Ben Nelson (D) bringing everyone together!

This takes skill – but apparently Reid’s amendment is up to the task.

The National Organization of Women:

We call on all senators who consider themselves friends of women’s rights to reject the Manager’s Amendment, and if it remains, to defeat this cruelly over-compromised legislation.

Planned Parenthood apparently agrees.

National Right to Life:

NRLC will score the upcoming roll call votes on cloture on the Reid manager’s amendment, and on the underlying bill, as votes in favor of legislation to allow the federal government to subsidize private insurance plans that cover abortion on demand, to oversee multi-state plans that cover elective abortions, and to empower federal officials to mandate that private health plans cover abortions even if they do not accept subsidized enrollees, among other problems.

In addition, if the final bill produced by a House-Senate conference committee does not contain the Stupak-Pitts Amendment, NRLC will score the House and Senate votes on the conference report as votes to allow federal mandates and subsidies for coverage of elective abortion.

And Rep. Bart Stupak (D) has or has not sent out his people to talk to or not talk to Sen. Mitch McConnell’s (R) people. Hard to say.

If your head hurts, don’t worry about it. That’s just the Great Old Ones eating your brain.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Democrats contemplating just passing the Senate HCR bill?

(H/T Instapundit) While I see Mickey Kaus’ point in the abstract:

People in the know in Washington appear to have already considered and dismissed the “ping pong” option–the possibility that if the Senate finally passes a compromise health care bill, Pelosi’s House might simply vote “yes” on the exact same bill, avoiding the need for a “conference” to reconcile the House and Senate versions and instead sending the bill directly to the President for his signature. But from outside Washington, out here in the real America, this “ratification” route still looks awfully appealing–especially this week.

…there are pragmatic problems to consider: the House health care rationing bill passed with only two votes to spare, and only because of the Stupak amendment.  The Senate version currently lacks similar language, and it will probably not even get to a vote unless ‘public option’ is removed.  Put another way: for this gambit to work it’ll require no public option and hefty rules against federal funding of abortion.  Put yet another way: this gambit doesn’t just metaphorically gut-shoot progressives.  It requires that progressives metaphorically gut-shoot themselves as part of the process.

I’m not saying that they won’t do it.  Progressive Democratic legislators are quite good at emulating jellyfish.  But this would be above and beyond the usual spinelessness.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Dorwin Award*: Robin Carnahan.

Watch with some amusement as Missouri Secretary of State (and Senate hopeful) Robin Carnahan (D) refuses to answer two simple questions:

  • Does she support the House’s health care rationing bill?


  • What is her opinion on the Stupak amendment?

(See also: The

While Carnahan’s response to the first question might be at least considered a standard attempt at mealy-mouthing, and thus not overly outrageous; I cannot imagine how any progressive watching that could be pleased at her ‘answer’ to the second question.  Every credible side in the health care dispute concedes that the Stupak amendment is relevant to the discussion, and people are keeping track of who has what opinion of it.  Robin Carnahan’s going to have to choose a side.

Moe Lane

PS: What exactly did the Carnahan family do in Missouri to justify their quasi-hereditary political status in that state?  Save St. Louis from a rampaging Mississippi River monster?

*See here and here for the reference.

Crossposted to RedState.

2010 battle maps: Stupak and No on Health care rationing.

Jay Cost (H/T: @MelissaTweets) has written an article on the Democratic party that is impossible to excerpt properly:

How To Divide a Party, In Three Easy Steps!

So, you’ve decided to become the leader of a big political party. Only one problem: it’s too big! What to do?

Well, you’ve come to the right place. Here at the Horse Race Blog, we’ve developed a three-step guide to making that broad party a little more…narrow. Just follow these simple instructions and your majority party will be smaller and a little easier to handle in no time!

…and summarizing said article (the very short version: it’s a bad idea to run a national party as if it were an urban regional one) doesn’t do it justice. Instead, I suggest that you first read it, then take a look at the maps after the fold. Continue reading 2010 battle maps: Stupak and No on Health care rationing.