So would the White House if they - and both leaders - say you vote NO - we'll look to beat you in the primary.

Stupak, Kucinich, etc.

Want to look tough - draw that line in the sand.

Now wrapping it in a core value - like this is what Democrats are about - might help.

"Thank God" labor unions still have clout. They need to, or we're all more easily ground up by the corporate establishment. What will get enough people behind HCR in the end, is cost control. Any updates on those measures limiting HI company profits? They were discussed here awhile ago, people argued over what margin was fair etc. Pardon if I missed something but I don't see much directly, lately. (And having such measures at face value don't ensure the savings unless there's proper regulation since HI companies can pay out lots for expensive drugs etc to define their costs for the allowed premiums ratio, etc.)

PS: let me make another pitch for "The Coffee Party Movement", check it out.)

Okay:

What do the American Medical Association, the American Nurses Association, the American Cancer Society, AARP, the NAACP, and progressive activist groups like MoveOn.org have in common with the Obama administration?

McMahon is my congressman. The district (all of Staten Island and a little of Brooklyn) is full of republicans, who supported some guy named Fossella for years and years, until a drunk driving incident uncovered his second family (this was in 2008, you may remember). The typical Staten Island Republican doesn't think much about health care reform (or at all).

It isn't likely McMahon could win a second term without support from the base, and that means unions.

How'd that work out for Labor on EFCA?

The American Medical Association wants congressional Democrats to vote for health care reform. So does the American Nurses Association. The American Cancer Society does, too, along with AARP, the NAACP, and progressive activist groups like MoveOn.org ...
Congressional Dems who will decide whether reform lives or dies aren't especially afraid of any of them.

So the question is, how do make Congressional Democrats more afraid of pissing off their base than Republicans calling them bad names?

Because that really is the crux of progressive's problems in Washington. Elected Democrats don't have a problem blowing off progressives. And in many cases they are more afraid of having right-wing groups angry with them then us. Until Democrats feel a greater need to keep their base engaged than keeping right-wing nutjobs happy things will just continue to get worse.

We can all wish unions were stronger than they are, and that we still had an economy based on breadwinner jobs and manufacturing. But that's not reality. Even today, a disconcerting number of union workers vote Republican based on their deft use of dog whistles.

Until the Democratic Party finds a way of getting significant numbers of working-class white voters, we'll be bailing water from a leaky boat. I don't know the answer here but it's apparent that unions play a smaller role in our political calculations than Wall Street, trial lawyers, and the entertainment industry.

Here's something supporters of HRC to fear. As pointed out by Kathryn Jean Lopez over in the Corner:

One close watcher of the health-care debate reminds me: "it has been 78 days since the Senate passed the bill, and not a single one of the 39 Democrats who voted against the House bill have yet publicly committed to support the Senate bill."

One would assume that a Dem who voted no on the House bill would more than likely cast a safe no vote on the Senate bill. So if Nancy and the rest of the Leadership has given up on Stupak and other pro-life Dems, where the hell is she going to get 216 votes?

The only explaination that I can think of is that some of the Dems who voted no last time are intentionally lying low so as to avoid being targeted. Since Nancy hasn't called for the vote, one would assume that she hasn't convinced enough of them to switch to win at the present time.

So if Nancy and the rest of the Leadership has given up on Stupak... -Chicounsel

And if the sky was orange and you were smart, what a world we'd live in.

Pssst...the Stupak block is breaking up.

all the cited industry groups are integral parts of the medical industrial complex...of course they would support the forced ballooning of their businesses' share of US wealth with no meaningful constraints. Why wouldn't they?

While most non-rich, Americans' share of the national wealth shrinks under vicious 30 year assault of republicanism, two groups ever-growing obscene slice of the shrinking pie continue to grow unabated with no end in sight other than national financial collapse.

and the two groups are...

the medical industrial complex
the military industrial complex

“The message for incumbent Democrats from labor isn't subtle: ‘If you can't support this, we can't support you’.”

Finally, somebody takes a principled stand on healthcare legislation.

Imagine that.

If dems don't pass this you can expect them to be in the woods for a looooong, loooooooong, loooooooooooooooong time.

GOD BLESS THE UNIONS FOR LETTING DEMOCRATS & "DINO'S" [DEMOCRAT IN NAME ONLY] KNOW THEY WON'T GET A FREE RIDE ON THIS ISSUE.

WE NEED TO LET EVERY POLITICIAN ( & ESPECIALLY DEMS)IN WASHINGTON KNOW THIS IS AN ISSUE THAT WILL DETERMINE WHETHER YOU ARE A DEMOCRAT OR NOT & IF YOU ARE NOT BE FULLY WARNED THAT THE CONSEQUENCES WILL INCLUDE LOSS OF ALL SUPPORT, FINANCIAL & OTHERWISE, AS WELL AS OPPONENTS IN THE NEXT PRIMARY WITH THE FULL BACKING, FINANCIAL & OTHERWISE, OF EVERY PART OF THE PARTY.

Now look, kiddies, this should be simple mathematics: Fixing healthcare means (1) the insurance industry takes a bath on high-premium/low-benefit junk policies, (2) the chain drugstores that all seem to be located deep in the heart of low-income areas take a bath on usurious prescription prices, and (3) lending institutions take a bath on both high-interest/short-term personal loans and false-front credit card accounts. Stupak and his minions won't have to worry about being kicked to the curb in November, because there'll be juicy payoffs from the lobbies in exchange for killing reform. THAT's why some of these "democrats" won't budge---it's not about being "pro-life"; it's about being "pro-retirement-fund".

Think about this for a minute: HCR, once it actually goes on the books, serves as a foundation that can later hold a robust public option, followed by real single-payer, and right on up to full-on regulation of anything that can touch the sanctum sanctorum of the for-profit healthcare behemoth. And once that dragon lies slain, the rape of the nation by this runaway capitalistic free-for-all that seems to own the entire economy itself is placed in mortal jeopardy.

How much will Wall Street be willing to pay, just to keep Main Street from finding out that it's just a "man-behind-the-curtain" fraud found in Baum's OZ? How much to the malleable politicians to hide the fact that their real value is only a pittance of what they promote it to be; a tidy little factoid that would bring the entire house of cards down on their Lilliputian fantasy with the force of a Gulliver-sized guillotine?

GOP...AHIP...Chase...trillions of dollars' worth of overcapitalized, repackaged toxic assets with an actual net worth of zed serving as collateral to hundreds of billions' worth of debt-notes owned by Beijing; all waiting in the wings to jump out and make AIG and Lehman look like a toddler's first efforts in just-beyond-the-waves sandcastle building at low tide.

Can you sat "Titanic BOO of Epic, Extinction-event-like Proportions," boys and girls?

Good. I knew you could....