Update VI: Video of Steny Hoyer contradicting John Larson’s “we have the votes” comment.
They don’t have the votes but they continue to insist they do. Obama will likely have to sign an Executive Order which bans money for abortions. On this Sunday, the Conference of Bishops says that is not enough and they urge opposition to the scam.
Drudge reports, without proof, this: “OVERHEARD: Walking into Capitol this morning on phone, Speaker Pelosi tells Hoyer: ‘Steny, we have to get to 217. None of these members wants to be the deciding vote'”
Increasingly, the question is not “Do they have the votes?” but rather “Do they know what they are doing?”.
Nancy Kaptur votes to “Save Obama” and abandons the pro-life forces on the basis of “assurances”. Kaptur is a loss but not a surprise as she was not a “Stupak Bloc” diehard. She was “low hanging fruit”.
Solomon Ortiz is also a “Save Obama”.
The vote at this late Sunday morning is 206 “Save Obama” votes, 209 “NO!”. An Obama Executive Order which bans money for abortion (language unknown as of now and of dubious value other than politically), a Dimocratic president signing such an order, is the only way it appears that they can get the votes.
There are many primary challenge threats against “NO” voters. There is a lot of pressure on the “NO” votes. Will they cave? Stay tuned. They Still Don’t Have The Votes. Keep fighting.
Update V: [update to the mini update update: Politico’s count is 210 “Save Obama” votes – a count which is closer to our count than to the Larson count. Steny Hoyer also says they “will” have the votes, not that they do.]
[update to the mini update HERE which calls into question the claim they have the votes]
[mini update immediately after we posted the update – the House Caucus chairman John Larson insists they do have the votes. By our count as of 9:00 a.m. They don’t have the votes. We’ll wait to see if there were any overnight deals we have yet to hear about. .] Sunday morning – They Still Don’t Have The Votes.
The entire day will be consumed with attempts by Pelousy to get the “Save Obama” votes Obama pretended he already had. But they still don’t have the votes. The official schedule starts at about 2:00 p.m. ET
At 2:00 there will be a one hour debate on the rules of debate for the reconciliation bill and the Senate bill. At 3:00 the vote on the rules. The circus will continue throughout the afternoon and final votes are expected, if they have the votes, around 6:00.
They Still Don’t Have The Votes.
Update IV: Sanchez! Viva Sanchez!
She was a “yes” in November. The “NOs” still rolling in even after the big publicity stunt this afternoon. The DireFog number is now “Save Obama” 205, “NO!” 209, leaning “NO” 10, unknown 8.
Why is this a shocker? She was an easy “Save Obama” vote but instead…
“The Senate bill is a bad bill,” she told the paper.
Politically, the vote should be a relatively easy lift for Sanchez. The seven-term lawmaker has been re-elected with at least 60 percent of the vote since 2000, winning by a decisive 69 percent in 2008. President Barack Obama carried the district by 60 percent.
Expect Sanchez to be beaten up until she changes her “NO”. The “NO” vote is still ahead. The “Save Obama” Hopium guzzlers are behind. They still don’t have the votes.
Update III: It’s been a while since our last update, but guess what: They Still Don’t Have The Votes.
DireFog has the vote at this astonishing result: “Save Obama” 205; “NO” 207, leaning “NO” 10! unknown 9.
Back to the treachery of the night.
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.
Looking at the latest vote counts from The New York Times and David Dayen, tomorrow’s vote still hinges on the current size of the Stupak bloc.
Last but not least, here’s Zack Space on why he votes “NO”:
“Getting it done just to get it done is not something we should be doing. We should be doing it right,” Space told the Gannett Washington Bureau in a phone interview late Saturday.
Space said he has been getting calls and letters from his constituents, most of whom do not like the bill.
“I’m doing what I think is right,” Space said. “I have been under enormous amount of pressure this week in Washington. I have spoken to the president twice, once in the Oval Office. My own leadership has been working hard to get me to vote for this. But I don’t represent them. I represent the people in the 18th Congressional District.“
Now that is a shocking revolutionary statement!
Keep fighting. They Still Don’t Have The Votes!
The count at DireFog is 207 “NO” and 204 “Save Obama” votes.
Hillbuzz has photos of the Washington protests. The allegedly “pro-choice” clowns are “Save Obama” no matter that he will sign an Executive Order on abortion. No details on what the order will or will not say – or whether Obama will use blood instead of ink.
They still don’t have the votes.
Update: A victory on Demon Pass extracted from the “Save Obama” Cult. With that victory the fight continues on the Obama scam legislation itself.
Obama held a publicity stunt today but we still do not know if there is indeed a deal for him to sign an executive order on abortion designed to win votes from Bart Stupak and his cohort. If true, the blood will now be on Obama’s misogynistic hands.
The potential executive order on abortion and the death of Demon Pass are signs of weakness. Demon Pass is dead because the scam was hurting more than helping. The American people, who according to the “creative class” don’t care or are incapable of understanding “process”, are revolted and revolted. The prospective lawsuits also scared the Demon away.
The numbers are tightening up. They Still Don’t Have The Votes.
Hillary Clinton supporters vividly recall the treacheries and illegalities of the Cult Of Obama at the Democratic Rules Committee. We’ve been fighting to expose Obama for a long time, so we know the tricks. It’s happening again. Now it’s the Rules Committee of the House Of Representatives.
The Obama Cult in The Temple Of Doom – the Rules Committee of the House Of Representatives – want to “Save Obama”. To that end, the Cult, with their Hopium ceremonies and incense priests seek to plunge the nation into the abyss of Demon Pass.
They still do not have the votes. Such is the desperation that there is even talk (by Steny Hoyer) that Barack Obama himself might sign an Executive Order to appease the thus far stalwart Bart Stupak. The Republicans are also not making it easy to “Save Obama”.
What about “deem and pass” (hereinafter “Demon Pass”)? We’ll let Byron York explain the devil details of Demon Pass at the Temple of Doom:
“At the House Rules Committee meeting, Democrats desperate to pass their national health care plan are running into the barrier of basic civics. Here is the problem: The Senate has passed its HCR bill. If the House passes the same bill, it goes on to the president; once he signs it, the bill becomes law. But House Democrats, when they vote for the Senate bill using the “Deem & Pass” dodge, also want to simultaneously pass a package of amendments to the law. Except HCR will not, at that point, be law. It will only become law when the president signs it. Congress can amend the law — it does so all the time — but can it amend something that isn’t law?“
No, you cannot amend what does not yet exist. Is this an actual problem? Um, yeah.
“Which is where Democrats are tripping up. Passage of their HCR proposal should be very simple: Senate passes it, House passes it, president signs it. But House Democrats are terrified of voting for the unpopular bill, so they hope to pass it by “Deem & Pass,” in which they will vote, not for the bill, but for a rule that both deems the Senate bill to have passed and, in the same vote, passes the package of amendments. So House Democrats will have two fig leaves: 1) they didn’t vote directly for the Senate bill, and 2) they voted to simultaneously amend — to “fix” — the Senate bill.”
“The problem is the sequence. Can the House vote to amend something that isn’t the law, as the Senate bill will not be law before the president’s signature? The Rules Committee meeting turned into mass confusion when Democratic Rep. Henry Waxman said, “We’re not going to ‘deem’ the bill passed. We’re going to pass the Senate bill…I would be against the idea of ‘deeming’ something — we either pass it or we don’t.”
To Republican ears, that sounded as if Waxman was speaking out in support of a direct vote on the Senate plan. “I hope we’re making news here,” said Republican Rep. Joe Barton. If so, Barton added, “Praise the Lord!” Other Democrats jumped in to say that no, there would not be a direct vote on the Senate bill.
Barton then asked whether there would be some period of time between House passage of the Senate bill and House passage of the HCR amendments. During that period of time, the president would sign the Senate HCR bill into law. For the House to amend the HCR law, Barton said, it has to be law, which means the president has to have signed it. “If he doesn’t, it ain’t a law,” Barton said.
Democratic Rep. Sander Levin jumped in. “We’re going to be amending the law,” he claimed. Waxman added, “We change current law, and the current law will be the Senate bill once it’s voted on in the House.”
But it won’t be law until the president signs it. Obviously, Democrats are performing such strange contortions because many of their members are scared of voting for a bill that will likely mean defeat for them in November. But their attempts to avoid responsibility have created some very basic problems.”
They still do not have the votes for the Obama health scam. We still don’t know what will happen in the Rules Committee, other than skulduggery and chicanery. The situation and legal issues are even more complex than York describes.
Fred Barnes touched on the additional complications and political battles to come if, and it’s still an if, the Obama health scam passes. For now, the scam still does not have enough votes to pass and the protests are in the streets and moving into the congress. They still do not have the votes, but the whorehouse of Obama Rezko style bribery is filled with beds and gifts.
What if the Rules Committee passes the Obamaination health scam by taking the Demon Pass shortcut? Former federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, Michael McConnell (a Republican conservative) explains:
“The House will likely adopt a “self-executing” rule that “deems” passage of the amendatory bill as enactment of the Senate bill, without an actual vote on the latter.
This enables the House to enact the Senate bill while appearing only to approve changes to it. The underlying Senate bill would then go to the president for signature, and the amendatory bill would go to the Senate for consideration under reconciliation procedures (meaning no filibuster).
This approach appears unconstitutional. Article I, Section 7 clearly states that bills cannot be presented to the president for signature unless they have been approved by both houses of Congress in the same form. If the House approves the Senate bill in the same legislation by which it approves changes to the Senate bill, it will fail that requirement.“
Judge McConnell explains further why Demon Pass is a much bigger problem than the big problem it already appears to be:
“No one doubts that the House can consolidate two bills in a single measure; the question is whether, having done so, it may then hive the resulting bill into two parts, treating one part as an enrolled bill ready for presidential signature and the other part as a House bill ready for senatorial consideration. That seems inconsistent with the principle that the president may sign only bills in the exact form that they have passed both houses. A combination of two bills is not in “the same form” as either bill separately.”
This has not been done before, argues the Judge:
“Defenders of the Democratic strategy say that a self-executing rule has been used many times before by both parties. But never in this way. Most of the time a self-executing rule is used to incorporate amendments into a pending bill without actual votes on the amendments, where the bill is then subject to a final vote by the House and Senate. That usage may be a dodge around House rules, but it does not violate the Constitution. I am not aware of any instance where a self-executing rule has been used to send one bill to the president for signature and another to the Senate for consideration by means of a single vote.
Self-executing rules have also been used to increase the debt ceiling by virtue of adopting a budget resolution. That procedure is questionable, but because budget resolutions are not laws, this usage does not have the feature of using one vote to send a bill to the president and at the same time to send a different bill to the Senate. There may have been other questionable uses of self-executing rules, but not often enough or in prominent enough cases to establish a precedent that would overcome serious constitutional challenge.”
The question is whether the courts will dare rule on such a prominent issue. We suspect the Supreme Court and Chief Justice Roberts do indeed have the fortitude to kill this sick bill. The Judge addresses the doctrine of courts not intruding on congressional actions:
“Whether the courts would entertain such a challenge is a harder question. The “enrolled bill doctrine,” announced by the Supreme Court in Marshall Field v. Clark (1892), holds that the courts will not question whether a bill certified as having passed both houses of Congress was properly enacted. More recently, in United States v. Munoz-Flores (1990), in a footnote, the Supreme Court stated that Field concerned only the “evidence” the courts would consider in such a challenge and that when “a constitutional provision is implicated,” the enrolled bill doctrine would not apply. These holdings are not easy to reconcile. The D.C. Circuit, in a 1995 case, essentially said that it did not understand the Munoz-Flores footnote and thus would not follow it.
The Supreme Court might well hold that Field governs only questions of historical fact, while Munoz-Flores governs questions of constitutional interpretation. In Field, the question was what text passed the two houses of Congress; there was no doubt that only what the two houses passed could be treated as law. Here, by contrast, there will be no dispute about what occurred in the House; the question will be whether using a self-executing rule in this way is consistent with Article I, Section 7. It is one thing for the Supreme Court to defer to Congress on questions of what Congress did, and quite another to defer to Congress on the meaning of the Constitution. Indeed, in United States v. Ballin, decided the same year as Field, the Court ruled, “The Constitution empowers each House to determine its own rules of proceedings. It may not by its rules ignore constitutional restraints . . . .”
One thing is sure: To proceed in this way creates an unnecessary risk that the legislation will be invalidated for violation of Article I, Section 7. Will wavering House members want to use this procedure when there is a nontrivial probability that the courts will render their political sacrifice wasted effort? To hazard that risk, the House leadership must have a powerful motive to avoid a straightforward vote.“
Demon Pass might be cut off, but the hazard is reelection. The hazard is the Cowardice! of those that do not want to go on the record voting for the Obama health scam. The hazard is They Still Do Not Have The Votes.