Back to Headlines Print Version Buzz Up Stumble it Tweet it Facebook LinkedIn

Blue Dogs Wrestle With Competing Priorities On Health Bill

By Patrick Yoest, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- A group of fiscally-conservative House Democrats will vote this weekend on a health-care bill that virtually all of its members think does too little to rein in health costs and ensure that the federal budget deficit doesn't increase.

But by all indications, the 52-member group--known as the Blue Dog Coalition-- will split their votes on the measures, with some voting "yea" and others "nea." The lawmakers, some of whom played an instrumental role in passing a version of the bill approved by the House Energy and Commerce Committee, have met continually to discuss health-care issues but not taken a shared position on the bill now before the House.

Recent Democratic electoral losses in governors' races in Virginia and New Jersey have emboldened the Blue Dogs' Republican critics, who say that their competing demands of combating federal spending and obeying Democratic leaders on major legislative initiatives requires an untenable balancing act.

If health care passes, "a lot of Blue Dogs in this country are going to have a lot of 'splaining to do back at home in their districts, where people do not want the health care that's being peddled by this administration," Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele argued this week on the Fox News Channel's "On The Record With Greta."

A number of Blue Dogs have already announced how they will vote on the bill. Rep. Frank Kratovil (D., Md.) a freshman Democrat who narrowly won a previously- Republican seat last year, cited concerns about the bill's cost in announcing Friday that he will vote against the bill.

"Obviously the underlying commonality for all of the Blue Dogs is the concern of the cost and the deficit," Kratovil said. "If you ask all of us, the answer would be that there's still some concern. But individually, the answer becomes, 'Does the good outweigh the bad'?"

The Blue Dogs met with Congressional Budget Office director Doug Elmendorf Tuesday night to discuss the bill's long-term costs. Several members said they thought that the House bill compared unfavorably with Senate Finance Committee legislation on controlling costs, but wouldn't say whether they would vote against the bill.

While the group, which a group of mostly conservative Democrats formed in 1994 after Democrats lost control of the House, embraces a platform of fiscal discipline, its members represent a cross-section of views on social issues such as abortion. Still, a disproportionate share of its ranks also hold moderate-to- conservative views on social issues, and some have cited a lingering dispute over the bill's treatment of abortion in withholding support for the bill.

For other Blue Dog members, issues important to their district trump Rep. Baron Hill (D., Ind.) said Friday that he would support the bill--but only after Democratic leaders told him they would try to resolve his concerns about the bill's proposed 2.5% levy on medical device makers.

"I've been given assurances that they'll work with me, and that's good enough for me," Hill said.

Rep. Jason Altmire (D., Pa.) who as of Friday said he had not decided on how to vote, said he had spoken with several other like-minded members about whether to support the bill. But that doesn't include only Blue Dogs, Altmire said.

"I think you talk to people with districts similar to your own. Not all the Blue Dogs have similar districts," Altmire said. "At the end of the day, you have to go back to your district and justify why you voted the way you did."

At least some of the Blue Dogs will be needed to obtain passage of the bill. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) has a total of 258 Democrats in her ranks, and she needs 218 votes for passage, which means that only 40 Democrats can defect on the bill. That means that at least a dozen and likely more Blue Dogs would have to vote for it.

When the House passed controversial climate change legislation in June, 29 of 52 Blue Dogs voted against it.

Rep. Earl Pomeroy (D., N.D.) a Blue Dog, said this week that he expects there will be another "split decision" on how to vote for the bill

"Why haven't we had a clear, bright line in terms of Blue Dog demands [for the bill]? We couldn't get agreement," Pomeroy said after the meeting with Elmendorf. who has said he supports the current version of the legislation. "Who knows how they're going to sort out."

-By Patrick Yoest, Dow Jones Newswires; 202-862-3554; patrick.yoest@ dowjones.com

  (END) Dow Jones Newswires
  11-07-090815ET
  Copyright (c) 2009 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.