to the obvious conclusion that Pearce is to be avoided at almost any cost.
Posted by: barb | Nov 8, 2009 7:30:22 PM