Skip to main content

Once again the House passed legislation designed to disrupt the planned reforms of the nation's health insurance industry.  This time, 39 Democratic members jumped ship to join with the Republican opposition.


Keep Your Health Plan Act of 2013

A bill to authorize health insurance issuers to continue to offer for sale current individual health insurance coverage in satisfaction of the minimum essential health insurance coverage requirement.

(a) Notwithstanding any provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, a health insurance issuer that has in effect health insurance coverage in the individual market as of January 1, 2013, may continue after such date to offer such coverage for sale during 2014 in such market outside of an Exchange established under section 1311 or 1321 of such Act.

(b) Treatment as Grandfathered Health Plan in Satisfaction of Minimum Essential Coverage- Health insurance coverage described in subsection (a) shall be treated as a grandfathered health plan for purposes of the amendment made by section 1501(b) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

A list of the bill's sponsors, all Republicans is in the next column to the right.

Representative - Sponsor
Barton, Joe
Bilirakis, Gus M.
Blackburn, Marsha
Burgess, Michael
Cassidy, William
Ellmers, Renee
Gardner, Cory
Gingrey, Phil
Griffith, Morgan
Guthrie, S. Brett
Hall, Ralph M.
Harper, Gregg
Johnson, Bill
Kinzinger, Adam
Lance, Leonard
Latta, Robert E.
Long, Billy
McKinley, David
Rodgers, Cathy
Murphy, Tim
Olson, Pete
Pitts, Joseph R.
Pompeo, Mike
Rogers, Mike
Scalise, Steve
Shimkus, John
Terry, Lee
Upton, Fred
Walden, Greg
Whitfield, Ed

The Vote:

Party Ayes Noes Not Voting
Republican 222 4 4
Democratic 39 153 8
Totals 261 157 12

39 Democratic members of the House joined with 222 Republican members and voted to negate the reforms of the Affordable Care Act.

They voted to let insurance companies continue practices like medical underwriting which excludes persons considered too risky to insure.

They voted to undermine the newly created exchange market by letting the insurance companies control it while simultaneously competing against it in a separate market with unfair advantages.

Here’s the list of the 39 Democrats who lost their way.

Barber, Ron
Barrow, John
Bera, Ami
Bishop, Timothy
Braley, Bruce L.
Brown, Corrine
Bustos, Cheri
Costa, Jim
DeFazio, Peter
DelBene, Suzan
Duckworth, Tammy
Enyart, William
Esty, Elizabeth
Foster, Bill
Gallego, Pete
Garamendi, John
Garcia, Joe
Kind, Ron
Kuster, Ann
Loebsack, David
Maffei, Daniel
Maloney, Sean Patrick
Matheson, Jim
McIntyre, Mike
McNerney, Jerry
Murphy, Patrick
Nolan, Rick
Owens, Bill
Peters, Scott
Peters, Gary
Peterson, Collin C.
Rahall, Nick
Ruiz, Raul
Schneider, Brad
Schrader, Kurt
Shea-Porter, Carol
Sinema, Kyrsten
Vela, Filemon
Walz, Timothy J.

8 Democratic members of the House didn’t vote on the measure.
Becerra, Xavier
Cárdenas, Tony
Green, Gene
McCarthy, Carolyn
Miller, George
Rush, Bobby L.
Sires, Albio
Tsongas, Niki

4 Republicans crossed party lines to vote against the measure.
Bridenstine, Jim
Broun, Paul C.
Hall, Ralph M.
Massie, Thomas
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  hopefully saved their jobs, now need Landrieu (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    cks175, SouthernLeveller

    now need vote on Sen Landrieu's bill to give vulnerable Senate Democrats some cover and distance from the ACA rollout fiasco.

    Doing nothing is not an option.

    •  Sure it is (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      salmo, 3goldens, Pluto

      Both bills are crap bills.  No action needs to be taken.  Thankfully that's what likely happens.  The Landrieu bill probably passes but never gets reconciled with the House version.  This whole fuss about keeping garbage policies is laughable.  

      Intelligence agencies keep things secret because they often violate the rule of law or of good behavior. -Julian Assange-

      by ChadmanFL on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 01:19:14 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thsoe four GOP'ers did not "cross the aisle" (9+ / 0-)

    They are so far to the right of the aisle they voted against this because it isn't extreme enough for them.  They will only vote for a full repeal.  Zero republic party members voted against it from the left.

    Intelligence agencies keep things secret because they often violate the rule of law or of good behavior. -Julian Assange-

    by ChadmanFL on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 01:16:28 PM PST

    •  My English failed me there. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JVolvo, blueoasis, Lujane

      It's funny how I can write sentences like that knowing that it isn't precisely what I want to say and how readers find them and point them out. It takes time and concentration for me to be as fastidious as I want to be with my writing so that it's clean.

      Broun was featured in a piece I posted here a month ago and I know he's a teaparty Bolshevik.  Now you've made me think I should edit that.

      There is no existence without doubt.

      by Mark Lippman on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 01:31:25 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  When I heard about the 39 dems... (8+ / 0-)

    I just shouted to myself: WTF are you people thinking???

    I'm ashamed of DeFazio and Schrader from Oregon. I'm sending some nasty emails to both of them!!

    Thank you for digging up the names, I just got home from work, heard this and hadn't had a chance to go digging up the names -

    Brings to mind: with friends like these, who needs enemies.

  •  I notice that John Garamendi CA-03 (7+ / 0-)

    was one of the Democratic yea votes. He was at one point the Commissioner of Insurance in CA. He certainly has some technical understanding on the subject.

  •  Thanks. Next time DelBene (WA-1) spams... (6+ / 0-) inbox, I'll know where to send her.

    To AHIP and her Republican buddies.

    If there's one thing Dems must learn from Repubs, is how to stick together and tough out the fight.

    Right now, our representatives simply suck at it.

  •  Tim Bishop??!! (6+ / 0-)

    I have worked for that guy's reelections; I know he has been challenged by baggers, but still--sigh.

  •  Ron Kind, WI-03, needs to STOP taking (4+ / 0-)

    Democratic money and running as a Democrat.  He votes more often with Republicans than Democrats.  And we need to quit funding this farce of a Democrat.

    As for Mark Pocan, WI-02, I knew he'd vote NO.  He's my representative and I am so thankful for him.  He is a genuine Progressive.  

    "A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more." - from the prophet Jeremiah

    by 3goldens on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 02:00:34 PM PST

    •  The alternative to Kind would be an (R) (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The polling on this issue is going terribly for us, especially our representatives in swing districts.  Let's all take a deep breath, understand that this vote will never be enacted into law, and cut our brothers and sisters in the purple districts some slack.

      Dont Mourn, Organize !#konisurrender

      by cks175 on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 02:16:01 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sorry but I disagree. (0+ / 0-)

        If Kind (and those like him) willingly take Democratic funding and then continually vote with Republicans, then maybe we'd be better off with a Republican.  I'm thoroughly sick and tired of gutless wonders like Ron Kind not showing loyalty to the Dem Party.  If Kind prefers being a Republican (which he appears to), then he should go with the Republicans.  I despise people like him who want to play both sides.  Kind needs to get off the fence--before his ass is totally covered with splinters.

        "A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more." - from the prophet Jeremiah

        by 3goldens on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 02:31:11 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  But we do need a broad coalition in order to retak (0+ / 0-)

          retake the House.  Kind's votes are upsetting, but I would rather see them coming from our side of the aisle than Boehner's!  :)

          Dont Mourn, Organize !#konisurrender

          by cks175 on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 02:39:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  You sound like a really nice person, (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Woody, blueoasis

            while I, on the other hand, am old, cranky, and jaded.  ;-)  I've just lost my patience utterly with these folks.  At least he's not my House Rep and Mark Pocan, who is a very trustworthy Progressive, is.  So, I'll leave it to Kind's constituents to take him to the woodshed if they choose to do so (or not).

            "A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more." - from the prophet Jeremiah

            by 3goldens on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 03:14:25 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

  •  Was not a "Vote to Sabotage". Was a "Survival" vot (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    I have to disagree with the diarist.  Those 39 Dems have been put into a very tough position by the White House clique that steered Obama into sticking with the "If you like your plan, you keep your plan. Period" meme.

    It's really a vote to sabotage only if the bill has a chance of passing.  And we all know this bill will never be enacted into law.  So what it becomes is a symbolic vote against the blunders and perceived dishonesty of the administration in the implementation of ACA.

    These representatives, our brothers and sisters who help us maintain some chance of regaining the majority in the House, need to draw a line between themselves and the administration on the matter of a what's seen in their districts as a broken promise.

    Their jobs are on the line.  Taking a principled stand against the bill is easier said than done.  Remember, it's easy for us to criticize from our vantage point.  As bloggers and forum members, we really don't have to put much on the line to stand against the bill.  But try to put yourself in their shoes.  Facing an upcoming election, having to devote thousands of hours, thousands of dollars, committing your job over your family.  It wouldn't make sense to ask them to fall on their swords for a bill that at the end of the day has no meaning at the federal leve, but can very well save their jobs at the district level.

    Dont Mourn, Organize !#konisurrender

    by cks175 on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 02:26:39 PM PST

    •  I don't mind hearing what others think and I don't (0+ / 0-)

      have to be right about everything. This isn't a contest for me.

      This is the wrong time for Democrats to appease their opponents or tiptoe around them. The days of timid politics and playing it safe are behind us. There's nothing to be gained from toning it down or blending in with Republicans.

      Do you notice rightwingers minding their manners or fretting about appearing too extreme? They go whole hog and there's a noticeable lack of symmetry on the left.  Meek and mild doesn't rouse much support in politics. And there's no upside in it as a strategy. It's not like any rightwingers are ever going to vote for that nice Democrat, pick one from the list above, because he/she voted with Republicans on this or that. No it doesn't work that way. No Democrat is going to get any thanks or credit from rightwingers for conceding anything to them.

      Nobody respects people who don't stand up for themselves. It's never a winning strategy.

      There is no existence without doubt.

      by Mark Lippman on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 03:53:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I like a lot of the Dems on this list like Ruiz (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mark Lippman, VPofKarma

    and Synema.  I've given them money.  I will still support them but I think they were idiots to vote for this measure.  It's a meaningless vote because Harry Reid will never bring it up.  This furor is simply vapor.  There is nothing behind it at all.  I think for many, they either don't understand the law or are not confident in their ability to explain this situation to voters. I have met members of Congress who were not as informed as I was on a particular issue or two, and on this issue of health care, knowledge is important.

    I understand why they voted the way they did.  However, you can't get scared every time a Democratic initiative gets unfair treatment in the press.  You have to fight back with information, data and hard facts.

    Democrats have to stop freaking out just because NBC News started a firestorm when it tried to interpret something it did not understand.

    Global Shakedown - Alternative rock with something to say. Check out their latest release, "A Time to Recognize": Available on iTunes, Amazon, Google Play, Spotify and other major online music sites. Visit

    by khyber900 on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 03:25:39 PM PST

    •  Think back to a month ago. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The conventional wisdom was that the Republicans were resorting to desperate measures.  The ACA was about to go live and once it did there would be no turning back because people would love it.

      It's amazing how a sliver of the market was somehow leveraged to create a considerable backlash against the ACA that no one saw coming.

      Democrats are getting punked.

      There is no existence without doubt.

      by Mark Lippman on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 04:52:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Didn't the President propose this change? (0+ / 0-)
    •  Noooooo. Bite your tongue. :-) (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The President called on the insurers to offer current policy holders the choice of renewing their existing coverage.  He said the insurers should consider all existing policies as "grandfathered" meaning exempt from the provisions of the Affordable Care Act.  It would be up to consumers to decide whether to keep their old policies with the understanding that coverage doesn't match what's offered through the exchanges.

      Today's bill goes farther. It would allow insurers to continue marketing non-ACA compliant policies to new customers.  Insurers would be able to continue offering medically underwritten insurance and to continue the practice of excluding all but the healthiest applicants.

      The continuation of the old individual market along side the new exchange market would ultimately lead to the end of the ACA. This may be too technical, but the two markets would have separate risk pools and policies would be priced accordingly. All of the risk would be excluded from the old style market and funneled into the exchanges. Healthy people would have access to what has always existed and everyone else would be priced out by sky-high premiums. We'd be right back where we started.

      There is no existence without doubt.

      by Mark Lippman on Fri Nov 15, 2013 at 04:33:40 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site