DougJ is right, the Senate has (apparently) resolved their differences (for now) and Pelosi has the ball again. If that’s true then you may still have a chance to help push this thing over the line. Do you know where your Congressperson stands on HCR? Phone and ask. We especially need calls from readers whose House Member belongs to the Congressional Progressive Caucus or the blue dogs. Any single Congressperson on the fence can swing the vote one way or the other. Whether it’s about abortion or a strong public option, wavering congresscritters take a small shot of courage from each supportive phone call.
Switchboard: (202) 224-3121.
Guide for first-timers here.
geg6
Remember people, because of retirements, we only need 216!
Oh. And Altmire sez NO, that would take away from his pandering to the Teabaggers in Beaver and Butler counties. But he never voted for it in the first place.
KDP
Stark still has not expressed his intentions one way or the other. I expressed my strong desire for him to vote in favor of the bill. When asked whether I wanted a response, I said the only response I want is for the bill to pass.
Omnes Omnibus
@KDP: Same exact thing with Tammy Baldwin. I expressed strong preference to pass and fix. Mentioned largest Dem majorities in years. Mentioned that Dems will get killed if they don’t use their majority to pass leg. on a signature issue. Dude who answered the phone said she is getting a lot of calls. Would not say how the calls ran though.
mcc
I attended a Zoe Lofgren town hall this weekend and she said some encouraging if guarded things. She was strongly against passing the Senate bill for various reasons but was fairly positive on the President’s plan, which she seemed to be describing as not everything she’d like but about as good as we’re going to get. I’m not sure if she was saying she’d vote for it (I will try to call her office later). She spoke supportively about reconciliation and spent a good deal of her time expressing anger at the Senate’s dysfunctionality.
Based on what do you suggest the Senate have “resolved their differences for now”? I’ve not seen any new news about HCR this week.
Also wasn’t Obama supposed to make some process/strategy announcements this week?
Joshua
What mcc said. DougJ’s post cited only “scuttlebutt” as a source. If I wanted that kind of vague bullshit, I’d read the NYT.
ellaesther
I have called, I have tweeted, and I will blog about it myself (again).
@Joshua: Feel howsoever you might about DougJ’s sourcing or the NYT’s, it would not kill you, or HCR, to make a phone call.
Ed Drone
What would people think if Obama used a signing statement for the original bill if the fix-it bill looked like it was being delayed? Simply say that those parts which are subject to the improvement bill will not become active.
He could announce his intention to do this if it looked like there was too much of a holdup in the process, which might make the signing statement moot anyway.
But it’s a method, a mechanism, a tool, for his use (God knows George W. used it a lot, mainly to thwart the intent of Congress, so using it to “pre-legislate” what Congress intends to do makes at least some sense to me).
Ed
mcc
@Ed Drone: So it’s an interesting question, but that seems to really, really push the limits of what the signing statement could do. I’d be surprised if it were legal.
It also seems like it wouldn’t make a lot of sense. Consider some of the “parts subject to improvement”:
– The excise tax. This is literally the funding mechanism for the bill, so if it doesn’t go into effect then the bill can’t really go into effect either. It also as written doesn’t take effect for several years, so a signing statement saying “this doesn’t take effect yet” would be redundant.
– Preexisting conditions. One of the planned fixes is to cover a loophole where some people could get left out by the preexisting conditions protections. But if that part just doesn’t go into effect because of a signing statement… well, then nobody gets preexisting conditions protections. Not an improvement. And this part of the bill as written doesn’t take full effect for several years either.
What would make more sense maybe is a promise from Obama not to sign the passed Senate bill until the reconciliation sidecar has also passed? But I don’t know if Obama would make such a promise or if the House would trust him to stick to it. (And bills automatically pass after two weeks if the President hasn’t signed them anyway so this could only be a temporary thing.)
Tonal Crow
@Ed Drone: That’d be extending the concept of “signing statement” well beyond what even Dubya did. Dubya asserted (and Obama continues to assert) the power to declare that he won’t obey certain provisions of a signed bill because he believes them to be unconstitutional. Using signing statements in the way you suggested would replace this “unconstitutionality” assertion with a (much broader) general assertion of authority to declare portions of a bill inoperative. We shouldn’t want a president to have that kind of power.
patrick
my congresscritter is pete hoekstra….not worth the oxygen to call…
Kirk Spencer
@Ed Drone: The problem is that it deals with budgetary elements. Because it does, the house gets to play.
The president can play (some) games with released moneys and authorized budgets, but he cannot spend money the House hasn’t released in the first place.
Tonal Crow
@patrick:
You don’t have to be a constituent to call a congresscritter. Many don’t even keep track of where you’re calling from. Please call some of the Blue Dogs (house.gov/melancon/BlueDogs/Member%20Page.html ) and/or give Pelosi a shot of encouragement. It wouldn’t hurt to keep calling the senators, too.
ellaesther
@Tonal Crow: I just came back to post such a link!
So, yeah, if you don’t know if your Representative is a Blue Dog, click above. If you don’t know if s/he is a member of the Progressive Caucus, click here.
mcc
Following up on an earlier post: Apparently the white house will be announcing their roadmap for passing HCR on wednesday.
The Main Gauche of Mild Reason
Is there any point to me calling since my rep is Nancy Pelosi?
Mnemosyne
@The Main Gauche of Mild Reason:
I would call her with an encouraging message. My rep (Adam Schiff) is officially a Blue Dog but he’s been very reasonable about healthcare so far, so I’m going to make that kind of call tomorrow, along with encouraging calls to Boxer and Feinstein. Never a bad idea to pat them on the head once in a while.
dmhlt
The AP is reporting that there are ten (10) Democrats who had previously voted “No” who are now considering a “Yes” vote.
[Source: theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2010/03/optimism-and-pessimism-about-pelosis-votes/36863/ ]
Brian Baird of Washington
Bart Gordon of Tennessee
John Tanner of Tennessee
Rick Boucher of Virginia
Suzanne Kosmas of Florida
Frank Kratovil of Maryland
Michael McMahon of New York
Walt Minnick of Idaho
Scott Murphy of New York
Glenn Nye of Virginia
Seems they would be the ones to focus on. And since I’ve already sent a FAX to three of them, I’ll provide some contact info:
The Honorable Brian Baird
2350 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4703
Phone: (202) 225-3536
FAX: (202) 225-3478
The Honorable Bart Gordon
2306 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-4206
Phone: (202) 225-4231
FAX: (202) 225-6887
The Honorable Suzanne Kosmas
238 Cannon House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515-0924
Phone: (202) 225-2706
FAX: (202) 226-6299
And you can find contact info for all Congress folks here:
contactingthecongress.org/