Google Ads


Site Stats

MA-09: Stephen Lynch switches to "No" on HCR. Any primary opponents for this DINO-posing-as-lefty?

by: Joey

Thu Mar 18, 2010 at 4:07 PM EDT


Rep. Stephen Lynch, in MA-9, voted for the health care bill in November but announced today that he's voting against the new compromise bill -- supposedly from the LEFT.

That is, he says he won't back the new bill because it's weaker than the original House bill, doesn't do enough to constrain insurance companies and doesn't allow for a public option.  In other words, we're supposed to believe Lynch is to the left of Kucinich on this issue.  This is wildly implausible.  Lynch is a DINO, and his opposition to the bill is from the right.  Who does he think he is fooling?

My larger question is: Is there any possibility of a labor-backed primary opponent for Lynch -- from the actual left?  MA-09 (South Boston) is not the bluest of MA districts, but my hunch is that labor is pretty strong there.  It might be important for the larger project of keeping wavering "Yes" votes in line on this bill for some plausible primary opponent to at least begin to get talked about for Lynch.

The filing deadline in MA is not until 6/1...

Joey :: MA-09: Stephen Lynch switches to "No" on HCR. Any primary opponents for this DINO-posing-as-lefty?
Despite pressure from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other Democrats, Representative Stephen F. Lynch of South Boston said today that he will vote against President Obama's health care overhaul when it comes to the House floor, contending that it doesn't put enough pressure on insurance companies to reduce costs.

The move is a switch for Lynch, who voted in favor of the House health care bill in November. But he said the current version, which was approved by the Senate, is not as strong as that measure.

-- http://blogcabin.boston.com/mt...

Lynch goes on to criticize the raw deal Massachusetts gets financially from the bill because it's already so far ahead of other states in covering the uninsured, but the main line of his critique is that this bill is weaker than the House bill (not surprising, since he has to justify his vote switch).

This is not the first time a conservative Democrat has characterized skepticism about HCR as being from the left when it is actually from the right.  (Isn't that the trick Massa tried to pull before his spectacular recent flameout?)

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Primary. Now.


Some Dude, 19, Democrat, NH-02 (residence), MA-08 (college)

I'm going to jump up and vote against this bill from above!
Well, when it comes down to it, the result is still punching the bill in the face from the front, no matter which way you spin it.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

Massa
was ambiguous.  It's probably better for all of us not to try to put ourselves in that man's mind.

This is not the first time a conservative Democrat has characterized skepticism about HCR as being from the left when it is actually from the right.  (Isn't that the trick Massa tried to pull before his spectacular recent flameout?)

Primary challenge to Lynch sounds good to me.  It's a D+11 district, so not too too risky.  He's apparently meeting with Obama this afternoon, and may come around yet.  Even in that case, a primary challenge still sounds pretty good to me.  He's one of those like Lipinski, who is a waste of a very Democratic district.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11


I don't quite believe many of these
Kucinich and Gutierrez have already switched. I shall wait for the rollcall.

Yeah
there is so much posturing and bullshit motivating the public comments of public officials on votes, it's probably best to wait until the day of the vote.  Hasn't stopped me from following the whip counts though.

I predict passage by 221-210.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11


[ Parent ]
Reading the quotes
Lynch seems clueless about what he actually wants to vote against. Like he still thinks the Cornhusker Kickback is included. I predict 216-215. The Clinton budget all over again. And I wouldn't be shocked if Biden has to break a tie.

[ Parent ]
Biden doesn't break the tie in the House
A tie vote fails.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

[ Parent ]
I
think he was referring to the (hopefully) soon to come Senate vote.    

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Sorry conspiracy
I hate myself for suggesting you didn't know that.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

[ Parent ]
I agree with you about the House vote.
I think we'll end up with about a solid 54-55 in the Senate though. No Biden tiebreaker.

[ Parent ]
House
Might be for the best anyway - it passes but vulnerable Dems still get to vote against. No excuse for Lynch. Yeah, probably no tiebreaker. But then I wouldn't bet against it either.  

[ Parent ]
Likely so
Here is my list of possible no votes in the Senate

Blanche Lincoln
Ben Nelson
Joe LIEberman
Mary Landrieu
Evan Bayh
Bernie Sanders (from the left)

And there could be a few more possible flip floppers out there.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  


[ Parent ]
No way will Sanders vote No
Not a chance in Hell. He actually cares about helping people, and on balance, this bill helps people. Remember that he voted for the Senate bill.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
Bernie Sanders is a yes
He is certainly making that clear here in Vermont ... whatever he thinks the shortcomings of the bill are, he knows the good it will do. He voted for it before in the Senate, and the reconciliation package will make it more progressive, so he will definitely be on board.  

[ Parent ]
On a related note
The House defeated the GOP effort to stop "Deem and Pass".

http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

Odd that Lynch trashed it in his statement then votes the other way.

I suspect this isn't perfect science but the switches are:

No to Yes - 21 (Scott Murphy, Chet Edwards, Boccieri, Kissell, Altmire, Betsy Markey, Marshall, Kucinich, Lincoln Davis, Boyd, McMahon, Baird, Matheson, Chandler, Skelton, Barrow, Peterson, Bart Gordon, Ross, Boucher, Tanner)

Yes to No - 12 (Dahlkemper, Costello, Cooper, Carney, Arcuri, Giffords, Lipinski, McNerney, Michaud, Stupak, Perriello, Mitchell)

No and still No - 16 (Bright, Kratovil, Minnick, Adler, Nye, Childers, Teague, Kosmas, Shuler, Holden, Herseth Sandlin, Mike McIntyre, Dan Boren, Gene Taylor, Artur Davis, Melancon)

Some correlation there. I like that the former list is longer. Then again, some members in each category are on record as planning to vote the other way at the weekend.  


I
hope Matheson doesn't switch his vote. Politico did a piece about Obama nominating his brother to a position and it looking like he was buying a vote. I know it's not true but it would still look bad and would make Matheson's seat a possible loss. If the bill really comes down to one or two votes then Matheson should flip, but unless that happens he should stay probably a no vote.      

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Same deal with Chet and Boyd
In their case probably throwing a bone to leadership. The others are encouraging. Especially those from post-filing date states with weak or no opposition (Ross, Chandler, Kissell) or retirees (Tanner, Gordon, Baird). We shall see. I'm cautiously optimistic.

[ Parent ]
Chandler's a no vote again
I can't believe we are about to get this done. I am so proud.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
A have a bad feeling
that several people who have no business voting for this bill like Chet Edwards and Jim Matheson will have to because of jerkoffs like Lynch.

[ Parent ]
There's talk Betsy Markey is a "yes" b/c of jerkoffs like Lynch......
The speculation I read today was that Markey's announcement reflects Pelosi struggling to get to 216, that Markey is an "emergency" vote cashed in only if absolutely needed.

And don't count on Chet Edwards or probably Jim Matheson.  The reality is that in 1993-94 a lot of these more senior red-district Democrats were obstinate on Clinton's budget, which is why Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky was forced to vote yes.  MMM rightly complained at the time that the White House didn't whip the more senior and safer Dems nearly as hard as her and some other more vulnerable junior Members.

I get the sense this time that they're working harder at whipping the safer ones, as should always be the case.  The internet makes it a lot harder now than in Clinton's first term for a safer Member to vote "no," since the news coverage and activist attention are so much more intense.  The Stephen Lynches of the country hid more easily in the Clinton years, but he's "outted" now and will get a lot of heat.

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10


[ Parent ]
MMM
Is one of my all time favorite members. If more MMM's are forced into voting for this bill then Lynch and any other safe dem that votes no should be primaried.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Agree completely. (nm)
nm

43, male, Indian-American, Democrat, VA-10

[ Parent ]
that would be false
It takes months and months to vet a potential judicial nominee; the Matheson nomination had been in the works for a long time before that announcement.

[ Parent ]
Obviously
it isn't true. However they could make an issue out of it anyway, it really doesn't matter if it's true or not.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
Several of the yes-to-no are the anti-choice Democrats
Stupak, Dahlkemper, Costello, Michaud, and Lipinski are probably part of Stupak's fairy-tale bloc. Maybe Cooper too.

[ Parent ]
Michaud and Lipinski
have already signed on I believe.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
they certainly can't afford not to be
They represent Democratic leaning-seats, and Lipinksi knows labor and progressives will take him down in a heartbeat if he votes against the final HCR bill. He can survive the netroots, since he is representing a religious, blue collar dem district that is not the sort of place that DKos-Move On primaries from the left work, but labor has already made it very clear they will take down Democrats that stop them, and Lipinski had better know he has no option but to vote for the bill.

[ Parent ]
No
Marshall is a definite no, not sure where you're getting the idea he's changing his vote, it's never been a question with him. Please provide some link to prove otherwise that he's switching his vote.

Here's his spokesman clearly stating he's a no vote:

http://theplumline.whorunsgov....

Here's an interesting link from the Washington Post about the vote count:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Not sure why you have Barrow listed there either since he's undecided. Sanford Bishop is also undecided as well.


[ Parent ]
Read it all again
I said no such thing.

[ Parent ]
Um
"I suspect this isn't perfect science but the switches are:

No to Yes - 21 (Scott Murphy, Chet Edwards, Boccieri, Kissell, Altmire, Betsy Markey, Marshall, Kucinich, Lincoln Davis, Boyd, McMahon, Baird, Matheson, Chandler, Skelton, Barrow, Peterson, Bart Gordon, Ross, Boucher, Tanner)"

I see Marshall's name there.


[ Parent ]
He's just talking
about the procedural votes yesterday.  He is not saying Marshall's going to vote for the bill.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

[ Parent ]
I thought I was pretty clear
The procedural vote could be a sign of potential flips though in no means was it a given since, as I said, some of them have said they are still opposed. And since I posted that several have indeed confirmed they are changing their vote, namely Boccieri, Markey and Gordon.

[ Parent ]
Thanks
I appreciate you actually explaining it :)

[ Parent ]
Still not reading properly
"The House defeated the GOP effort to stop "Deem and Pass".

Odd that Lynch trashed it in his statement then votes the other way.

I suspect this isn't perfect science but the switches are:

Then again, some members in each category are on record as planning to vote the other way at the weekend."


[ Parent ]
So on Open Left
there are commenters proposing a primary to Dennis Kucinich for not being sufficiently progressive, now that he is compromising on HCR.  I had to slap myself in the face a few times before that one registered.  Wow!

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

There are people to the left of Dennis Kucinich?
No wait, lemme rephrase that: There are people with higher abs(Im(position)) than Kucinich?  I mean, in our party, so Ron and Rand don't count.

(For the non-mathy people, that means "farther out on the imaginary axis".)

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01


[ Parent ]
Sure
Kucinich is a gadfly. The people who want to primary him from the left are socialists and suchlike.

That said, any reasonable socialist would be screaming for the bill to pass, even whilst condemning it as insufficient. Much like Sanders, really.


[ Parent ]
Yeah, but socialists, or at least people who are avowedly socialist
aren't among the politicians in the Democratic Party (someone will correct me if I'm wrong), so they can't run in a Democratic primary.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
Well, excpt Bernie Sanders.


party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
Sanders is an independent
He caucuses with the Democrats, but he is not a Democrat and presumably couldn't run in a Democratic primary, but I guess that depends on rules in Vermont. After all, the Democratic Suffolk County Executive is going to run in the Republican Gubernatorial primary, but I think he changed his party registration a couple of hours before announcing.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
FWIW
The Democrats have at least tacitly acknowledged Sanders before, and I know for sure that the Republicans have nominated Welch literally.

party: Democratic, ideology: moderate, district: CT-01

[ Parent ]
He caucuses with them
But he isn't a Democrat.

"I'm not a member of any organized political party, I'm a Democrat!"
--  Will Rogers  


[ Parent ]
I'm one
I'm an avowed socialist, but with the two-party system as it is, I know it's foolish to go third-party.  So, when I can, I push for a gradual progressive shift in the Democratic Party.  Among politicians, I imagine you're largely, though not entirely, right.  On the local level, many Greens who have come back into the Democratic fold, may be avowed socialists.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01

[ Parent ]
DK is not purist enough for their taste?
Come on, that's a joke comment on there right? They can't possibly be serious on that one. If they are my thoughts of the people of OpenLeft still stand corrected.

22, Male, Democrat, PA-18.

[ Parent ]
Read it and weep.
I can't link to it, but it is under "Quick Hits" and called "How to end Dennis Kucinich's career."  There were at least a few people who agreed with the diarist, and it was clearly not a joke.  Not necessarily a reflection on the whole Open Left community, although they are a pretty purist bunch.  I actually like their site and it's in my regular blog rotation.

34, WM, Democrat, FL-11

[ Parent ]
"although they are a pretty purist bunch. I actually like their site and it's in my regular blog rotation. "
Which is exactly why I can't stand OpenLeft I don't necessarily like purist.

22, Male, Democrat, PA-18.

[ Parent ]
When
I'm doing target practice for paintball (Yes I paintball, not much else to do around here) I plan on using a picture of Lynch. Kidding (?), but all the same can someone give me a list of candidates that might be interested in the upgrade?    

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

Here's one possible primary challenger
http://www.bluemassgroup.com/d...

Harmony Wu, an organizer for the Obama campaign, is the subject of a draft movement / primary challenge.


[ Parent ]
Meh
I think we should put someone stronger than that up. She seems nice and all, but too unknown. We need someone with a lot of name rec. that could actually win.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
I agree!
I'm not in the district and have no inside info about who that might be...

[ Parent ]
I think it's a no for a different reason
There's no way Lynch is voting NO from the left.  However, I can see Lynch as an easy Stupak Stooge.  From a very Irish Catholic district, I can see the Bishops and, to some extent, his constituents, really forcing this issue.

30, male, Democratic, CO-01

Someone else who should be primaried
Perhaps not in this cycle, but there are now rumors that Loretta Sanchez is a no vote. Considering her seniority she should be ashamed of herself. She would have been fine if she voted yes, but she is now going to make some vulnerable freshman make up her vote. Shame on her!    

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

Agree
Cowardly. Votes like hers and Lynch and Arthur Davis means people like Besty Markey in much tougher districts have to vote for it. Shameful is an understatement. Still, an agreement with Stupak looks hopeful so it may be moot.

[ Parent ]
MSNBC
is now reporting that the Stupak bloc will vote for the bill. Yet to my surprise John Tanner will vote no, I wonder if he is thinking about running for the Senate in 2012, or he could just be genuinely opposed to it, I don't know. Thankfully Baird will vote for it.

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]
False Alarm
She will vote for it after all. I take back my comments on her.  

Proud member of the Indiana Democratic Party from IN-9.  

[ Parent ]

Copyright 2003-2010 Swing State Project LLC

Primary Sponsor

You're not running for second place. Is your website? See why Campaign Engine is ranked #1 in software and support among Progressive-only Internet firms. http://www.mediamezcla.com/

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About the Site

SSP Resources

Blogroll

Powered by: SoapBlox