Wake Up the Senate: Health Care Passes the House

The Affordable Health Care for America Act passed the house tonight with two votes to spare.  One Republican, Rep. Joseph Cao of  Louisiana, crossed the aisle for America tonight and voted in favor of the measure. One lone Republican who gets it. Be sure to thank him: 202-225-6636.

Here are some news links.  Even thought WTAE is identical to the Chicago Tribune story, I’m giving them the nod because their email is always the first to arrive in my inbox.

From the Chicago Tribune:

In a victory for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed landmark health care legislation Saturday night to expand coverage to tens of millions who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry. Republican opposition was nearly unanimous.

The 220-215 vote cleared the way for the Senate to begin debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.

A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi likened the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.

“It provides coverage for 96 percent of Americans. It offers everyone, regardless of health or income, the peace of mind that comes from knowing they will have access to affordable health care when they need it,” said Rep. John Dingell, the 83-year-old Michigan lawmaker who has introduced national health insurance in every Congress since succeeding his father in 1955.

More here from the Tribune.

From the New York Times:

After President Obama urged lawmakers to “answer the call of history” and approve a sweeping overhaul of the nation’s health care system, House Democrats edged closer to a vote on Saturday night as the House adopted an amendment that would tighten restrictions on coverage for abortions under any insurance plan that receives federal dollars.

The concession eased a threat by some anti-abortion Democrats to oppose the bill but it infuriated supporters of abortion rights, who said they would support the larger bill and continue to fight for changes in the final legislation.

After months of internal party wrangling, angry town-hall-style meetings and extended committee deliberations, the House was debating into the night on the legislation to transform the nation’s health insurance system.

Democrats were increasingly confident they had locked up the necessary support for the measure, an optimism bolstered when the bill easily survived a preliminary vote, despite Republican opposition.

But the difficult issue of how much to restrict new federal spending on abortion continued to complicate the outcome by creating a split between Democratic supporters and opponents of abortion rights and loomed as one last obstacle.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi decided late Friday night to allow anti-abortion Democrats to vote for the so-called “Stupak amendment,” named for Bart Stupak, Democrat of Michigan. The measure, long expected to pass, would tighten restrictions on abortions by prohibiting federal money from being used to pay for the procedure, either through a new federal health insurance plan or under private plans that enroll people relying on federal subsidies.

“From Day 1, my goal has been to ensure federal tax dollars are not used to pay for abortions,” said Representative Brad Ellsworth, Democrat of Indiana and one of the authors of the abortion provision.

Ms. Pelosi’s concession eased a threat by some Democrats to abandon the bill but also left abortion-rights Democrats facing a choice between backing a provision they bitterly opposed or scuttling the bill.

More here from the NYTimes.

From the Washington Post:

Removing a key final hurdle for House passage of historic legislation to expand the nation’s health-care system, lawmakers late Saturday approved a measure to ban almost all abortion coverage under health-care plans run or subsidized by the government.

The controversial amendment prohibits a government-run insurance plan the bill would create from offering to cover abortion services. It also would block people who receive federal subsidies for the purchase of health insurance from buying policies that offer coverage for abortions.

Should a health-care package pass the Senate, it’s unclear whether the anti-abortion amendment would survive negotiations between the two chambers over the shape of final legislation.

Anti-abortion Democrats had said they could not support the health-care package without assurances that tax dollars would not end up paying for abortions. Pro-life and religious groups had also sought the amendment.

Both parties continued to closely guard their private whip counts in advance of the late-night vote on the entire package, but the public pronouncements by lawmakers during the day suggested an extremely tight vote. Democrats remained publicly optimistic they would come out just above the minimum 218 votes they need for victory. Freshman Reps. Dan Maffei (D-N.Y.) and Ann Kirkpatrick (D-Ariz.), joined by second-term Rep. Michael Arcuri (D-N.Y.), announced their support for the bill, giving a boost among the critical bloc of votes coming from the roughly 75 Democrats who were elected within the last three years. Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn.), a veteran who is considered a health-care expert among conservative southerners, is also expected to vote for the legislation.

“We know the status quo is unacceptable and bankrupting individuals, businesses and all levels of government. While this bill is not perfect, it is necessary that we pass it so we can begin to fundamentally reform health care,” Maffei said in a statement as debate inched along.

More here from the Washington Post.

From WTAE in Pittsburgh:

In a victory for President Barack Obama, the Democratic-controlled House narrowly passed landmark health care legislation Saturday night to expand coverage to tens of millions who lack it and place tough new restrictions on the insurance industry. Republican opposition was nearly unanimous.

The 220-215 vote cleared the way for the Senate to begin debate on the issue that has come to overshadow all others in Congress.

A triumphant Speaker Nancy Pelosi likened the legislation to the passage of Social Security in 1935 and Medicare 30 years later.

“It provides coverage for 96 percent of Americans. It offers everyone, regardless of health or income, the peace of mind that comes from knowing they will have access to affordable health care when they need it,” said Rep. John Dingell, the 83-year-old Michigan lawmaker who has introduced national health insurance in every Congress since succeeding his father in 1955.

In the run-up to a final vote, conservatives from the two political parties joined forces to impose tough new restrictions on abortion coverage in insurance policies to be sold to many individuals and small groups. They prevailed on a roll call of 240-194.

Ironically, that only solidified support for the legislation, clearing the way for conservative Democrats to vote for it.

More from WTAE here.

Now the Senate can get to work!

Politico Says Dems Have 218 Votes for Affordable Health Care for America Act

From our friends at Politico:

Hours before an expected vote on a sweeping health care bill, House Democrats believe they’ve secured the 218 votes they need to approve the bill, several party insiders said.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took to the House floor about 6:30 p.m. to say, “Today we will pass the Affordable Health Care for America Act.. . .We will make history. We will also make progress for America’s working families."

In response to a question about whether the bill would pass when she brought it up, Pelosi told reporters Saturday night, "That is our expectation."

Thirty-two Democrats have publicly declared their opposition to the bill, giving party leaders the narrowest possible margin to push the bill across the finish line. But numerous sources said Democrats believe they do have the votes after a day of intense lobbying of wavering Democrats.

The Affordable Health Care for America Act reportedly includes a Public Option.

A vote is expected tonight.

Click here to Tweet your Representative now!

ACLU: Rep. Jackson Voted Against the Patriot Act in 2001, So Thank Him

Some clarification today from the ACLU:

Dear ACLU Supporter,

Acts of courage on civil liberties should be rewarded. In 2001, Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr. courageously voted against the Patriot Act—a significant political risk at a time when few others dared to stand up for constitutional rights.

In an email yesterday, through a clerical error, we misstated that fact. We sincerely apologize to both him and you for this mistake.

We were able to count on Rep. Jesse Jackson, Jr.’s leadership in 2001, and we’re counting on it now. Thank you for all you do in defense of civil liberties.

Sincerely, 

Lisa Sock

Lisa Sock
ACLU Online Team

And I couldn’t agree more. Please thank Congressman Jackson, and re-elect him.

Jackson’s GOP challenger Isaac Hayes is completely off the wall. In his numerous press releases, he rails against any change to the health insurance system.

This came from Hayes’ office on October 29:

Democrats in Washington — including the scandal-plagued Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. — seem intent upon pushing a socialist-style health care plan on an unwilling American public. But the so-called "public option," or government-run health care, has failed everywhere it has been tried in the U.S. already. The laboratory of the states has proven that this experiment is just for mad social scientists, not serious public policy advocates, the public record demonstrates.

"The Public Option proves the status quo in Washington, D.C. is not serious about improving our health care system, but rather fulfilling an ideological dream of a single-payer system," says the GOP’s Isaac C. Hayes, the nominee for Congress in IL-2. "Variations of the Public Option have failed in every state in which it was tried: Hawaii, Oregon, Massachusetts, Tennessee and Maine. When we here the discussion of free-market solutions we will know they are serious about reform."

Hayes also notes that news reports indicate that even the Canadians are backing away from their socialized model of health care, and are embracing "fee for service" healthcare. 

That’s all very nice, except it’s not true. Citing no evidence whatsoever, Hayes is intent to campaign on sound bytes. None of his press releases are much longer than a couple of short paragraphs.

This from November 2:

You know the "public option," otherwise known as socialized medicine, is in trouble in the Congress when even the liberal sister of radical left-wing Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr. is distancing herself from the legislation.

"Today, WVON’s talk show host, Santita Jackson, admitted on her show that she too was ‘wary’ of the 2,000 page health care bill," says Rev. Isaac C. Hayes, the GOP nominee for Congress in IL-2, where he faces Jackson’s corrupt brother next fall. "Considering that Ms. Jackson is the sister of Congressman Jesse Jackson Jr., we have a staunch supporter of the Representative questioning a bill he is avidly promoting. Mr. Jackson should listen to his big sister because it is apparent he is not listening to other hardworking Americans."

I really don’t understand why we should be worried about a 2,000 page bill. Can’t the Republicans read? I know the Republicans want to do away with the Department of Education, but are they against literacy as well?

Look, Rev. Hayes, if you want to be an adult in congress, then you’re going to have to read a lot. Step up or quit the race.

My vote is with Jesse.

Sister Donna Quinn Suspends Activism for Abortion Rights

There’s a headline you won’t see often anywhere.

From the Chicago Tribune:

For decades, Sister Donna Quinn has championed the rights of women to use contraception, seek ordination and end unwanted pregnancies.

The Dominican nun has picketed for abortion rights inWashington, petitioned the pope for a female archbishop and escorted women into abortion clinics.

But as the Vatican turns up scrutiny of the nation’s nuns and U.S. Roman Catholic bishops refuse to support universal health care if it covers abortion, Quinn has put her crusade on hold.

"I want to be clear that this is my decision," she said in a statement Tuesday, saying she would suspend her role as a peacekeeper outside the ACU Health Clinic in Hinsdale. "Respect for women’s moral agency is of critical importance to me, and I look forward to continuing to dialogue with our congregation on these matters as a way of informing my actions as well as educating the community."

On Tuesday, the Wisconsin-based Sinsinawa Dominican order announced that Quinn had been reprimanded for escorting patients into a Hinsdale clinic that provides abortions.

"After investigating the allegation, congregation leaders have informed Sister Donna that her actions are in violation of her profession," Sister Patricia Mulcahey, head of the Sinsinawa Dominicans, said in a statement. "They regret that her actions have created controversy."

It’s no surprise that Sr. Donna Quinn has been asked to curtail her activities. What is amazing, in this climate, is the fact that she has been able to keep working in these activities so long.

What should be more alarming for American Catholics is the fact that the Vatican is investigating nuns in the United States. The sisters "regret that [Sr. Donna Quinn’s] actions have created controversy?" Really? Are the sisters aware of the controversy Christ created? Do they not remember that Jesus went out of his way to spend time with sinners? With those who society stepped on?

Did you know that the Vatican is requiring that each order foot the bill for these investigations? Yes, that’s true. Each order must pay for the airfare, room and board for the Inquisitors from Rome. No kidding at all.

The Vatican would do well to get in touch with the spirit of these women who do these good works.

But the fraternity of bishops, radical conservatives all, won’t get that ever.

My prayers are with Sr. Donna Quinn, and with all American nuns under investigation by bishops who have forgotten Christ’s many controversies.

Lesbian Leads Chicago Cubs

From On Top Magazine:

A leading voice of the gay rights movement took the helm of the Chicago Cubs front office last week, gay newssite ChicagoPride.com reported.

Forty-one-year-old Laura Ricketts is a member of the Ricketts family, whose members completed their purchase of the sports landmark earlier in the year. With the purchase, Laura became the first openly gay Major League Baseball owner.

Laura serves on the board of New York-based Lambda Legal, a nationwide group that advocates for gay rights. The group’s lawyers represent LGBT clients, including those seeking the right to marry.

What role Laura will play in the actual day-to-day management of the team remains unknown, but if recent appearances are any indication, she’s likely to become a major voice of the team.

From Chicago Pride:

41-year-old Laura, the only daughter, is openly gay and lives in Chicago. With the Rickett’s purchase of the Cubs, she becomes the first openly gay MLB owner.

Laura is a gay rights advocate and fights for gay marriage. She serves on the board of Lambda Legal, a national organization fighting for gay rights.

41-year-old Laura, the only daughter, is openly gay and lives in Chicago. With the Rickett’s purchase of the Cubs, she becomes the first openly gay MLB owner.

Laura is a gay rights advocate and fights for gay marriage. She serves on the board of Lambda Legal, a national organization fighting for gay rights.

The oldest sibling is 45-year-old Peter who lives in Omaha. He ran for U.S. Senate as a conservative Republican. Peter opposes gay marriage.

All this must make for wonderful Thanksgiving Day conversation at the Ricketts table.

Forgive the attempt at humor.. I’ll try better down the road.

There’s always next year, after all…

Jennifer Clark, Mother of Three, Killed at Party

This is wrong any way you look at it. A young mother of three lost her life Sunday in Chicago.

From the Sun-Times:

Jennifer Clark had three children at a young age but tried hard to improve her prospects, continuing her education after high school and working as a home health-care aide.

Her life ended early Sunday in a hail of bullets at a West Side party. Clark, 24, died of a gunshot wound to the chest when someone fired into a party at Hau’t Sneakers and Gear, 5360 W. Division.

Police said the shooting happened about 1:05 a.m. after a man was asked to leave the event for "rude behavior." Once outside, the man filed several shots through the door, hitting Clark and a 16-year-old girl, said Police News Affairs Officer Laura Kubiak.

The teenager was wounded on the bottom of her left foot and was in serious condition at West Suburban Medical Center, Oak Park. The Cook County medical examiner’s office said Clark, of the 3200 block of West Crystal, was pronounced dead at 1:41 a.m. at Mount Sinai Hospital.

All because a dude was asked to leave a party.

Dude, you gotta step up. A woman lost her life because your pride was hurt.

And three children lost their mother.

Dude, you gotta step up.

Rep. Danny Davis Goes Overboard Filing for Office

Look: Decide what office you want to run for, and go for it.

Don’t play games with the voters, like Danny Davis.

From the Southtown Star:

U.S. Rep. Danny Davis has officially filed paperwork for two positions in the February primary election, saying he’s still unsure which race he’ll pursue.

The Chicago Democrat today submitted his petition for re-election to his 7th congressional district post. Last week, he submitted a petition for Cook County board president.

Davis has until next Monday to drop out of one of the races.

Is Rep. Davis confused? We know how this is going to end. Rep. Davis will drop out of the race for Cook County board president, and run for and be re-elected to Congress.

Someone else must defeat Todd Stroger.

And Todd Stroger must be defeated.

For the good of Cook County.

Woman Robbed While Urinating in Public; Witness Also a Urinator

I would love to talk to the officer who wrote this one up.

From ENEWSPF:

A woman reported two bags stolen from a bench at the bus stop at the corner of Victory Drive and Main Street shortly after 10 p.m. on October 23. According to the complainant, she stated that after getting off the bus, she set her bags down on the bench at the bus stop, and went into the bushes to urinate, leaving her bags unattended. When she came out of the bushes, she noticed that her bags had been taken from the bus stop bench, and observed a black female dressed in a dark hooded sweatshirt walking away from the bench with her bags. Another passenger on the bus reported that he also got off the bus, went into the bushes to urinate, and saw a woman dressed in dark clothing take the two bags from the bench.

First, I cannot imagine myself ever witnessing a crime and having to tell the officer taking the report that I was in the bushes taking care of urinating — at least not since my college days.

The victim and the witness were not ticketed for “pubic elimination of bodily waste,” as the charge would stand (and even that sounds funny), most likely because of the theft.

Still, I think I’ll to avoid that bus stop.