House Vote On SCHIP Falls Short Of Veto Override; Not One GOPer Changed Vote

Comments (37)

Dan wrote on October 18, 2007 1:35 PM:

So sad.

SkippyFlipjack wrote on October 18, 2007 1:39 PM:

Ad agencies are counting the cash already -- these ads are going to write themselves!

Cue the skinny kid crying about the hair lip they'll be stuck with for life because they can't afford the surgery...

jeffgee wrote on October 18, 2007 1:44 PM:

Let 'em follow Bush over the cliff.
Dems need to club every Republican who sided with the President about this.
Funny how Republican congressman (like Jeb Hensarling, R-TX) can vote for Bush's tax cuts and deny that the wealthy are the biggest beneficiaries, then say that the dreaded sCHIP helps the wealthiest Americans.
Apparently they are OK with helping only the wealthy evade income taxes, but not the poor and middle-class in need of health care.
But Bush feels relevant again when he vetoes popular legislation and the GOP sure doesn't want the boy-king to feel irrelevant.

POed Lib wrote on October 18, 2007 1:47 PM:

So what is going to be done? Unless they are punished and punished severely, the Repukeliscum have won a cost-free victory.

What will be done?

LiveOak wrote on October 18, 2007 1:49 PM:

The 44 Republicans who voted against this legislation must live in some VERY safe districts, otherwise, as others have noted, the vote against SCHIPS will be the one that killed their chances for re-election in the coming 2008 Democratic landslide.

heir ball wrote on October 18, 2007 1:52 PM:

Did Hensarling call the majority party The Democrat Party? If this slur continues, John Boehner's name should be publicly and repeatedly mispronounced also. Makes sense, right Boner?

Redactora wrote on October 18, 2007 1:53 PM:

But why oh why would the GOP want to follow the loser president over the cliff? Have they no sense of self-preservation? Have they no shame? Oh, never mind.

rudy wrote on October 18, 2007 2:03 PM:

America is a redneck, Republican lie.

Stephen H wrote on October 18, 2007 2:03 PM:

The Democrats should do exactly what the Republicans did on the war funding bill. Keep complaining that uninsured children are waiting to see a doctor, while Republicans are playing politics and trying to keep kids out of the program.
Didn't Bush just say that he vetoed the bill "to ensure that I am relevent" How could you possibly be more blatantly political than that?

Anon21 wrote on October 18, 2007 2:06 PM:

44 Republicans voted FOR the legislation, and 154 voted against. Presumably the former are worried about their re-election prospects, and some significant proportion of the latter either aren't, or are more worried about reprisals for crossing their leadership.

fred wrote on October 18, 2007 2:19 PM:

We expected this from the Ripublicants BUT what about the Dems that voted with them? I think they too should be targeted next election

Ebenezer wrote on October 18, 2007 2:31 PM:

I am glad the Democrats fought hard for this one. It's too bad they won't fight as hard to end the war in Iraq or protect our freedoms at home that the Bush administration is trying so hard to take away.

At least Bush is consistent - he thinks the government should subsidize the wealthy. One example is when Bush was the Texas Rangers' managing general partner, and worked to get a $135 million public handout to build the Ballpark in Arlington. This subsidy dramatically increased the club's value, resulting in Bush's $606,302 investment growing to $14.9 million.

That's not to mention Blackwater, Haliburton, or his partnership to help Enron bilk California in billions by ignoring the energy market manipulation.

This isn't just a case of hypocrisy - Bush is simply interested in power and wealth for he and his cronies. He will take whatever he can, without regard for ethics, the U.S. Constitution, or decency. W has gladly damaged the U.S. to take and distribute the spoils of holding the office of President. If the Democrats do not show a backbone, Bush will continue to run rampant in tearing down our nation.

bajajazz wrote on October 18, 2007 2:34 PM:

The Democratic Party is overstuffed with boat anchors and burnouts. This is why they can't get anything accomplished even when they're in the majority. The Republicans organized from the grassroots up while the Democrats ran their party like an elite country club. As a result, Republican legislators today are younger, tougher and wilier than the old line Democrats who have been in office so long their hemmorhoids have grown tentacles into their chairs. It's time for a giant housecleaning by way of contested primaries. Useless old farts like Dingell, Levin, Rangel, Feinstein, Rockefeller and Leahy have to get out of the way for younger talent with some energy and balls.

gcs wrote on October 18, 2007 2:39 PM:

Huh. I guess all the jibber jabber about "family values" doesn't extend to having healthy children.

If the Dems cannot slam the Republicans over the head with this REPEATEDLY then they don't deserve to run the country.

Billyboy wrote on October 18, 2007 2:46 PM:

That's some the brand the Republicans are trying to rebuild.

Mikeg wrote on October 18, 2007 2:58 PM:

Follow Bush over a cliff? What is going to be done? Nothing. Nothing is going to be done. None of these clowns will suffer. Personally or Congressionally. There's too many idiots in America and not enough sane, civics-minded voters who have (to coin a phrase) "enough votes" to get rid of these vermin. Sick, sick, sick, the way the Republican mind works, eh?

ibc wrote on October 18, 2007 2:59 PM:

"The 44 Republicans who voted against this legislation must live in some VERY safe districts..."

Oh, why is our children not learning reading comprehension? 44 was the GOP vote-count in favor.

NCSteve wrote on October 18, 2007 3:03 PM:

They're willing to follow him over the cliff because they managed to convice Bush to switch from "I'm agin' this 'cause it could eventually lead to everyone having health insurance" to "I'm agin' this 'cause the evil Democrat leadership is trying to give free health insurance to rich kids and force all you poor people to pay for it."

I'm guessing convincing Bush to switch from the truth to a lie wasn't the hardest sell in the history of the Republic.

James Katzen wrote on October 18, 2007 3:09 PM:

Fuck *every* republican - today, tomorrow and forever. Siding with a psychotic hasbeen like Bush over the needs of children .... christ I wish I was in a lifeboat so I could beat their skulls in with an oar as they tried to cling to the edge.

so suomi wrote on October 18, 2007 3:12 PM:

The first news story I heard this morning was that the Dems had announced that they failed to over ride the veto. That was at 7:00am. The "framing the message" battle is already lost on this issue. 3 stations, one message, the Democrats failed. That's before a single vote was cast. If we only had more weak morons like us, we wouldn't lose as many battles with the most unpopular president ever. Then we would only lose most, but not all. It's still a rubber stamp congress, they just changed the stamp.

Dawn wrote on October 18, 2007 3:16 PM:

Hang on kids - we'll have a different president in 2009. Hope you are not too sick.

David wrote on October 18, 2007 3:17 PM:

Bush and the Republicans blocked the SCHIP program to protect the Tobbaco Industry.

Democrats should take out the Cigarette Tax in the bill and instead include several, complicated progressive roll backs of the Bush Tax Gouges.

When Bush threatens another veto, the Dems can say "We took out the cigarette tax you opposed to protect your Big Tobacco Cronies, but you can't expect us to add spending without paying for it, the way Republicans did for the last 15 years! We all agree sick kids should be cared for, so how do you propose we pay for it?" Bush will become the naysayer who has no ideas.

David in Burbank wrote on October 18, 2007 3:22 PM:

New slogan for the Republican party:

UNITED WE FALL

cmb wrote on October 18, 2007 3:26 PM:

It's tragic how many Republicans prefer philosophical quibbling to giving access to good medical care to poor children. They'll never feel the pain they're inflicting on the most needy families in America, but lets NOT let them forget about this on ELECTION day. Compassionate conservatives, indeed.

DaveW wrote on October 18, 2007 3:29 PM:

Who were the two Dem nays? Not that it would have changed the outcome.

Steve In CA wrote on October 18, 2007 3:35 PM:

The two Dems voting against were Gene Taylor (who is quite conservative, but given the socioeconomics of his district, I really don't get this one) and Jim Marshall (who is following that oft-failed playbook of pretending to be a Republican in order to win election in a marginal district).

ianG wrote on October 18, 2007 4:03 PM:

Does anyone think the Dems should just let SCHIP expire? Congress passed the bill, Prez vetos. Poor children don't get health insurance. That's the story. If Congressional leaders accept a lesser bill, then the Dems will NEVER get anything through. If they can't pass a bill that helps kids, then they should just let the Republicans take control, cause that's what has happened.

Harry wrote on October 18, 2007 5:02 PM:

They need to send it in again, as they said they would, and launch a really over the top PR campaign about the heartless swine who keep vetoing the measure, making sure to compare the cost with the outrageous cost of the hopeless war in Iraq.

They need to walk the walk.

jeffreydj wrote on October 18, 2007 6:06 PM:

Ah yes, the future anti-Repub campaign adverts. Let us note that while a large number of children will suffer illness without relief, at least a few of them will die. Therefore, shall we not call every Repub Congressman that voted against this bill a "baby killer"? Frank Luntz could readily explain the power of such a move.

Here in my state, KY, I look forward in eager anticipation to calling Mitch McConnell a baby killer. It just rolls right off of the tongue, dunnit?

really angry republican wrote on October 18, 2007 7:26 PM:

Here's what I immediatley wrote to Dole. Blount, Boehner, WVGOP, RNCC, GOP.com and I'm working on the list of those who voted against S=CHIP:

I've been a registered Republican most of my life, but after the defeat today of the S-CHIP legislation, I shall NOT vote for any Republican candidate - not in local, state, county, nor federal races.

I am embarrassed to be a Republican.

Evan wrote on October 18, 2007 7:35 PM:

Dems should keep bringing this bill back, keeping it in the news and running up the score. I want to see the ad "Republican Joe Smo voted 27 times to deny medical care to poor children."

I like David's idea to present the same bill with different funding. Then we can talk about all the tobacco and tax cuts for the rich that Republicans want more than health care for poor kids.

Maybe SCHIP can be attached to the next war funding bill -- no SCHIP, no war.

Tenacious D. wrote on October 18, 2007 8:11 PM:

Can the Democrats make them pay for this? We'll see.

Steve Currier wrote on October 18, 2007 8:36 PM:

Dana Perino's 'point' about those horrible organizations spending a million dollars to get 'ditto head' GOPer's to change their votes at the end of her tirad on SCHIP was as pointless and the rest of the press conference. A million dollars spent to convince a block, an appropriate term, of fillibuster-minded neo-con's that children's health in this country is more important than, as 'Sandra D.' Perino puts it 'a win' for the party. Who 'won'? I can tell you who lost and continues to lose, America's poor kids. No, no... 'Sandra D.' Perino would argue...it was MoveOn.org and those horrible union types that lost and "we won". Oh, and by the way, she considers this whole issue with the health of child "a game" Let's see, gambling with the lives of a child. How 'moral' majority of you and the 'ditto-heads' that 'won' this 'game'. So...what's the saying...win the battle but lose the war.

sberkowitz1 wrote on October 18, 2007 9:30 PM:

no. one republican changed his vote.Peter King who voted for the bill,was absent. Which is a vote against the override.

starwheel wrote on October 19, 2007 5:07 AM:

I suppose this is a stark reminder that no matter how bad the Democrats are with their seemingly perpetual capitulation to Bush, the Republicans are much, much worse.

Pigs.

I'm disgusted with the leadership of this country.

Gopher Interloper wrote on October 19, 2007 7:00 AM:

"Apparently they are OK with helping only the wealthy evade income taxes, but not the poor and middle-class in need of health care."

-- Of course, the Bush tax cuts DID help the middle-class (especially with the elimination of the 'marriage penalty'), and the poor still don't have to pay taxes. Also, the poor are still covered by Medicaid, and lower middle-class kids are still (and, under Bush's EXPANSION of coverage, would still be) covered by S-CHIP.

"Oh, why is our children not learning reading comprehension?"

-- That's the best rhetorical oxymoron since Homer Simpson's classic: "I'm not a genius, or are I?"

"you can't expect us to add spending without paying for it, the way Republicans did for the last 15 years!"

-- Interesting. None of the increased spending during the Clinton years was his idea? It was all the work of the Republican-controlled congress, and Clinton's record of 37 vetoes with only 2 overrides doesn't factor into it? I guess it was some kind of miracle that he balanced the budget, then.

"I've been a registered Republican most of my life, but after the defeat today of the S-CHIP legislation, I shall NOT vote for any Republican candidate - not in local, state, county, nor federal races.

"I am embarrassed to be a Republican."

-- If your support for, and loyalty to, the Republican Party has dropped from (presumably) at least 50% to ZERO, I'm sure they're equally embarrassed to have you as a member.

Ann Masch wrote on October 19, 2007 1:44 PM:

The country that doesn't value children wouldn't value their health. Big surprise the override not coming through. Caring for children is an expensive, messy, often unpleasant, exhausting, thankless task. That is whether you are a parent, caregiver, or blow hard politician trying to score favor. We see the ramifications in the divorce rate, failure to comply child support orders, public and private schools, welfare lines, emergency rooms, family court rooms, juvenile halls-the list goes on and on. We wouldn't recognize America if we valued our children. Eventually we won't recognize it because we don't value them. To value something means paying more then lip service. That goes for hate mongering rhetoric on both ends of the political/media spectrum. Serving no more purpose then stirring the s%*t pot. I am going to write a letter to my local paper because yesterday, hot on the heels of my bitter disappointment with our Congress, I noticed my neighborhood grocery store has put the baby formula under lock and key. Meanwhile the beer and wine remains free for the shoplifting. Now I ask you who is on the other end of a stolen can of formula? A hungry baby. But hey, who gives a damn? Values are skewed and that is a fact.

Post a comment

Name:
Email Address:
URL:
	Remember personal info?
Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)