For Future Reference
For future reference, here is the list of Democrats who voted “Aye” on the Stupak-Pitts Amendment.
AL-2 Bright, Bobby; AL- 5 Griffith, Parker; AL-7 Davis, Artur; AR-1 Berry, Robert; AR-2 Snyder, Victor; AR-4 AR-4 Ross, Mike; CA-18 Cardoza, Dennis; CA-20 Costa, Jim; CA-43 Baca, Joe; CO-3 Salazar, John.
GA-2 Bishop, Sanford; GA-8 Marshall, James; GA-12 Barrow, John; KY-6 Chandler, Ben; IL-3 Lipinski, Daniel; IL-12 Costello, Jerry; IN-2 Donnelly, Joe; IN-8 Ellsworth, Brad; IN-9 Hill, Baron; LA-3 Melancon, Charles; ME-2 Michaud, Michael.
MA-2 Neal, Richard; MA-9 Lynch, Stephen; MI-5 Kildee, Dale; MI-1 Stupak, Bart; MN-7 Peterson, Collin; MN-8 Oberstar, James; MS-1 Childers, Travis; MS-4 Taylor, Gene; MO-4 Skelton, Ike; NM-2 Teague, Harry
NC-2 Etheridge, Bob; NC-7 McIntyre, Mike; NC-11 Shuler, Heath; ND Pomeroy, Earl; OH-1 Driehaus, Steve; OH-6 Wilson, Charles; OH-9 Kaptur, Marcy; OH-16 Boccieri, John; OH-17 Ryan, Timothy; OH-18 Space, Zachary.
OK-2 Boren, Dan; PA-3 Dahlkemper, Kathleen; PA-4 Altmire, Jason; PA-10 Carney, Christopher; PA-11 Kanjorski, Paul; PA-12 Murtha, John; PA-14 Doyle, Michael; PA-17 Holden, Tim; RI-2 Langevin, James
SC-5 Spratt, John; TN-4 Davis, Lincoln; TN-5 Cooper, Jim; TN-6 Gordon, Barton; TN-8 Tanner, John; TX-16 Reyes, Silvestre; TX-23 Rodriguez, Ciro; TX-27 Ortiz, Solomon; TX-28 Cuellar, Henry.
UT-2 Matheson, Jim; VA-5 Perriello, Thomas; WV-1 Mollohan, Alan; WV-3 Rahall, Nick; WI-7 Obey, David.
And the 26 Democrats who not only voted “Aye” on Stupak but “Nay” on the final bill:
Altmire, Barrow, Boccieri, Boren, Bright, Chandler, Childers, Davis (AL), Davis (TN), Gordon (TN), Griffith, Holden, Marshall, Matheson, McIntyre, Melancon, Peterson, Ross, Shuler, Skelton, Tanner, Taylor, Teague
I’m looking forward to this group leading us forward into a glorious new approach to governing, providing me with the chance to opt out of funding executions, torture, and fruit loop religious projects
tx2vadem says:
But you are Blanche, you are in that chair!
November 9th, 2009 at 12:31 am
MB says:
Yes, that would be the issue.
November 9th, 2009 at 12:46 am
Amit says:
well if we want our healthcare outsourced to the govt then we have to accept the opinions of those we disagree with.
I know its easy to make fun of the rule which requires all vending machines to display calorie information but how fun will it be when transfats are regulated like illegal drugs for the public’s benefit?
November 9th, 2009 at 4:55 pm
tx2vadem says:
No more or less fun than when we regulated tobacco. I think we are all at a point where we think tobacco users should pay additional taxes for the burden they place on the healthcare system. So, it’s easy to see how transfats would go the same way. It’ll be harder to do for sugar and high-fructose corn syrup though, they are such a powerful lobby.
These are only small logical extensions afterall. If you are willing to tax alcohol sales to treat alcoholism and you are willing to tax cigarette sales to fund healthcare expenditures (with the intention of that going towards treating the cancers that smoking causes), it isn’t that far a leap to tax/regulate transfats, right?
November 9th, 2009 at 5:54 pm
Amit says:
I thought smokers cost the system less because they are less likely to go to the doctor and they die sooner.
November 9th, 2009 at 6:01 pm
CG says:
“less likely to go to the doctor and they die sooner.”
Ban abortion and hope any extra slackers die of free will choices.
That might be the Repubs plan. hard to argue the cost savings.
November 9th, 2009 at 10:08 pm