Article Source: msnbc.com
from:msnbc.comA little-known legislative procedure called "reconciliation" is making a fierce comeback as congressional Democrats' best hope to end the Senate's stalemate over health care reform.
You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead. |
Biden attacks Romney tenure as venture capitalistBill Clinton to U.S., Europe: quit bickering over spendingObama raises $44 million for campaign, Dems in MayAmericans split on Obama's gay marriage decisionObama walks fine line in bashing Romney, courting Wall StreetFlorida governor takes aim at firms with ties to Cuba, SyriaNo boost for Obama from gay marriage decisionPaul hopes to influence Republican agenda at conventionNo boost for Obama from gay marriage decisionEx-Senator Edwards didn't know of payments, confidante testifies
Leave a Comment:
So much for the will of the people...... Reid does not care anymore since he is being voted out next election. What a rip off of the American people. VOTE EVERY INCUMBENT OUT..... they do not care about the voters anymore. They are elitist's who want to destroy the income of the American workers.
Well, the Dems could try something really out there conceptually ... drop the crap and work for a bipartisan smaller bill? Golly, there might actually be a ... concensus? All they got to do is have Tort reform and cross state policies ... Oh yeah they might just cut costs!
But no, it appears that Nancy-P and Harry-R can't drop their progressive ways. Controll the world and kill private enterprise.
Sad!
I'm afraid that before we can address the needs of this country, we need to start seeing what the real problems are in this country. That is the corrupt and greedy politicians in both parties. People that can't keep their hands out of the cookie jar, should not serve in powerful committees. Sorry Charlie, like Nancy and Harry and so many others, it's time to go.
"The New York Times, reported on July 10, 2008 that Rangel rents four apartments in the Lenox Terrace complex in Harlem at below-market rates. The newspaper reported that Rangel paid $3,894 monthly for all four apartments in 2007, but that the going rate for similar apartments offered by the landlord in that building would be as high as $8,125 monthly. Three adjacent apartments on the 16th floor were combined to make up his 2,500-square-foot (230 m2) home; a fourth unit on the 10th floor is used as a campaign office, even though that violates city and state regulations that require rent stabilized apartments to be used as a primary residence. The apartments are in a building owned by the Olnick Organization. Rangel received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from one of the company's owners, according to The Times. Rangel told the newspaper his rent does not affect his representation of his constituents.
Rangel was also accused of failing to report income from the rental of a villa he owns in Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic, a three-bedroom, three-bath unit that has been rented out for as much as $1,100 per night in the busiest tourist season, from mid-December to mid-April Labor lawyer Theodore Kheel, one of the principal investors in the resort development company and a frequent campaign contributor to Rangel, had encouraged the congressman to purchase the beachside villa. Rangel had purchased the unit in 1988 for $82,750 and financed $53,737.50 of the purchase price for seven years at a rate of 10.5%, but was one of several early investors who had interest payments waived in 1990. In September 2008, Lanny Davis, Rangel's attorney, disclosed that Rangel had failed to report $75,000 in income he had received for renting the condo on his tax returns or in congressional disclosure forms .
Additional accounting discrepancies were disclosed on September 15, 2008, including omission in Rangel's financial reports of details regarding the sale of a home he once owned on Colorado Avenue in Washington, DC, discrepancies in the value listed for a property he owns in Sunny Isles Florida (varying from $50,000 to $100,000 all the way up to $500,000), and inconsistencies in investment fund reporting.
In late November 2008, following relevations from another New York Times story, Republican members of Congress asked the House Ethics Committee to look into Rangel's defense of a tax shelter loophole that allows tens of millions of dollars in tax breaks for a company which has donated $1 million to the City College of New York school named after Rangel; under the loophole approved by Rangel's Ways and Means Committee, Nabors Industries has been allowed to open a small outlet in Bermuda and call itself a foreign corporation. "
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_B._Rangel
As I said before. Desperate people will do DESPERATE things. There may just be enough Democrats left out there, who know that their political careers are over regardless of if they pass health care or not so damn the torpedoes full speed ahead. They will at least go down fighting with nothing to loose. At least they'll be able to brag to their friends and family that they are responsible for Socialized Health care in this country. Unless or course it goes as bad (or worse) than the opposition believes it will. Then they'll pull an Oliver North and have "no clear recollection" of doing that or anything connected with it.
Regardless, if they manage to ram this down our throats it is "We The People" who will be stuck with the bill for what may be the Democrat's last party.
If they pass this via Reconciliation then it will be clear that they think we have a Republic and not a Democracy which is:
Definitions of 'democracy'
(dĭ-mŏḱrə-sē)
Dictionary.com · The American Heritage® Dictionary - (5 definitions)
[French démocratie, from Late Latin dēmocratia, from Greek dēmokratiā, dēmos, people, + -kratiā, -cracy.]
(noun: pl., -cies.)
A republic is defined as:
Definitions of 'republic'
(rĭ-pŭb́lĭk)
Dictionary.com · The American Heritage® Dictionary - (5 definitions)
[French république, from Old French, from Latin rēspūblica, rēs, thing, + pūblica feminine of pūblicus, of the people; see public.]
(noun)
Given these dictionary definitions and their actions which do you think they are acting like we are operating under? They sure as hell don't care about what the majority of Americans want if they pass this trillion dollar plus political mess. I really don't know how, they could expect anyone to have confidence in them to create a new and vastly more expansive and costly health care system, when they can't even fix what is wrong with Medicare.
“I’m not using reconciliation,” Reid declared flatly at a November news conference.
"They should stop crying about reconciliation as if it's never been done before," Reid said last week. "It's done almost every Congress, and they're the ones that used it more than anyone else."
Yes Reid, clearly you are not the one who needs to grow up.....something even you refused to attempt last year is now being paraded as a legitimate option just because you lost your super majority. Damn the country....we'll find a way to give ourselves something to call an "accomplishment".
Remember in January when Obama and company said they were listening to America...that was a nice 4 hours.
What I don't understand is-if a good portion of the proposed legislation is allegedly funded by cost savings and fraud reduction in medicare and medicaid, why haven't we implemented them in the past year?
Wouldn't that have been the smart thing to do? Prove to the American public that the savings could be achieved!? Novel concept!
We do not need an act of Congress to begin achieving the alleged cost savings by reducing the fraud, waste and abuse in the system.
I think all Democrats have come to the realization that the Republicans will shine the shoes of the devil to keep status quo and protect the profits of the big Insurance Companies and Pharma! 8 lobbyist for ever member of Congress - that's how strong the force is from big insurance and big pharma. Don't you ever question why the Republicans pushed so hard for the bill to be held until after the August recess? It was because they new that Dick Armry from Freedom Works, heavily supported by big insurance and big pharma had lots of money to pay enough people to rally against the bill and draw support from you unsuspecting people who thought it was a grass roots crowd. They lied and lied about the bill, misrepresented it and got everyone stirred into a hissy about "government takeover" - insurance in the bill will be provided by private insurers, but they will have new regulations to abide by to protect them from screwing over the public anymore, they will have to use 85% of funds collected on actual insurance costs. How can this be "government run" when we have many rules for other agencies like USDA, FDA, etc. that are designed to protect the general public. The Republicans are bought and paid for by big corporations, so they will fight to protect the interest of big corporations before the American public. Nothing is more telling than what Senator Bunning just did, holding up unemployment extensions for millions out of work, throwing other millions out of work by shutting down construction jobs - supposedly because he wants to see funding for it. Why doesn't he suggest that they cut 10% from all government salaries that are over $150,000 which would include all of the legislators, let them feel the pain of those that have been out of work for 1-2 years and can't find jobs. Don't give me all the garbage that the people don't want to work, it's easier for them to sit back and collect unemployment - I know better because I know a lot of them and have seen the stress and anxiety that they are going through on what the future holds for them. Bunning thought it was OK to pass for funding for two wars on the credit card, one, the Iraq war has not been proven that Bush was prepared to go to war with them before 9-11, he also passed Medicare PartD on the credit card - which was purposely done by Republicans to drain the Medicare fund so they would have an excuse to end it. If you believe they are for you . . . you'd better think again - they are scamming you big time!
The devil is wearing no clothes. That includes foot wear. Ginico, I bet you don't know exactly where this bill originated do you?
cons cry. we used reconciliation to pass tax cuts under Bush , over 1 trillion worth .. ok so they cost more in the long run ...
but boo hoo , dems aren't allowed to use reconciliation. that's a con toy.
and again , those tax cuts didn't create any jobs and actually cost the US more !
I wish Congress would spend more time trying to address ways to help the people who are unemployed to find jobs. They seem hell-bent to force this health care bill and seems to be the only matter that gets their attention. It seems to me that a wholesale overhaul of our health care system, which will benefit a few yet affect much more adversely while plunging this country into a deeper hole financially, is not a proper course of action. Perhaps they should try to help/subsidize (not by another welfare program) those who do not have access to affordable health care.
Why do Republicans love the insurance companies so much? Why do they love huge annual premium increases with lower coverage? Are Republicans just plain insane?
Nope, but we can realize crap when we see it. Health Care Reform would be acceptable. There are things that could be changed to the benefit of all. Honest people appreciate things more when they work for them.
BULL S...
The damn Republicans have been destroying America by being the Party of NO, and represent only big business. Its about time that we put a stop to Republican nonsense. If you don't like the idea of a 51% majority, then you don't understand the Senate and need to go back to school and learn that 51% represents a majority. Wake up and stop being a horses ass.
Ripley Hit this one on the head!
The Republicans are crying "unfair" over a procedure that they have used for more costly legislation. Give us a break! Bunch of whiners! Fact: Reconciliation has been used 22 times since 1980, 16 of those was the Republicans.
How is it that a procedure that allows for a simple majority vote is "unfair"? Give it a rest!
Liars, idiots, thieves, crooks, imbeciles, PROGRESSIVES, larcenists, pilferers, stealers, robbers, hijackers, pickpockets, nincompoops, donkeys = ANY CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS WHO VOTE FOR RECONCILIATION.
Reconciliation is used for BUDGET PURPOSES ONLY !!!
KILL THE MANDATED HEALTH CARE BILL !!!
http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/video/america-rising-an-open-letter-to-democrat-politicians/
Common, don't you know how to make a noun possessive? And America is awake. 60% do not support the current health care bill. So, why would your savior want to avoid that kind of majority?
Democrats should follow in the steps of their Republican predecessors and learn from them...........don't revisit reconciliation, make it a normal part of your day!
The Bush administration left a well worn path down reconciliation lane and the Democrats should follow it.
What worked well for the Republicans will surely serve the Democrats well also.
After all, the Republicans never have and never will let themselves be any part of the word bi-partisan................so with Republicans refusing to actually DO anything bi-partisan the Democrats should just go it alone--Republicans can jump on any time.
Why doesn't anyone have a tizzy about how many times the Republicans used reconciliation during the Bush tenure?
You people supporting reconciliation realize that if the Democrats use it to pass this bill, the provision forcing insurance companies to accept people with pre-existing conditions probably won't survive a parliamentary test, right?
Neither will the exchanges or the mandate.
All they'll be able to pass via reconciliation is tax increases and reallocations of spending.
Sparky,
If you look a little closer at the polls those numbers are not what the right is hoping for.
When you include the choice of a Public Option the numbers in favor go as high as 77%. When you explain to the poll takers what is actually included in the bill being currently offered the numbers flip with 61% in favor.
The poll numbers you are using simply show how successful the insurance industry and the republicans have been with their manipulation of the facts.
I don't have a problem with reconciliation as long as its used in accordance with the rules of that have been in place since 1974. Specifically, the process can be used for balancing the budget and tax cuts, but can not be use to introduce new issues, such as pre-existing conditions, universal health care, etc. Now, the senate parliamentarian will decided which issues are new and which are not, but from the sounds of it, the aspect that has never been used before is the Vice President acting as Senate President can and will override the decisions made by the parliamentarian.
So Reid's comments about the process having been used before is correct, and if he uses it in the same manner, then there should be no issue. But the moment they introduce some new issue, something other then balancing the budget, or if the Vice President overrides the decision of the parliamentarian then we have issues, rather big issues, which I believe will probably go before the Supreme Court to determine if the actions are legal or illegal.
The Democrats want reform but they want to pass a huge pile of crap that NO ONE wants. The Democrats themselves don't like it but they say it is better than passing nothing.
Why not pass the measures that both Republicans and Democrats agree on and then revisit other ideas next year. That way congress can work on the economy.
I was skeptical of the Republicans until I watched the entire health care debate last week. I am now convinced that the Obama, Pelosi and Reid want to systematically change this country and do not care what the people want.
How does one find jobs that don't exist ?
Obama has been having power lunches with ceo's over this problem.
IMO it's the mass migration of corporations and jobs over seas that started because of NAFTA , which wasn't too bad , but those doors to India and China blew off the hinges under Bush.
so .... what do you replace them with ?
I say companies that send jobs and manufacturing over seas shouldn't be allowed to sell their crap here. or tax them heavily.
Tax imports more ... alot more.
that would created some incentive to keep jobs and create jobs here.
Tax cuts for corporations ? BS. most don't pay or pass that cost on to the consumer. time to cut the corporate welfare which we pay more of than to social.
I wonder how many of the vulnerable Democratic members of the House will be willing to march off a cliff for Obama's socialistic agenda?
I found it telling that Pelosi said that House members should be worried more about passing her far-left bill than their own re-election prospects.
This should be interesting.
By the way. Whatever happened to "controlling costs"? How can a bill that costs $1 Trillion extra (more likely $2-3 Trillion) save money - especially when that means tax increases of up to $3 Trillion to make it "deficit neutral"?
When the people find that their premiums are going to cost more, and their taxes are going to increase significantly for the first five years, but they won't get any "benefits" from the health insurance reform bill, I wonder how many of them will be "thanking" their Congressional representatives that voted for the bill"
Let's see now.
$500 Billion in cuts to Medicare - that should please the seniors.
$400 Billion in taxes and penalties to young people who don't want to buy insurance - that should make the young people who voted for the Democrats excited.
Higher premiums for the middle class to cover the higher costs of covering "pre-existing conditions" - that should make them happy.
Higher taxes and costs on businesses and investors – that should help job growth.
Collect taxes and penalties for 4-5 years before ANY coverage kicks in - that should make everyone else happy, sort of like paying for a car for 4-5 years before we get to see it.
Lower payments to doctors and hospitals, which will cause many of them to "retire early” or go out of business, which will lead to severe rationing of care – especially with 30 million more “insured”.
Is there any group that the Democrats left out when finding ways to screw up the economy?????
Oh - I almost forgot - They project the National Debt will go up by $1.2 Trillion more, which means it will ACTUALLY go up by about $3 Trillion because of this bill. Obama's own Budget calls for the National Debt to increase to over $23 Trillion in 10 years WITHOUT this bill's cost, but it's extremely optimistic, and will probably be over $30 Trillion, which will put our children and grandchildren hopelessly in debt to foreigners (like China).
I think that covers just about everyone, except perhaps the illegal immigrants, who will get free or subsidized health care at taxpayer expense, but they can't vote (at least for now).
WE CAN'T WAIT UNTIL THIS YEAR'S ELECTIONS TO SHOW OUR “APPRECIATION”.
Of course we'll have to contend with ACORN, who will register a few million extra imaginary voters and illegal immigrants for the next election. It worked well in Minnesota, where they registered 48,000 new voters (using taxpayer funds), which allowed Al Franken to win the key 60th Senate seat by 312 votes. Somehow they “misplaced” all of the registrations by Republicans.
You voted for “Change we can believe in”, and you certainly got it, didn't you.
CONGRATULATIONS.
The will of the people includes more than those who spend all day on FOX News and listening to Limbaugh. Many Americans need access to affordable health insurance. A public option would be even better, which is something the MAJORITY have wanted all along. But it is obvious with all the fillibustering, the majority would never get a chance.
What filibustering?
Until three weeks ago, the Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.
You mean the cloture votes the Democrats took to end any debate and discussion so they could continue cramming through something the American people don't want? Do you mean the cloture votes that OTHER Democrats had to be bribed to vote for? Do you realize that cloture is pretty much SOP, filibuster or no?
The majority is also not staring at Olbermann and Maddow, and in fact Fox ratings outpace both of those two combined with several others.
http://tvbythenumbers.com/category/ratings/top-news/cable-news
The majority does NOT want this bill to pass.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/26/poll.health.care/index.html
CNN, not Fox OR MSNBC.
People want reform, they do NOT want this version of non-reform national bankruptcy via mandate and unaffordable tit programs.
Early last year, Democrats dusted off their rulebooks and began examining the intricacies of passing the health care bill using reconciliation, which would require only a simple 51-vote majority. Almost all of them reached the same conclusion: using an obscure budgetary procedural to pass a massive overhaul of one-sixth of the nation’s economy would be politically perilous and alarmingly unpredictable.
If you can't win playing by the rules. Just change the rules. LOL
Harry Reid is an absolute liar with no conscience. He is on film back in 2005-2006 decrying the use of "the nuclear option" over changes in tax legislation variances. In November 2009, he said he would not use "reconciliation". Even last week, Harry said he was not considering using this procedure.
Now Dirty Harry is ready to do it ! To hell with the American people....right, Harry ????? You are just a tool of B.O. and we all know that this law was not intended for forcing major socialist legislation on our country. What a moron you are Harry ! Oh, but we know that daddy B.O. has millions in Nevada for this cooperation......what is it this time ? Is it millions in mortgage support for your constituents ?
Roy..no way the bill ends up with more than 700 pages after the "Byrd-bath" that will happen. After that point there is no way in HELL there will be 50 Senators willing to stand up and vote fo it..it is dead..kiss it good bye..
yeah kiss it good bye...
We keep hearing the new Republican phrase "Tort Reform" touted as the be all end all answer to health care reform. The theory being that if there were limits placed on settlements in malpractice cases then doctors wouldn't have to spend so much on insurance and would in turn pass the savings along to the patient. This sounds a lot like trickle down economics which don't work. The doctors would just pocket the savings and make more money without having to worry about being accountable. Another theory is that doctors perform unnecessary tests to cover their butts against law suits driving up patient costs. In my town doctors hire two or three nurse practitioners or physician assistants to see the patients and charge the insurance companies for a DOCTOR's visit. They don't seem too worried about patient care to me. How many people now go to their doctor's office only to see a nurse practitioner? Where do they fit into Tort reform?
Desperate actions by a truly desperate party...
To be honest I do not care what Republicans or Democrats have done in the past with this reconciliation option. We are not talking about the past we are talking about the here and now.
Harry Reid has said many many times in the past that this option was not on the table, he would not entertain the idea of this option being used.
IF you are going to go on record as a leader of the senate and say time and time again that this issue is too big for reconciliation. You go on LIVE TV a week ago and say that this has never been an option. YOU DO NOT come back a few days later and say you are now thinking about using this option.
Crap like this is why people are fed up with BOTH parties.. They say one thing to your face and when your back is turned, they do the exact opposite. We the people are going to hold you accountable come elections.
You say you don't care what Republicans or Democrats have done in the past then start your next paragraph with what Harry Reid has said in the past... We're talking about the here and now right?
Judy - what a typical liberal ploy, nitpick when you have no defense. Here and now applies to health care, and Harry Reid said at the "summit" (a lie, btw) that no one was talking about reconciliation. The topic of health care has been beaten to death over the past year, and yet it is still the here and now. Deal with it, nitpicking doesn't prove you point, it only makes you look like you don't know what you're talking about.
Which, regarding tort reform, you don't. The lawsuits are less the point than the exhoribitant costs of defenesive medicine. I have read various estimates that the annual cost of defensive medicine - extrat tests and procdures doctors due to cover themsevles against lawsuits - is staggering. Here's a source I bet even you can wrap your mind around. Sanje Gupta on CNN did a report the other day on this topic as well, and showed research that said 10 to 35% of all testing and procedures were done "defensively" (it varied by procedure).
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johnny-benjamin/healthcare-reform-and-def_b_243537.html
Are you being Obtuse on purpose or are you just trying to twist everything..
I'm pretty much certain that everyone else reading this knows exactly what I am talking about. I do not care what has gone on in past with the reconciliation option. What Harry Reid has said, while yes is technically the past, directly relates with today's topic. Hence it is relevant in the discussions.
I care about what our current congress says, and then does. NOT what congress from 8, 10,15, 30 years ago have done. It was pretty clear that is what I was talking about, but maybe simple English is a bit over your head.
Prag,
Wrap your head around my earlier post. If doctors are spending so much on defensive medicine, why are they turning their patients over to physicians assistants and nurse practitioners? This has become a common practice and it is done so they can see more patients and make more money while they charge the patient's insurance company for a DOCTOR's visit. If the health care costs aren't the doctors fault, and they aren't the insurance company's fault, I guess you're saying it's the patient's fault . As for Harry Reid, people have a right to change their mind. And Jeremy I understand English perfectly. I suggest you learn how to use it.
judy,
Part of the reason doctors use assistants today, as they have for decades, is to make them more efficient in their work. I don't imagine Obama writes many of his everyday speeches either. Surgeons do not always stitch up a patient when finished either, that's how the younger doctors gain experience......nothing new here either.
As for TORT REFORM, I'm sorry if you don't understand reality. When well-experienced professionals have to spend $100K for malpractice insurance, or more, the cost does become part of the overhead and it DOES GET PASSED ON TO YOU. When doctors get sued if ANYTHING goes wrong, and I do mean anything, then it does, indeed, cause them to order more tests....JUST TO BE SURE, ya know, because the ambulance chasers are out there.
Years ago the ratio of plaintiff attorneys to doctors was 1 to 1. Now it is 4 to 1 because they FEED upon the medical profession. Did you ever wonder why so many attorneys are now advertising on TV FOR VICTIMS ?? It's because that's how attorneys get rich.
"Call Goldberg eight-hundred, six-hundred six oh one four". Wake up to reality and learn what drives up the cost of practicing medicine and, therefore, the cost of your insurance.
You truly believe that if doctors save a huge amount of money on malpractice insurance they will suddenly drop their prices out of the goodness of their hearts with no one making them do it? I'm sorry you don't understand reality. Surgeons may not stitch up their own patients but they at least show up for the surgery. Doctors use nurse practitioners and PA's as cheap labor and keep the profit. And once again charge the insurance company for a Doctor's visit.
I am so sick of this BS about Republicans never using reconciliation for anything but it's original purpose. That is pure BS! Take the Bush tax cuts they have nothing to do with a need to fast track a budget! Yet the the Republicans used reconciliation to pass them. It cost the US Government 1.9 Trillion over 8 years. Or how about schip, or cobra! Come on people. Stop with the lies!
Lets take this one step further shall we! The filibuster was never meant to be used as the Republicans are using it now. In fact the filibuster is simply a rule not part of the constitution. The Senate was originally designed to operate with a simple majority wins vote.
So just stop with all this BS whining, have a little dignity. You are in the minority, take our lumps and try to vote them out in the next election.
Reid swore in the past that reconciliation never should be used again. He's nothing but a lying disgraceful crook. If a citizen offered a bribe to a member of congress that person would be arrested and tried.
Progressives in both parties are intent on implementing some form of total government control of everything whether American want it or not. Any State that doesn't want to be dragged down into the coming formation of the Communist States of America ( left wing progressives) or the Facist States of America (right wing progressives) needs to break away now.
It's really quite predictable. I predict a HUGE loss for these low-life bastards who have wasted over a year trying to pass a bill that very few support.
We all want good, affordable healthcare...just place restrictions on insurance companies and pharmaceutical companies. Simple really.
You people who shout about socialized healthcare just make me laugh. What in the hell do you think Medicare is?? I bet you'll take advantage of that when you are eligible, won't you??? Think about what you are saying before you say it.
Judy,
Nurse practitioners do not work for physicians. There are many NPs that are in private practice just like any other provider. Insurance companies pay a contracted rate for services provided. You're talking about some kind of insurance fraud! Please, if you don't know what you are talking about, just don't say anything. Or, ask questions of those who do.
Judy, you are clearly well practiced in mouthing off, but poorly educated as to what you're talking about.
Your medical insurance does not cover "Doctor Visits". It covers "Treatments from Health Care Providers". To be honest, your obvious ignorance as to the medical profession actually serves to reinforce one of the primary reasons NOT to introduce a "public option".
That is, there is already a shortage of qualified medical professionals. You don't need an internal medicine specialist to diagnose routine illnesses or to assign treatment. You need a qualified medical professional. By your same twisted logic, doctors would all be drawing their own blood - or taking their own x-rays. Utterly ridiculous, and illustrative of your inexperience combined with a rather cavalier attitude. At this point Medicare treatments are ALREADY underfunded - causing some professionals to decline treatment because the reimbursement levels are insufficient to even break even. Actually, even those larger institutions that DO accept such insurance are forced to pass those unreimbursed costs along to the rest of us who carry private insurance.
Meaning - that "public option" that already exists? Like the two bills in question - it doesn't pay for itself. Exactly why would we expand that? For what reason?
Now, about the principal issue. You apparently have a very dim view of medical professionals, and disregard the years and years of extremely expensive education which generates hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt before the "doctor" ever sees the first patient. There are physicians out there 10 years out of medical school STILL trying to find a way to pay off their educational debt - all while paying massive malpractice insurance premiums. And you would have them penalized - so that you and your liberal friends can throw a party because we have "reformed health care".
Wow. It constantly amazes me that the group of people (liberal) who like to believe they are so "progressive" and "educated" have such a difficult time discussing actual facts. It's surprising that they find it so difficult to comprehend simple, logical and common sense issues. No, they would rather accuse people who don't want fully 1/6th of the entire US economy pulled into an even larger government imposed morass as "obstructionists". They would prefer to point at fringe issues around the debate to call conservatives "deceptive" and "misleading" while at the same time completely ignoring the massive misrepresentation at the hands of Obama and Pelosi. Labels are interesting, because honestly, I find nothing "Progressive" nor "liberating" about your behavior - and your obvious lack of intellectual honesty.
Judy. I think Nancy has a job for you.
You have my vote. I am voting in the new on both sides of the fence.
lets get it right people most are against it because it don't include the public option, when it was on the table the majority was for it.......... Obama ratings are down because he is trying to cater to the idiots on the right.......
This needs to be brought up here and everywhere else I can post this:
FOR PETE SAKES!!!!! OBAMA IS NOT GOING TO BAN FISHING!!!!!!
I Must Repeat: OBAMA IS NOT, yes I said it, NOT, N O T, NOT BAN FREAKING FISHING!!!!!!
This has to do with a ban on Salmon fishing in a teeny part of Washington that was started in 2007!!!!!
Democrats go for it and it will be the last time that Democrats will be elected to office. Listen to Obama and not the American taxpayer, that have to pay for your BS Socialistic ideas. Doctors have already warned you that they will limit their care for Seniors. I also believe that means Medicaidpatients too. We will all have health insurance and no competent doctors to take care of us. Wake up and listen to the people not your socialistic party bosses.
Man are you Republicans ignorant. Reconcilliation was used by the Bush gang several times. That's how the Republicans got their big tax breaks for the wealthy, and without a way to pay for it (causing much of our deficit).
Republicans are the party that created our deficit and recession, and Republicans did much of it with reconcilliation. Where were all the make believe fiscal conservatives when Bush was destroying America?
Boy you progressive thinkers are ignorant. Reconciliation has never been used like the dems want to use it now. It was intended to "fast track" budget legislation. Not thwart the will of the people. Even Robert Byrd said it should never be used by one party just because they don't have enough votes. And if you look back you will see that when it is used there is more often than not bi-partisan votes on the matters. This time it is being used because the party of "can't get anything done" doesn't have the votes again to get things done.
Progressive Thinker - Republicans did not cause the deficit. They were unable to cut worthless social programs that were started by the low life scum progressives in the 60's and 70's. Progressives should be hanged from trees for the traitorous trash that they are.
Txsecede, the national debt doubled during George W. Bush's presidency, and he didn't veto a single Republican spending bill during the first 6 years of his presidency. The fact is that the current version of the Republican Party is a big-government conservative party. The federal government grew significantly in size while the Republicans were in control.
Remember Medicare Part D? That was a new entitlement (what you call a social program), created by Bush and a Republican Senate. That was the program that was so expensive that the Bush Administration mislead Congress about its' true cost. The Republican entitlement forbids the federal government from using its' purchasing power to negotiate lower prices. As a result, the Veterans Administration, which can negotiate prices pays 58% less for drugs than Medicare Part D.
I assume you'll want to hang George W. and Bill Frist and the rest of the Senate Republicans from the trees along with the progressives.
Progressive,
Uh, I think the Bush tax cuts are about to expire. Does anyone believe that once a monster entitlement like Medicare, SS or government heathcare is created that it will ever expire? NO. It will be a black hole which will haunt the American people for generations to come until it goes bankrupt.
Actually, Republicans have used reconcilliation in a much LARGER bill: Bush's idiotic tax cuts for the wealthy was a huge huge huge huge huge bill that significantly increased the deficit. Of course it was supported by all of our make believe fiscal conservatives who unfortunately have NO FISCAL talent.
The part of the health bill that will be reconcillation is only a small part of the bill, unlike the huge Bush tax cuts for the wealthy which was very LARGE deficit increaser.
Republicans are just too ignorant to actually understand this.
Progressive,
Did you participate in the London marijuana use study?
U R Providence -
You are a total moron.
The nation debt increased by 1.4 trillion during Bush's 8 years, the same as Obama increased it one year (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aA8lChe4zUQU)
It is expected to increase by 6.35 trillion in only 4 years under Obama.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms
Try learning before typing.
txsecede,
Let me put this thought into simple terms anyone can understand. With all due respect and I am not defending or attacking either side, but when Clinton (Democrat) left office after eight years, wasn't our budget balanced?? When Bush (Republican) left office after eight years wasn't our budget wrecked??
Using your logic and since you brought it up, I think it is pretty obvious to anyone whether you are a Republican, Democrat or Independent who should be hanging from a tree.
Hard to argue with facts vs. conjecture. As far as your language, you really represent your party well son! I am sure they would be proud!
I think that if the Democrats "go for it", they will become heros. The Republicans know this, why do you think they are bellyaching so hard.
Blue Star,
How was it possible that the VP under Bill Clinton could not get elected following the success of that administration? Oh yeah, the economy went all to hell in 2000. In Clinton's final 12 months, the Nasdaq went from 5000 to 2470. It's just so happens that the Nasdaq mirrors the artificial tech bubble built up during the Clinton years. That all came tumbling down in 2000 and Al Gore paid the price.
this has to be one of the dumbest , full of BS posts I've read this week.
UUMMM no ...... Gore won the popular vote in 2000. that means more Americans wanted him as president !
and you think Bush got handed a bad deal ? compared to what Obama got handed from Bush ? Bush got a projected surplus and a memo on al queada and screwed them both up.
and a lovely Bush quote about the economy he was taking over ...
"America has a strong economy and a surplus.... Now is the time to reform the tax code and share some of the surplus with the people who pay the bills."
--George W. Bush, nomination acceptance speech, 3 August 2000
now clinton suggested that surplus be put in SS. instead Bush raided SS and left it empty.
BUSH PLEDGES NOT TO TOUCH SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS... "We're going to keep the promise of Social Security and keep the government from raiding the Social Security surplus." [President Bush, 3/3/01]
...BUSH SPENDS SOCIAL SECURITY SURPLUS The New York Times reported that "the president's new budget uses Social Security surpluses to pay for other programs every year through 2013, ultimately diverting more than $1.4 trillion in Social Security funds to other purposes." [The New York Times, 2/6/02]
Jobseeker,
Good question but kind of beside the point don't ya think? Especially if you compare apples to apples (that collapse vs. this one)? Anyway, I am not sure you can really blame Democrats or Republicans if you look at the big picture. What got us into this mess are derivatives. If any one individual (being honest and above board) should be hung from a tree it should be Alan Greenspan. Our economy came down like a house of cards because of the "Russian Roulette" he allowed to play out in the markets under his watch. Guess what? We still have yet to fix it under Clinton, Bush or Obama!
We had better do something soon or the "best" is yet to come!
Ripley,
He lost the election because he lost his home state of Tennessee. It should not have been that close if the Clnton administration was as successful as the liberals claim. After all, even a loser like George Bush won on the coattails of Reagan.
I never mentioned Bush. You did. I never mentioned Obama either. I was merely responding to a post talking about the good old days of Bill Clinton.
Blue Star,
I submit to you that Clinton had some good years, but like any other presidency except Reagan the last 50 years, he left office with the economy in recession. As to his success, you can credit that mostly to the same person who was responsible for Reagan’s success. It was Lawrence Summers. He was the economic adviser for both Reagan and Clinton, and was a staunch advocate for tax cuts, especially capital gains. Read his biography and learn something. Incidentally, Summers is also Obama economic adviser. Unfortunately, Obama is not listening to him. Oh, before you bring up Reagan's deficit, it had nothing to do the 20 million new jobs created nor the record tax revenues generated as a result. The deficit had everything to do with Democrat Congress spending more than the taxes they took in. Reagan was not without fault since he had to sign these spending bills. But what is reality is tax cuts work in creating jobs and more tax revenues for the government. Only if they can stop spending like drunkin sailors.
Job Seeker,
Here is an interesting article about the Clinton "surplus".
http://www.craigsteiner.us/articles/16
a political hail mary if ever there was one............
Progressive Thinker Bush might have done some of it but the Economy under Bush was doing great till the Democrats took over Congress in 2007. The Economy down fall right now goes back to Clinton and his housing policy. Bush had warned Congress Democrats in 2002 and 2004 about the housing crisis. But it was the Democrats in Congress that said there was no problem with Fannie or Freddie. Congress and not the president cont-rolls the debt. We have a Democrat run Congress now, and nothing is being done but spending, payback to the unions, banks and AIG. What about the American Taxpayer that has to pick up the tab? Were are the Jobs Obama promised a year ago if Stimulus was passed. They all lied.
JobSeeker,
This applies to all of them across the board. So called "Liberal" Democrats and so called "fiscal" conservatives (who aknowledge their spending spree during the Bush years) and Democrats who claim to be spending out of necessity due to the economy.
There is a fascinating documentary on derivatives and how it has set up our current economy for a fall. I believe was aired on PBS a while back. Maybe you can use a bit of "learning" yourself. Check it out.
Regardless, it will always be the other sides fault depending of what side you set up camp. In addition, unless you are a Congressman on Capitol Hill, you only know as much as they and the media want you to know. In the end, the only thing one can do and be sure it is 100% accurate is vote. It is the only thing we know for sure.
I'm out!
sergio,
The only thing disgraceful is your complete lack of any sense in #2.21. Did you forget your medication today or are you still waiting on your welfare check ? We are glad YOU voted for change, but that does not mean we need a complete government TAKEOVER of 1/6 of our country. BY the way, see if you can use a little more foul language next time.
Progressive thinker - is reconciliation an appropriate way to pass the largest act of Congress in the history of this country? Or is it an act of desperation by a failing fraternityof "progressive" elitists who claim to know better that the American public. It is not a minor budgetary change for which these processes where put in place for and used in tha past for...it is shear desperation...
Sergio, your rant is so racist and full of juvenile name calling that it's perhaps the most pathetic post I've read in months (perhaps since your last post). You may have a point, but it's lost in your tirade. Good job.
sergio dericks banned, rereg of johnjohn67.
Cut it out, Progressive Thinker. You're suspended for a day for violating #1 - and #5 of the Code of Honor.
Wishing horrible lives on elected officials isn't deathwishing, but that's not great either.
Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) said on Sunday that if Democrats push health care through under the majority only process known as reconciliation, it will be a "political kamikaze mission."
Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the second-ranking Republican leader in the House, made it clear on Sunday that Republicans see a Democrats-only bill as an election-year issue. "If Speaker Pelosi rams through this bill, through the House ... they will lose their majority in Congress in November," he said.
So let me get this straight. The republicans are claiming that this legislation is so bad and most Americans don't want it that the result of the dems passing the final legislation using reconciliation for some aspects is that they'll lose the majority in November?
This appears to be the new republican talking point in various forms, i.e., reconciliation a political kamakaze mission, etc. Funny, it wasn't a political kamikaze mission when the republicans used it 16 out of the last 21 times it has been used, including the two Bush tax cuts for the wealthy that added trillions to the deficit and Medicare Advantage which also was not paid for and added trillions to the deficit. Oh, but I digress.
Okay, so if these claims are true, why are the republicans fighting against it being passed so vehemently? After all, if the dems pass it, the republicans will gain back their majority, right?
I believe the republicans are backed into a corner and their despicable lies and misinformation are catching up to them. After all, this new vehement opposition against the dems using reconciliation seems a little ridiculous considering the republicans believe it will result in the loss of the majority for the dems.
Oh! what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive!
-Sir Walter Scott
The problem for the republicans and the real reason for the vehement opposition is that when the final legislation passes, no matter how the final legislation is passed, is that people don't really care, nor will they remember, how the final legislation got passed. They'll only know how much it improved their lives, their access to quality affordable health care insurance, lowered their monthly premiums and out-of-pocket costs, made them eligible for quality affordable health care insurance no matter what medical status, their doctor deciding the care they need, not an insurance company review board, etc.
That is all the American people will know, making it the most popular legislation since, well, Medicare.
That's really very bad for republicans. They know it. Look at their behavior, becoming more and more erratic and more and more desperate. The republicans are so desperate they are fighting vehemently against passage of a final bill that they claim if passed, will result in the republicans gaining back their majority. Isn't that what they want?
The democrats will pass the final bill using the means available, President Obama will sign it, instantly improving the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans. That is a fact, and one that will result in the republicans wandering in the wilderness for decades.
Oh, and before anyone starts going on and on about how nothing goes into effect until 2013/2014, the following, among other things, would take effect within the first year of passage into law resulting in hundreds of millions of Americans receiving relief and benefits of the legislation immediately.
Access to Affordable Coverage for the Uninsured with Pre-existing Conditions Will provide $5 billion in immediate federal support for a new program to provide affordable coverage to uninsured Americans with pre-existing conditions. This provision is effective 90 days after enactment, and coverage under this program will continue until new Exchanges are operational in 2014.
Access to Quality Care for Vulnerable Populations Makes an immediate and substantial investment in Community Health Centers to provide the funding needed to expand access to health care in communities where it is needed most. This $10 billion investment begins in 2010 and extends for five years.
No Pre-existing Coverage Exclusions for Children Eliminates pre-existing condition exclusions for all Americans beginning in 2014, when the Exchanges are operational. Recognizing the special vulnerability of children, the Managers’ Amendment prohibits health insurers from excluding coverage of pre-existing conditions for children, effective six months after enactment and applying to all new plans.
Re-insurance for Retiree Health Benefit Plans Will create immediate access to re-insurance for employer health plans providing coverage for early retirees, effective 90 days after enactment. This re-insurance will help protect coverage while reducing premiums for employers and retirees.
Closing the Coverage Gap in the Medicare (Part D) Drug Benefit Will reduce the size of the “donut hole,” raising the ceiling on the initial coverage period by $500 in 2010. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will also guarantee 50 percent price discounts on brand-name drugs and biologics purchased by low and middle-income beneficiaries in the coverage gap, beginning July 1, 2010.
Small Business Tax Credits Will offer tax credits to small businesses beginning in 2010 to make employee coverage more affordable. Tax credits of up to 35 percent of premiums will be immediately available to firms that choose to offer coverage; later, when Exchanges are operational, tax credits will be up to 50 percent of premiums. The full credit will be available to firms with 10 or fewer employees with average annual wages of $25,000, while firms with up to 25 or fewer employees and average annual wages of up to $50,000 will also be eligible for the credit.
Ensuring Value for Premium Payments Will establish standards for insurance overhead and require public disclosure to ensure that enrollees get value for their premium dollars. The Managers’ Amendment tightened these standards, requiring plans in the individual and small group market to spend 80 percent of premium dollars on clinical services and quality activities, and 85 percent for plans in the large group market. Health insurance plans that do not meet these thresholds will provide rebates to their policyholders. This provision takes effect in 2011 and applies to all plans, including grandfathered plans, with the exception of self-insured plans.
Patient Protections Protects patients’ choice of doctors by allowing plan members to pick any participating primary care provider, prohibiting insurers from requiring prior authorization before and woman sees an ob-gyn, and ensuring access to emergency care. This provision takes effect six months after enactment and applies to all new plans.
Extension of Dependent Coverage for Young Adults Will require insurers to permit children to stay on family policies until age 26. This provision takes effect six months after enactment and applies to all new plans.
Free Prevention Benefits Will require coverage of prevention and wellness benefits and exempt these benefits from deductibles and other cost-sharing requirements in public and private insurance coverage. This provision takes effect six months after enactment and applies to all new plans.
Beginning on January 1, 2011, Medicare beneficiaries will receive a free, annual wellness visit and will have all cost-sharing waived for prevention services.
No Lifetime Limits on Coverage Will prohibit insurers from imposing lifetime limits on benefits. This provision takes effect six months after enactment and applies to all new plans.
Restricted Annual Limits on Coverage Will tightly restrict insurance companies’ use of annual limits to ensure access to needed care, effective six months after enactment for all new health plans. These tight restrictions will be defined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. When the Exchanges are operational, the use of annual limits will be banned.
Protection from Rescissions of Existing Coverage Will stop insurers from rescinding insurance when claims are filed, except in cases of fraud or intentional misrepresentation of material fact. This provision takes effect six months after enactment and applies to all new plans.
Prohibits Discrimination Based on Salary Will prohibit group health plans from establishing any eligibility rules for health care coverage that have the effect of discriminating in favor of higher wage employees. This provision takes effect six months after enactment and applies to group health plans.
Public Access to Comparable Information on Insurance Options Will enable creation of a new website to provide information on and facilitate informed consumer choice of insurance options.
Health Insurance Consumer Information Will provide assistance to States in establishing offices of health insurance consumer assistance or health insurance ombudsman programs to assist individuals with the filing of complaints and appeals, enrollment in a health plan, and, eventually, to assist consumers with resolving problems with tax credit eligibility. This provision is effective beginning with fiscal year 2010.
Appeals Process All new health plans will implement, within six months of enactment, an effective process for appeals of coverage determinations and claims. And, states will provide an external appeals process to ensure an independent review.
Blah Blah Blah .......... all it means is more taxes and another unsustainable "entitlements" (welfare) program. Worse than nothing because, since it is unsustainable it will eventually break the bank and provide benefits for none. But those bearing that burden will be our kids and grand kids, so go ahead.... go into debt and spend it like it was yours.
Wonderful.
So, who's paying for it?
If this country wants healthcare reform let the individual states do it. The federal government has no business butting in.
Total BS - as soon as you stated "president Obama will sign it and immediately improve the lives of hundreds of millions of Americans" I was laughing so hard I had to stop reading your cartoon. If we have 300 million Americans and 85% are happy with their current plans are the "hundreds of millions" legal Americans?
Where is President Obama going to get all these billions of dollars?
babina:
I see your approach is to apply the principle of never letting brevity get in the way of making your point.
Did you help author this thing?
Amen!
Thank you - it would be interesting to hear how the Congressional pensions are funded. Since Reagan, they have borrowed from the SS Trust Fund to pay for government because of revenue short-falls caused by the big tax breaks given by all Republican Presidents to the rich. Now, Ryan in AZ has this fantastic proposal - privatize social security (same plan Bush had - Wall street is licking their chops on how much money they can make on SS Funds) give vouchers to Seniors to go to the private insurers for their insurance and scrap medicare. Maybe we should start insisting that whatever they decide for the public must be adhered to by them, no more special pensions and health care benefits that are different than what they want to impose on us. Republicans rue the day when they can kill ALL social programs - why should they care, they're taken care of by all of their rich friends for whom they have gained so much back in Republican tax reform. People wake up - obviously you don't understand when you're being scammed - they throw in the wedge issues like abortion, gay marriage, take your guns away - just to get you riled. How many Republicans have had flings just this past year and are still in office - they're just a bunch of hypocrites! If you want real torte reform, how about a public option for mal-practice insurance -non-profit - now that would really make a difference!
Sorry, nozzle, I mean ginico. You started your post with a blatant falsehood, and anyone that makes it past is uninformed.
You are the liar you want to say the Republicans are. And people like you are the reason I'm embarrased to admit to being a Democrat.
LBJ started robbing Social Security to help pay for ..... guess what?
Medicare and Medicaid, and the Vietnam War.
One government tit program robbed to pay for another, and 45 years later they represent a combined unfuneded liability of $100 TRILLION. That is double the entire worth of the United States. Not the GDP, the ENTIRE worth of this country - doubled. Oh, and WAR.
If you weren't such a lying partisan hack, maybe you'd pay attention to some facts and relent with the baseless accusations, name calling and outright lies.
Bush/Cheney created the deficit using reconciliation to get their crappy tax cuts so get used to it. NO, you don't want to hear that do you? Where were the Repubs back then screaming about that issue? They have zero credibility because they are so hypocritical.
The fact is, this country wants the public option and the Republicans who are in the pockets of the insurance companies have refused to listen. They are the party who will pay. Anybody screaming about socialized healthcare sounds like a moron. Medicare is socialized healthcare but I bet all of you will use it when you are eligible.
Oh, and 85% of the American people ARE NOT happy with their healthcare plans. Come back to earth.
"crickets" on my question.....why are the repubicans vehemently against passage of a final bill that they claim if passed, will result in the republicans gaining back their majority? Isn't that what they want?
I would love to see the republicans back in the majority. But I would rather that they block this health care reform now and see what happens later.
Good point!!
Babina, the "crickets" are because you put everyone to sleep, or else proved to them you couldn't answer the question of who is going to pay for all of this folly?
Republicans are, and have been, against this bill pretty much from the get go. This bill came out of nowhere (and no Democrat has yest answered the question where it really came from, over 2,000 pages, and a done deal when it dropped out of the sky). It was written in the darkness, and no GOP input was solicited, nor desired. It was a backroom deal and a well kept secret. So was the pitiful charade put on by the Massachusetts legislature to change their laws back and forth solely to benefit one party rule, not only of Massachusetts, but of our nation. But apparently God intervened and no matter how far into the political gutter the president and the democrats were willing to stoop, the Republican won. Now there is not much lower you can all crawl, but you are going to go there. Fine. The Republicans don't want your bill, they don't want you, and they would be pleased to take your president's office back.
Babina -
Because the Republicans actually - and for the first time in a long time - seem to be willing to fight something that has massive long-term negative reprecussions for this country, and are listening to the 69% of the American people who do NOT want this bill to pass - whom the Democrats are ignoring.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/01/26/poll.health.care/index.html
That is also supported by Real Clears average, which has support for passage of this bill at 40.7%. Do the Democrats care that they're trying to pass something the American people reject?
You have it completely backwards, too. Republicans are being REWARDED for fighting this, and they will be rewarded at the polls for fighting it - whether it passes or not. I'm not convinced they deserve to have both houses of Congress back just yet, after the piss poor performance they delivered from 2000-2006.
It's just really a shame when it becomes an issue of the lesser of two evils for the American people, isn't it.
Oh, and your ranting tirade about the supposed benefits of the bill actually leaves out some key funding issues - but facts don't seem to get in your way. You let me know if you're interested in documentation for the double counting of the funding via Medicare cuts, the absense of the $200 billion for the "doctor fix", the provisions that carve out Florida, Nebraska, Vermont, Maine and Louisiana for special treatment including the insurance companies in Nebraska, the backroom deals cut with the unions - ALL of that stays if the pass this on reconciliation.
babbleina,
You really seem to miss the entire point with your 27,000 word rant. Government is inefficient by nature. Medicare is broke. Social Security is headed that way. The U.S. Postal Service is losing money out the wazoo. Fraud and corruption are running rampant with almost every government social program.
HEALTH CARE IS NOT A RIGHT. Health Care is a commodity to be paid for just like everything else. Those who plan wisely and pay for insurance have some relief from the costs. Those who do not want to pay for it, and are not paying for it should not expect me and other hard-working Americans to pick up the tab !
Mix these two and you have a financial disaster waiting to happen...it's called Obamacare !
JM641424,
Your statement:
HEALTH CARE IS NOT A RIGHT. Health Care is a commodity to be paid for just like everything else. Those who plan wisely and pay for insurance have some relief from the costs. Those who do not want to pay for it, and are not paying for it should not expect me and other hard-working Americans to pick up the tab !
Mix these two and you have a financial disaster waiting to happen...it's called Obamacare !
I say B.S. on your statement. You can plan wisely all you want trying to get relief from the costs unless you get seriously ill. What a stupid statement. Unless you are wealthy, we are all one serious illness away from banruptcy and losing everything. You need to wake up and smell the coffee.
babina
And why are Democrats so vehemently for a bill now that they couldn't pass themselves before?
The answer is simple...it's all about special interests groups and big money politics...while the American people get "Byrd droppings."
Over 115 filibusters - lies and misrepresentation to all you who should know better - that's why it hasn't passed. My God, how long can you guys ignore the obvious. You all need to lose your jobs and health insurance and then maybe you might start to understand what the Republicans are up to!
So, let me get you straight, the Democrats kill all the jobs, and then use that to promote free health insurance? Sounds like them. Of course, it takes a patriot to see that if no one has a job, no one can pay the bill. So, you'll have it on paper, a very hollow victory, but very progressive.
Ginico -
The Senate Democrats had to bribe members of their own party to vote to cloture on this bill.
At the time, they had a filibuster-proof majority.
You lie, in every post.
Oh, and by the way - if you like what you have? You CAN'T keep it. Here's Obama on tape, finally admitting that after parading around pounding the "keep your insurance" drum. Another lie.
http://www.thefoxnation.com/president-obama/2010/02/02/obama-admits-you-might-not-be-able-keep-your-health-insurance-under-dem-p
^^^^
TYPICAL LIBERAL
Gimme, Gimme, Gimme!!
Sergio, have you always been such a hateful person? You should calm down and try to actually communicate your feelings in a way that might cause others to even care a nanosecond.
In 2005, Senate Democrats Obama, Biden, Clinton, Baucus, Dodd, Feinstein, Reid and Schumer, railed against the proposed use of reconciliation to end Democrat filibusters:
Obama on April 25, 2005: “What I worry about would be that you essentially still have two chambers the House and the Senate but you have simply majoritarian absolute power on either side, and that’s just not what the founders intended.”
Chuck Schumer on May 18, 2005: “The checks and balances which have been at the core of this Republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option.”
Charles Schumer on May 23, 2005: “They want their way every single time. And they will change the rules, break the rules, and misread the constitution so that they will get their way.” (Gee and they’re doing it too, except that supposedly he was talking about Republicans, as the Senate breaks EVERY one of the rules they not only passed, but condemned Republicans for doing)
Harry Reid on May 18, 2005: “The right to extended debate is never more important than the one party who controls congress and the white house. In these cases the filibuster serves as a check on power and preserves our limited government.”
Harry Reid on May 18, 2005: “But no we are not going to follow the Senate rules. No, because of the arrogance of power…”
Diane Feinstein on May 18, 2005: “The nuclear option if successful will turn the senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority. It begins with judicial nominations. Next will be executive appointments and then legislation.” (Notice though that it’s the Democrat s that are using it for legislation, NOT Republicans who used if for budget and appointments ONLY!!!)
Diane Feinstein on May 18, 2005: “If the leadership insists on forcing the nuclear option the senate becomes ipso facto the House of Representatives where the majority rules supreme and the party of power can dominate and control the agenda with absolute power.”
Diane Feinstein on May 18, 2005: “The nuclear option if successful will turn the senate into a body that could have its rules broken at any time by a majority of senators unhappy with any position taken by the minority.”
Joe Biden on May 23, 2005: “This nuclear option is ultimately an example of the arrogance of power. It is a fundamental power grab.”
Chris Dodd on May 18, 2005: “I’ve never passed a single bill worth talking about that didn’t have a lead co sponsor that was a Republican. And I don’t know of a single piece of legislation that’s ever been adopted here that didn’t have a Republican and Democrat in the lead. That’s because we need to sit down and work with each other. The rules of this institution have required that. That’s why we exist. What were the framers thinking about 218 years ago? They understood Mr. President that there is a tyranny of the majority.”
Hillary Clinton on May 23, 2005: “You’ve got majority rule and then you have the senate over here where people can slow things down where they can debate where they have something called the filibuster. You know it seems like it’s a little less than efficient -- well that’s right it is. And deliberately designed to be so.”
Hillary Clinton on May 23, 2005: “The Senate is being asked to turn itself inside out, to ignore the precedent to ignore the way our system has work, the delicate balance that we have obtain that has kept this constitution system going, for immediate gratification.”
Max Baucus on May 19, 2005: “We are on the precipice of a crisis, a constitutional crisis. The checks and balances which have been at the core of this Republic are about to be evaporated by the nuclear option. The checks and balances which say that if you get 51% of the vote you don’t get your way 100% of the time.”
Max Baucus on May 19, 2005: “This is the way Democracy ends. Not with a bomb but with a gavel.”
In 2005 both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton Opposed Reconciliation as an “Infringement on Democratic Principles.”
Obama in 2005 said that the “51 vote ‘nuclear option’ is an ‘arrogant” power grab against the FOUNDER’S INTENT.”!!!!!
And the big brouhaha in 2005? About using 51 votes for NOMINEES!!!!! Not budget, not health care, not tax cuts, not anything other than voting on a nominee to the cabinet. But you would have thought that Bush was wanting to take over GM, or the banks, or the health care industry!!
Do you know how to spell hypocrisy? How about Obama, Reid, Schumer, Biden, Clinton, Dodd, Baucaus? The MOST SWEEPING change to our economy in probably the history of the country is going to be done through a process that DEMOCRATS condemn!!!!
Hypocrisy is spelled: DEMOCRAT!!!!!!
What you liberals and “progressives” need to know about “reconciliation”:
Reconciliation has been used MOST often to REDUCE the federal deficit through spending reductions, revenue increases, or a combination of the two. (Not to FORCE every American to buy what the government says is the “right” health insurance, to raise taxes and steal from seniors to pay for it)
Presidents Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton used reconciliation to win DEFICIT REDUCTION. Reconciliation was also used during the Clinton Administration for welfare reform and the Children’s Health Insurance Program. President George W. Bush used the technique for passage of his signature tax cuts. (Gee, tax cuts that lowered unemployment to below 4%, and raised RECORD income taxes being paid by Americans)
The Senate’s Byrd rule (named after its chief sponsor, Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia) prohibits items in reconciliation legislation that are “extraneous.”
Any of six situations makes a provision extraneous under the Byrd rule. One is that the provision DOES NOT produce a change in federal outlays or revenue.
A motion to waive the Byrd rule requires agreement of three-fifths of the Senate (60 votes).
"Reconciliation" means "restoration of harmony."
Do you liberals and Democrats think there’s going to be ANY harmony from the over 60% of this country that is against this boondoggle being shoved down the throats of the American Taxpayer? Do you know who is actually FOR this ripoff of the country? “Progressives” that want us to be pretty well “socialized” anyway, and the people that DON’T PAY for health insurance in the first place. The rest of the nation, that WILL have to pay for it knows exactly what this is, a takeover of the health industry that WILL result in more HIGHER premiums (according to DBO) massive deficits, rationed care, theft of health care from seniors, and LOWER QUALITY healthcare in this country.
And all because Obama wants “health care reform”. It seems as though it’s not really “reform” though. Instead it seems to be an attempt to DRIVE the insurance companies out of business so that the government can take it over like AmTrak, GM, and the banks.
And he doesn’t much care about over 10% unemployment, (actually REAL unemployment over 18%) because he’s spent over a year on “health care”. He doesn’t care about the millions of homes being foreclosed on because he’s spent over a year on “health care”. He doesn’t care about the bribes, the corruption, the payoffs and tax breaks for unions, because he’s spent a year on “health care”. He doesn’t care about massive deficit spending, massive borrowing, or massive taxes being passed, because he’s spent a year on “health care”.
Don’t you liberals think it’s about time to maybe start looking at the REAL problems in this nation instead of creating a “crisis” of health care in your attempts to have the government take over another industry in this country????
your full of bs, reconcilitation got us into the Bush/Cheney war, so it goes both ways, get real.
you didn't reply to my comment, reconciliation is not the "nuclear option" and it was used very recently, so my point is; it is not new and has been used before, far more often by Republicans than Democrats.
Yes, they kept given Republicans every opportunity to come to the table and help put the bill together - and all they got were the same old talking points, lies and misrepresentations by the right. Now it's time for the Democrats to do what they have to do to get the bill passed. Once it is in place, they will become heros - that's why the Republicans continue their antics.
Ginico, you live in another place. This bill was completely written in secret, with no GOP input reqested nor wanted. It hit the floor as a "done deal" without even being read by your President, because it was his lobbyist buddies who wrote it. He didn't have to read it, he trusted his buddies, he knew them. "Every opportunity to come to the table?" You are completely devoid of recent history, or else are completely lying.
RogerM -
so what you have your panties in a knot about is that essentially dems are now playing by the con playbook and you don't like it ?
lmao. get over it.
ah the answer used when one has no argument. yet cons blamed Clinton for how many years ?
see my point above to Roger ...
RogerM -
please read this .. then taste your feet.
Cost of the Bush era: $11.5 trillion
Wall Street bailouts: $6 trillion
Tax cuts and deficit spending: $2 trillion
In 2001 and 2003, Bush signed legislation that cut taxes, much to the benefit of the affluent. The first cut was designed to help the economy after the Internet bubble collapsed. The second was to boost growth after the 2001 recession ended.
Kogan estimated the tax cuts have cost the Treasury $1.7 trillion in revenue to date. Of course, that may not be one bit disturbing to the taxpayers who've watched their tax bills go down. The only problem is, the cuts have been critical in opening up the gargantuan budget gap that Obama will face.
Because Bush did not reduce spending, Washington has paid about $265 billion in interest on loans to cover the lost revenue. So the $1.7 trillion in tax cuts really cost around $2 trillion.
Meanwhile, Bush increased deficit spending, incurring more debt service. Bush's expansion of Medicare drug benefits for the elderly, for example, cost around $130 billion, of which $10 billion was debt service between 2006 and 2008, said Kogan, of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
"If some of this spending had been paid for by tax increases, then there wouldn't have been interest costs," he said. "But none of it was. We had tax cuts and spending increases."
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/StockInvestingTrading/cost-of-the-bush-era-11-point-5-trillion.aspx#pageTopAnchor
really ? there is a huge difference between sponsoring a bill and writing it. can you list me the names of those who wrote it ? can you list me of those who were behind those closed doors ?
because I can't find who wrote it. it doesn't state it when you read the bill.
no GOP input ? are you sure ? proof please ?
Hi Ripley. Sorry, I asked first, but nice try to deflect an honest question. I believe there are indications this bill was written before it came to the Senate or the House. It just up and appeared in June or July, and your savior demanded it be passed immediately, even prior to any of our representatives reading it. He knew, and apparently didn't want it to sit around long enough for anyone of any sense (like a Republican) to begin to smell it. You think it had Republican input? Please. As I asked first, tell me where this bill came from.
Roger M: You are being made a fool of. All of the quotes you provided made by democrats regarding the nuclear option refer to the filibuster, not reconciliation. It is a term made up by the republicans 5 years ago regarding the filibuster, not reconciliation. Please do your research prior to posting. Thank you. There you go jankins.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/35573155#35573155
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/35654587#35654587
lmao no sparky.. but you keep that tin foil hat on ok ?
I guess you've said "uncle" because you don't want any of your buddies to find out the truth? Keeping people in the dark, is the only way your comments can be believed. If you knew who wrote this bill, then you could begin to understand what it's true intent was.
Nuclear option are fake words made up by the Repubs. It's reconciliation when the Repubs use it but nuclear option when the Democrats use. As usual, smoking mirrors presented by the Repubs.
Just like Bush/Cheney had made the decision to go to war long before they spoke about it to the public. We'll be paying for that forever.
sparky for real I mean how long have this bill been on the table, if they haven't read it, it's because they don't want to or they can't read, I bet they read Sarah Palins book.......
Revisited? It was never off the table...
I'm against "reconciliation," except for a worthy cause like this one, which is to enrich private health insurers.
Sterling Greenwood/Aspen Free Press
They will have strings attached that will prevent them from doing a lot of the mischief that they have gotten by with these last 30 years.
Which could be done WITHOUT spending a trillion dollars, without screwing 260 million people to help 10 million and in a way that actually benefits EVERYONE, not just tit suckers who love them some government cheese.
And guess what? The Republicans would support re-regulating the insuracne companies - they already do. I realize you're too much of a partisan hack to understand that, but maybe you can understand this:
The "regulations" in the Democrats bill FORCES 30 million people into the insurance companies laps. It does not "give" anyone anything, it forces people to buy something from the VERY insurance companies you people seem to hate so much, WITHOUT removing their anti-trust immunity which means they can still price fix and enjoy their state-level monopolies. It creates another group of people sucking at the government tit, which also creates trickle up poverty, whereby people earning slightly MORE money have LESS spending power than people earning less - who are having their needs met by government tit money taken from the pockets of people earning slightly more.
If you think the bulk of the weight of this isn't going to fall on the middle class, you're crazy. 260 million people are potentially screwed by this, who have been playing by the rules, which is a hallmark of this administration. Wealth redistribution and punishing good behavior while rewarding bad.
What is it you think you will gain? Because that's the only possible explanation for support of this bill at this point - selfishness.
I would think most of you have realized by now there are two sets of rules. Those the Democrats follow and those the Republicans follow. Both are a sorry bunch but Democrats seem to have a much shorter memory and enjoy demonizing all that oppose them, crying foul whenever anything negative is said.
Yes, Richard Nixon is generally credited with inventing the original two sets of rules to run the white house. Its all on tape.
Seems to me that the record show that the Republicans have used reconcilliation and threatened the nuclear option when they were in power, much more than the Democrats have. Whats good for the goose, is good for the gander - DEMOCRATS DO WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO, EVEN IF YOU LOSE YOUR POSITION - YOU WILL BECOME MARTYRS.
Martyrs? I suppose then that they'll meet 77 Virginians in heaven? Losers will be more like it.
Listen, reconciliation can only be used for budgetary provisions, anyone who thinks abortion or anything else that isn't substantially related to the buget will pass the senate is wrong, it is a fact and unfortunately me telling I told you so in a couple of weeks, isn't good enough, this needs to be stopped NOW!! The Senate Bill, probably minus some of the bribes (which will be budgetary) will pass the House with the lie that all the House's worries will be reconciled, then those worries will be nullified in the Senate and the Senate Bill will become law and Nelson and Lincoln and any of the other frauds who are vulnerable in their states can vote against the final bill and it will still pass because they only need 51 votes. It is a shell game and they are playing a game with our future, they should be ARRESTED!!
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=124921
Sign the Declaration of Health Care Independence!
Tell everyone you know about it!!
it will be interesting to see which provisions survive this process. i still, however, wish there was some transparency in the proceedings ---- it would be nice to see how these leaders make their concessions --- instead, everything gets done behind closed doors. i guess they don't want the voters to discover what really takes place behind those closed doors. --- could it be that they are embarrassed about what goes on ? --- could it be they don't want their constituents to know what they are saying because it goes against what their constituents desire ?
I am guessing Obama will tout how transparent this process has been from the 6 hour dog and pony show a few days ago.
You guys seem to be forgetting 8 years of this before President Obama. This is how government works, or at least tries to, when the Senate Republicans have their thumbs up each other's azzes in a big ring around the GOP...as exemplified by those 6 hours on C-span for anyone to see.
I get to retire in July...I remember protesting the Viet Nam War in the 60's, when Nixon bombed Cambodia, I also remember the Cuban Missile Crisis, where we all faced nuclear annihilation, grow up you say? LOL
Please advise me how many bills have been reconciled on the floor of the house and senate? Seems to me that it has been done by a committee.
Jim, you mean you were part of denegrating our brave men in uniform? Those who put their lives on the line for your freedoms? I joined during that time. I came from a family that supported our country with their service, during war and peace. Bless you for calling me a baby killer and for throwing trash at me from your passing cars. Now I can understand how you can support such crap.
Jim, you're actually part of the generation that has caused virtually every problem facing this country right now with your selfishness.
You and all the other "boomers" should be ashamed of yourselves.
You all got your government tit programs, you made a butt load of money in the 80's and 90's, and now that you're retiring you want more tit programs.
I seriously cannot wait until the "boomer" generation is no longer a consideration, because you have literally ruined this country.
Prag,
You sound like a spoiled snot from the "It's all about Me" generation. No one in this country should have to be financially ruined if they get seriously ill. Most of the baby boomers I know have not been a drain on our economy. Your statements are crap. It's jerks like you who will ruin this country.
Little known my azz, the Republicans have used this increasingly for the last two decades. How do you think we went to war in the middle east. I would have expected this article on Fox News and conservatives think, MSN is liberal? Ha. The Republicans can whine, pizz and moan, all they want, they get their own medicine right back at them....(no pun intended).
pizz and moan, pizz and moan...Is that all you got?
2010=HOPE
2012=CHANGE
Yeah! After this bill is passed, we'll throw the rest of the Republicans out!
Ginico, I'm saving that comment for December. By then it will be even funnier.
Jim, are you claiming that the Iraq war vote was done on reconciliation?
Really?
You'll need to prove that, because I can prove the opposite is in fact true.
You first, though. This should be comedy gold.
"crickets"
The incredible shrinking healthcare bill. You liberals will get the worst of both worlds, a bill with no teeth and the more fuel to public anger in November.
wow...they're gonna use reconcilliation after the Democrats failed to pass the bill the first time when they could? Isn't that sorta like Tiger saying that he really didn't know that he was cheating on his wife...twelve times?
If they use the nuclear option, to cram this bill down our throats, there will be a huge nuclear wind blowing, at the polls, during this Nov. midterms. All those who voted for this bill will be swept out of their seats, Obama knows that, but does not care, the polls show along with the recent elections in Va. NJ. and Mass that Dems are already being voted out, so he is willing to scarfice those seats, as long as he completes his agenda of government run HC and moves his socialist agenda forward by completing the biggest power grab and control over our lives. He knows he is toast in 2012, but he is willing to be a one term-er in order to advance the far left progressive movement. That is what he meant when he said, he would rather be a good one term president than a two term mediocre one. He wants a socialist, government run nanny state and will do whatever it takes to move our nation further in that direction.
Billy Bob,
So why did the Repubs have to use it so often? Let me guess. To cram everything down our throats.
Remember when America was a democracy? When Obama said change he meant the end.
To Ernie 201266 - I hate to burst your bubble, but our Constitution is setup as a Republic and not as a democracy. I learned that a long time ago in Civic Class - go look it up in the library!
If this bill is going to reduce the cost of health care, then why is it going to cost the average American more for their health care?
How many times does it have to be explained by the CBO - people who have health care now, will have better health care at lower cost, since they have lower cost, they still might opt for a more comprehensive plan that would cost more, that would be their option, have better insurance at a lower cost, or get an even better plan for a few dollars more - it's in the CBO report - the Republicans have tried to mis-interpret it to scare you - it was clarified at the summit!
Ginico, how many times does someone have to tell you that the reason America is so great, is because it provides incentive to succeed, and anyone can start at the bottom and rise as high as they are able. Take away the incentive (e.g. collective farming) and the results are higher cost for the few necessities you can find in the Collective Store, or using your hands when you can't find toilet paper anywhere in the country. Health care will necessarily plunge into the dismal swamp of practice by graduates of the cheapest and worst schools, who would be willing to fill the ranks of all the GPs who leave the field. You are totally blinded by progressive drivel. It would be good of you to go to Cuba and have a bypass operation, then come and extoll the virtues of socialized medicine.
ginico,
Spin it big guy ! Better health care at lower costs ???? You should be on Comedy Central with that one. Let's see, Obama will wave his magic wand and include all those with pre-existing conditions and THAT will lower costs. Or, after requiring EVERYONE to carry health insurance, yet SUBSIDIZING (hello welfare) for those who "can't afford it" (redistribution of wealth) that will lower our costs ? Or maybe the gargantuan addition of 150 new federal agencies to administer it (per MSNBC) that will undoubtedly create a new bureaucratic nightmare.....maybe that will lower costs ???
Or maybe, after 10% to 20% of all doctors opt for "early retirement" maybe this will give us better healthcare. Or maybe government deciding if a 77 yr old man really "deserves" a new hip replacement, maybe that will give us better healthcare.
Sorry, but your post is weak, illogical and has no foundation in fact, but only in fantasy.
That's a lot of new jobs, yes? Jobs that pay people? People that would then pay taxes on their pay? Hmmmmm
Our healthcare system stinks like crap now. Quit trying to fool everybody with your smoking mirrors. How rediculous. Who in the hell could even begin to say our current healthcare system is good. It is rotten to the core and everybody knows it.
what i find intrigiung is that when they offer these amendments for reconciliation, why don't these guys already know whether it will meet the demands of the rules or not ? you'd think with all the aides and assistants, they should already know what will fly, and what won't. why bother to offer an amendment that will fail the test, unless you are doing so just for show ?
What in the world to you think they are working on right now - they are crossing the t's and dotting the i's - just wait and see.
well... this article made it sound like it wasn't all so easy, so it will be interesting to see what happens to these amendments. --- i imagine the media will do a blow by blow presentation as each amendment is either denied or accepted.
Think Obama care should reform Medicaid. The way it is done like in CA Medicaid, no PCP referral needed. No insurance authorization needed, no HMO, one state public health care that is efficient, cost effective and affordable.
That will save Medicaid billions of dollars, no need to cut Medicaid or new taxes to fund Obama care. The Medicare cut called Medicare advantage, run by Private insurance that ended up ripping of the government and collecting 400 billion more than the government run Medicare. Therefore; Medicare cut is justified. The other 400 billion he can get from Medicaid reform noted above. That is saving 800 billion every year after year.
The Obama care idea of premium pay pool of insurance will compete and reduce cost. That never happened, insurance companies agree not to compete because competition will lead to lower cost that is not to their advantage, everybody can understand that.
However, some tax exemption and/or partially subsidized by the 800 billion dollars to premium pay pool of insurance will lower insurance premium, will insure many and is better than Obama care idea of giving health insurance tax credit to the pocket of Private insurance
No need to press for pre-existing condition and denial of coverage and changing abortion no funding law and cap on lawsuits against health care providers, Most want you to sign that even if you dies he will not be liable, if this is legal, there is no need to debate cap or no cap. 2000 pages and a trillion dollars will not pass. You can do all that later.
Let's see...health care needs fixing...so are these the same guys in the WH that wanted to fix the auto industry so they fired the CEO of GM, then rehired him as a consultant at $60K a month?
...wow...I guess that's reconcillation for you.
GM is getting stronger every day = car sales are up - we just bought one.
And tell us what gas mileage you honestly are getting (and don't quote from the window sticker, actually divide your miles on a tank by the gallons to refill it). Did you get a Pontiac or a Hummer? Interestingly, you purchased a car partially paid for by working Americans. I'm certain that makes you glow.
gm may be experiencing anemic improvement due largely to the governments artificial influence........the car company that is rapidly recovering is ford.......solely on the basis of their wise decision to forego the government handout last year.........which the vast majority of americans agreed with ergo the rise to the number 1 domestic car manufacturer........absolute proof that the majority of americans don't side with the governmental takeover of the car companies that put themselves in such dire straits.....
American Idle - A Congressional Haiku:
http://haikme.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/american-idle/
1) Bush used reconciliation for his Medicare RX bill and his tax cuts!! He cut the DEMs right out of the process. This is really no different!!
2) What the American peole REALLY want is a single payer, government run healthcare insurance program along the lines of Medicare. It has broad support all around the county!!
http://www.wpasinglepayer.org/PollResults.html
Thank you - Republicans continue to ignore those polls and if Brown in Massachuettes thinks he will "derail" this bill, he's better think again because people voted for him because they were angry that medical reform was not "strong enough". He will not be re-elected if he signs the death sentence on this bill . . . no if, ands or buts about it!
Look at a real poll for a change. Congressional approval >20%. Presidential approval >50%. Support for your current bill 40%
ginico #21.1
Scott Brown made it abundantly clear in his campaign that he WAS and IS opposed to Obamacare. The people of Massachusetts elected him and repudiated Obama-backed Coakley. Your statement that he was elected because Massachusetts voters wer angry because this Obamacare legislation "was not strong enough" is BLATANTLY FALSE.
I f you attempt to argue, avoid the obvious lies and listen to the post-election focus group's response.
Scott Browns Massachusetts and Lieberman's Connecticut when polled were for the public option. Massachusetts has universal healthcare. Why would they not want that available for the whole country? Lieberman turned his back on his state and did not represent the wishes of the people. That creep is on his way out.
America has become a collection of people who want everything but can't pay for it unless it's on the back of someone else or everyone else. If the Libs want health care let them pass the bill so we can rip it up and publically burn it- trust me-it will happen.
You know, they just might have had money to pay for these things if tax breaks for the rich over the the last 30 years hadn't moved 95% of the wealth of this country to 10% of the people, and if all of the fast track free trade bills hadn't moved out jobs that created wealth for this country. We have very little manufacturing now and a lot of paper pushing on wall street that makes the stock market look good, but has little affect on most Americans - why do you think wages have declined or stagnated during this time period from Reagan on? Explain it to me, PLEASE
I'd try, but you wouldn't understand. "Don't try to teach a pig to sing. It will make the pig mad and will frustrate you."
Sparky,
You should apologize to the pig. I'll bet you that pig would sing long before your buddy would even begin to understand the complexities of economics.
Oh, and you do understand JMO. Hardly.
mid term elections will clean out the jerks, and insure obama will be a one term president. if only we could make his "one termj" less than 4 years......he and his puppets just dont like america.
pretty amazing our own president does not like america ...........and pretty sad, isnt it?
Really!!?? Mid terms will clear out the republicants? After this bill passes, we will have to see what the American people think. 7 months is a long, long timespan.
Blue44,
You are an idiot to suggest the President doesn't like America. And you are a complete ass to suggest making his one term less than 4 years. Is that a threat against the POTUS? I hope the FBI scoops your stupid ass off to jail.
Settle Jim. The name calling does not become you. There is such a thing as impeachment to remove a sitting President prior to the end of his/her term.
You are pretty sad - disillusioned, but what difference does it make, you got yours!
He might have his that he works hard to pay for, and he'd like to keep it.
You, on the other hand, want him to pay more or loose what he has so you can have it?
And you think you're somehow superior?
No, you're not.
The leeches will be put off with salt.
Pelosi is a piss poor Speaker of the House. The old Speakers of the House are laughing at her right now. They would have pushed this through and had it done by now with the majorities the Dems have - or had. What a bunch of disorganized idiots. They can't get this thing passed and they had a Super Majority in the Senate and control of the House, and the Presidency. If you cant get a bill passed with that kind of deck stacked in your favor, you don't deserve your place in office.
Americans will support a health care reform bill once it passes by majority rule. If the Republicans really think this will doom the Democrats in November then why are they against reconciliation? Perhaps because they know in their hearts that this is the right thing to do for the American people but are not willing to admit it for fear of being criticized by conservatives and the leader of the Republican party Rush Limpbaugh.
One word for you Argo.
"yup."
Argo: I have been asking that question on these boards for a couple of days now. So far, no reasonable explanation has been offered.
Argo & Bambina--- the answer-- because the Republicans know they are operating in the American people's best interests by opposing Obamacare.
Amen. This bill is an abomination, actually an obomination.....truly a government takeover of 1/6 of our economy. B.O. needs to focus on the economy, yet his obsession continues to the detriment of the American people.
The Republicans have made such asses out of themselves and cannot stand the possibility that the Democrats might pass something Bush/Cheney had plenty of time to do but were too busy helping out Wall Street, their buddy Ken Lay at Enron, starting the wars and using reconciliation to give the rich a tax break they know they are in big trouble. I love watching their nasty asses squirm when someone asks them what their agenda is. They haven't had anything decent to offer yet. Damn, I'd love it if it wasn't so disgusting.