White Males Were 36 of 39 Democratic House Health Care NO Votes
The 39 Democrats who voted against passage of the House health care reform bill will be as indelibly remembered politically as the 29 Senate Democrats who foolishly voted in 2002 to support the Iraq War.
Both were were political choices, not choices made in the best interest of the American people. And both votes were about viewpoints foundational to the Democratic party, and to the essence of being a Democrat.
(See the list of 39 DINOs at Who Voted NO on the House Health Care Bill?)
Hillary Clinton lost the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination because she fatefully cast her 2002 vote to support George Bush's and Dick Cheney's oil-based attack and occupation of Iraq. John Kerry had no credibility on the Iraq War during the 2004 presidential race since he also voted YES on the Iraq War.
Yet, the late Sen. Ted Kennedy, who was among the 23 senators who wisely voted NO on the Iraq War, prophetically called it "the best vote I have cast in the United States Senate since I was elected in 1962."
Likewise, the 39 House Democrats who voted NO on the sole issue that has united all Democratic presidents for more than 75 years, health care reform, will be remembered for their lack of good judgment, and especially for their lack of compassion and support for everyday Americans.
I've carefully reviewed and researched the 39 Democratic naysayers, and found two common attributes: the group is almost entirely white and male:
- 38 of 39 are white; one, Rep. Artur Davis of Alabama, is African-American.
- 36 of 39 are men, representing 17.8% of all House Democratic men.
- 3 of 39 are women, representing only 5.4% of all House Democratic women.
To my surprise,the following were NOT common denominators among the 39 House naysayers of health care reform:
- 30 of 52 pro-business Blue Dog Democrats voted for the House health care bill.
- Only 17 of 39 NO Democratic votes came from Southern state representatives.
- Age was not a factor. House Democrats voting NO ranged from ages 39 (Stephanie Herseth Sandlin of South Dakota) to 77 (Ike Skelton of Missouri).
I've compiled these 39 names so you don't forget them. Remember these 39 DINO's for their lack of courage, lack of wisdom, and lack of compassion.
I'm not suggesting that we don't vote them back into Congress if there aren't better alternatives. But I am strongly suggesting that they never be considered for higher office. They have neither earned nor deserve our trust.
Read Who Voted NO on the House Health Care Bill?
- Essential Reading
- Key Provisions of the House Health Care Bill
- White House Statement of Support for House Health Care Bill
(Photo of Rep. Mike Ross of Arkansas, vocal leader of Blue Dog Democrat oppostion to the House health care reform bill: Mark Wilson/Getty Images)
Comments
Dennis Kucinich voting against it was surprising by all accounts. He was on the Ed Shultz Show tonight and said he voted against it because it was a pro-insurance company bill. He felt that it lined the pockets of the insurance companies, and that it will not create lower premiums. I’m not sure if he is correct. One thing is certain, the provisions allowing HHS to negotiate prices and the other provision restricting the insurance companies from denying coverage were great parts of the bill.
I think many of them were upset because it did not include any single payer legislation. But we all know that would be a bill that would fail at least at this point in time.
It doesn’t matter anyway because it will not get past the Senate, especially when the Democrats are relying on Leiberfool for a vote.
As a 50 year old white male I have been told by my State’s AG that I have no rights.
And you wonder who is at the tea party.
I always find it strange when congressmen are criticized for making a “political” vote. Aren’t they supposed to be representatives? Shouldn’t they carry out the will of their states and not their parties? Everybody complains about overly partisan officials that don’t think for themselves, until they become inconvenient servants to their constituents that don’t think for themselves.
Hell, maybe they just thought the bill needed more work (which it does!).
Let’s not forget that this bill includes an amendment that denies reproductive health care services…this is also a factor which likely caused people to vote against it. The same argument can be said towards those who voted yes-why on Earth would they back a reform package which excludes reproductive health benefits?
Bruce:
You have rights. You have the right to remain silent. I’m kiddin. Don’t get me wrong, white males have rights. But they don’t get special benefits because of race or gender, and they shouldn’t. No one should be given preferential treatment based on the color of their skin or their anatomy. That is discrimination. I am Italian. I think its funny that some beleive that they should get extra benefits because of their color. I am not crying bloody murder since there has NEVER been an Italian president. BTW there are A LOT of us here.
On another note, there is no difference between a Greek, a Latino, an Italian, or an Albanian pigment wise. So why would the Latinos get special treatments. Last time I checked the Spaniards were ruthless conquerors who decimated innocent people in South America. So hundreds of years in the future they get benefits because of their race.
How about the Jewish people. They clearly are minorities and have been picked on throughout history. They don’t get minority benefits. As much as I don’t agree with giving African-Americans and Native-Americans special treatment, at least I can logically see why that was put in place. When you look at the way women were treated in old days you start thinking that it was also grossly unfair to say the least. They were property transferred from a father to their husbands(mostly through arranged marriages). My daughters should have every opportunity I had but not get preferential treatment over my nephew.
Here is a novel idea. We are all AMERICANS. We are part of the American race, and we are all God’s people regardless of one’s religious affiliation. And maybe if a certain group whether by race, religion, or gender are socially downtrodden then we can fix that through social programs for the poor not for their skin color, race, or gender.
An African-American child born in the Bronx has it no better or worse than some poor white slob growing up in a trailer park in the south.
Help the poor, not the (fill in the blank). Affirmative action is wrong but social systems for the poor is the answer. That’s the only way to break the “cycle of poverty”.
Regarding the “Tea Baggers”. They have no merit. Anyone who is rallying calling the president a Nazi commi is ignorant of history, math, science, and reality to say the least. Last time I checked the Nazis killed more commis than any other group.
If these “Tool Baggers” were so concerned about fiscal responsibility then where were they the last 8 years. Let alone when Bush proposed the bailout money long before Obama took office.
They are hate breeders. They also need to do a Google search for other meanings of the term “Tea Bagging”. I won’t give the definition here, but just state it’s quite vulgar to say the least.
Way to pull the race card on this one. What does it matter if the “no” voters were white or not? If the “no” voters were black would you point it out then? Also, enough with this “African American” politically correct jargon, unless you were born in Africa, then emigrated to the U.S., then yes, you are African American. (which, by the way, would include Dave Matthews) Besides, what we really mean by “Arican American” is Black or of a similar skin color.
Now, for the record, I vote Democrat, yet I’m getting a bit fed up with this obsession with race. I’m an idealist, and I believe Dr. King said it best by “judging not by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” And we wonder why race contiues to be an issue…perhaps it’s due to our obsession to file people away into easy to identify groups. To the Government, and most paperwork that involves me I am a white American. I am forced to choose this designation due to genetic factors that I inherited without choice. Apparently, I am also lumped in with the aforementioned Democrats who did not support the Healthcare bill because of my skin color. Can you see where this is going?
Another point is to why it is so wrong for people to not support the Bill. I am for the reform but that doesn’t mean that no one else’s opinion matters. I am also not so blinded by my AGENDA that I stop listening if I don’t like what I hear. The Bush Administration also blindly followed it’s own AGENDA, remember? There’s a term for what i have just described, it’s called HYPOCRISY.
My final point is that while dealing with the race issue, lets quit labeling and categorizing and finding new ways to be even more politically correct. I find that there are two kinds of people if I must assign a label: “Nice” people, and “Jerks”. These labels do not involve petty genetics and are more or less a measurement of character. Think about it.
Pardon me my liberal loons, but where does the health care bill fit into the United States Constitution?
Forest
Where does building bridges, disaster relief, and the internet fit into the constitution. If you played by that logic we wouldnt all be blogging here today since the constitution didnt include DARPA funding to create the internet.
Just because it wasn’t written by our founding fathers, doesn’t mean it cant be part of our life.
I totally disagree.
Rep Brian Baird is NOT a DINO, and specifically gave this reason for not voting yes: There is no control over increases in rates; there is no evidence that rates won’t go up.
The bill being considered is a total sellout to the Insurance Industry, and should be called the Health Insurance Industry Bailout.
It mandates middle class Americans to spend $10K per year, and will cause Democrats to lose heavily if signed into law.
This bill, as currently written, perpoetuates a virtual monopoly on health care coverage by the corporate interests.
If the mandate weere removed, the bill would be excellent. The mandate ruins it and will eliminate the Demo majority in 2013, when people start feeling the pain. And don’t think Republicans won’t point out a million examples of this.
Medicare for all would be so much better.