Yeah this analogy doesn't hold in this situation. What the voting record shows, and not just this one but the last renewal as well, is that the left wing of the Democratic Party (the progressive caucus in the house) will vote against renewal. In the last renewal, in the House IIRC it was a bunch of dems from the progressive caucus plus one libertarian republican: Ron Paul, who voted against it. So while the Democratic Party, as a political party, has failed to stand up against it in sufficient numbers, the evidence suggests that the further to the left the person in question, the more likely is he or she to oppose. That nuance puts this into a context which I'm afraid tends to weaken the thrust of your analogy. The Democratic Party isn't one person as in your analogy - it is a collection of people with differing viewpoints, and a collection which happens to contain more in opposition than the opposing collection.
Not only that, but the core philosophy of the party - Liberalism - is associated with opposition to this bill, as evidenced by the fact that those who voted against renewing it have voting records further to the left of those who voted for it, e.g. they tended to favor single payor health care over more market drive approaches. So the problem appears to be some democrats, not liberalism. Another way of putting it is this: the further right you move, the more likely you support this law, regardless of party affiliation.
I will mention in fairness that more republicans voted against it this time than the last, so perhaps the GOP is very slowly starting to come around.
Facebook
Twitter