send to a friend | print | comment
Two Pa. Dems vote against health care bill
Two House Democrats from Pennsylvania bucked their party late Friday night to vote against the party’s health care reform bill, which passed by a narrow margin. All Republicans from the state’s delegation opposed it.
Congressmen Jason Altmire (D-4) and Tim Holden (D-17) both voted nay. Altmire could end up facing a competitive reelection fight while Holden is considered safe.
In a statement, Altmire voiced concern that the bill would hurt small businesses without controlling costs, but did not rule out supporting final legislation to come after the Senate passes a bill and the two meet in conference committee.
“Although I was unable to support this particular bill, I strongly believe that we need common-sense health care reform,” he said. “I will continue working with my colleagues in the House and the Senate to create a bill that will preserve what works in our current system, reduce health care costs for American families and small businesses, and build a payment structure that better incentivizes efficiency, value and quality of care.”
Paul Huber, a Republican running against Congresswoman Kathy Dahlkemper (D-3), appeared to be the first congressional challenger to formally jump on his or her opponent’s vote.
“I’m deeply troubled by Rep. Dahlkemper’s vote in support of Speaker Pelosi’s health care bill,” Huber said in a statement. “As a lifelong businessman who knows how to create jobs, I can tell you that this is a trillion dollar expansion of government and it will be a job-killer for businesses in Northwest Pennsylvania.”
Below are statements from several representatives from both parties:
Congressman Joe Sestak (D-7)—”As a 31 year Navy Veteran, I went to Congress to ensure that everyone has the same quality health care treatment as my daughter had just a few years ago under the government’s TRICARE program when she was diagnosed with a brain tumor at age 4. This is why I requested to sit on two health sub-committees, why I worked to pass health insurance reform out of the Education and Labor Committee, why I have held numerous town halls and summits over the past three years to listen and to explain the benefits of this effort, including the public option, and why I am honored to have had the opportunity to vote for the Affordable Health Care for America Act. Today, we are a significant step closer to achieving this critical goal.”
Congressman Jim Gerlach (R-6)—“Speaker Pelosi just handed the American people a prescription for higher unemployment and bigger government with a $1 trillion co-payment that generations to come will be paying,” Gerlach said. “The $500 billion in tax hikes included in this bill will place a huge financial burden on Pennsylvania’s more than 32,000 small businesses at a time when workers are watching jobs vanish at an alarming rate. If we do not get serious about creating jobs, the number of people without health insurance will keep growing.
Congressman Paul Kanjorski (D-11)—”The House has taken an important first step today to improve the affordability and accessibility of health care. While today’s health care legislation is not perfect, action to address this important issue is absolutely necessary. If we do nothing to reform health care, health care costs are expected to double over the next ten years, just as they have over the last ten years.”
Congressman Glenn Thompson (R-5)—“This bill will cost every American and I question whether it will ever lower costs. It costs $1.3 trillion and imposes taxes on small businesses and individuals. It taxes medical equipment like wheelchairs, it cuts Medicare by some $500 billion and shifts many new people onto Medicaid rolls at a huge cost to state budgets.”
Congressman Chris Carney (D-10)—“I am proud that today we stood firm and passed healthcare reform legislation that explicitly prohibits public funding for abortion. While this bill is far from perfect and there is much more work to be done, it accomplished some important steps that I strongly support. We ensured that maternity care is no longer optional, but required; pregnant women will be guaranteed coverage at a time when they need it most, for themselves and their unborn children.”
Congressman Joe Pitts (R-16)—”Instead of passing healthcare reform with a united front of Democrats and Republicans, Speaker Nancy Pelosi chose to reject bipartisanship and twist arms to pass this bill with a slim majority. The American people can have no confidence in this bill that seeks to take over 17 percent of the American economy.”
Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz (D-13)—“Health care reform is both a moral and economic imperative. Americans have been waiting decades for access to affordable, meaningful health care, and tonight’s historic vote moved us closer than ever before to this goal. This legislation builds on what works, and improves what doesn’t in our health care system. It ensures that we will provide nearly every American with access to affordable, quality health care coverage. It improves delivery of care and will lead to better health outcomes for all Americans. And, this bill contains the rapidly rising costs of health care—critical to America’s economic strength in a global economy.”
November 8, 2009 at 1:25 am
Tags: Jason Altmire, Tim Holden
Leave a Reply
pa2012.com blogs
Red in a Sea of Blue
Purple in Pennsylvania
The Latest from @pa2012 news
More UpdatesStay connected with pa2012.com:
advertisement
advertisement
advertisement
The Pennsylvania Guardian
Nov 8th, 2009
Obama and Pelosi are worried about tax-payer funding for abortion while unemployment is over 10% and still climbing ???
Lee Levan
Nov 8th, 2009
“Obama and Pelosi are worried about tax-payer funding for abortion while unemployment is over 10% and still climbing ???”
No. They had to make that deal in order to get enough votes to pass the health insurance reform bill. That’s reality.
Jon Geeting
Nov 8th, 2009
If Holden is in a safe district, why isn’t he voting for the bill? And what does Carney think he’s doing abetting those assholes trying to put the Wire Coathanger Amendment in the healthcare bill? Democrats need to take a good look at some of the crappier representatives in our big tent with an eye to changing them out in 2010. The Democratic party needs more House primaries from bold progressive candidates. That’s not to suggest a self-defeating purity purge as Republicans are doing. But we need a better method for making sure that we have every Dem House member voting as liberally as possible relative to the partisan lean of the district. If Holden is truly in a safe Dem seat, I want him voting for Anthony Weiner’s single payer amendment. If Dahlkemper really is in a tough district, let her do what she needs to do. But we need to make sure that all safe or moderately safe seats are filled with as progressive a candidate as the district will allow. I have a feeling we would be looking at a significantly more progressive Democratic caucus.
Greg K.
Nov 8th, 2009
I was disappointed that Rep. Holden didn’t vote in favor of the bill, but I understand that he’s in a difficult district and I imagine Speaker Pelosi released him when she had enough votes.
There should have been more Republican support considering how many Republican-friendly ideas were incorporated (deficit neutral, no money for abortions, reduces costs long term, malpractice reform, high-risk pools, interstate competition, small business protection, etc.) but I’m not really surprised. So many Republicans have publicly stated that the bill’s passage is not in their best interest politically.
KG
Nov 8th, 2009
Jon-
“The Democratic party needs more House primaries from bold progressive candidates. That’s not to suggest a self-defeating purity purge as Republicans are doing.”
You’re drawing an imaginary distinction.
The only difference between your suggestion for Democrats and the fatal purges by conservative Republicans is a false belief that leftward purges would somehow be more successful.
The bill passed, that’s what matters. I congratulate both Democrats in PA who was lucky enough to get to vote no. I’m glad the national Democratic leadership recognizes how valuable it is to hold seats in PA, and how important moderates are as a means of doing so.
Jack
Nov 8th, 2009
I guess people don’t realize that when Democrats use the strategy of allowing people to vote no because they don’t have the courage to vote the right way, they make every Democrat who did the right thing a bigger GOP target.
“I congratulate both Democrats in PA who was lucky enough to get to vote no.”
Even beyond the grammar here, this is a ridiculous statement. I’d like to congratulate all those who had the courage to do the right thing and not screw over their fellow Democrats, while giving the GOP more credence to their opposition.
Also, where did anyone read that either Altmire or Holden got a pass by Pelosi? Altmire used to be a lobbyist for UPMC and was rarely close to being definitive on any support for real reform.
KG
Nov 8th, 2009
Jack-
Touche on the grammar, and touche on your substantive point as well – I went too far. However, allow me to expand on my point.
I’m watching the Eagles right now, so I hope you’ll permit a football analogy. The health care vote is a big one, but it’s still one vote. Whether it was won by a margin of 2 or 10 makes little difference. Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Hoyer are looking down field, recognizing that there will be important votes next Congress as well.
If they can get it through, and at the same time know they have votes to spare, why not allow embattled freshmen and sophomore Dems in conservative districts to vote no? They help to protect seats for important votes in the future, and they get health care too. To me that looks like a win-win scenario.
flynnbw
Nov 8th, 2009
Rep. Holden’s district is an R+6 — hardly a “safe” district. I’m glad Carney (PA-10,R+8) had the guts to stand up and vote in favor of needed reform — it seems he’s really trying to play up his pro-life bona-fides.
Lee Levan
Nov 8th, 2009
What’s the point of electing Democrats who vote like Republicans, especially on historically significant issues such as health care insurance reform? If you want to root for your favorite, pick a sports team; not a political party. How many Democrats there are is not what’s significant. How they vote is what counts.
This is not some minor matter. Healthcare insurance reform means lives and health and bankruptcy. Is it acceptable to put re-election ahead of the good of the country and its people? Not to me it’s not.
KG
Nov 9th, 2009
Lee-
Respectfully, Democrats in Congress could have 100% solidarity in voting, but that won’t matter if they lose the majority.
I agree that health care is no minor matter, but neither are cap-and-trade, closing Gitmo, ending DADT, common-sense regulation of Wall Street, the fight against global AIDS, and a host of others – which certainly won’t all be able to be addressed this Congress.
The Democratic leadership played it smart on this one.
M1
Nov 9th, 2009
Thank God for Altimire and Holdren sticking to their principals and Voting “No” to Healthcare and the republicans. Healthcare along with cap & trade will tax Pennsylvanians excessively. Allyson Schwartz voted her ideology instead of what is good for her constients.Thats why she has so many constients voting against her in 2010.
BerksWoman
Nov 9th, 2009
According to the Cook Political Report http://www.cookpolitical.com/races/house/chart.php Tim Holden’s seat in the 17th is a “Solid D”. What good is a Democratic seat if that representative is not voting the party platform? The healthcare reform bill is THE Signature Issue of the Democratic Party and President Obama, the head of the party. There is no way that Speaker Pelosi gave him a “pass” on this one…the vote was way too close and besides, as other posters already said, we needed a united front on this so that we don’t leave the brave Democrats in the at-risk seats hanging out to dry.
Lee Levan
Nov 9th, 2009
Sorry, KG. The goal of the game is to pass good legislation. If we stopped counting how many Ds and how many Rs, and started electing people who voted in the best interests of this country, it wouldn’t matter which party had the majority. My goal is not, in your word, solidarity. It’s also not a meaningless party majority. It’s good, forward looking legislation.
Good legislation, including all of the examples that you listed, would be just as good if it was passed by Ds or by Rs. Or, God forbid, on a bipartisan basis.
Everyone draws a line somewhere. I respect that you draw it in a different place than me. As BerksWoman (my home county) wrote, healthcare insurance reform is the signature issue of the Democratic Party. It’s decades overdue. I don’t care if Holden gets reelected. I do care if people die because they don’t have health insurance.
TB
Nov 11th, 2009
“Respectfully, Democrats in Congress could have 100% solidarity in voting, but that won’t matter if they lose the majority.” -KG
I agree with with 100%. I believe that the Speaker was pragmatic in letting Members like Altmire and Holden vote no. I believe that if Holden had voted ‘yea’ his safe seat had the potential to turn into a toss up over night.
TB
Nov 11th, 2009
Let me also point out that comments from one Member of the Pennsylvania Delegation are conspicuously absent from the article. The sophomore Member from the 8th District.
Arturo Reppe
Jun 24th, 2011
I do not commonly reply to posts but I’ll in this case.
my God, i believed you had been going to chip in with some decisive insght on the finish there, not depart it
with ‘we depart it to you to decide’.