2 More Votes For a Public Option In the House

I found something worthwhile from last night's election results. TPM:

The NY-23 seat [. . .] went to Democrat Bill Owens [. . .] [a]nd the CA-10 seat [. . .] went to Democrat John Garamendi. That creates some simple arithmetic. Yesterday, Democrats had 256 voting members in the House. By week's end, they'll have 258. Last week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi could afford to lose no more than 38 Democratic votes on a landmark health care reform bill. Next week, after Owens and Garamendi are sworn in, she can lose up to 40.

Garamendi is a liberal and Owens said about the [HCR] bill at a debate last week [. . .]: "I think moving towards this legislation is very appropriate. I think the type or the form of the public option included in this bill is reasonable. [. . .]"

(Emphasis supplied.) That's two more votes for a public option. That's the biggest story of the night.

Speaking for me only

< Deeper Into The Village | "Effective Death Penalty Apeals Bill" Introduced in House >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I didn't realize they would be sworn in (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by nycstray on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:42:54 AM EST
    so quick. Excellent news.

    Special Elections (none / 0) (#19)
    by Socraticsilence on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 02:34:49 PM EST
    since their replacing members that aren't currently in the House they go in immediately.

    That's strange (5.00 / 4) (#7)
    by Steve M on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:51:08 AM EST
    I thought the natural position of moderates representing struggling blue-collar districts is that the continued success of private insurance companies is more important than the existence of a public option that might help many of their constituents.  It's almost as if the Blue Dogs who take that position are motivated by something else.

    That is, if they keep their promises (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Cream City on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:55:33 AM EST
    unlike some.  But pols will be pols, so we are told.  So how soon will the newbies become villagers, too?

    As soon as they contract (5.00 / 1) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:16:40 AM EST
    re election fever feeding on someone threatening to destroy their campaign finance resources.

    House last minute revisions (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by MO Blue on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:22:35 AM EST
    In a move aimed directly at health insurance companies, the revised House bill would launch a federal-state crackdown on what it terms "unjustified premium increases." The companies would have to publicly disclose the justification for premium increases before they go into effect. The federal Health and Human Services department would monitor patterns of premium increases, and could bar insurers from the exchanges if the price hikes are found to be out of line. The bill would also provide $1 billion in grants to state insurance commissioners, allowing them to ramp up their own monitoring and enforcement.

    Democrats also strengthened a provision that would strip the industry of its decades-old exemption from federal antitrust laws.

    Supporters said the tougher approach is needed to keep insurance companies from artificially boosting premiums in advance of the major reforms taking effect in 2013. link

    Really? (none / 0) (#1)
    by jbindc on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:31:11 AM EST
    Are Garamendi and Owens being sworn in this week because they were special elections?

    Answser : Yes (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by jbindc on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:32:07 AM EST
    Yes (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:32:14 AM EST
    Don't you expect the Blue Dogs to take away (none / 0) (#4)
    by steviez314 on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:41:38 AM EST
    the completely opposite lesson they should have learned from Deeds?

    It's not a new lesson ... (5.00 / 4) (#6)
    by Demi Moaned on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:49:06 AM EST
    nor a refutable one.

    If a Democrat moves to the right and wins, it proves that moving to the right was a good strategy. If a Democrat moves to the right and loses, it proves that the Democrat didn't move far enough to the right.


    It depends (none / 0) (#9)
    by jbindc on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 09:58:23 AM EST
    Here in Virginia,

    An exit poll for The Associated Press showed that eight in 10 voters were concerned about the economy, and a majority of them backed McDonnell.

    Further, economic jitters drove the votes of independents who make up one-third of the electorate. They broke to McDonnell nearly 2-to-1, according to the AP.

    In the first Republican sweep since 1997, the double-digit wins by McDonnell; Lt. Gov. Bill Bolling, who sought a second term; and Attorney General-elect Ken Cuccinelli suggest that independents shunned their time-honored practice of ticket-splitting.

    To Paul Goldman, former state Democratic chairman, this is a reminder of a constant in Virginia politics: wooing conservative-to-moderate independents. They narrowly favored Barack Obama last year in his successful presidential campaign.

    Sounds exactly like Blue Dog territory to me.


    Not where we need them (none / 0) (#10)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:07:11 AM EST
    We need support for the public option in the Senate - and in the White House. Although having a strong progressive is nice.

    Doesn't matter (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by jbindc on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:14:29 AM EST
    Harry Reid has signaled that the vote will be put off until next year.  Which should be fun as it will be an election year.  Watch how many moderates and Blue Dogs start to peel off support, especially after yesterday.

    Next year (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:18:50 AM EST
    The public is going to be hurting a lot more.  This is going to be a brand new Christmas experience for many people too.  The push for actual health-care needs being met is not going to subside....it is going to deepen.

    Need them everywhere (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:21:24 AM EST
    Garamendi is good news (none / 0) (#13)
    by andgarden on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 10:18:43 AM EST

    Most recent House whip count (none / 0) (#17)
    by jbindc on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 12:22:29 PM EST
    WHO CARES (none / 0) (#18)
    by Bornagaindem on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 01:57:10 PM EST
    The public option (or as pelosi likes to call it now- the consumer option) as it is currently constituted is worse than useless. And now they have stripped out the Kucinich amendment so that states will not be able to start their own public options. And most likely they will not even fulfill the promise to allow Wiener a vote on HR676 the single payer bill. Every day this gets worse- it is time to drop the pretence

    AMERICA IS 37th
    that is why we need single payer!

    (or at least a bill that will allow us to get to single payer by the back door)