Stupak presser canceled

[fugop]

Now it's reportedly been canceled.


On edit: Here's the Wonk Room link: http://twitter.com/Wonkroom

[Connie_Corleone]

1. Talking Points Memo has it too.

The reform wire is saying the presser is canceled.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/live/countdown-to-reform-wire/?ref=fpb

[fugop]

2. TPM's take

Interesting. I was thinking if he canceled, something fell through. But TPM thinks it means a breakthrough. Hope they're right!

[Connie_Corleone]

3. I'm hoping that Stupak's little bloc wasn't needed for passage of the bill.

[lamp_shade]

4. That's my hope too.

[Tippy]

6. We picked up several no to yes votes

It seems there were a few not sure who or what or how many that did in fact defect yesterday.

[DCBob]

5. or a breakdown... but seems more like a breakthrough.

I suspect his plan was to announce his no vote but Nancy did her magic and convinced him otherwise or to at least keep negotiating. We shall soon find out.

[CTyankee]

7. Sounds to me like there's some furious negotiating going on...

Can't wait to see the book that will come out about this whole thing by some journalist that claims to have the "inside story."

Maybe Chuckie Todd will have another rush job like he did with the electoral returns right after the 08 election...that was a quick and dirty if I ever saw one...

[Imajika]

9. Kinda disturbing to me that this is the stuff of books...

If the bill is so good, why is it we are struggling in this epic battle to get an overwhelmingly Democrat congress to pass it?

I mean, this isn't about finding some Republicans, we are in having an incredibly hard time getting our own Democrats to vote for it.

Yes, I know the polls for HCR are bad and that makes it hard, but if it were such a slam dunk, you'd think it wouldn't be so hard to find 216 votes out of 253 Democrats.

Perhaps it really is just a matter of so many Democrats having been elected in conservative districts.

[mucifer]

10. powerful insurance lobbyists swarming the capital. Misinformed teabaggers flooding their reps

with calls of talking points from fox news. That's my guess.

[CreekDog]

12. You make it sound as though if it were just a better bill that would give it more votes

I mean, have you been paying attention? :rofl:

That is NOT how these things work. :banghead:

[Jennicut]

13. Have you seen some of the politicians in DC? When are they not cowardly.

Cowards exist in the Dem party too. In 1993 it took Gore breaking a tie in the Senate to get Clinton's budget passed. And it gave us a budget surplus of all things. This is DC, I expect nothing less.

[karynnj]

11. I would rather have an insider book written by Nancy Pelosi or

a top staffer for her, even if it is years from now. The 2008 books suggest why a book by a prominent TV analyst might be useless.

I did read Todd's book and it was pathetic. To me, it was kind of a summation of all the linked articles on DU on the election, with everything not fitting the end result removed. My main observation is that it added no new insight on how Obama was able to build the team he did and gain the support he needed to beat a candidate with the party and media support.

The awful gossipy Game Change book, for which I've only seen the excerpts, seemed to do more, but it was limited to things people chose to leak. It does suggest the outline of strong Senate Democrats, people who knew Clinton very well, banding together and pushing Obama to run, with their tacit support. It was especially stunning to read that Schumer, who was 110% behind Clinton publicly, was included. She was stabbed in the back by the Centrist wing of the party. If it all true.

This really challenged the view I had from following the race closely here and elsewhere. In that view, Obama started with Senator Durbin, who was his only superdelegate for a long time. The first of the many major endorsements I saw was John Kerry, followed by several Conservative Democrats, and then the very important Caroline and Ted Kennedy endorsements. Reid, I thought, was neutral - his son was a prominent Clinton person, so many of us here thought, though he was neutral, he leaned to Clinton. Looked at that way, Obama owed the left - the Kerry/Kennedy wing. Remember the excitement in the week before superTuesday with those endorsements. Without them, Clinton would have won more delegates in MA, CA, NJ and NY if she ran like she polled then - SuperTuesday would have made her the nearly certain nominee.

With the new insight, how does that change? Here's where I am not sure. As the centrists were silent, how did they influence anyone? The only thing I can think of is that they could have influenced the big money donors - but, that doesn't seem likely given that Hillary's bundlers raised huge amounts of funds. What I do know is that the Kerry/Kennendys endorsements did create positive stories and energy at the critical point.

My question now is what was the real truth? Was there really a big conspiracy in the Senate to deny Clinton the Presidency? As it was publicly silent and didn't stop fund raising, what did it really do? My guess is that what we saw was a big piece of the truth and the Harris book spins what was likely encouragement to have another viable candidate in the field into a plot to explain why Clinton lost.

Will we ever know? I think we will - years from now when Axelrod, Pouffle or someone whose name we might not even know tells the story from the inside.

[DCBob]

8. Faux (Cavuto) just reported "discussions are continuing"..

they said that came from a Stupak spokesperson.

update: Stupak spokeswoman Michelle Begnoche said, "I can say discussions are continuing."

[DCBob]

14. Dems may be moving on without Stupak...

From the plumline...

I’m hearing that House Dem vote counters are preparing to move forward without him. Reports of a deal with Stupak were overblown. Some in leadership argued for it, but pro-choice members shot it down, and Nancy Pelosi never agreed. There’s still a question as to whether Stupak controls the amount of votes he claims to and discussions with Stupak and the members of the Stupak bloc are ongoing. What Stupak wants — a resolution that adds the same restrictive abortion language Stupak attached last time — isn’t happening. That may explain why Stupak abruptly canceled his presser.

Conversations are still ongoing, and some kind of accommodation with Stupak is possible, though not the one he’s apparently insisting on. Dems are holding a whip meeting soon to determine where the votes are and whether it’s possible to move forward without him and whoever else he controls.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/dems-prepare-to-move-forward-without-stupak/

This sounds like good news.. Means Pelosi doe not need Stupak.

[Jennicut]

15. Stupak needs to offer a vote on a separate bill. No way is he getting

that horrible resolution. He is playing hardball and is not compromising enough. If we can get Marcy Kaptur and some others to agree on the separate bill idea, we got this. Go around Bart Stupak.

[DCBob]

16. yep. Stupak deal is off !!!

[Inuca]

17. Updates on Kos

Dem Leaders Prepare To Move Forward Without Stupak (last update, headline from the plumline)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/3/20/848168/-BREAKINGx6:-Deal-with-Stupak-is-OFF,-Dems-ready-to-ditch-him,-his-pressers-canceled

[Inuca]

18. Latest update from Kos - no deal with Stupak

UPDATEx7: "There's not going to be any deal made with Mr. Stupak...there's been no deal whatsoever. He's been told that his language is not going to be added to the legislation. ... We think we have the votes regardless, and we're going to be moving forward," Schakowsky said. "Yes. We do think we have the votes without him." (Beutler: Pelosi: "No separate vote" on abortion)

I recommend Ezra's twitter list for the latest!

[prolesunited]

20. Ha, ha!

FAIL

[backscatter712]

19. WOOHOO!!!

SUCK IT, STUPAK!!!

My bet is he canceled his press conference because half his groupies wouldn't have showed up.