The vote in the House on SCHIP was 265-159. That’s 18 votes short of the 2/3 majority needed to override the president’s veto.
But the Speaker and the Democratic leadership are making progress. According to the most recent report I’ve found, “Pelosi said Democrats need 13 more votes to override Bush’s veto.” And that’s without knowing what Dennis Kucinich, who voted “no” because the bill would exclude children of legal immigrants, would do.
All of which is to say that Jim Idon’tknowski’s continuing refusal to talk about what he’d do on the SCHIP override vote is the height of irresponsibility. The override attempt could come down to one or two votes. If the MA-05 winner is seated in time, as could well happen, MA-05 may determine the fate of SCHIP. The people of the MA-05 district deserve to know what he would do.
Why won’t he level with them? Can he possibly respect them so little?
that this veto override is in play. There were (IIRC) 5 no-shows… 2 Ds and 3 GOPs. A number (8? 9?) Dems voted against it the first time, and they might be “flippable” if a veto override is on the line.
<
p>
Then, there’s the pressure, particularly in places where the PVI is near 0 — CDs near Philly and in NJ for example. There may also be states where a GOP governor pressures GOP members of the House to flip their vote for the good of their home state.
<
p>
Then there’s the issue of primaries. I suspect that there are some GOP members of the House who feel stuck — a vote for SCHIP hurts them in a primary, but a vote against SCHIP hurts ’em in the general election. A SCHIP vote between those two times might yield more GOP votes for SCHIP.
<
p>
Don’t vote for Tsongas [or Ogo] because you think she or he will be the lynchpin for passing or submarining SCHIP. Vote for the one who best represents your views on SCHIP and the variety of other things, since SCHIP will be one of many close bills in the next 15 months or so.
I don’t think I could vote for anyone who wouldn’t give an answer to a question this basic. If he said “allow me a few days to think about it,” maybe I’d find that acceptable… but no.
<
p>
Conclusion? He’s against it but doesn’t want to admit it. That’s a very, very, very reasonable assumption. That’s just weak.
…if Ogonowski sincerely doesn’t know how he stands on a veto over-ride on S-CHIP even at this point, and is unwilling to announce where he stands, there is something seriously wrong with him.
<
p>
If he knows where he stands on a major issue, he should say so. If he doesn’t know how he stands, then he is inattentive. If he believes that the S-CHIP bill should be amended, he should say how. As far as I can tell, from what I have read here, he has done none of the above.